944»

Young and Restless

8153669827Cheating_Boyfriend_Gonna_DieHi Susan,

When I started reading your blog almost two years ago, I’d never had sex, had a girlfriend, or even been kissed. Today, thanks to your blog and some very good luck, I’ve done all of the above and more. I have a great relationship with my girlfriend; despite being in my early 20s, I feel that she could potentially be someone I’d marry when I’m more mature and financially responsible. We are both each other’s first significant other and sex partner. She’s a few years younger than me. 

However, I sometimes feel inadequate and “not good enough” for my girlfriend. I don’t think I’ve worked as hard as I should in school, and I don’t have a great job lined up like many of my friends. A few of them have even started firms that have received VC funding! I sometimes feel that my girlfriend and my parents regard me much, much too highly compared to what I’ve really accomplished relative to my peers. However, I’m not depressed and I know I will do much better in the future. 

Nonetheless, I’m very curious about my attractiveness to other girls. Somehow I don’t feel it’s enough that my girlfriend adores me. I love her and her loving me should be enough… for both of us. Yet, I feel that if other girls don’t like me then my girlfriend’s getting “ripped off.” If other girls like me then I’d feel confident and content about her, me, and how she feels about me. Also, that’d feel really good given my past and its dearth of interest from females. In a way, I’m asking for validation from females. Of course, I don’t want to cheat on my girlfriend. 

A week ago, I asked out a girl I’d met in one of my classes. Incredibly, she said yes even though I didn’t put much effort into asking her out. However, a few days ago she found about my relationship status and it made me feel incredibly stupid. I didn’t really think the situation through; I had no end game. What was I going to do if I had gone to the date? Kiss her and cheat on my girlfriend? I politely ended contact with her and felt really, really stupid. In addition, I felt like a major asshole.

Yet, there seems to be an asymmetry between women and men when seeking validation from the opposite sex. Women just have to dress well and men’s intentions will be quite obvious. It’d not hard for them to value their own raw and superficial attractiveness. However, as a man, I seem to have a really hard time judging my own attractiveness from the behaviour of others unless I ask them out… but that’d definitely be a faux pas when I’m in a relationship. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, my girlfriend would feel I’m cheating and the other girl would feel I’m a major DOUCHE.

Susan, what should I do? Is there any way to get validation from women without deceiving them and betraying my girlfriend? If not, then should I just give up trying to think how other women feel about me? 

JJ

Dear JJ,

That’s an awesome field report! I’m so glad to hear that you’ve got a great relationship, and that you value it (and your girlfriend) highly. While I can’t condone all of your actions, I can say it is very clear to me that you are a man of character who wants to do the right thing. You have considerable empathy for your girlfriend. You also are very introspective and self-aware for a young guy. That is all to your credit. 

The feelings you are having are also perfectly natural and normal for a man in your position. I would never suggest that you stop thinking about something or bury it to keep the peace. Doubts or questions that you have will not be denied forever – it’s much better to deal with them squarely, and it’s really only fair to both of you. 

Preselection

Let’s deal with the question of preselection first. If you’ve been reading here for a couple of years, then you’ve seen in the posts I’ve written and in the comments that men benefit directly from the attention of other women. Studies show that having an attractive woman at your side will increase your chances of attracting other women. (A wingwoman is potentially far more powerful and helpful than a wingman.) Research also shows that women rate “taken” men as more attractive than single men, everything else being equal. It’s not hard to understand why:

  • Female intrasexual competition is often fierce. Observing that a man is taken means that women presumably competed for him. Obviously, few men have women fighting over them, but having a girlfriend gives you the credibility of having attracted and won a woman.
  • It’s human nature to want what others have, and this is hardly restricted to women (though it may be that women are more influenced by preselection). This behavior can be observed in toddlers: “I don’t want my apple, I want her apple!” All of us like winning, and we like having the best or being the best. We tend to become dissatisfied with ourselves, always wanting more (see Woody Allen).
  • Some researchers believe that a man who is already spoken for is communicating that he has clearly met the criteria for an LTR. He’s in a relationship, and he’s presumably making his woman happy. That’s a potentially powerful filter, as it may save considerable “costs” to other women, e.g. time, energy, emotional investment. 

Often times, the preselection is not readily apparent to the observing female. In your case, the girl in your class responded positively to your invitation without realizing you were already in a relationship. (For your sake, I hope she never feels motivated to communicate this to your gf.). Rather, you are most likely coming across to women differently – you feel validated by your girlfriend’s attention and love, so you are able to approach another girl without being overly invested in the outcome. In fact, your clear ambivalence about the whole thing may have worked in your favor. 

In short, you have successfully parlayed your preselection in at least one case, and I have no doubt you could do it again if you chose to. Of course it pleases you to discover that you are attractive to several women instead of one. Why shouldn’t it? The question you need to answer for yourself is what you want most – the relationship or the variety. You cannot have both and still be a man of character, as you have clearly acknowledged.

Not being “good enough”

The next thing I want to address is your feeling of inadequacy. It doesn’t make sense that your girlfriend is being shortchanged somehow because she didn’t choose you via preselection. There is a wide range of male behaviors that influence how attractive they are to women. The #1 most powerful predictor is extraversion. That doesn’t mean extraverted males make better mates, just that they are better at seeking and receiving attention. Similarly, there is also a wide range of female attraction cues, and a woman’s own level of extraversion also plays an important role. Some women can only “get it up” for highly visible men who are players and cads. Other women avoid such men at all costs.

My guess is that your girlfriend is far more comfortable in a relationship with someone of similar outlook and experience to her own, and would not appreciate or like you more if she knew that girls in your classes were open to being asked out by you. No doubt she already believes that, as she is clearly very attracted to you herself. You successfully met her criteria, and the relationship is thriving. She does not feel shortchanged in any way, so it’s not useful or valid to project your own need for attention from other women onto her.

As for your sense that your status is not high enough to warrant her love and admiration, I think you are being too hard on yourself. At your age, girls are measuring you on potential, not VC funding. Clearly, despite your sense of disappointment, both your girlfriend and your parents feel just fine about where you are in life right now. Ease up on yourself.

The male preference for variety

That brings us to your own ambivalence about commitment vs. getting validation from other girls. Ideally, many men would like the opportunity to have a mutually loving relationship, along with additional sexcapades on the side. As I’m sure you know, this is not what most women want. Most women want a monogamous commitment and are unable to desire another man when they are in love. 

I don’t think I need to tell you that your asking the other girl out constitutes cheating. The fact that she found out the truth and called it off doesn’t let you off the hook. Cheating is anything you do in secret because you know it would hurt your girlfriend. Is secretly texting a cute girl the same as having sex with someone else? No, but both actions are on the cheating spectrum.

In this case, it’s “no harm, no foul,” but you need to think about what you want and then live with your decision. Your girlfriend deserves your full commitment. If you can’t give it to her, you need to cut her loose. And there’s nothing wrong with that. You may feel a real desire to date other people and see what else is out there. 

Asymmetry

It’s true that women have a much easier time getting sexual validation. That’s not surprising – men would like to have sex with as many women as possible. It’s hardly a mark of distinction to be singled out for sex by some horny guy.

Women, on the other hand, are wired to have sex with as few men as possible, and to distinguish ourselves by earning commitment from a quality male. We’re much more likely to focus on whether a guy is willing to make us his girlfriend than feel good about getting our asses grabbed while grinding at some party.

(Of course, there’s a high level of dysfunction in the SMP, so we see women chasing sexual variety and men chasing commitment. But that’s wacked.)

Overall, you seem like someone who has a lot of empathy, but some difficulty understanding how your girlfriend is experiencing all of this. I urge you to talk about it with her. Ask her outright whether she notices or cares whether other girls think you’re hot. And believe her when she tells you what she feels. If she is able to reassure you and you still find yourself tormented by the idea of wanting validation from other girls, then I think it has more to do with what you want, not what she wants. 

Susan

 

  • SayWhaat

    Someone’s unhaaaappy.

  • Vicomte

    I like to have a bit of fun with the reader mail here, but there’s no way this is on the level.

    JJ is a damned rascal.

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

      I like to have a bit of fun with the reader mail here, but there’s no way this is on the level.

      JJ is a damned rascal.

      I’ve vetted the writer, who is well known to me. He’s as earnest as they come. It’s on the level.

  • Escoffier

    Call me “old and sedentary” so take this FWIW, but I see some similarities here.

    Much like the letter writer, I have a great gal (wife in my case), a nice life and nothing to justly complain about. I would not trade my wife for anyone and have about as much interest in divorce and playing the field as I have in cleaning stables. (That’s aside from nature’s innate desire for variety, which is present but not particularly powerful and always well under control.)

    However, I am not extroverted (to say the least) and the generality of women have never found me particularly attractive. They still don’t. This is true today even though my SMV is almost certainly higher than it has ever been, both in terms of fitness and status. In terms of my face, I’m reminded of the devil’s comment to Bedeker in an old Twilight Zone: “I’m afraid there’s nothing I can do about that.” I’ve been hearing for 20 years that female interest in a guy will rise when they see he’s attached. Well, not me.

    Like you, I find this annoying. Not too depressing and certainly not debilitating, but somehow annoying, even though I know I should count my (considerable) blessings and not care. Which I try to do as often as possible. I also believe that Susan is right that what the majority of women are most attracted to is extroversion, which I mostly lack, but that my wife is one of those rarish birds who prefers a more introverted and bookish guy, hence we really are right for one another. It sounds like you have found another such girl, in which case, if everything else is good, keep her. If you’re lucky, this feeling of yours will simply go away. If not, take it from me, it’s manageable.

    Regarding your lack of accomplishments (so far), this can be considered a feature not a bug. In terms of SMV and especially MMV, your girl is “buying” you when your price is relatively low, knowing or expecting it will rise. She’s not out playing with guys who’ve already achieved status. She’s bought you at a young age to ride the elevator up with you, rather than hang out on the top floors with alphas and cads waiting for you to get there, at which point her N would be … who knows what. Many, MANY guys who post here and elsewhere would kill to get what you already have so don’t eff that up.

    I would not waste any time envying friends with VC funding for start-ups. Most–the vast majority–go nowhere. If you are right about yourself that you’ve not, thus far, lived up to your potential, then the good news is that you’ve recognized that relatively young and can rectify it. So get to work. You will find this easier with a great partner than alone.

    Finally, asking out that other girl was truly stupid and you are fortunate to have gotten off so easy. You didn’t do anything irreparable to your relationship (to say nothing of your soul) and the other girl corrected the situation and delivered a much-needed (and deserved) rebuke. Apart from the initial offense, it’s almost an ideal outcome, you got the wake-up call without horrible consequences. Learn from that and don’t do anything like it again.

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

      Escoffier’s advice to JJ is like that of a loving uncle. Perfect in tone, and generous. Good to have you back, Escoff.

  • Mireille

    All that sexual drama is a smoke screen to the real problem: that kid is competing with the other males. He’s questioning his worth as a man compared to the other guys regarding financial/intellectual power and even sexual power, and he’s tried looking for “cheap” ways to assuage that anxiety, like female attention.
    Instead of projecting your own anxiety on your girlfriend by and try to reassure yourself/her(?!) that you’re worth it in the eyes of other women, you’d better focus on what is going to maker her feel even more secure in your affection like building a life together and making a name for yourself (whatever that means). You can be certain that asking other women out is NOT part of that list.

    I don’t think JJ really thinks his gf feels shortchanged, I think HE feels shortchanged because he is not as “hot” (financially or sexually) as the other dudes. I bet he’ll try again with another girl, maybe this time she might not find out that he has gf…

  • OTC

    It’s a trap!

  • HanSolo

    Two points:

    1) If you’re not good enough for your gf but she loves and respects you then thank your lucky stars and hold onto her for dear life (in a non-needy way).

    2) Take your feelings of career inadequacy and turn that into a positive drive to improve yourself. Don’t set some unrealistic goal (like becoming a billionaire) that will just leave you feeling like crap. Within the realms of the possible, do what you can to improve (switch jobs or get an additional certificate in your area, e.g. CFA if you’re in finance or consulting), and most importantly CHILL OUT and enjoy the ride.

  • Tomato

    This need for validation from other women, especially when you appear to have a great relationship with one already, is a recipe for disaster. You should instead spend this energy on improving yourself, your career, and your relationship with your gf. The 20s are a hot mess of insecurity for both men and women. It sounds like you have a loving gf and parents, both of which will help you through this period. Keep moving forward!

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Need validation from other people = constant struggle and perpetual unhappiness.

    Get regard from your own self = self-respect and contentment.

    There’s a line that goes, “The race is long and, in the end, it’s only with yourself.”

    http://www.rosehope.com/wear-sunscreen/

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

      @Hope

      Thanks for linking to the post with the Sunscreen speech! I adore Baz Luhrmann, and I have always believed he wrote it. His delivery certainly was great.

  • Jason773

    Sorry, not buying this line of crap. Dude wants external validation, wants to know he can get other girls (even hotter girls than his gf) and will eventually cheat on his gf or trade-up if given the convenient opportunity. This guy is obviously an insecure beta, for many reasons listed and this has absolutely nothing to do with feeling like his gf is getting ripped off.

    JJ, if you read this, own up to your bullshit and either cut the shit or break up with your girl. Don’t monkey branch, cuz that’s what chicks do, and it’s all together as distasteful look for a man.

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

      Don’t monkey branch, cuz that’s what chicks do

      Ugh, was this really necessary?

  • Sai

    Er… JJ, I’m not a guy, but I am a person who struggles with inadequacy at times, so I’ll agree with the others who say this will probably stop being an issue when you start making your life a really good one. Do your best! (and be grateful you’re not partnered with a gold-digger)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Having been involved with start-ups personally, almost all of them fail and make it nowhere. Don’t be jealous of that scam.

    Also, another line of advice, “Don’t be reckless with other people’s hearts.”

  • http://meistergedanken.livejournal.com meistergedanken

    “I sometimes feel inadequate and “not good enough” for my girlfriend. I don’t think I’ve worked as hard as I should in school, and I don’t have a great job lined up like many of my friends. A few of them have even started firms that have received VC funding! I sometimes feel that my girlfriend and my parents regard me much, much too highly compared to what I’ve really accomplished relative to my peers…
    Nonetheless, I’m very curious about my attractiveness to other girls. Somehow I don’t feel it’s enough that my girlfriend adores me. ”

    Narcissism Alert!!!! Seriously, this is the most overt case I’ve EVER seen in print. Note the tacitly admitted feeling of shame that he thinks he could alleviate if only he could project a different image of himself by shoring up his identity with the right status signifiers, so he could be the “type” of man that a girl “like her” could love. The Last Psychiatrist has written inumerable times on this. The completely wrong reaction is to say “oh how sad, he doesn’t think he is worthy of her”. This guy will be a train wreck all his life. And I say this as a guy who usually has way more empathy with the male in the relationship, rather than the female… his only hope (and the hope of the women who love him) is that he is still quite young and possibly can grow out of his narcissism as he matures and becomes a healthy adult.

  • Escoffier

    I think some of you are being too harsh. I don’t sense narcissism so much as the (apparently justified) sense that he is not where he should be, owing to his own lack of effort. The solution is simple, if not easy. Get to work.

  • INTJ

    I cosign Escoffier’s comment.

  • Vicomte

    ‘I’ve vetted the writer, who is well known to me. He’s as earnest as they come. It’s on the level.’

    Jesus.

    In that case, JJ, you think like a woman, which I’m not sure anyone here can help you with.

    However, since Susan assures me (indirectly) you are are male, you’re acting like a little bitch.

    Stop that.

  • Anne

    This just confirms what I’ve always thought: don’t get into monogamous relationships with young guys (<25). Not if you're ultimately looking for something serious. Either he will grow and want someone else (regardless of how amazing you are) or he will stand still because he stopped making effort.
    He knows he can be more than he is and he wonders what kind of girls he could potentially get. I don't think it's weird at all. Even though girls don't want sexual variation, they face the same situation. He's like the equivalent of a female 7 who knows she could work out more or do her hair better, but doesn't know quite how to go about it.
    I'm sure he's a good boyfriend, but from the letter he does not appear to be in love. I'm not getting the sense that he feels like he's struck gold with this girl. If it doesn't end in marriage, it's temporary, so why not be single instead.

    Susan, did you post a marriage statistic for men once? I seem to remember reading a statistic saying that men with college degrees look for a wife around 25-26 and men with MBAs starts looking for a wife at 28-29. Did you post something about this?

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

      @Anne

      Susan, did you post a marriage statistic for men once? I seem to remember reading a statistic saying that men with college degrees look for a wife around 25-26 and men with MBAs starts looking for a wife at 28-29. Did you post something about this?

      I don’t believe I posted on when men start looking for a wife, but I did post on the mean age at marriage, which varies by education level. We can probably safely deduce that they might be looking a couple of years before that.

      The average age at marriage today for males in the U.S. is 28.7 years. I can’t find the data right now, but as I recall, the average age at marriage went up a couple of years for each degree, and that was true of both sexes.

  • OTC

    That’s a whopper of an extrapolation there, Anne, from one story.

  • Jesse

    This just confirms what I’ve always thought: don’t get into monogamous relationships with young guys (<25). Not if you're ultimately looking for something serious.

    Damn, I got the feeling I was in no-man’s land. Guess I’m going to have to mine the middle schools for those girls looking for ‘older men.’

    Either he will grow and want someone else (regardless of how amazing you are) or he will stand still because he stopped making effort.

    What if you grow with him? Might that help at all?

  • INTJ

    @ Anne

    If it doesn’t end in marriage, it’s temporary, so why not be single instead.

    I agree with this. I’m also 21, so take what you will from that.

  • J

    I don’t know that extraversion is, in and of itself, more attractive to women than introversion. I tend to think it’s more like the Gretzky quote on a previous thread. If you never take a shot, you miss all the shots. I’m also reminded of the “King of the Hill” episode in which Boomhauer is picking up women in a department store shoe department. He approaches several women who all rebuff him viciously, but he plays the odds until someone responds well. Then he takes her home.

    Many extroverts are extrememly obnoxious, but they are putting themselves out there where, sooner or later, they have to score if only by dumb luck. There are probably many more score-worthy guys among the introverts, but they make themselves invisible by being quiet.

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

      Many extroverts are extrememly obnoxious, but they are putting themselves out there where, sooner or later, they have to score if only by dumb luck. There are probably many more score-worthy guys among the introverts, but they make themselves invisible by being quiet.

      I think this is the heart of the problem. Introverts can be just as attractive, but they’re far more risk averse in general. Some very successful alpha types here have admitted they get blown out a lot of the time, but they take a lot of shots.

      When I was acting, I recall that the rule of thumb was one part for every 10 auditions. That meant that if I wanted to be working at all times, I had to be auditioning constantly. I could be in a play year-round if I were willing to go on 50 auditions. If I only went on 10, I’d be lucky to get one. It’s a numbers game.

  • J

    If JJ’s relationship with his gf is as great as he says, I think it’s follish for him to jeopardize it just to get some validation from other girls. Validation is not that hard to get if you put yourself out there; a good relationship is much harder to find.

    One of the most enviable marriages I know is my cousin’s. He met his wife as a toddler. She was literally the girl next door. They grew up together, dated only each other, married while he in med school and have been together about 40 years–3 sons, grandkids, the works. As a doctor, could he have pulled some other women? Of course! I doubt he would have ever had a better marriage though.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Many extroverts are extrememly obnoxious, but they are putting themselves out there where, sooner or later, they have to score if only by dumb luck.
    Some guys do the dumbest things to get girls and everyone shakes their head but once in a while they score and that all they remember “It worked” is like asking a gambler if going to Las Vegas is a good investment.

  • J

    Need validation from other people = constant struggle and perpetual unhappiness.

    Yes, indeed.

    Esco, great advice to JJ!! Cosigned.

  • J

    Some guys do the dumbest things to get girls and everyone shakes their head but once in a while they score and that all they remember “It worked” is like asking a gambler if going to Las Vegas is a good investment.

    Exactly. And I like the metaphor as well.

  • http://breadbeforerice.blogspot.com Fred Mok

    Esoffier’s advice is so helpful because it’s coming from an older, mature male authority figure. Ultimately, the validation we want, psycho-babble aside, must come from a father figure. Only a man can affirm another’s manhood. I’m happily married as well and in moments of insecurity I want to know how I rate with other females. But that pales in comparison to the validation I want from my male buddies. And that further pales when it comes to the validation I want from my own father.

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

      @Fred Mok

      Welcome, I found your comment very moving. I do think that the validation women can give is no substitute for what a man can give to another.

  • Escoffier

    1 for 10 sounds very high, I thought it was worse than that?

    Fred, I am not an authority, JJ will have to evaluate my advice on the merits. As the saying goes, on the Internet, no one knows you’re a cat.

    As for me, the validation I most savor is when people I consider learned, virtuous and smart–mostly, but not entirely, my old teachers–read something I wrote and say it is good. I can pull that off 2-3 times a year, which is not bad.

    I also like it when my guests enjoy my cooking but that is rather easy because who doesn’t love to eat? When my really skilled chef friends compliment my knife skills, that is nice.

  • Jimmy Hensricks

    I sometimes feel that my girlfriend and my parents regard me much, much too highly compared to what I’ve really accomplished relative to my peers.

    Count your blessings. Most guys are fortunate to have that kind of support from parents OR their girlfriend. You have both.

    There’s definitely something to be said for a girl who’s willing to invest in you and make the journey together, instead of one who just wants to buy the finished product. Sounds like a keeper to me.

  • Tasmin

    @JJ
    We are 30 comments in and you are already a pussy, a cheater, insecure, a BETA, a narcissist, lazy, and unhappy. Obviously a lot to work on. (I kid). This woman is your first GF at 20-something. Late blooming is not easy. You are in your character building years, slow down, don’t get too caught up in trying to become all of these versions of you that seem or feel better than who you are right now. Stop comparing yourself to others. There will always be smarter, richer, taller, (apparently) happier, richer, etc. friends. Don’t assume their path is any better or easier or more rewarding; it is their path, that is all.

    I think you are feeling a bit of validation from your GF and now are obviously tempted with exploring your options. Decide now what you really want. If you want to play the field, go do that and accept the spoils and the toils, the validation and the isolation. But if you care for your GF and the relationship, your commitment requires the subordination of any desire to explore your options. That will never change: a committed relationship is a conscious choice every waking moment of every day.

    I think you know what you really want deep down, but your fear, insecurity, and lack of experience are getting in your way. And I agree, seeking external validation is futile, fruitless, and will steal from you all that matters in the end: your time.

    What you are experiencing will never go away until you put it away. The best way is through your own thoughts and actions. You are self-aware and that is good. Be grateful, be patient, be purposeful, and be honest with yourself and with others. The rest will come. But as long as you seek from others to fill yourself up, those others will own that part of you. The truth is that you already have all that you need. Its cheesy, but true, its inside of you.

    Now this drunky uncle (bloody mary lunch) would also tell you to lighten up. You want to cut your teeth on some external female validation, then get after it. Just don’t drag the young lady through that. The good news is that you are young and can pound tail with little downside. Probably land some high 5′s along the way, maybe even get to stare some important truths about women and sex in the face long enough to find value in that path. And yes I did say sex in the face.

    When I was your age, male advice was either “get laid as much and as often by as many different women as you can before you [get married]…” OR the whole Blue Pill handbook, which was the “good” path. I was a good man. And my character building years netted me a lot of taking the high road, white knighting, friend zoning, and carpal tunnel in my right wrist. So if you want to be her BF, be a goddamn good one by being YOU. If not, get out now and go get laid. Repeatedly.

    Ironically, I’m 40 and know your shoes quite well, so be wary of hibernating those beasts for they will eventually awaken, and be very hungry. If you need to wrestle a bear, do it while you are young, while you heal fast, leaving plenty of time for those scars and stories to turn sexy and useful.

    And as always: kill your TV, unplug your FB, and read something old. Try Marcus Aurelius or Thoreau. Lift weights. Grow taller. Chop a cord of wood. Be USEFUL. Oh, and for the love of god don’t drink light beer.

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

      Invaluable advice from Tasmin! Here we are on a blog kind of aimed at women, and I’m blown away by the advice from the 40 yo guys to JJ. It warms my heart, it really does. As I said in the post, I totally get where JJ is coming from. Why shouldn’t he wonder about his SMV now that he’s had some success? But he must choose, and then he must live with his choice. It’s not an easy decision.

  • Iggles

    @ Tasmin:

    Ironically, I’m 40 and know your shoes quite well, so be wary of hibernating those beasts for they will eventually awaken, and be very hungry. If you need to wrestle a bear, do it while you are young, while you heal fast, leaving plenty of time for those scars and stories to turn sexy and useful.

    ^^ THIS is gold.

    Excellent advice, Tasmin. Speaks to the heart of what JJ’s struggling with.

    I think he’s a good guy; young and inexperienced. I think he truly cares for his girlfriend is doesn’t want to hurt her. If his choices are framed as “if you love her, you’ll stay in the relationship” and “if you don’t love her, cut her loose so you can pursue other girls”, JJ will likely choose to stay.. and one day cheat on her.

    The sleeping bear has the capacity to wreck his best intentions. He is grateful to have his girlfriend, but he also feels indebted to her. Part of him resents that, as well as the feeling of being boxed into the relationship (family and friends thinking they’re the perfect couple). It doesn’t make sense to him on a conscious level, but subconsciously his can’t escape the nagging thought that now that he has had her (his first girlfriend) he could land other girls. “Hotter” girls specifically.

    I’ve seen this up close before. Sometimes guys who are late bloomers gloss over things like longterm compatibility and/or physical looks in their rush to date someone who actually is interested in them too. Going for a 5 isn’t a big deal until 6s pays him attention. If the relationship is strong, it’s something he can easily ignore. If the relationship becomes stale or otherwise weakened, the desire to pursue these other girls who are now in his league grows.

    Back in college, one of my best friends dated a guy who was a late bloomer. They dated for a year and then he called things off. He refused to tell her why, but much later she found through a mutual friend that her Ex confided that he dumped her because he thought he could “do better” :roll:

  • J

    Only a man can affirm another’s manhood.

    I think a man can choose to validate his own manhood. DH’s relationship to his father was interrupted by the latter’s absence and alcoholism. He once said to me, “I’m my own father.”

    Perhaps not the nicest road to manhood, but it can be done.

  • Lokland

    You have three options.

    1. Break up with your girlfriend and fuck around.
    2. Stick with her and be faithful.
    3. Do both (character be damned).

    Your need for validation may or may not dwindle with time. If you get 5 years on, marry the girl and decide that its still a necessity your stuck with option 3 (or 1 but a divorce is messy).

    In which case, you’ll be more of an asshole if you dump or try option 3 with her now.

    ——————-

    As, for you feelings of inadequacy, its probably because your inadequate, stop being lazy.

    Simple fix.

    ————

    As, for feeling your girlfriend is not getting all she deserves with you. Not your problem.
    Let her make that judgement call. You don’t have to understand nor agree with it but its not your place to determine it.

    As long as she actually values you, follows through with actions, shows a reasonable degree of congruence between them and provides a feeling that said treatment/value will continue indefinitely its not your problem.

    ——————-

    Personally, I thought I wrote the letter to myself and Susan was hacking me or something. This so closely aligns with some of my thoughts/opinions.

    I’ve said a few of the same things.

    I’m married. I met my wife when I was 22, quite young. I’ll be 27 this summer.
    She’s 23.

    I do want that validation, still, that hasn’t gone away. Probably will when I’m wrinkly.

    I’m not sure whether or not I cashed in too early. Most men are getting to the same place I am with a greater degree of validation under their belts. I have 4 years experience with my wife vs. their couple of lays/girlfriends.

    Thats really the choice laid out before you and I don’t know which is better both in the moment or over a long period of time.

    Regards
    Lok

  • Lokland

    @J

    “Validation is not that hard to get if you put yourself out there; a good relationship is much harder to find.”

    -1

    Relationships are literally easier for a guy to obtain than almost anything else.
    Literally, its more work to go to the store and buy then cook food then get a girlfriend.

    Validation is like hitting a Cheerio with a bullet shot over a mountain, so it arcs every so perfectly.

    YMMV.

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    On external vs. internal validation.

    The homeless guy who thinks he is awesome and self-content is still a homeless loser.

    External standards matter.

  • J

    @Esco

    Both DH and my father have/have mad knife skills.

  • Lokland

    @Iggles

    “Back in college, one of my best friends dated a guy who was a late bloomer. They dated for a year and then he called things off. He refused to tell her why, but much later she found through a mutual friend that her Ex confided that he dumped her because he thought he could “do better””

    I’d hate to point out the obvious here,

    blooming in college for a guy is not late. Its actually kind of early.
    Therefore, a SMV X girl who decides dating an SMV X guy in college is a bit of an idiot. She is at her highest value ever, he is at one of his lowest points ever.

    He is better than her, just not right now.

    Unfair and mean. Yes. Also true however.

  • Iggles

    @ Lokland:

    He is better than her, just not right now.

    Unfair and mean. Yes. Also true however.

    I see where you’re going. In plenty of cases that would be true, but as I know the former couple in real life I can say that doesn’t apply. He thought he could do better, but he can’t.

    As karma would have it, he started losing his hair not long after the break up. Dude is still under 30 and he has lost so much of his looks. My friend was devastated after they broke up, but now she knows she dodged a bullet. The way he handled the break up showed a lot about his character, but she has also come to realize they just weren’t right for another anyway (as is the case in most break ups; time heals all wounds as perspective gives us a different view).

    blooming in college for a guy is not late. Its actually kind of early

    We’re not using the same definitions here.

    When I say late bloomer, I am referring to a person who started dating and had their first relationship after their teens (age 20+).

  • OffTheCuff

    Tasmin’s advice is pretty good here. JJ’s only crime here is being aware of both paths, admitting it, and not knowing what to do, rather, than being forced down a single path out of ignorance.

    Either break up and play the field and risk losing here, or, go all in with her for now. (There’s a third honest option, but I doubt he could get away with it.)

    Maybe you two will last, but probably not. Don’t accept pressure to marry from anyone, ever, and keep your standards high. You’ll know after a few years (yes, years) on your own timetable.

    Should you break up, then feel free to experience all the validation you want. I suspect you’ll find that it doesn’t solve the problem you hope it does.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Lok

    Personally, I thought I wrote the letter to myself and Susan was hacking me or something. This so closely aligns with some of my thoughts/opinions.

    Agreed.
    If I put in the effort to make myself look attractive, I can walk out the door and start getting glances with ease. This is ego-gratifying, and it’s a bit addictive after a while. I don’t initiate conversations, but it is undeniable that at points I might like to open a set, so to speak.

    Don’t, don’t, don’t. Bad mojo. Don’t set yourself up to resist temptation.

    It’s also unavoidable to have some feelings of inferiority on occasion at our age. They are temporary. Keep working on yourself and don’t be lazy.

    Most of all, do not endanger your relationship and be respectful to this girl.

    I think the moment-shifter for me was when one of my old college friends grabbed my crotch. Unwelcome, I should add. After that I tried to restrict myself a lot more.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    JJ’s insecurities will do his relationship in eventually. It’s just a matter of time. Not necessarily because he will ask other girls out–he may or may not do that again. But because that insecurity, hanging in the back of his mind, will slowly grind away at his self image and self esteem. Bit by bit, every day, until he becomes so unattractive and soft that his girl will end things.

    This is his first sex partner. It’s natural to wonder how he measures up, what his real sexual value is. He has almost no other positive reference experiences with the female gender. It’s going to be almost impossible for him to feel dominant and powerful over his woman. A young man needs to take risks, be ballsy, hit on girls. JJ is opting for the easy way out, which is to avoid the chase and cuddle with his girl. It’s comfortable and familiar.

    A man’s testosterone declines in the absence of risk taking and exertion. Getting out there, pounding the pavement, picking up chicks, taking risks, getting rejected, doing it again–that takes work, but it makes you feel alive.

    It will never make sense to me why young people (male and female) opt for serious exclusive relationships. Barring a hefty amount of maturity and self-awareness.

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

      It will never make sense to me why young people (male and female) opt for serious exclusive relationships.

      They get to experience all the benefits of emotional intimacy, loyalty, and love.

      They get to have sex without assuming high levels of risk.

  • Morgasm

    “should I just give up trying to think how other women feel about me? ”

    YES.

  • Joe

    @Susan

    Here we are on a blog kind of aimed at women, and I’m blown away by the advice from the 40 yo guys to JJ. It warms my heart, it really does.

    Yes – some really good stuff. I’m not sure it’s all equally good, though.

    Tasmin’s advice was to get off the fence, yes? JJ should choose one path or another, and not even try to straddle a line between what he thinks should, and what he thinks he wants to do. Right?

    But I don’t see a balance point there. JJ’s choices don’t seem to be equal in nature, one “red pill” the other equally “blue pill”. At least, they don’t look that way to me. I don’t think his choices should be given equal weight!

    One of JJ’s choices seems to be front loaded, and maybe short term or even shortsighted. The other, seems more long-term, a bit “iffy” and more difficult for that. The problem with front loaded and shortsighted choices aren’t that they’re bad in and of themselves – it’s that they close off good options later. Good options are *always* needed later.

    And then, there’s the other people involved. She counts too. To JJ, I would advise erring on the side of caution and on the side of considering the bigger picture best you can.

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

      @Joe

      One of JJ’s choices seems to be front loaded, and maybe short term or even shortsighted. The other, seems more long-term, a bit “iffy” and more difficult for that. The problem with front loaded and shortsighted choices aren’t that they’re bad in and of themselves – it’s that they close off good options later.

      One of the classic stupid decisions is giving up something great because you think you can do better. Often times one party will suggest a “break” where they test their market value. (No person should ever agree to a break – always insist on 100% commitment or a full breakup.) Often times, they realize what they had and try to get back together. This is often tempting for the person who’s been hurt, but it’s never a good idea. Not if the impetus for the breakup was validation from other men or women.

      Making these sorts of shortsighted decisions is hopefully the province of the immature. If JJ breaks up with his gf she will experience her first heartbreak, and she’ll eventually get up, dust herself off, and find someone who is not plagued with those questions.

      I know some people marry their first sweetheart, but it’s unusual. Most people plan on doing some dating to shop around, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Of course, you run the risk of passing on the best person you ever will attract.

      And then, there’s the other people involved. She counts too.

      Indeed. Despite my saying “no harm, no foul” in the post, the girl he asked out has also been injured, however slightly.

  • Morgasm

    “(Of course, there’s a high level of dysfunction in the SMP, so we see women chasing sexual variety and men chasing commitment. But that’s wacked.)”

    Men chasing commitment is not wacked.

  • Jesse

    I’m talking out of my ass here since I didn’t read everything carefully, but to me it looks like this:

    The two yes/no questions you have to answer are 1) are you tickled pink to be with this girl, and 2) are you the kind of lad who’s cut out for early commitment/marriage? What I’m getting at is firstly how much you see this girl as marriage material, and secondly how strong a need you feel to dip your wick elsewhere, as it were.

    You can build a 2×2 matrix encompassing all four possibilities, and the way I see it the only way you should continue this relationship, and therefore swear off other women, is if you answer yes to both questions. If you’re not absolutely thrilled with her then get out anyway, and if it’s going to gnaw at you that you haven’t seen what other bids you can get, then you should probably end things as amicably as you possibly can with your lady friend and go about your business. Who knows, you might even be able to come back after a while and take things up with her again, so don’t be an ass with her if that might matter to you.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Who knows, you might even be able to come back after a while and take things up with her again, so don’t be an ass with her if that might matter to you.

    “I really love and want to marry you, but first I need to chase other women and bang them. I’ll be back in a few years.”

  • Valentin

    Ask her outright whether she notices or cares whether other girls think you’re hot. If she is able to reassure you…

    How to kill the vagina tingles 101 right here.
    If you’re reading this JJ, let me teach you about the one thing that makes a man: a man.
    That is riding through your fears and insecurities and needs for reassurance. Do not for one second allow them to influence your behaviour and social wants. Find that strength within you and man up.

    Or you know: act like a beta and wonder why your gf stopped getting wet for you in about one or two months. Never ever talk about these issues of yours with any woman. Never ever openly need reassurance from a woman.

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

      @Valentin

      Ask her outright whether she notices or cares whether other girls think you’re hot. If she is able to reassure you…

      How to kill the vagina tingles 101 right here.

      You’re right, that was bad advice and I’m happy to retract it. Very high risk of DLV, though my guess is that his gf does not care, and that should be fairly obvious. He’d know if she cared and found him lacking.

  • Valentin

    “I really love and want to marry you, but first I need to chase other women and bang them. I’ll be back in a few years.”

    I freely admit to this.

    Not only that but most women hate men that get oneitis because they never had anyone else. Why do you thing they’re so huge on preselection to the point that it completely blinds them? The irony is that this extreme preselection is exactly what is creating and compounding the problem.

    But yeah alot of betas feel rather bitter and vindictive: women get to play around in their youth while men that don’t are treated like low quality goods. Do you really expect a guy that has matured and gotten his game on to settle with a woman that has gotten to play around more in comparison? The answer is no 9/10 times.

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

      “I really love and want to marry you, but first I need to chase other women and bang them. I’ll be back in a few years.”

      I freely admit to this.

      When my focus groups were still in college, one was told by a guy she was seeing that he didn’t want a relationship:

      “You are exactly the kind of girl I want to bring home to my parents. But I really don’t plan to do that for another 5 or 10 years.”

  • Underdog

    1. We could be witnessing the male hamster justifying its natural need for promiscuity.

    2. We could be witnessing the development of a doomed beta’s relationship.

  • taterearl

    If you spend your life only validating yourself through women…you will live a terrible life.

    I only found this out about a 1/2 a year ago…but I can tell you when I stopped this life became so much easier and smoother. The byproduct is people will become attracted to who you are.

  • Thinking Neanderthal

    (…) despite being in my early 20s, I feel that she could potentially be someone I’d marry (…) EVENTUALLY, MAYBE. (…)

    However, I sometimes feel inadequate and “not good enough” (…). I don’t think I’ve worked as hard as I should in school, and I don’t have a great job lined up like many of my friends. A few of them have even started firms that have received VC funding! (I HAVEN’T DONE ANYTHING REMARKABLE WITH MY LIFE YET AND I SEEM TO BE ENVIOUS OF MY FRIEND’S ACCOMPLISHMENTS, WHICH I INCIDENTALLY USE SOMETIMES BY ASSOCIATION TO AUGMENT MY APPARENT SOCIAL VALUE)

    Nonetheless, I’m very (…) ATTRACTED to other girls. Somehow I don’t feel it’s enough TO HAVE HAD SEX WITH ONLY ONE WOMAN (…) In a way, I’m asking for validation from females. BUT I’M TOO MUCH OF A WUSS TO LEAVE MY GIRLFRIEND BECAUSE I’M NOT SURE I CAN GET ANY BETTER. (…)

    A week ago, I asked out a girl I’d met in one of my classes. Incredibly, she said yes even though I didn’t put much effort into asking her out. However, a few days ago she found about my relationship status and it made me feel incredibly stupid WHEN IT OCCURRED TO ME SHE WASN’T EVEN BETTER LOOKING THAN MY CURRENT GF. (…) I politely ended contact with her and felt really, really stupid TO HAVE BEEN CAUGHT CHARMING A GIRL PLAYING BELOW MY GAME LEVEL. In addition, I felt like a major asshole. TURNS OUT I’M NOT A TOTAL ASSHOLE JUST YET.

    (…) I’M WAXING EXISTENTIAL TRYING TO JUSTIFY MY BEHAVIOR TO MYSELF (…)

    Susan, (…) PLEASE CONFIRM THAT IT’S OK FOR ME TO LEAVE MY CURRENT GF TO HAVE SEX WITH OTHER WOMEN, AND THAT IN THE END I WILL FIND A GIRL OF HIGHER VALUE, NEVER TO REGRET THIS DECISION.

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

      Thinking Neanderthal at 58: Hilarious.

  • Bells

    I’m a bit reluctant to appreciate the advice that some men have offered to JJ. In the end, their words simply boil down to: spread your seed as much as possible, settle down later, and then fondly reminisce about your awesome sex stories. If anything, this type of advice inadvertently encourages women to turn a blind eye and accept the fact that guys need a period of time to gather a larger variety of sex partners in order to feel like a true man. That’s nauseating and not attractive.

    I also don’t believe that this is the proper use of the term preselection. I’m not attracted by a man’s ability to bang a lot of girls. This may be considered a trophy for men but it’s a turn off for many women. I define pre-selection by a high quality female (beautiful with a great personality) being involved in a relationship with a man. Even then, pre-selection does not play such a large role that it blinds my logic and compels me to single-mindedly compete for the same man. That’s attributing too many points to an issue that’s barely negligible.

    This also makes me guarded because I personally thought it would be a better decision to invest in a man at his youth in order to grow together through age. It would hurt to be simply discarded because he felt he could get a hotter girl as his status increased.

    If women looked at other alternatives, I’m certain that some men will find a way to become embittered about the process. Ex: If women primarily formed relationships with the finished aged product, some men will grumble about being forsaken in their youth and others will accuse you of being a gold-digger.

    Anyways, I think JJ should do whatever he wants. If he wants to try out other girls, just don’t drag the gf along with your inadequacies.

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

      @Bells

      I’m not attracted by a man’s ability to bang a lot of girls. This may be considered a trophy for men but it’s a turn off for many women. I define pre-selection by a high quality female (beautiful with a great personality) being involved in a relationship with a man. Even then, pre-selection does not play such a large role that it blinds my logic and compels me to single-mindedly compete for the same man. That’s attributing too many points to an issue that’s barely negligible.

      An interesting and cogent view. I wonder how widely shared it is by women in general. I will agree that preselection is weak unless the quality of female is high. And of course you are right about logic. So many precepts of Game assume a non-thinking female – the feral hindbrain.

  • Escoffier

    Perhaps the reason that N=1 marriages are not common has less to do with the desirability of such men (though I concede that is a factor) and more to do with modern culture, which pushes and prods people into early, indiscriminate sex.

  • Lokland

    What a bloody mess.
    Redo. (Susan if you wouldn’t mind deleting both prior comments.)

    @Bells

    @Bell

    “If anything, this type of advice inadvertently encourages women to turn a blind eye and accept the fact that guys need a period of time to gather a larger variety of sex partners in order to feel like a true man. That’s nauseating and not attractive.
    I also don’t believe that this is the proper use of the term preselection. I’m not attracted by a man’s ability to bang a lot of girls. This may be considered a trophy for men but it’s a turn off for many women.”

    JJ and his girlfriend are both N=1.
    We all assume that JJs gf will be satisfied in marriage.

    Seeing as their is a lack of N=1 marriages it would lead one to suspect that JJs gf may not be satisfied in a marriage with a man whose only had 1 sex partner.

    Other options are that:N=1 marriages are plentiful but they aren’t here commenting or that they are here but silent about that detail (as it stands we have NO ONE in such an arrangement at HUS and these are the happily married people)

    JJ does need to consider that his position currently is quite rare as well. There might be a reason for that rarity. (Mega perhaps you have exact stats.)
    (He must also consider his own drives. Regret now vs. possible regret later whereas the regret now will be temporary. Regret later will be life ruining.)

  • Lokland

    Btw, though it may sound strange.
    JJ, I’m offerring you non-directive advice.

    If you want my honest opinion, stick with the girlfriend who actually loves you.

    Since your young, theres lots of time to trade in before marriage (or engagement) and atm your desire for variety seems to be more of the grass is greener variety than an actual drive to do something.
    If those desires do not go away or grow in intensity than yes, its time to go play the field.

    Your options are not dump her and variety or relationship bliss as some of the women would have you believe.

    Keep the girlfriend until you decide what is better for YOU. Be that marriage with her or variety without her (or both). However, do not cheat on her.

    Be on the level about it and keep her around until you’ve decided what is best for you. (Don’t drag it out for years, thats cruel.)

  • Cooper

    “Someone’s unhaaaappy.”

    ROFL!! Too good!!

  • Cooper

    @Bells # 59

    +1

  • Thinking Neanderthal

    “I also don’t believe that this is the proper use of the term preselection. I’m not attracted by a man’s ability to bang a lot of girls. This may be considered a trophy for men but it’s a turn off for many women.”

    I’m not sure why it should be assumed that a man’s measured ability to bang a lot of girls is the factor to be considered when evaluating his attractiveness. I think the statistics themselves – which are perhaps better left uncommunicated anyway – are less important than the skills and confidence acquired in the process. This is where the attraction comes from, not the road sheet.

    As mentionned by Lokland, though it is certainly possible and has no doubt been seen before, it may be a bigger challenge for someone who has experienced only one partner and relationship to maintain desire in a LTR. Not to mention that the continuous self-doubts, “what ifs”, and feelings of inadequacy expressed by the unsure partner may eventually jeopardize the relationship.

    It may be she is the girl of his life, but how can he really know if he hasn’t internalized other experiences with which to compare this current relationship ? I know the doubt would drive me crazy, and I personally prefer to be with a woman that knows we are a good match because she has experienced poorer fits before, not someone who stays with me only or in part because she’s afraid of the unknown. Then we can both really appreciate our good fortune.

    But maybe that’s because I am at n > 1, and I can only see my own experience.

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

      I know the doubt would drive me crazy, and I personally prefer to be with a woman that knows we are a good match because she has experienced poorer fits before, not someone who stays with me only or in part because she’s afraid of the unknown. Then we can both really appreciate our good fortune.

      I remember being extremely gratified when my husband and I first shared that for both of us, the relationship was miles better than anything we’d had in the past. It does help to have a basis for comparison, I think. I benefited from knowing “This is it!” when he surpassed all prior guys, and I also liked knowing that I had out-competed the women in his own past.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Susan:

    They get to experience all the benefits of emotional intimacy, loyalty, and love. They get to have sex without assuming high levels of risk.

    All of these things can be had with relationships that are non-serious, non-exclusive, or a combination of both. The traditional boyfriend/ girlfriend model, while very familiar culturally, is basically a “proto-marriage” of sorts, and is usually adopted by people (late teens and early twenties) who have not experienced enough life and enough of themselves to know what the hell they’re doing. The result is often a lot of emotional ups and downs, heartbreak and misery.

    I’m not against serious, exclusive relationships at all, but in the proper context and done intelligently. Young people should ease into them by first experiencing less serious bondings, especially while they’re building their career and finding their identity.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Bells, I do understand the frustration, but:

    If women looked at other alternatives, I’m certain that some men will find a way to become embittered about the process. Ex: If women primarily formed relationships with the finished aged product, some men will grumble about being forsaken in their youth and others will accuse you of being a gold-digger.

    Do you actually believe our reality is something different from this? Are you under the impression that college men are being inundated with aggressive female competition and relationship offers? That women are eager to commit at a young age and want to grow with a boy into a man and fall in love with his potential?

    IME, women are more excited over at least a semi-finished project, especially if it is attractive.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    After some consideration, there are some keywords and statements missing from the original letter that lead me to believe JJ should probably let the girl go.

    No “she’s hot” or “she’s really sexy.” No “our sex life is great / amazing / awesome.” No statement of great attraction to her, only the desire to be validated by other women.

    Conclusion: he’s just not that into her.

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

      No “she’s hot” or “she’s really sexy.” No “our sex life is great / amazing / awesome.” No statement of great attraction to her, only the desire to be validated by other women.

      Conclusion: he’s just not that into her.

      I’m afraid you’re right. If he was that into her, he would never have gotten to the point of inviting a classmate out on a date. He may love her, but he doesn’t seem to be in love with her. ILYBINILWY That happens to guys too. :P

  • Just a thought

    Hi guys, I thought Tasmin’s advice was beautiful, well written and sweet. I kinda want to save it for posterity. I wish we had some gallery of the best advice/posts on HUS. While I can’t contribute much, being only 19 and all, I thought this poem would be nice.
    “Desiderata”
    Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.
    As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant, they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.

    If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself. Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

    Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism. Be yourself. Especially, do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love, for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is perennial as the grass.

    Take kindly to the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.

    Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

    Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul.

    With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world.

    Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.”

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

      @Just a Thought

      Thanks for sharing Desiderata. That is a recipe for contentment.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    JJ does need to consider that his position currently is quite rare as well. There might be a reason for that rarity. (Mega perhaps you have exact stats.)
    (He must also consider his own drives. Regret now vs. possible regret later whereas the regret now will be temporary. Regret later will be life ruining.)

    You forgot Deti’s case in which he let go a not so hot but good woman and ended up marrying someone hotter but that lied about a very important, to him, matter to get the ring and that ended up telling to him the truth in the worst possible way. Not sure how common that is, but it does happen.

  • Jonny

    Many questions “Is there any way to get validation from women without deceiving them and betraying my girlfriend? If not, then should I just give up trying to think how other women feel about me?”

    Not really. Your girlfriend’s validation should be enough for you, but since it isn’t, perhaps you should consider breaking up with her. You can learn from this. Breaking up is hard, but better to find out if the validation from other women is genuine. Betrayal towards your girlfriend is worse. You probably already left her in your heart and mind.

    The longer you dwell on other women, the less committed you are with your girlfriend. I would say give it up, but you’re still young and not ready for commitment.

    Breakup now. Date around. Find out your actual worth, which I suspect isn’t all that, but you never know until you did it. NO REGRETS!!!

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Anacaona, from the perspective of the girl, I would rather marry a man who was passionate about me than only lukewarm. If a guy got married to the plainer girl but wasn’t that into her, he might cheat on her and break her heart later, possibly after they have kids. That is much worse than leaving her when she was young, which frees her to be with a man who truly appreciates her good qualities.

    I see no point in convincing someone to love me and be faithful to me. I would rather be alone than be with a guy who kept me as a “safety” and the whole time wanting to see if he could get other girls.

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    “I see no point in convincing someone to love me and be faithful to me. I would rather be alone than be with a guy who kept me as a “safety” and the whole time wanting to see if he could get other girls.”

    Not to down on this but like some men who won’t ever have options, some women will never be able to have men who actually desire them.

    Lukewarm may be as good as it gets for some people.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Anacaona, from the perspective of the girl, I would rather marry a man who was passionate about me than only lukewarm. If a guy got married to the plainer girl but wasn’t that into her, he might cheat on her and break her heart later, possibly after they have kids. That is much worse than leaving her when she was young, which frees her to be with a man who truly appreciates her good qualities.
    I think I see leaving the plainer girl to chase hot bitches as a stage. I remember that Athol mentioned a stage when he though on forsaking monogamy but once time passed he realized that not pursuing this was better than the other way around and he seems happy at this point in his life with championing monogamy instead of any other options as the best. Like someone said men want an additional woman when cheating not to let go of the other one so I don’t see it as a situation were he will never fall for her, more like a stage that will pass when the song of Testosterone stops ringing his ear.
    I don’t think a man that chooses the plainer but better girl will regret it later unless he is really in the unrestricted scale more like maturity will show him that he got it right all along.
    Cheating is more complex than I didn’t slept with enough women in my youth, men never sleep with enough women if we go for what their hindbrain tells them. And a cheater doesn’t need an excuse to cheat he will create his own rationalization, regardless of how attracted he is to the current woman in his life.
    This is something they outgrow because is hormonal, it gets worse with the really unrestricted ones whose hormone probably stay in the same levels for almost all their lives, but most men just learn that sexy hot bitches are not the key to happiness sooner or later regardless how many hot bitches they have in their past, YMMV.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    N=1 marriages are plentiful but they aren’t here commenting or that they are here but silent about that detail (as it stands we have NO ONE in such an arrangement at HUS and these are the happily married people)

    Not that I really comment anymore or am married, but I’m in an N=1 relationship that’s going on four years. My BF’s N count doesn’t bug me, but I might be weird.

  • Escoffier

    The idea that one can go through life and have “no regrets” is very harmful as it is being promulgated in some posts here. I suppose it depends on the meaning of “regret.” If one means simply, no debilitating feeling that you blew it somewhere along the way, made a truly terrible choice for which you’re still paying, then, yes, that’s possible.

    But many here seem to mean, “Never wonder if the grass might have been greener, whether taking the left as opposed to the right fork in the road might have yielded a better result.”

    For example, when I was in grad school, about halfway through, I was unexpectedly offered a great job in a city where I desperately wanted to be. After much thought, and persuasion by my top prof, I decided not to go. About two months later my future wife showed up and in little over a year we were married. So, what might have happened had I gone? Who knows! I think about it sometimes. It’s not a regret, but everyone at some time has to choose between competing goods, or even a certain good v. a speculative better. The idea that it’s always smart to ditch the certain good to chase speculative better is nuts. It’s only slightly less nuts for the young who have more freedom but it’s still a tool for warping the mind.

    And the grass somewhere will always be greener, often in the strangest, most improabable ways. I married my wife for many reasons but her intellect and interests were high on the list. We studied the same subject, loved the same authors, had the same point of view, etc. Trust me, this is like one in 10 million for pretty girls.

    Many years later I was at a party and I met a very charming and attractive young lady who, it turned out, was a grad student of the professor I admire the most on this earth. She was studying my exact specialty, which he has written extensively about (I have his books more or less memorized). She knew the material in even greater depth than my wife, having been at it longer and more recently. It was like having the most intellectually stimulating seminar conversation ever, but with a hot chick. If my wife was one in ten million, this girl was one in a billion. Spooky!

    So, one reaction I might have had was to think “Damn, I married the wrong girl, if I only I had held out, I could have found the absolutely perfect woman for me, all of the same essentials, just MOAR!” But that would have been stupid, to say nothing of immoral.

    Whatever your most cherished quality is in a mate, there’s always someone out there who has more of it. The same is true of you. Whoever you are.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Whatever your most cherished quality is in a mate, there’s always someone out there who has more of it. The same is true of you. Whoever you are.
    This is a very important observation. Very well said. :)

  • Jackie

    By the time I got to part about asking the other girl out — BTW, how is this *not* cheating? We talk all the time about how intent matters here. Isn’t this clearly intent to cheat on his GF? — I thought, This guy has one foot out the door already.

    Maybe it’s in the name of “validation,” maybe it’s sowing wild oats, maybe this just isn’t the right match. All I know is, I don’t think any of us would like to be in the situation of “adoring” someone, the way he says his GF does to him, while they are asking other people out behind your back.

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

      @Jackie

      By the time I got to part about asking the other girl out — BTW, how is this *not* cheating? We talk all the time about how intent matters here. Isn’t this clearly intent to cheat on his GF? — I thought, This guy has one foot out the door already.

      It is cheating – I thought I made that pretty clear. My definition of cheating is very conservative: it is anything you do that you conceal from your partner. A long telephone call with an ex is cheating if you keep it a secret. Flirting at a bar when you’re out with the girls is cheating. Giving your phone number out is cheating. If deceit is present, including lies of omission, you’re cheating.

      I do think that not all cheating is created equal – and IMO JJ did take responsibility for his wrongful behavior. If we take him at his word and measure his intent, he planned to go on the date and kiss the girl. He was only saved from the wrongdoing by her discovery of his lie.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Lokland, the lukewarm PLUS desire for other women is what I object to, so I wouldn’t mind lukewarm and faithful. I probably don’t inspire passion in my husband all the time. But I can always inspire more when I put in more effort, if the man is committed to me and not looking for greener grass.

    Escoffier, that may be true, but it is the sum total of the whole person that is the one I love. You could say it is the soul of the person which I cherish, and there’s no one out there with more of that. Different yes, but not more.

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

    Now, if we were to consider a man WHO HAS ONLY EVER BEEN WITH HIS WIFE, would his relationship be better or worse (if his wife were also his first as i doubt anything greater than that is possible)… than if he had had prior partners.

    I think that depends entirely on how he feels about his history. If it makes him feel inadequate, his relationship will suffer. And of course, there is some number of prior partners that registers disgust with many women. I honestly don’t know what that number is – it will vary. I shared the story of the woman who was disappointed to learn her model bf’s number of 21. And I know another woman who was relieved that her bf’s number was 12. She was afraid it was higher. (Her own is 12, and she reports they’re both happy with the information.)

  • Escoffier

    Yes, indeed, which is why even if you find someone who has more of your Most Desired Trait, that trait is not, by itself, the whole person so if you married a good mate in the first place, you should be happy staying. The whole should be greater than the sum of the parts and much greater than even the greatest part.

    BUT–”Nature has created men so that they are able to desire everything and unable to attain everything. So, since the desire is always greater than the power of acquiring, the result is discontent with what one possesses and lack of satisfaction with it.”

    It’s important to learn to get this impulse under control.

  • Jackie

    ““I really love and want to marry you, but first I need to chase other women and bang them. I’ll be back in a few years.”

    I freely admit to this.

    When my focus groups were still in college, one was told by a guy she was seeing that he didn’t want a relationship:

    ‘You are exactly the kind of girl I want to bring home to my parents. But I really don’t plan to do that for another 5 or 10 years.’”
    ====
    All of the above is a super “DLV” to me:

    First of all, why would you want to be serious about a guy who apparently sees the actuality of you as less valuable than the million-and-one possibilities which only have a small chance of existing? Isn’t that rather insulting?

    I mean, just admit it and break up honestly. You can’t stash love away like a miser hoards gold or stuffs money into a mattress. It doesn’t “keep” that way– just like any other living thing.

    Secondly, does it ever occur to this guy (or anyone else) that tomorrow is not promised? I am seeing a lot of assumptions here: That people won’t get sick, be injured, or have loss of any kind. Basically, that their lives are like a stock that is only going to keep going up and up and up. But you never know what life is going to bring you.

    Lastly, it shows an arrogance (not be confused with confidence) and a poverty of experience to think that someone is going to wait around for you while you sow wild oats. Maybe if they have low self-esteem or other issues, but healthy people move on with their lives. (Didn’t Hope have a story about a guy who wasn’t into her, then looked her up later to find out she was married and had started a family? I seem to remember something along those lines…)

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

      @Jackie

      I think that remark about coming back in a few years was meant facetiously. One would have to be insane or have zero self-respect to even to listen to such a suggestion!

  • Jackie

    “Now, if we were to consider a man WHO HAS ONLY EVER BEEN WITH HIS WIFE, would his relationship be better or worse (if his wife were also his first as i doubt anything greater than that is possible)… than if he had had prior partners.

    I think that depends entirely on how he feels about his history.”
    ===
    Agreed! It’s interesting to me how much of this really has nothing to do with women, but, instead the validation of other men. It’s almost like “notches” are their currency for self-worth.

    This reminds me of the discussion with the BB player’s text message– Have you observed that many of these uber-players have grown up without dads and/or dad-like validation (mentors, role models)? I’m thinking of the BB players, athletes, rappers, etc. It’s almost like there is this hyper-exaggeration of masculinity in these guys that doesn’t exist in guys who have a solid relationship with their dad.

    And that makes me really sad, actually. Sad for the guy and sad for the women who buy in to those games, since no amount of sex will be able to give him the self-worth that comes from having an involved father. :(

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

      @Jackie

      It’s interesting to me how much of this really has nothing to do with women, but, instead the validation of other men. It’s almost like “notches” are their currency for self-worth.

      I agree that this is a trap that many young men fall into. There’s a lot of self-loathing among young men who don’t have numerous partners in their past. It’s more than the biological drive for sex. There is a large component of comparison to other men. Perhaps this comes back to male status and social dominance being the result of intrasexual male competition. When men compete for women, they’re competing with other men, and sex is the highest stakes game of all. How do we accomodate the males who actually prefer sex in a committed relationship? We need to eradicate the shame associated with that preference, but I have no idea how to do that in our culture.

  • Escoffier

    “If he was that into her, he would never have gotten to the point of inviting a classmate out on a date.”

    Not necessarily. I don’t find what he said implausible. In game terms, his hindbrain (“Variety!!!”) is competing with his frontal lobe (“You have a great girl here!”)

    Conventional wisdom these days says that men can squelch the desire for variety by indulging it for a while, or “satisfying it.” I doubt that. Seems to me more like indulging intensifies the taste for it, at least in the near- and medium-term. And, from what I have read on certain game sites, even if a guy eventually gets over it, it takes years and he emerges rather cynical and burnt out. Not exactly great material for a loving marriage.

    There just might have been a reason why society used to discourage this!

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

      In game terms, his hindbrain (“Variety!!!”) is competing with his frontal lobe (“You have a great girl here!”)

      Right, that summarizes his email, IMO. However, wondering about variety is natural enough, but actually going through with the cheating is surprising to me. He risked his relationship by doing that. It seems to me that he’s already checked out to some degree, by playing with fire.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I think that depends entirely on how he feels about his history. If it makes him feel inadequate, his relationship will suffer. And of course, there is some number of prior partners that registers disgust with many women. I honestly don’t know what that number is – it will vary. ”

    I was actually referencing the way the woman feels (as well as the man).
    We can see it here, no to few women (Olive), are openly admitting that their N=1 with husband (or even low N).

    I’m just simply pointing out that what we point out to be a horse is as rare as your average unicorn.
    That might be due to a whole slew of factors including confirmation bias, silence from those who would fit into the situation etc.

    Or maybe its because the people in those relationships are not content and/or happy (man or woman) and thus those relationships tend not to exist.

    “and I also liked knowing that I had out-competed the women in his own past.”

    This is what I was getting at when saying the woman may not be happy in such a relationship.

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

      @Lokland

      I think N=1 relationships are rarely reported on secular blogs. The fact that today we go an average of 15-17 years between puberty and marriage is bound to make it unusual. The claim is common on some of the Christian Game blogs, and so is much earlier marriage.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    (Didn’t Hope have a story about a guy who wasn’t into her, then looked her up later to find out she was married and had started a family? I seem to remember something along those lines…)

    Not sure if Hope but I did mentioned once that I had a coworker than upon announcing my engagement to my gringo was really surprised and troubled. When I pressed him he told me that he knew I was a very good girl and was going to marry me as soon as he was done with the “cueros’ (Dominican expression of sluts usually the ones you need to dine and wine before they put out)
    I was livid and a bit amused since this guy and I just talked a bit once in a while at work. He knew that I was not going to find a mate because “I was a good girl” and most men in my country will not get anywhere near me with that requirements and never felt sorry for my loneliness. He also counted on me be so lonely that the first guy that showed some commitment will do regardless of anything else. Bizarrest thing ever. :/

  • Jackie

    @Susan (96)

    That’s good to know! Sometimes I completely miss tone on the internet! ;-)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I think Escof is nailing it. Men also have the competition behind hind brain and forebrain going on, all the time even. We are also suspectible to emotional frames and states dictating “truths,” and that includes our evaluation of other people.

    Most notably, Dennis Rodman seems to think Kim Jong Un is a good guy. That whole prison camp thing? well he doesn’t really WANT to do it…RUN HAMSTER RUN!

    The reason we put so much emphasis on female emotionality is that, apparently, they are much more “in touch” with their emotions than men, whereas men apparently take a longer time to react emotionally to a situation. Female attraction triggers also appear to be malleable and responsive to emotional frames. Men are visual.

    That doesn’t mean men have no emotions, though. We just have to learn to control them when they are getting out of hand.

  • Jonny

    @Escoffier, Post 76: In saying “No Regrets”, I meant the truest sense of that. Don’t have any regret in whatever you’re doing. This shouldn’t mean that you can’t hurt anyone. In this case, the guy is hurting his girlfriend regardless of whether he chooses to stay or leave. He is clearly in a NO WIN situation. He brought this upon himself.

    One should lessen the negative impact on the girlfriend. The lesser impact, unfortunately, is him breaking up with her. She will be sad, but her pain will not be as bad as if he cheated, or he checked out of the relationship. He might even do the best thing and stay. What of that? He is still young. He still might not marry her. He could waste another 3 to 5 years with her and then break up as relationships that don’t lead to marriage do.

    Or he marries her in the end. He will have no regrets then. Unless he cheated on her after the marriage.

    “Damn, I married the wrong girl, if I only I had held out, I could have found the absolutely perfect woman for me, all of the same essentials, just MOAR!” But that would have been stupid, to say nothing of immoral.”

    You never know who you will meet, but in addition to stupid and immoral, this is ridiculous. You had several choices, but just because you met someone perfect does not mean she will hookup with you from a chance meeting. No regrets please. You picked and married your wife. We all make decision for ourselves and our mates. Pick carefully. Your decisions now will affect your life.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “There’s a lot of self-loathing among young men who don’t have numerous partners in their past. It’s more than the biological drive for sex. There is a large component of comparison to other men.”

    Yes.

    “Perhaps this comes back to male status and social dominance being the result of intrasexual male competition. When men compete for women, they’re competing with other men, and sex is the highest stakes game of all.”

    Not exactly. In a society where sex is plentiful (perceived or real) your a loser for not having multiple partners.
    In a society where sex is restricted access to most men (never going to be all) and a subset of the female population then its NBD.

    Most guys want to be normal. Not a super Casanova. They seek that from both their elders and peers.

    Having a girlfriend is not the mark of normality but a loser who couldn’t do better.

    Also, I don’t think this shame will stop at LTRs. Theres no reason a man should stop being ashamed after marriage. He is still a loser who couldn’t get laid in a culture where it should have been easy.

    “How do we accomodate the males who actually prefer sex in a committed relationship? We need to eradicate the shame associated with that preference, but I have no idea how to do that in our culture.”

    Simple, make girlfriend situation normal. Make player a vindictive, evil outcast who preys on the bad woman.

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

      @Lokland

      In a society where sex is plentiful (perceived or real) your a loser for not having multiple partners.
      In a society where sex is restricted access to most men (never going to be all) and a subset of the female population then its NBD.

      I do think correcting Pluralistic Ignorance can help. But IDK, I see a lot of resentment of women going for “top males.” That resentment is usually directed at women, but they’re just responding to cues. Even the women who don’t hook up with them will still objectively be able to perceive their good looks. I think the shame can only work if it comes from other males. Not sure how that could be done effectively.

      Having a girlfriend is not the mark of normality but a loser who couldn’t do better.

      Most depressing comment of 2013!

      Make player a vindictive, evil outcast who preys on the bad woman.

      Heh, I do my share of player shaming. I wish men would shame cads – after all, they’re the ones who stand to benefit the most in one sense.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Anacaona “And a cheater doesn’t need an excuse to cheat he will create his own rationalization, regardless of how attracted he is to the current woman in his life.”

    Cheating usually happens after the initial passion has cooled, so there is an “immunity” period when people first fall in love and are super attracted to each other. How a person acts and think in this cooler period tells a lot about the long-term viability of the relationship.

    Susan, yep. I’ve heard that ILYBINILWY line from a guy. The following week I cried and moped, and it was during that time I met my husband.

    Jackie, I’ve told that story before, and it was with the same guy who wasn’t “in love” with me. When I was pregnant, he said something to the effect of “wish that was my baby” and I was like WTF. He also said I was too eager and didn’t play hard to get enough. I did not talk to him again.

    Lokland, my husband has low N, and I am super happy. I don’t see why you keep asking for testimonials like we’re in infomercials. :P

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Thats the part that makes no sense.
    if we assume that any relationship has the same chance of success/leading to marriage as any other (normal assumption) then we would expect to see a uniform distribution of N’s in relationships.

    This is not the case and theres actually a skewing towards higher N meaning that for whatever reason it is favoured over low N relationships.

    If the distribution were normal, and there was no real selection for or against, we would be seeing an equal number of high and low N relationships which is not the case.

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

      @Lokland

      if we assume that any relationship has the same chance of success/leading to marriage as any other (normal assumption) then we would expect to see a uniform distribution of N’s in relationships.

      This is not the case and theres actually a skewing towards higher N meaning that for whatever reason it is favoured over low N relationships.

      If the distribution were normal, and there was no real selection for or against, we would be seeing an equal number of high and low N relationships which is not the case.

      I’m sorry, I’m confused. Could you please restate this with more detail? A skewing towards higher N in what? Are you saying that higher N is more likely to lead to marriage? If so, I expect Megaman will swing by and set us right.

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    “Lokland, my husband has low N, and I am super happy. I don’t see why you keep asking for testimonials like we’re in infomercials. ”

    Big ass grin :P
    Because I’m an INTJ. I need numbers and anecdotes not feelings.
    Also, I’m not asking. Merely commenting on the difference in apparent numbers of each (i.e.. skewed distribution).

  • HanSolo

    @Susan 98 and Jackie

    It’s also women pulling out the “you’re a loser that can’t even get laid” card.

  • Jackie

    @Susan
    “How do we accomodate the males who actually prefer sex in a committed relationship? We need to eradicate the shame associated with that preference, but I have no idea how to do that in our culture.”
    ===
    I think that our culture has the same issue as JJ’s letter: The need for external validation has to be shown as worthless compared to the better path of self-awareness and self-respect.

    Yes, this will definitely be a tough sell! But I think the best advertisement is actually living it, without excuses. It’s interesting that Hope’s story, of restricted people committing to each other and starting a family, is what the guy who “wasn’t in love” with her wanted in the end.
    =====
    @Lokland

    LL, I’d be interested to know if you have analyzed yourself enough to understand how you saw yourself in JJ’s letter. Thanks for considering the request.

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

      @Jackie

      The need for external validation has to be shown as worthless compared to the better path of self-awareness and self-respect.

      Yes, and that speaks to the woeful lack of character education in our society. Something that cannot be taught in schools. It must happen at home. Because so many American parents are invested in having their kids be “the best” at everything, they stress competitive excellence, character be damned. And of course kids whose parents are not present have less opportunity to learn important lessons.

      This is one very important function of religion – it provides us with a blueprint for a good and noble life. The more secular we become, the more character suffers.

  • Jackie

    @Captain Solo

    “It’s also women pulling out the “you’re a loser that can’t even get laid” card.”
    ===
    :shock: Really? Because that seems like not only a cruel thing to do, but really crass as well. :( And it also seems the worst kind of metric to judge loser-dom by, in my humble opinion!

    If I haven’t missed tone (like I did upthread!) what kind of women do this?

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    Simple, make girlfriend situation normal. Make player a vindictive, evil outcast who preys on the bad woman.

    I’m curiuos about how you make the player the vindictive outcast and whether that will have any effect. Low-level wannabe players are easy enough to influence by getting women to stop putting out for them–these guys are really herd followers rather than herd leaders–but it’s the apex-level players (like J.R. Smith) and the much greater number of women per apex-player that is more of the problem.

    How do you make the JR’s an outcast when they’re making millions, kind of charming in their own badass way (notice how his phrase “you trying to get the pipe” caught on here and Iggles thought his posting the picture of dozens of pipes was funny), and simply put, for every one of him, there’s a 1000 women or more that want to fuck him?

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

      Sorry guys, the spam filter hiccuped. Nothing personal.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Cheating usually happens after the initial passion has cooled, so there is an “immunity” period when people first fall in love and are super attracted to each other. How a person acts and think in this cooler period tells a lot about the long-term viability of the relationship.
    I used the cheater of a reason. Most people are capable of cheating a cheater is someone that for some reason will always want to try other people and their relationship status only means how much they will need to hide it. In this case I was referring to this people.

    If the distribution were normal, and there was no real selection for or against, we would be seeing an equal number of high and low N relationships which is not the case.

    Didn’t you answered your own question? Getting laid is the normal so why would people strive and take the steps to end up in a loving relationship and getting married before anyone else?

    Also, I’m not asking. Merely commenting on the difference in apparent numbers of each (i.e.. skewed distribution).
    I was happy with out beating all women my hubby dated, but I would had been happy out-beating any woman to take his cherry too. In my experience everyone is attractive to someone else so I don’t see a virgin man or a man with low number as a loser. There are 101 reasons he could be a virgin and even if it was because no woman wanted him. It wouldn’t matter. I don’t need any woman’s permission or assessment to know what I like. If all women hated chocolate I will still love it, my taste buds don’t lie, YMMV.

  • HanSolo

    I’ll add, getting the women to stop putting out for the low-level wannabe players is not easy, though.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Guys use the “not getting laid” thing as an insult, too. My husband has mentioned the feeling like a “loser” part, back when he didn’t have any girl. But part of that is he was/is really picky about girls. He also wasn’t into casual.

    Validation from random strangers, in my opinion, is not as good as appreciation from someone close. I tell my husband all the ways that he’s awesome which strangers do not know, see or appreciate. I can assuage his moments of self-doubt, so he’s not going to some other girl to try to get it. This may be a part of girl game, too. If he expresses “I don’t feel good enough for you,” I tell him all the ways that he’s the most amazing man I’ve ever known, inside and out, and he’s like “oh right, I guess I am awesome!” Then he goes back to being confident and content.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Bitchy, mean-spirited women will do this, along with mildly or outright misandrist women. But make no mistake. A lot of women (maybe not most) enjoy the feeling of sexual power that they have in their 20′s (they have much more than the men). Kind of like that foolish song, “girls rule the world.” There’s a portion of young women that love to go out to night clubs and shoot down guys.

  • OTC

    Low n would be below the median of 6. Big difference between 1 and 5. And, the false dichotomy is misleading. What if he wants to have 3 or 4 LTR’s before marrying? That’s hardly catting around.

    There’s also no mention here about seeking out hotter women.

  • HanSolo

    Make that Run the World (Girls) in my comment that’s in moderation.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Can we get JJ’s input and response to the advice and questions being asked?

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

      @HanSolo

      Can we get JJ’s input and response to the advice and questions being asked?

      I’m surprised he isn’t here. I emailed him and requested his participation yesterday. I don’t know if he’s away, or prefers to observe from afar. I was a little worried that we were too hard on him right out of the gate yesterday. But I agree – it would be helpful if he could respond and ask some questions himself.

  • Jackie

    @HanSolo
    “How do you make the JR’s an outcast when they’re making millions, kind of charming in their own badass way (notice how his phrase “you trying to get the pipe” caught on here and Iggles thought his posting the picture of dozens of pipes was funny), and simply put, for every one of him, there’s a 1000 women or more that want to fuck him?”
    ===
    I don’t think you can make this type an outcast, by dint of accomplishment. Even if the guy has lousy character (which I think he does), he has still reached the pinnacle of achievement in one area of life. That will be impressive to some group of people; whether it is in sports, art, music or intelligent achievement.

    I think, though, you can absolutely point out that their relationships with women are pretty much crap. The girls end up being used and discarded like a tissue. (Even if you have his child, he’s never going to commit to you, as it sounds like he has baby mamas.) The guy isn’t even going to remember your name. What’s so great about getting used by someone who sees you as interchangeable, you can ask them?
    ===
    “I’ll add, getting the women to stop putting out for the low-level wannabe players is not easy, though.”
    ===
    Why does it matter what these women are doing? I ask because, some chick who is interested in a player is probably (I hope!) not the kind of girl you are going to be looking for. So why does it matter what they are doing? Let them go ahead and be with the wannabes!

    @Ana
    “In my experience everyone is attractive to someone else so I don’t see a virgin man or a man with low number as a loser. There are 101 reasons he could be a virgin and even if it was because no woman wanted him. It wouldn’t matter. I don’t need any woman’s permission or assessment to know what I like. If all women hated chocolate I will still love it, my taste buds don’t lie, ”
    ===
    You speak the truth! 8-)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Guys use the “not getting laid” thing as an insult, too. My husband has mentioned the feeling like a “loser” part, back when he didn’t have any girl. But part of that is he was/is really picky about girls. He also wasn’t into casual.

    They also give crap to each other if the girl is ugly and if she is a slut and they commit to her, mentioned here many times.

  • Escoffier

    “It seems to me that he’s already checked out to some degree, by playing with fire.”

    Maybe, but it’s also plausible that he was tempted by the fire, waved his hand over it, got a little scorched, and will now stop playing. No great burns to either party and lesson learned.

    I just don’t but the notion that it’s always wise to “sew wild oats” and that will make all these bad desires go away and everyone lives happily ever after. I mean, dudes in the manosphere say that’s what chicks do all the time–constantly bolting for better–and if it’s not good when they do it, it’s not good when guys do it. Both sexes need to realize a good thing when they have it.

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

      I just don’t but the notion that it’s always wise to “sew wild oats” and that will make all these bad desires go away and everyone lives happily ever after.

      I agree. Here’s the thing. Most people are going to have some number of potential partners before they marry. (I don’t mean sexual, I mean LTRs.) IDK what the mean is, let’s say 3-6 or so. Your “highest value” or “best” match may occur early or late in the game. At any given point, people have to decide whether to bow out or stay on the market. Economists have looked at this question – when to marry – and I’ve written about it a couple of times.

      It may be that JJ’s girlfriend is the best woman he’s ever going to be with. If he breaks up with her, he runs the risk of later viewing her as “the one that got away.” We’ve had commenters here admit to having those sorts of feelings for someone in their past. If he chooses her, he’ll never know if someone of “higher value” would have come along later.

      There is no certainty. Personally, I think that if two people are head over heels in love and the relationship works in terms of compatible values and character, they should lock it down. I’ve only had that feeling once – and I’m glad I was mature enough to marry at that point.

  • mr. wavevector

    Susan,

    Here’s another Atlantic article that looks like it’s right up your alley:

    Women In Their 20s Shouldn’t Feel Bad About Wanting a Boyfriend

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

      @mr. wavevector

      Thanks for the link, that looks awesome!

  • SayWhaat

    This may be a part of girl game, too. If he expresses “I don’t feel good enough for you,” I tell him all the ways that he’s the most amazing man I’ve ever known, inside and out, and he’s like “oh right, I guess I am awesome!” Then he goes back to being confident and content.

    Tried that with my ex. Didn’t work.

    You can try all you want, but ultimately you can’t save them from themselves…

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

      Tried that with my ex. Didn’t work.

      You can try all you want, but ultimately you can’t save them from themselves…

      This reminds me of the doomed relationship where the guy felt so terrible about having lost his job. She thought highly of him, but he essentially said, “You don’t know what you’re talking about. I am so a loser.” You can’t change someone’s self-esteem with compliments.

  • Lokland

    @Han

    “I’m curiuos about how you make the player the vindictive outcast and whether that will have any effect. ”

    I mean the low level players. Getting them in line, like you said is relatively easy.

    If you can get them into relationships (by force) then your probably covering 98% of the male population.

    At that point, whats left becomes irrelevant.

    Basically, I said most guys want to be normal. The solution is then to place the normal bar at girlfriend and not low level player-dom.

    I acknowledge there are men who will always have an unlimited number of options and frankly they aren’t my problem as long as they stay away from my women. Nor do I think that that group alone will be able to skew the ‘normal’ bar.

    So, turn the wanna-be low level player into an outcast. Not the actual alpha.

    Thats more on women than men though.
    As are most of the problems in the SMP (excluding most mens inability to..you know…act like men).

  • Lokland

    @Jackie

    “LL, I’d be interested to know if you have analyzed yourself enough to understand how you saw yourself in JJ’s letter. Thanks for considering the request.”

    I’m not sure what your asking here.
    If your curious whether or not I’m introspective, yes more so than 99% of the population I just do my business alone in most regards :P

    If you want a drawn out thought map, I’d rather not emotionally vomit all over an interesting thread.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Why does it matter what these women are doing? I ask because, some chick who is interested in a player is probably (I hope!) not the kind of girl you are going to be looking for. So why does it matter what they are doing? Let them go ahead and be with the wannabes!

    It matters because a lot of these women are not the purely-unrestricted, wanna-slut-it-up, don’t-want-a-husband type. I think there are two ends of the spectrum, unrestricted and restricted, and a whole lot in between that are a mix. Most of these in the middle do want kids and marriage eventually so by putting out for players (even if for only 1, 2 or 3) they harm themselves a little bit emotionally, add a few N onto themselves and get little out of it and they lower the price of sex overall (price is often determined by the marginal unit [the one at the edge] being sold) and make it harder for women to require commitment.

    The bigger issue is too many women are choosing to be with assholes (and yeah, there are too many assholes abut that’s another topic).

    One friend of mine has just stopped an LTR with a controlling asshole (in all fairness I haven’t met him so she might be exaggerating). Another is in a do-it-for-the-4-kids marriage where the guy is making her life hell and threatens to make her life more hell if she leaves (little does he know that the laws are not so in his favor to do that).

  • Lokland

    @Ana

    “They also give crap to each other if the girl is ugly and if she is a slut and they commit to her, mentioned here many times.”

    Not the same. Not getting laid is outright public embarrassment level insults.
    Dating a slut/ugly women (btw, the key is uglier than you, not just ugly) is more of silent disapproval.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    “So, turn the wanna-be low level player into an outcast. Not the actual alpha.

    Thats more on women than men though.”

    I agree, but how do you do it since enough women are rewarding enough of the low-level wannabes enough? (Say 2 or 3 lays, flings or STRs a year for several years, enough for them to keep trying. Maybe these guys tire of it eventually.)

  • Lokland

    @Han

    I heard that women don;t respond well to being shamed.
    I once called a female colleague an idiot (something I do regularly with male colleagues) and she cried.

    Me thinks this shaming thingy might be effective.

    Doubly compounded by the fact that women think its unfair and evil. That probably means it works.

    Also, toss in some propaganda promoting boyfriends, maybe make it a sparkly zombie or something. That seems to work too.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Not the same. Not getting laid is outright public embarrassment level insults.
    Dating a slut/ugly women (btw, the key is uglier than you, not just ugly) is more of silent disapproval.

    College men here had said they outright shame men for getting with fatties and uglies. So is not only getting laid but getting laid with hot women.

    I agree, but how do you do it since enough HOT women are rewarding enough of the low-level wannabes enough? (Say 2 or 3 lays, flings or STRs a year for several years, enough for them to keep trying. Maybe these guys tire of it eventually.)
    Fixed it for you.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I do think correcting Pluralistic Ignorance can help.”

    I included that bit you bolded for a reason.
    I’d expand it to not just say that player is expected normal but girlfriends are typically seen as bad. (Easy fix for the second part, ‘member the story about the girlfriend who went up and pulled him upstairs and he got the ‘respect’ from his bros. Have every girl in college with a boyfriend do that once a month and I’d invest every cent I have that the number of people in relationships in college goes up like mad.)

    “But IDK, I see a lot of resentment of women going for “top males.” That resentment is usually directed at women, but they’re just responding to cues. Even the women who don’t hook up with them will still objectively be able to perceive their good looks.”

    You need to delineate this for me.
    Women (who are not as hot as top males) want top males. Men of equal value are pissed off that this is so.
    (Need explanation on woman responding to cues, ‘You can get laid for a night with a guy hotter than you’ appears to be the only cue.)
    So, men should shame the top men for being hot even though the women that desire them are trying for something they are not actually worthy of?

    Thats what I gathered but feel free to correct where I am wrong.

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

      @Lokland

      ‘member the story about the girlfriend who went up and pulled him upstairs and he got the ‘respect’ from his bros. Have every girl in college with a boyfriend do that once a month and I’d invest every cent I have that the number of people in relationships in college goes up like mad.)

      That’s a great idea for a post!

      Women (who are not as hot as top males) want top males. Men of equal value are pissed off that this is so.

      I think both men and women can easily identify the most attractive people of the opposite sex – there will be consensus on this (within each sex). And in theory, everyone would “want” these very attractive people. However, the culture has bred many more narcissistic women than men, so you’re right, the delusion is mostly among females.

      So, men should shame the top men for being hot even though the women that desire them are trying for something they are not actually worthy of?

      No, that’s not what I meant. And FTR, I don’t think it’s incumbent on men to shame one another. I’m just suggesting that perhaps there is some mileage in men rewarding character among themselves. We’ve seen this online – men disrespecting cads and shady guys. But IRL guys are notorious for being non-judgmental – they’ll usually separate a guy’s value as a buddy from the way he treats girls. Some of the biggest cads have loyal buddies who are not cads. What if those guys were to say, “Dude, that’s not cool what you did with that girl. Your gf is cool, I’m not going to cover for you if she asks.”

  • Escoffier

    RE: 128, this issue of resentment has come up before. I do think it’s true that, in general, men are more likely to resent women merely for looking. That is, being obvious about the fact that Jake over there is a total hunk, or having posters of big stars on your wall. Whereas women sort of expect men to drool with regularity. In my youth it was very common for guys to have posters of the hot babe at the moment (I’m a little too young for the Farrah poster but the Heathers Locklear and Thomas were big in my day). Girlfriends did not resent this but guys were not so forgiving of the converse.

    However, today it goes much further. Guys don’t seem to resent girls just for looking, they resent them because so many girls can now get the equivalent of the male model on the wall (for a short time) that many of them ignore all the guys who, 25 years ago, would have been their boyfriends. That’s what pisses men off.

  • Lokland

    “Most depressing comment of 2013!”

    Hmm, I’m pretty sure I said that last year too.
    What beat me out last time?

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

      Hmm, I’m pretty sure I said that last year too.
      What beat me out last time?

      You probably beat out yourself! :P

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    SayWhaat, I’m sorry to hear that. I didn’t realize that was part of what happened with your ex. Unfortunately some people were never healthy to begin with, and you can’t fix them… they have to want to do that for themselves.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I’m sorry, I’m confused. Could you please restate this with more detail? A skewing towards higher N in what? Are you saying that higher N is more likely to lead to marriage?”

    Merely that the perceived curve (here and society at large) shows that most relationships have people with above average N in them (especially men).

    If we called 6 the median and a normal distribution, we’d expect an equal number of men with N=1 as with N=11.

    And I just realized why N=1 is so rare in marriage. Nvm, I showed myself why I’m an idiot.

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

      Merely that the perceived curve (here and society at large) shows that most relationships have people with above average N in them (especially men).

      It’s probably true here, but I don’t think it’s true overall, at least according to census data.

  • INTJ

    Didn’t Cooper meet one girl who told him to go get some sexual experience and then come back?

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    I really don’t see what the problem is with men and women having sex with each other. If they like each other, and they each fulfill the need of the other person at that time in their lives, what’s the big deal.

    Now, if and when a woman wants to find a long term partner and settle down, she is perfectly free and capable of doing that. It doesn’t matter if 90% of the female population is banging everything that moves. It’s that individual woman’s choice.

    Correction: It doesn’t matter UNLESS that individual woman is using sex as her primary bargaining chip in the marketplace. Isn’t that interesting? Wonder of wonders: back when sex was women’s only leverage over men, women didn’t need to worry about intelligence, personality, or anything else. She could just withhold sex long enough and voila, she had a husband.

    Today, we have ensured that sex no longer has this power. Sex is cheap. People can have it and enjoy it without getting bogged down in demeaning and offensive power plays. A woman who wants to be more than a fling for a man has to actually offer him something genuine and unique: herself (not her body).

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

      @Introverted Playboy

      I really don’t see what the problem is with men and women having sex with each other. If they like each other, and they each fulfill the need of the other person at that time in their lives, what’s the big deal.

      Now, if and when a woman wants to find a long term partner and settle down, she is perfectly free and capable of doing that. It doesn’t matter if 90% of the female population is banging everything that moves. It’s that individual woman’s choice.

      So I gather you have no objection to committing to a woman with a large number of sexual partners in her past?

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    Thats the part that makes no sense.
    if we assume that any relationship has the same chance of success/leading to marriage as any other (normal assumption) then we would expect to see a uniform distribution of N’s in relationships.

    This is not the case and theres actually a skewing towards higher N meaning that for whatever reason it is favoured over low N relationships.

    If the distribution were normal, and there was no real selection for or against, we would be seeing an equal number of high and low N relationships which is not the case.

    Actually it would be an exponential distribution (and thus skewed towards lower N) if each relationship had the same chance of success.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Heh, I do my share of player shaming. I wish men would shame cads – after all, they’re the ones who stand to benefit the most in one sense.

    Doesn’t work. At all. Men who shame cads are perceived as having sour grapes and complaining about cads because they’re losers who can’t get laid like the cads can.

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

      Men who shame cads are perceived as having sour grapes and complaining about cads because they’re losers who can’t get laid like the cads can.

      High value men who can get laid but choose not to, or at least behave with honesty, could definitely shame cads. Come to think of it, I know one such guy, and he does shame cads. Not sure if it has any effect, though. They probably dismiss him as a weirdo.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland and Jackie

    Here is my tentative theory. It’s open for amendment and is simplistic by nature and not wanting to complicate with endless caveats and clauses.

    Short version:

    Apex males (top 0.1% or 0.01%) set the conditions for what they want and have tons of women that will respond. The lower you go in male value the more the power shifts to women in being able to set the price for sex so that by the time you’re below top 10 or 20% of men the power is nearly all in the hands of the females to set the terms for how sex happens. Since enough of these non-apex females have lowered the price for sex and don’t demand commitment as much then men have slowly responded and are trying to enbody the traits that women are choosing (e.g. game).

    Thoughts?

    Long version in next comment.

  • HanSolo

    Long version:

    The top 0.1% or less of men (maybe 0.01%), the apex of the alphas or sigmas–the male 10′s–are the leaders. These are the men that many (NOT ALL) of the top 20% of women want though most get real or were real all along and go for a good guy at their level.

    Look at the J.R. example. He’s an apex alpha with wealth and badass charm and a don’t-give-a fuck attitude (and he’s basically just an average-skill NBA player, not a star). Even that model who’s ass picture he posted was kind of pissed but more in a “but I can’t help liking you kind of way” in how she responded. Look at the picture of the 18 y/o girl tweeting him. She looks young yeah but was quite beautiful with big cleavage. She’s like a top 5% or at worst 10% girl in terms of looks and SMV. She looked like maybe an 8.5 or a 9 (hard to tell with the small pic exactly). Just as JR has hundreds of lesser SMV (his SMV is not based on his looks per se) that want him, she likely has a lot of guys down around her level (and certainly lower but we’ll ignore them) that would like to date her but she wants JR (I’m hypothesizing, we really don’t know that she’s excluding guys around her forever and waiting for JR).

    Now, this cascades further because the players at her level will play girls lower or sometimes equal to them and the LTR-seeking guys at her level that might have dated her have one less to choose from.

    Once we’re down to this level (roughly around males of S/MMV=9) the power starts to shift from the males and over to the females. Note I said start, not even shifted in its majority necessarily. I think at male value of 8.5 is where there’s about equal power, though I’m just estimating or pulling it out of my….

    Once we’re down to about male value of 7-8 then it is firmly in the territory of males following what the females of the herd demand to get sex. Before, that meant dating, courting and marriage. Now the female herd has loosened up and allows the herd-following men in for less and the males respond by not offering a higher price than is required.

    Next we move down to the median level of S/MMV where the males are very much herd followers and too many (likely not even the majority but enough to skew the market) of the women in their 20′s are being a bit too picky (either explicitly in what they want in a man or implicitly by focusing too much on career, travel, fun that essentially means a man would have to have a much higher value than he would if she were looking for a relationship).

    Further down we get to the male 1′s and 2′s that are basically (not) screwed and a lot of the women here can’t get relationships though they can get sex from the males of value 3 or lower.

    Conclusion: without reining in the alpha stallions enough you’re never going to get enough of the lower alpha mares to settle for their assortive counterparts and that will cascade down as enough of the lesser mares don’t want the lesser stallions as mates and hook up with slightly higher value stallions.

    Two questions:

    How do we get the hypergamous mares (not all mares are like that) to decide to go for the commitment-seeking stallions at their level?

    How do we get the promiscuous stallions (not all stallions are like that) to go for commitment with the realistic mares at their level? However, at lower and lower levels of male value, they are less able to be promiscuous so there it is more up to the females that might be hypergamous to decide that they would prefer someone realistic that will stick around instead of a fuck-by-night “charlatan.”

    Thoughts?

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

      @HanSolo

      You don’t get hypergamous mares to get with commitment seekers. The only pairings that will ever work are unrestricteds with unrestricteds and restricteds with restricteds.

      That’s why I have no issue with J.R. Smith. He’s offering the pipe to a ho. It’s a good thing if those people just bang one another (though not if they reproduce).

      It’s my belief that there are more than enough good looking restricted guys, if we don’t define SMV by # of lays. Certainly restricted women don’t.

      It occurs to me that since you define yourself as unrestricted, you may not like this viewpoint. :)

  • HanSolo

    @Ana

    “HOT women are rewarding enough of the low-level wannabes enough”

    I don’t agree with this.

    By hot, I mean women who are 8+ in SMV (mostly based on looks). low-level wannabes would be more guys of SMV 6, even 7 (a complicated combination of many factors to determine male SMV, I’m not referring just to their looks), and they are not getting laid very much by 8′s. A male 6 will be getting casual with 5′s and lower and the ocassional 6 and the once in a blue moon 7.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    “I was a little worried that we were too hard on him right out of the gate yesterday.”

    Well, I don’t think we were too hard. In fact, some like Escoffier and I weren’t hard on him at all. Anyway, that’s part of being a man: being able to take incoming fire and learn from it. And he did ask. In situations like this it is best to put one’s ego aside and really learn from what people are saying. Filter out what really doesn’t apply to you and take the good.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I’m sorry, I’m confused. Could you please restate this with more detail? A skewing towards higher N in what? Are you saying that higher N is more likely to lead to marriage?

    No, I think he’s saying that people acquire higher Ns on their way to marriage than they would have had each relationship ended by pure chance (rather than ending because the people had lower N). Personally, I don’t see how one could statistically prove or disprove such a claim, as in such a scenario, one would expect different people to have different relationship success rates, so the resulting distribution will not even be a perfect exponential distribution. If the curve of Ns at marraige were non-decreasing at some point, then that would be proof of this, but I’d expect the distribution is strictly decreasing.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Susan:

    So I gather you have no objection to committing to a woman with a large number of sexual partners in her past?

    That’s correct. As long as we had a good connection, chemistry, compatible, etc. The number of sex partners in and of itself means nothing. What really matters is her lifestyle, values, intelligence, and so on.

    I dated a girl who was afraid her “number” was too high. She had fucked 6 guys before me. Big friggin deal. We dated for 6 months, and it was awesome. (Hey, one month for every guy, I just realized that! LOL)

    The only men who have a problem with this are men insecure in their own sexuality/ masculinity, or hardcore traditionalist types (and the two groups are not mutually exclusive of course).

    Our culture is obsessed with sex. We need to stop obsessing about people’s sex lives and start focusing on their true human qualities. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have lots of hot sex, including with lots of hot people, for men or women.

  • Thinking Neanderthal

    ” I think N=1 relationships are rarely reported on secular blogs. The fact that today we go an average of 15-17 years between puberty and marriage is bound to make it unusual. The claim is common on some of the Christian Game blogs, and so is much earlier marriage. ”

    That seems quite true. I work in a muslim country at the moment and I’ve met quite a few people claiming (or wanting) to be in n=1 marriages. And it seems to work for them. The social environment applies a different set of pressure and the resulting behavior is distinct. Of course, a lot of the males in this population end up chasing tail in Thailand or marrying more than one partner … and several of the expressed n=1 are likely to be in fact n>1. I’ve also noticed that like everywhere else, when a male with high SMV comes around all the rules can quickly be forgotten, especially amongst the female population it seems.

    “The bigger issue is too many women are choosing to be with assholes (and yeah, there are too many assholes abut that’s another topic). ”

    I’m tempted to say the “asshole” quality is a secondary characteristic, one that is more easily ignored than lack of initial sexual attraction. Over time, as natural sexual tension decreases, it comes back to the forefront and we may get the situation of your two friends, who I sincerely hope will find better mates sooner rather than later. There’s really no good reason for being a jerk. To me, it usually appears as the result of insufficient self-actualization, poor character and downright laziness.

  • Joe

    Susan, do you remember the song “Down By The Station”? My memory said it was the Kingston Trio’s version that taught me a lesson when I was a kid, but maybe it was this one by The Four Preps.
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpI51YG8ynI]

    (and if my WordPress style didn’t link right, it’s here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpI51YG8ynI )

    Thought it was funny that, when I googled it, only some sort of kids version seems to be known today. Looks like the message has been overwhelmed too, which is more than symbolic.

    If you never heard it, you’ll enjoy it. – Always relevant to HUS, and it applies often.

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

      @Joe

      I’ve never heard of the Four Preps before, but that song is definitely relevant to HUS! I found it interesting that they were a big influence on Brian Wilson – I grew up on the Beach Boys.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I disagree about the clean division between unrestricted and restricted. I think that the mushy middle is where the majority of people are, with the median man a bit more unrestricted than the median woman. What I am saying is there are some median women who are having sex with the unrestricted guys. (Anecdotal but I certainly have personal experience doing this as many of the women I have had sex with were low N, as in 0, 2, 6, etc. before me–I could come up with more low N’s if I thought more about it. Basically once I got beyond 15 most of the women had lower N than me. Though I am not the go to the bar kind of player so I think I attract lower N women than the typical man of my N would.)

    What is the viewpoint I might not like?

    I say I’m unrestricted because I took that test and got 8 out of 9 on each of the 3 categories. However, you shouldn’t mistake that for what one is capable of or what one wants most. I was a voluntary religious virgin up til about 30 and then kind of had a lot of women after that. But my deepest desire is to get married, be faithful and have 4 kids. So, I would gladly trade in all those lays for having one awesome woman to marry and be in love with. Basically, I’m a dual-track male, superficially unrestricted in the sense of taking flings or STRs as they come but really wanting a lifelong and loving marriage with kids at my deeper level.

    Over time I have raised my standards of who casually “gets the pipe” though. At first getting sex was more experimental and I had a ton of doubts and hang-ups about sex, my ability to please a woman and so on. The first one was hot, about an 8, but made things worse–I shared that story on another recent post about cock-breaking. The second was not and mildly helped. The 3rd was fairly hot, about a 7.5. The fouth didn’t really help either. With my first post-losing-virginity gf (about an 8 or 8.5) I was able to slay most of those dragons of doubt. She was my N=5. I was really able to open up to her and share all my sexual insecurities and overcome 99% of them.

    My N=6 gf (about an 8.5-9 in SMV and a 9 in MMV in my eyes) was a woman I wanted to marry but she moved to Africa and fell out of love with me due to the distance. If she would have married me I would have been very happy and my N would have stayed at 6. Unfortunately it has grown a lot since then.

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

      @HanSolo

      I was just teasing you. I actually find you to be incredibly open-minded and not at all interested in pushing any agenda. You’ve expressed a desire to go “all in” with the right woman, and I can’t ask any more than that from any man.

      I like the term “mushy middle.” I’ll agree that most folks are indeed in the mushy middle, though it’s hard to define what that is.

      If I had to boil sociosexuality down to one question, it would be whether one believes sex is ideally a feel-good recreational activity or an emotional, even spiritual union between two people who love one another. Of course, there’s no validity to this in terms of the SOI metric – it’s just my sense of where the line is drawn for most people. Despite your unrestricted scores, my sense is that you are in the latter camp.

      Of course, behavioral choices are another matter. About half the population has had a ONS, and my guess is that there are quite a few men and women in that group who prefer meaningful sex but went for the casual hookup at one time or another.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Hope @ Susan

    It was admittedly more complicated than that. Every artist is going to struggle with self-doubt in their lives, but he had a particularly troubled history with depression. I’m sure I had a role to play as well, but I think that his depression was a major factor in our relationship.

    It wasn’t before, but that sort of thing is going to be a deal-breaker for me going forward. I just felt so helpless with him sometimes. I need to be with someone who has the mental fortitude to withstand a rainy day (literally).

    I also think it’s very much a male need to feel secure in his own providing ability. No amount of compliments is going to make him feel better about being able to provide for himself. I don’t blame him for feeling that way.

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

      @SayWhaat

      Every artist is going to struggle with self-doubt in their lives, but he had a particularly troubled history with depression. I’m sure I had a role to play as well, but I think that his depression was a major factor in our relationship.

      That is a difficult path in a relationship. My mother’s depression defined my parents’ marriage, my childhood, and that of my brothers. Many people have a touch of depression, or a slight tendency toward it (20% of the population, IIRC), but a troubled history is not to be taken lightly. Creative genius and depression are correlated, obviously. I think it’s particularly hard on their mates.

  • HanSolo

    I think betas are more likely to respond to shaming, either from other men and especially from women.

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

      I think betas are more likely to respond to shaming, either from other men and especially from women.

      Well, that’s no good! They’re not the guys who need to be shamed!

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I think I figured out what you mean, that my unrestrictedness or high-N will make it less likely to find a woman who is not unrestricted for marriage.

    From my personal experience, I think that there is a small amount of truth to that but not much. First of all, my rough sense is that women will give men leeway of about 2 or 3x as high as men will give women. If men think 10 is about the limit women would be more around 20 or 30, though in the end as we’ve seen with many of the men on here accepting higher N in women than they’d like, falling in love with someone will make the N a bit less important than it does in the abstract. But I recognize that those women who value a not too high N in men may rule me out.

    The last example where this came up was where my N was about 7x higher than hers. She was kind of shocked because she knew of my Mormon background but then after a few minutes moved on and kept dating me.

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

      @HanSolo

      First of all, my rough sense is that women will give men leeway of about 2 or 3x as high as men will give women. If men think 10 is about the limit women would be more around 20 or 30

      I agree – that is my sense of the numbers as well. Personally, I think most women in the “mushy middle” will prefer 20 rather than 30, but I have no doubt that a “catch” will do just fine.

      I can say with 100% certainty that the claim that women reward higher and higher N in males is not true. I’ve called this a boomerang effect in the past – there is a point at which N works against a man, depending on the restrictedness of the woman.

  • HanSolo

    Final point. Since my deeper desire is for a great marriage, I would be happy to have society return to more assortive mating and so I think that is one reason many of my comments could be seen as supportive of that, in spite of the fact that I have indulged in some of the “sinful” delights of the season.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    High value men who can get laid but choose not to are assumed to be gay

    Fixed that one for ya, Susan!

    Seconding what Lokland said about “dragging the boyfriend upstairs” bit. My buddy who aspired to be a player, promptly decided that was dumb after seeing that my GF was a positive for my life and I get to have sex pretty much whenever I want.

    The perception of girlfriends among a lot of guys, at least that I know, is that they demand a LOT of attention, time, and money, and add essentially no value to a man’s life, and the sex is usually lackluster (unless you’re dating a slut). Most women are automatically presumed to be non-nurturing and self-interested. They are also assumed to be crazy and neurotic and extremely jealous.

    They are also lazy.

    So men will respond well if they have positive role-models for relationships and see a way they can actually get a girlfriend.

    My best friend saw that I was happy with my girlfriend (and that I got lots of sex) and decided he wanted one, too. He saw that another friend of his found a girlfriend on Eharmony and promptly signed up and started messaging women.

    What happened after that, oh…excuse me, but I am going to have go on another tangent…

    He encountered actual women and not the idealized versions he had in his head and promptly lost interest. He gave his number to one girl and she started texting him non-stop. Also wasn’t very attractive (quite frankly below his level) so he stopped chatting with her.

    Another girl would wait days to respond to his messages. He was annoyed, but they eventually went on a date. She did not talk. At all.

    I introduced him to a work friend of mine who was single. He introduced herself. She just turned away and ignored him for the entire night.

    I know we hear a lot about how terrible men are, but, based on my experience, the behavior of young women is abysmal. NONE of my friends are bad guys. They are all decently attractive, with good jobs, church-going, one fucking built a house for the homeless. Women almost always treat them like shit. Even my female friendships usually involve a lot of posturing, as if any man would take them seriously as competition. I would prefer to be gay in Iran than to date the average American woman, if the sample I have met is representative.

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

      High value men who can get laid but choose not to are assumed to be gay

      ??? Gay men are more promiscuous than anyone, I don’t understand.

  • HanSolo

    I think very high value men can shame other high value men a little bit, but any men trying to shame men of higher value will be seen as losers and sour grapes.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Indeed, there’s a social status hierarchy, and the lower-status males shaming the higher-status males just makes no sense.

    It could even get your face smashed in.

  • Bells

    @Lokland

    JJ and his girlfriend are both N=1.
    We all assume that JJs gf will be satisfied in marriage.
    Seeing as their is a lack of N=1 marriages it would lead one to suspect that JJs gf may not be satisfied in a marriage with a man whose only had 1 sex partner

    Why is the situation being upturned by placing the spotlight on JJ’s girlfriend? There is no way that we can theorize that JJ’s gf will be unhappy with a marriage because her N=1. Regardless, the only clue of evidence is a positive one. JJ has stated clearly that his girlfriend adores him. The main problem is JJ’s need for validation. I personally wouldn’t encourage trading long-lasting pleasure for temporary frisks. It is JJ’s life so he can do whatever he wants. If he desires to try out other girls, then he should do so. And also accept his consequences.
    Nevertheless, it would be better for her to be cut loose than to suffer the emotional consequences from his wandering lusty eyes.

    I do think it’s an awful advice to encourage him to keep the gf out of a purely selfish convenience, until he sees a better prospect.

  • Escoffier

    I will dissent with everyone on the value of shaming males.

    On the one hand, I see what the guys are saying. Men from a guys’ peer group will be last to even try to shame even and even if they did they would fail. Also, the relative “losers” of the SMP will just be laughed at (or worse) by the “winners” if they try. And women trying to shame the cads will be laughed at all the more. So that’s all a dead end.

    I also agree with the men that shaming women is a lot more effective than shaming men and that feminism had made that unthinkable.

    However, these are not the only ways. We used to have a general societal disapproval of playa men. It was not good for your career to be known as a lothario. Even to this day some firms have an unwritten code against such behavior. A man’s families would be openly disapproving. Women would spread the word to other women that he was a guy to avoid. Not that all women did avoid him but because of his reputation, women either had to be furtive about seeing him or else tarnish their own reputations.

    All this worked to tamp down cadhood, at least to make it lower than it is now and otherwise would have been. It’s less effective than shaming women and doesn’t work that well in isolation but in combination it’s reasonably effective. Shame both is the right answer (for society).

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

      Shame both is the right answer (for society).

      Agreed. Shame is essential to maintaining civilization.

  • Lokland

    @Bells

    “Nevertheless, it would be better for her to be cut loose than to suffer the emotional consequences from his wandering lusty eyes.

    I do think it’s an awful advice to encourage him to keep the gf out of a purely selfish convenience, until he sees a better prospect.”

    Yeah, but I’m advising JJ, not his girlfriend.
    Whats in her best interest is at odds with what is in his best interest.

    Being moral and just sounds really good until you actually have to do it.

  • Bells

    @Thinking Neanderthal

    I’m not sure why it should be assumed that a man’s measured ability to bang a lot of girls is the factor to be considered when evaluating his attractiveness. I think the statistics themselves – which are perhaps better left uncommunicated anyway – are less important than the skills and confidence acquired in the process. This is where the attraction comes from, not the road sheet.

    I fully disagree with the thought process stating that skills and confidence are what solely attributes to preselection. When I see a beautiful woman with a great personality (emphasis on personality is a disclaimer so that men don’t assume that most women are envious of their relationships with hot and bitchy women), I don’t dwell on his level of charisma needed to attract her. I’m primarily curious about his relationship qualities as a man. Attaining such a high status woman shows that not only is he skilled but largely because the relationship is a great indicator that he has been pre-tested and has been successful checkmarked as a future potential to be a great family man.

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

      @Bells

      When I see a beautiful woman with a great personality (emphasis on personality is a disclaimer so that men don’t assume that most women are envious of their relationships with hot and bitchy women), I don’t dwell on his level of charisma needed to attract her. I’m primarily curious about his relationship qualities as a man.

      This is compatible with the research finding that the most attractive women are the least promiscuous. They’re more LTR oriented, so a man in a relationship with a beautiful woman is more likely to be LTR worthy.

  • Bells

    @Lokland

    If everyone was selfishly self-absorbed with their needs, I don’t think civilization could last very long.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    SayWhaat “I think that his depression was a major factor in our relationship.”

    Depression is a tough one. Was he on any medication, or did he attempt to self-medicate?

    “I also think it’s very much a male need to feel secure in his own providing ability. No amount of compliments is going to make him feel better about being able to provide for himself. I don’t blame him for feeling that way.”

    That makes sense. It seems like men can feel very defeated by a lack of career/financial success.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Hope:

    Depression is a tough one. Was he on any medication, or did he attempt to self-medicate?

    No, and no. I did ask him to consider going back to therapy at one point, but he didn’t/couldn’t do that either.

  • HanSolo

    @Wavevector

    Great (though disturbing) article from the Atlantic:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/women-in-their-20s-shouldnt-feel-bad-about-wanting-a-boyfriend/273737/

    Some young women deeply desire meaningful relationships with men, even as they feel guilty about those desires. Many express the same sentiment again and again: “Why do I, a young and highly educated woman in the 21st century, value relationships with men so highly?” To do so feels like a betrayal of themselves, of their education, and of their achievements….

    she worried her single-minded pursuit of a graduate degree might limit her ability to meet a man with whom she could build a life. This realization—that she might want to prioritize a relationship over a career—felt shocking to Katie, and she did not admit to it easily. She felt deeply ashamed by such thoughts, worried that they signaled weakness and dependence, qualities she did not admire. To put such a high premium on relationships was frightening to Katie. She worried that it meant she wasn’t liberated and was still defined by traditional expectations of women.

    I have heard Katie’s dilemma from countless young women. Many feel ashamed about being too relationship-oriented in their 20s. Parents warn, “Do you really want to settle down so early? We just don’t want to see you miss out on any opportunities.” Friends intone, “How will you know what you like and want if you don’t play the field? You’re only young once. Now’s the time to explore.”

    What a fucked-up culture that instils guilt in women about having meaningful relationships. This is proof that some of the women are listening to the expectations that feminist activists and parents tell them, wanting to follow what they think is expected to be a good and liberated woman, yet in conflict with their innate desire for a meaningful relationship.

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

      This is proof that some of the women are listening to the expectations that feminist activists and parents tell them, wanting to follow what they think is expected to be a good and liberated woman, yet in conflict with their innate desire for a meaningful relationship.

      Of course they are – those are the messages they hear from the time they are born. The people who love them most, and the people who teach them are unified in this chorus of feminist propaganda. It’s no wonder women feel conflicted.

  • Lokland

    @Bell

    “If everyone was selfishly self-absorbed with their needs, I don’t think civilization could last very long.”

    If you haven’t noticed Western civilization is on a steep slope and OMFG….MOUNTAIN!!!!!!!!

  • Bells

    @ADBG,

    Do you actually believe our reality is something different from this? Are you under the impression that college men are being inundated with aggressive female competition and relationship offers? That women are eager to commit at a young age and want to grow with a boy into a man and fall in love with his potential?
    IME, women are more excited over at least a semi-finished project, especially if it is attractive.

    Most women in their twenties tend to primarily date men within their twenties to early thirties. Dating these men presents a great risk-factor that all women must take up. These younger men are not completely financially secured, some are emotionally unstable, and some are douche players. I can’t deny the appeal of a semi-finished young project; if given the opportunity, I would jump with glee to buckle myself with him. But unfortunately, that’s not always possible. Truthfully, it would be financially better for all women to be with men in their late thirties who are already settled in their careers. But we don’t. So yes, I do believe that most women are investing in the potential of younger men.

  • HanSolo

    More from the Atlantic:

    Confused about freedom and desire, young women often split their social and psychological options—independence, strength, safety, control, and career versus connection, vulnerability, need, desire, and relationships—into mutually exclusive possibilities in life. Romantic relationships then often become something to be avoided and denigrated rather than embraced.

    In part, this is why men that try to pursue a relationship with such women get shot down and seen as lame. Who fills in the gap? Players that don’t want anything serious. What do the LTR-seeking guys then do after getting shot down a few times? They start to act more like players.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Despite your unrestricted scores, my sense is that you are in the latter camp.”

    Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the rose-colored glasses for the alpha! It’s funny how despite our past behavior and even self-reported desires doesn’t matter. You really do get a “free pass” based on looks and success.

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

      It’s funny how despite our past behavior and even self-reported desires doesn’t matter. You really do get a “free pass” based on looks and success.

      It is Han’s self-reported desire for an all-consuming love relationship that led me to this conclusion. He’s very romantic and very emo about his past love experiences. I’m willing to take anyone at face value. (I also believe that an engaged man with a low N is highly unrestricted when he says so, considering that he describes mind-fucking strangers on a regular basis and frets continually about what turns women on.)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    This is one very important function of religion – it provides us with a blueprint for a good and noble life. The more secular we become, the more character suffers.
    It also tampers narcissism you have to surrender yourself to a higher power. Secularism is about what makes YOU happy, you are your own God. The worst way to live life in civilization if you ask me, YMMV.

    What if those guys were to say, “Dude, that’s not cool what you did with that girl. Your gf is cool, I’m not going to cover for you if she asks.”
    This is one of the reasons why a woman does well by befriending his guys social circle instead of competing for attention with them. Is harder for a group of good guys to cover for any girl than cover from Jane Smith that chick that is so cool to us and play video games. Unless this is a I cover for you because I will need you to cover for me situation, YMMV.

    Men who shame cads are perceived as having sour grapes and complaining about cads because they’re losers who can’t get laid like the cads can.
    Not if all of them do it. Really 90 betas telling to the 10 cads that dogs also get laid a lot but are not good to do much else will have power if only they choose to. Alpha men want to feel they could lead if they wanted to, very hard if your men show you disrespect for being a dick with legs. It used to work once upon a time, it could work if we tried to, we just won’t.

    Creative genius and depression are correlated, obviously. I think it’s particularly hard on their mates.
    True that is why we creative types learn to control our dark moments to a point as not to make our mates and family, live in the hell we see everyday. Maybe SayWhaat’s boyfriend will learn that lesson later, hopefully it does it will make for sad lonely life and that is so 19th century.

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

      @Anacaona

      It also tampers narcissism you have to surrender yourself to a higher power. Secularism is about what makes YOU happy, you are your own God. The worst way to live life in civilization if you ask me, YMMV.

      Good point. I think in America at least we have a large number of self-appointed deities running around… :-/

      This is one of the reasons why a woman does well by befriending his guys social circle instead of competing for attention with them.

      Agreed, that increases the odds of his friends having your back, but honestly, I’ve seen so many good guys look the other way on stuff. They don’t want to piss off the AMOG, so they put their hands in the air and take three steps back.

  • HanSolo

    @OTC and Susan

    That’s why I think most people can’t just be lumped into rest. or unrest. I’m unrest. when single and the opportunity arises (and I don’t go out seeking it that much really) but when in love I am faithful and want to get married, and that is my deeper desire.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Really 90 betas telling to the 10 cads that dogs also get laid a lot but are not good to do much else will have power if only they choose to.

    And if all women would just stop giving it up so easily then we could go back to having no sex before marriage.

    One of my favorite economic websites is called Marginal Revolution. The idea behind it is that small changes over time build up to big changes. This is how you make progress. If you want to try to reorganize all of society in short order, you are wasting your breath unless you have an army to back you up.

    And want to kill a LOT of people.

    If you want to effect a REAL change, you must empower more beta men to do what beta men do best, you must change the dynamics to encourage more marriage among restricted folk at earlier ages, and you must shame the marginal woman into not chasing players.

    Instead we are shaming the marginal beta men to be even more beta, loading up young people with debt and no jobs, and shaming marginal women into chasing careers and putting up with players in the name of female empowerment and financial security.

    Basically, exactly the opposite of what needs to happen.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I agree – that is my sense of the numbers as well. Personally, I think most women in the “mushy middle” will prefer 20 rather than 30, but I have no doubt that a “catch” will do just fine.

    I can say with 100% certainty that the claim that women reward higher and higher N in males is not true. I’ve called this a boomerang effect in the past – there is a point at which N works against a man, depending on the restrictedness of the woman.”

    Kinda like flying to close to the sun to roast marsh mellows can backfire as well right?

    Most guys aren’t even scraping 10 but those mushy middle girls will be good with 20.

    Bahh its not even worth pointing out the obvious at this point.

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

      Kinda like flying to close to the sun to roast marsh mellows can backfire as well right?

      There is a whole spectrum of women. Some fly close to the sun, some stand back from the campfire with the marshmallow at the end of a long stick, and some find that the microwave makes delicious melty marshmallows without risk of injury or the hard work of constantly maintaining a fire.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    FWIW, I have outlined in the past what society would be like if it were more “regressive” and “patriarchal.” My GF wanted to be a math teacher and was instead shamed by her mother and friends into pursuing a high-level degree from a top school, which has earned her so much student debt she is considered a poor credit risk and probably wouldn’t be able to get a house.

    Even now, the female members of her family are trying to shame her into improving her career and not settling down, because, you know, at 27, she has so much time to waste trying to find a new man. Especially in a town of 17,000 people where the median age is over 50 and the typical male is barley employed.

    When everyone around you is a fucking idiot, it is extremely difficult to feel shame.

  • Lokland

    @OTC

    “You really do get a “free pass” based on looks and success.”

    I agree.
    I just wish it wasn’t shameful to admit it.

    Having to dance around and make excuses for why one person is better than another without saying their hotter can be quite difficult.

  • HanSolo

    Yes, beta males do not need more shaming. The media focus on how it’s easy for men to get sex just makes the betas feel like losers. The good betas take to heart the “don’t be creepy or a predator” and approach women even less than the meager amounts they would without that shaming. Women need to be more like Hope and Anacaona in encouraging betas. Betas (not all, of course) really flourish when they’re needed, appreciated and treated well.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Yes, but Han, it is one thing to say something and prove it logically and another to make people viscerally FEEL something.

    I really hate to say it but this whole discussion about Restricted vs. Unrestricted and attractive males getting a free pass really does ring a bell here. Not that I think attractive males get a free pass. Everytime the guys say that I shake my head. It’s really exactly what Susan says, you wax poetic and romantic and OTC says he has a 3-some (sorry to bring it up again OTC, but using to make a point).

    You may be middle of the road or whatever, but regardless of what you say, your actions would automatically make me suspect you of being unrestricted. I take OTC’s words at face value and interpret him as restricted. Pretty much the opposite of what some people here are suggesting, but waxing poetic doesn’t work on me, usually, especially not at 9 PM when I am tired and my emotional faculties have all but shut down and can only really be triggered by my SO or baby niece/nephew.

    It will take a lot to convince me otherwise because this is my heuristic.

    If the modern SMP is a battlefield, which is the standard heuristic of 20-somethings, suggesting that men do not need more shaming is like telling women to disable their artillery shells. At least, I suspect this is how many women will interpret it.

    And since they will also interpret this as telling them to surrender, they will probably intensify shelling, and obliterate a few male POWs just as an example of how super serial they are. In practical terms, I believe some women might call this “empowerment” by perhaps rejecting a male little too harshly after feeling threatened by social shame, essentially reaffirming her boundaries, but I don’t have evidence of this.

  • OffTheCuff

    Ah, Han, the perfect dual-ladder answer. So smooth. Everyone should learn from you…

    But I’ll be more specific, who do you think is more “emotional” about sex, you, or me? I can say with certainty that I am 95% incapable of sex without getting emotionally involved, a single ONS aside. Now, compare that with everyone else’s opinions of us. Amusing, eh?

  • HanSolo

    @ADBG

    I was never denying that I am unrestricted. I am. To the tune of 8/9 on the survey. But my point was that people are more complex than a one-dimensional variable and that being unrestricted doesn’t mean one doesn’t want to marry for life and be faithful. I don’t think I ever said that I was restricted at a deeper level, just that I want to get married at a deeper level.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Han,

    You’re focusing on the wrong part of the post. How about the girls and their shame-shells? ;)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @OTC
    Did you notice that I don’t compliment HS right? Having a threesome = having casual sex, for me.

  • HanSolo

    @OTC

    For me there are two ladders for sex. On one ladder the women I love, like a lot or could grow to love will receive emotional bonding beyond lust (and lust is an emotion). On the other ladder, lust, excitement and maybe some small amount of affection.

    I have never had a 3-some though.

    I do find it funny that people are placing you in the unrestricted category to whatever extent they might be doing so.

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

      I do find it funny that people are placing you in the unrestricted category to whatever extent they might be doing so.

      It’s that pesky threesome. OTC has engaged in a behavior only 14% of Americans have engaged in. My guess is that a very, very tiny percentage of marrieds are in that group.

      Unrestricted measures behaviors but also attitudes about sex, and whether one pairs sex with love as a value. OTC’s experience flips that switch, at least for me.

  • HanSolo

    ADBG

    I agree that too many young women are combative, hold most of the SMV power and yet indulge in the narrative that they are the victims. I think this is due in part to the victimhood narrative that the feminists barrage us all with.

    Perhaps part of there shame shells is a subconscious hypergamous assertion that they “deserve” better and how dare anyone try to disabuse them of the fact that they are only a 6 instead of an 8.

    In the end though, they have to live amongst the dead and the shell-pocked battlefield and realize at a later time that they helped kill all the good men and turn them into MGTOW or players.

  • HanSolo

    ADBG

    Also, NAWALT. I was referring to the more narcissistic, combative and bitchy ones. But there’s enough of them to skew the market.

  • OffTheCuff

    Han, I think you are being pretty fair. I’m just pointing out the limitations of restricted and unrestricted model. It doesn’t seem to fit well for everyone. We really are more complex than that.

    Here’s a (completely hypothetical) question – which is more restricted? Some threesomes with someone you’ve known and loved for years, and perhaps still do… or a one-night stand with someone you just met?

    Ana, I think there are two errors in your thought. One, since you are very-restricted (again, nothing wrong with it, I was there myself most of my life) even people slightly to the right of you seem unrestricted, no matter their actual score. Second, you are weighing one particular activity as sort of an unrestricted trump-card, when the SOI has no such penalty. It’s a bit like calling a woman who likes anal, a slut or unrestricted.

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

      Some threesomes with someone you’ve known and loved for years, and perhaps still do… or a one-night stand with someone you just met?

      The ONS is more restricted. The restricted person is far more likely to risk a ONS than a threesome. The threesome is sex with someone you may love, but it’s also sex with someone who is there strictly for recreation – a masturbatory aid. It’s a ONS + getting it up for another woman, something women in love do. not. want. their husbands doing.

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

      Sounds like we need a refresher on the SOI.

      Here are the behaviors commonly found in the top quintile for both sexes:

      Had sex with someone the same day you met

      Got pregnant, or got someone pregnant, before marriage

      Had sex after having a lot to drink

      Was unfaithful to a steady partner

      Had sex with two people in a 24 hour period

      Ever had a sexually transmitted disease

      In addition, the top quintile infidelity rate is 50%, compared to 25% in the general population.

      The female in the top quintile has nearly as much sexual experience as the male in the top quintile.

      http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/10/23/whatguyswant/restricted-vs-unrestricted-sociosexuality-what-does-it-mean/

      Since the inventory covers past behavior as well as attitudes, it makes sense that someone from a strict religious background may have limited behavioral experience while displaying an attitudinal preference for casual sex and perhaps a very active fantasy life, which is the third component.

  • HanSolo

    @OTC

    I think they’re about equal, done once.

    But, someone who does 10 ONS’s would be much more unrestricted than one threesome done with 2 women that the man cares about.

    I don’t think you’re highly unrestricted, FWIW.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Ana, I think there are two errors in your thought. One, since you are very-restricted (again, nothing wrong with it, I was there myself most of my life) even people slightly to the right of you seem unrestricted, no matter their actual score. Second, you are weighing one particular activity as sort of an unrestricted trump-card, when the SOI has no such penalty. It’s a bit like calling a woman who likes anal, a slut or unrestricted.
    Is more like I have a broader definition of sociosexuality and it seems that in the end is better to go for a mix of attitude+acts+body count matrix than just using one criteria.
    Your body count is low but the acts and the attitude (the fact that you don’t regret the threesome) puts you in the same category of unrestricted even if your motivation was “I loved the other person too”. Restricted people also fall in love with one person at the time.
    Han has the two ladder of sex and raking up body counts= unrestricted.
    Mike C has low body count but the desire to bang women and two ladder of sex. Unrestricted.
    Lokland seems unrestricted as well. More than one person at the time and no regrets.
    My hubby is probably higher than many here in numbers (6 or 7 I’m a bit confused because I know at least a couple were virgins but I don’t remember if he broke up with one before they were intimate) But all of them were one woman at the time and they were in a relationship no cheating, not ONS, no group sex and they didn’t broke up because he was looking to upgrade and doesn’t seem to find mind fucking strangers all amusing or arousing. That is restricted.
    I would define restricted as content with one person that you get to know and love before sexing them up. Meaning that if that hot girl goes into the slut pile you get up and leave because you wanted her for something meaningful, not sexing her up with the idea of not calling her the other day.
    Everything else is unrestricted to varying degree till you arrive to Roissy’s levels of fucktery.
    By that definition Ted is also restricted. Capisce?

  • OffTheCuff

    Your definition of restricted makes some sense, but you use it to mean it to mean something entirely different than the SOI does, which acutally does measures a lot of attitude-type things. Have you read or taken the SOI?

    Yours is more like a “slow-enough monogamy scorecard,” or something. Thanks for clarifying, but we are talking about entirely different things, then.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Han

    Also, NAWALT. I was referring to the more narcissistic, combative and bitchy ones. But there’s enough of them to skew the market.

    I guess my bigger question is how do we affect real change in the direction we want it to?

    An interesting anecdote. While one of my friends has decided not to keep putting himself out there after a few bad experiences, another friend of mine decided to start online dating. The pattern is always the same: he finds a girl he really, really likes, 2-3 dates, never hears from her again.

    What’s the problem? He doesn’t know and tries to stay positive. I think it’s starting to grate him, though.

    Of course, I know the problem: He’s too goddam nice and unexciting. Great guy. Not good for girls. His own damn mother tells him that he has to be more of a dick.

    When your own mother tells you that you need to be a bigger dick, you are too Beta. Hell at the point you’re defining new zones of Beta.

    But that gives me hope, because hopefully it means that some women are getting the message that they have royally fucked up their sons and need to shift strategy.

    Her and the other mothers told me I had to read 50 Shades. I had to give a little smirk: already made the girlfriend read some of the saucier scenes while she was bent over the couch. Naked, of course. It does the job…

    Anyways, back on topic, how do we convince women to start acting like women and less like soldiers?

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Have you read or taken the SOI?
    No. I though we were having a personal experience talk. Links?

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    I’m just pointing out the limitations of restricted and unrestricted model. It doesn’t seem to fit well for everyone. We really are more complex than that.

    True, there’s a spectrum, but it’s skewed to the left (restricted population > unrestricted subpopulation). Though the model can be easily actualized: practice monogamy by choice, which most people are content to do, or don’t…

  • OffTheCuff
  • HanSolo

    ADBG

    I think it comes down to what the alpha mares of the herd (and to a lesser extent the alpha males) demand. It was the apex alphas that wanted lots of pussy and the feminists (I’m probably missing some factors as well) that drilled into women that they should put off marriage and romance and be good career men during their 20′s (not all listen but enough). It’s going to be damn hard to change what the apex alphas want so we have to start with changing the message that women are telling women.

    The two main sources are from the feminists saying that women should be career women above all else (see the Atlantic article Wavevector posted and that I commented on above) and from pop-culture slut divas and feminists saying that women should be sluts and fuck like men. That’s probably the biggest bang for the buck. Just as many girls (especially middle class and UMC) wanted to be good “herdlings” and study and work and so on, in spite of their innate desire to be in good relationships, they did it…look at what they achieved, 60% of university degrees.

    So, we need the narrative to switch back to saying that women need to give relationships a higher priority than they are now, to not wait until 30 to start looking for the man of her life. We need the narrative to stop shaming virgins and glorifying a bit of sluttiness. Since most women will follow fairly well what it takes to be part of their herd then that is how you get change.

    Once you get enough of the female herd to change the beta males and even many of the alphas will change their tactics and accept the necessary terms required to get sex–namely, if women won’t put out unless it’s in a committed relationship then by god these men are going to start coming courting again instead of trying to be badasses. Apex alphas (and I mean the top 1% or whatever will continue to do whatever they want and seduce women along the way but by correcting the message that most of the female herd gets you will correct most of the problems, I think).

    There is the underlying factor that won’t change that much and that is technology and wealth that has made males less needed as providers and protectors and given women control to not have children. These factors subconsciously shifts the average behavior to slightly more promiscuous. And then the narratives I mentioned drive it even further to the promiscuous side. We can change the narrative enough to bring some sanity. We likely won’t change the technological things that have made all of this shift towards promiscuity possible–and in the long run robots and computers will probably replace us all and we’ll have to either join them or become obsolete but that’s a different tangent.

    Most men should be expected to be masculine again and taught the good aspects of game.

  • OffTheCuff

    That is a very good point, Mega. I am not sure of what the distribution of the SOI scores are. It makes sense that it should skew left of center, since the SOI is probably interest in measuring something that has no real upper bound, but does have a floor.

  • OffTheCuff

    Found it: http://www.larspenke.eu/pdfs/SOI-R_norms_-_5-point_response_scale.pdf

    Normal is 3 for men, 2.6 for women, out of 5. Seems pretty centered to me, but I have no idea if I’m reading the paper correctly.

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

      @OTC

      That study is of Germans. I think their sociosexuality is quite different from ours. I know that a significant percentage of amateur uploaded porn comes out of Germany, for example.

      I would love to see a distribution of scores for the U.S., but have been unable to find one. If anyone finds a link, please share.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @OTC

    I am not sure of what the distribution of the SOI scores are. It makes sense that it should skew left of center.

    From a purely sociological POV (snooze alert), it seems reasonable to conclude that a large majority of men heading intact families, either married or not, are of the much maligned beta persuasion. Admittedly, it’s not an exciting or glamorous lifestyle. But perhaps these sad, sorry men without options have subconsciously sublimated any desire for variety into more productive and worthwhile endeavors? :idea:

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

      From a purely sociological POV (snooze alert), it seems reasonable to conclude that a large majority of men heading intact families, either married or not, are of the much maligned beta persuasion.

      I never fail to be amazed when people claim that no one wants betas. Who do people think women are marrying?

  • Morgasm

    “By hot, I mean women who are 8+ in SMV (mostly based on looks). low-level wannabes would be more guys of SMV 6, even 7 (a complicated combination of many factors to determine male SMV, I’m not referring just to their looks), and they are not getting laid very much by 8′s. A male 6 will be getting casual with 5′s and lower and the ocassional 6 and the once in a blue moon 7.”

    Poor babies.

  • Morgasm

    Susan:

    So I gather you have no objection to committing to a woman with a large number of sexual partners in her past?

    That’s correct. As long as we had a good connection, chemistry, compatible, etc. The number of sex partners in and of itself means nothing. What really matters is her lifestyle, values, intelligence, and so on.

    I dated a girl who was afraid her “number” was too high. She had fucked 6 guys before me. Big friggin deal. We dated for 6 months, and it was awesome. (Hey, one month for every guy, I just realized that! LOL)

    The only men who have a problem with this are men insecure in their own sexuality/ masculinity, or hardcore traditionalist types (and the two groups are not mutually exclusive of course).

    Our culture is obsessed with sex. We need to stop obsessing about people’s sex lives and start focusing on their true human qualities. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have lots of hot sex, including with lots of hot people, for men or women.

    __________

    6 is a low number. Especially for this blog. The people here seem to be convinced that most women are running in the double digits by 24, and super high double digits by 29.

    The truth is that not that many people are having that much sex with that many people.

  • Cooper

    @ADBG 166

    Yes!

  • Morgasm

    “Shame is essential to maintaining civilization.”

    What about guilt?

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

      “Shame is essential to maintaining civilization.”

      What about guilt?

      Both have their place:

      “Psychoanalyst Helen B. Lewis argued that ‘The experience of shame is directly about the self, which is the focus of evaluation. In guilt, the self is not the central object of negative evaluation, but rather the thing done is the focus.’ Similarly, Fossum and Mason say in their book Facing Shame that ‘While guilt is a painful feeling of regret and responsibility for one’s actions, shame is a painful feeling about oneself as a person.’”

      I would go further and say that the action that inspires guilt usually involves the infliction of pain, either intentionally or unintentionally, upon another person.

      http://www.afterpsychotherapy.com/shame-and-guilt/

  • Cooper

    (‘are assumed to be gay’ part)

  • Morgasm

    “RE: 128, this issue of resentment has come up before. I do think it’s true that, in general, men are more likely to resent women merely for looking. That is, being obvious about the fact that Jake over there is a total hunk, or having posters of big stars on your wall. Whereas women sort of expect men to drool with regularity. In my youth it was very common for guys to have posters of the hot babe at the moment (I’m a little too young for the Farrah poster but the Heathers Locklear and Thomas were big in my day). Girlfriends did not resent this but guys were not so forgiving of the converse.”

    What? Totally bizarro world and the exact opposite of my personal experience (and my sister’s, and mom’s and friends’, and, and, and, and,….)

    I’ve always seen women, including myself, as being waaaaaaay more jealous than the men in our lives. And that includes double takes at other hot women. Ooooooooooooooh that burns us inside.

    I’ve never seen a man react the same way, or even react at all, if not just sort of laugh or smile or joke about it.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    http://www.larspenke.eu/pdfs/SOI-R%20Manual.pdf
    Interesting. I can see why you resent the comparison. But I was not using this measures. I think this is a bit too simple for something a lot more complex, YMMV.

  • Morgasm

    JJ, if you’re lurking around here I think you need to go see a psychologist, maybe get into some cognitive behavior therapy or some self-esteem program.

    “How do you make the JR’s an outcast when they’re making millions, kind of charming in their own badass way (notice how his phrase “you trying to get the pipe” caught on here and Iggles thought his posting the picture of dozens of pipes was funny), and simply put, for every one of him, there’s a 1000 women or more that want to fuck him?”

    — The type of women that go for this guy appear to not even be women yet – high school girls into sports! Or at least into the sports team. I’m sure his baby mamas aren’t hitting the “intelligence and character” balls outta the park, either.

    So basically we’re NOT talking about very well-rounded, intelligent, mature, high quality women here so who cares who they want?

    Introverted Playboy, I agree with most of your points but there’s really no reason for a young person to dump his/her boyfriend/girlfriend just so they can try failing at dating a multitude of people. I do agree its probably too soon for JJ and his girlfriend to be considering marriage, but fix something that ain’t broke?

  • Mike C

    @Ana

    “HOT women are rewarding enough of the low-level wannabes enough”

    I don’t agree with this.

    By hot, I mean women who are 8+ in SMV (mostly based on looks).

    Han, yeah….Susan had a post on this:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/02/12/hookinguprealities/the-most-attractive-women-have-the-least-casual-sex/

    Less attractive women seek casual sex as a compromise, and more attractive women avoid it.

    Although I’m not sure exactly what category less attractive would be. A 6 is less attractive than a 9.

    This is a combination of speculation, personal observation, and direct personal experience, but I think a good chunk of the casual low investment sex takes place between male 8-9s and female 6-7s because female 6-7s are probably the most prone to mistake male sexual interest for something more or think they can win the guy with sex or if they are unrestricted simply find appealing the idea of having sex with a “hot” guy. For the male 8-9 the female 6-7 is low hanging fruit that may not take much effort, but yet is attractive enough to make the experience visually enjoyable but they are not going to cross down into 4-5s.

    In any case, I think you are correct to point it it wrong that “HOT” women are rewarding men if by hot we are talking the female 8-9s who will hold out for higher investment.

  • Mike C

    I think both men and women can easily identify the most attractive people of the opposite sex – there will be consensus on this (within each sex). And in theory, everyone would “want” these very attractive people. However, the culture has bred many more narcissistic women than men, so you’re right, the delusion is mostly among females.

    Susan

    The delusion is also a result of not getting the right informational signals. A male 5-6 who routinely approaches and pursues 9s will get consistently shot down over and over and over and over. He will quickly learn “his place”. Another difference here between men and women I think is men even friends won’t hesitate to tell each other “dude, she is out of your league”. In contrast, I think women are more prone to lie to each other based on wanting to keep good feelings. I’d actually be curious how often women will tell another woman “girl, he is out of your league”. I could be wrong, but I doubt it happens that frequently. And as I mentioned in my previous comment, unlike a higher SMV female who will clearly indicate to the lower SMV male he has NO CHANCE, the higher SMV male will entertain the prospect of a ZERO investment casual sex encounter if the lower SMV woman indicates her interest. So the bottom line is beyond just narcissicm (which is at work as well) there are more avenues for women to engage in self-delusion if a large SMV differential is present.

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

      @Mike C

      In contrast, I think women are more prone to lie to each other based on wanting to keep good feelings. I’d actually be curious how often women will tell another woman “girl, he is out of your league”. I could be wrong, but I doubt it happens that frequently.

      There’s no question about this. I have never, ever heard a girl say that to another. At most, they’re likely to say, “I don’t think he’s likely to want a relationship.” (Leaving out the “with you.”)

      the higher SMV male will entertain the prospect of a ZERO investment casual sex encounter if the lower SMV woman indicates her interest

      Agreed, and then the lower SMV woman wants to claim some sort of victory for scoring with the high SMV dude. Which is why you see so many guys online saying that your SMV is reflected in who you can get to commit to you, not to sex you up once.

  • Mike C

    But IRL guys are notorious for being non-judgmental – they’ll usually separate a guy’s value as a buddy from the way he treats girls. Some of the biggest cads have loyal buddies who are not cads. What if those guys were to say, “Dude, that’s not cool what you did with that girl. Your gf is cool, I’m not going to cover for you if she asks.”

    Not going to happen in any substantive way. No offense intended, but I don’t think women understand male friendship. Can’t find the reference or link now, but basically it is a friend is someone who “will help you hide the body”. And then you’ve got expressions like “snitches get stiches”. I think every guy has certain lines he won’t cross for a friend, but the value of that friendship is based strongly on loyalty. I’d argue loyalty is probably one of the top virtues valued by men. I could probably spin some evo psych reason around that if I tried (calling Han).

    I will say this though…just today I had a conversation with my player co-worker where I tried to give my thoughts on what was the “right” way to treat a girl he is dating who I think isn’t the typical slut he mostly dates. But if he ignores my opinion/advice I’m not going to treat him any differently.

    I could be wrong, but I don’t think you’ll see men shaming men for playerish behavior.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    So I think that’s the majority of hot women, not putting out for lower SMV guys, and especially not for casual…but…I think there is a phase that many hot women go through where they can be quite feral.

    I think back to high school and how many (I won’t say most) of the hottest girls were rather feral (not with me!) and has sex with a lot of guys. One badass Mormon girl in my ward who was an 8.5 or 9 has sex with 8 guys over one summer. Another girl who was more of an 8 but had the queenbee personality slept with like 12 different guys over a summer, all who had gf’s, and then in the fall when the rumors broke the gf’s confronted her and beat her up! lol However, most of these guys were the alpha jock types. There were other such goings on. We can speculate as to why they did it: wanting validation, loving to exercise their sexual power, horny, etc.

    Now, maybe these were just the 20% most unrestricted of the hot girls or they had really low self esteem or were narcissists, but it definitely raised my goody-goody Mormon eyebrows at the time.

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

      I think back to high school and how many (I won’t say most) of the hottest girls were rather feral (not with me!) and has sex with a lot of guys.

      Remember sociosexual orientation is only one piece of the puzzle. As you say, narcissism and low self-esteem can play a role, but there are a variety of other factors that correlate to promiscuity, including family dynamics, parental divorce, prenatal exposure to androgens, the DRD4 dopamine gene mutation, genetic personality traits, etc.

      What we can say is that all other things being equal, the most attractive women eschew casual sex.

  • Mike C

    Anyway, that’s part of being a man: being able to take incoming fire and learn from it.

    Han,

    +1,000,000,000.

  • Mike C

    but…I think there is a phase that many hot women go through where they can be quite feral.

    I think back to high school and how many (I won’t say most) of the hottest girls were rather feral (not with me!) and has sex with a lot of guys. One badass Mormon girl in my ward who was an 8.5 or 9 has sex with 8 guys over one summer. Another girl who was more of an 8 but had the queenbee personality slept with like 12 different guys over a summer,

    You may be right…IDK. My high school experience was very much one of being on the outside looking in. I didn’t go to any of the parties so I really don’t have the slightest clue who was doing what with who. I couldn’t tell you anything about the sex lives of the 5 hottest girls in my high school class.

    Now my 20s is a different story. I was a regular on the club/bar scene and for part of those years I hung with a group of guys who were apex alphas (one is the male model I’ve mentioned) so I was able to directly see the SMV levels of the girls who were easy pickings, especially for the top 2 guys in the group. I remember one night the male model and I met these girls at a bar and went back to their place that night. He ended up having sex with that girl that night (she was probably around a 6 while he was a 9 in looks easy). On the ride home, he joked with me because when we were first at their place he thought I was doing better with my girl and I actually got shot down that night (but ended up having sex with her on date 2). Years later, when I was bouncing I would see this same pattern where I would see 6-7 females almost behave like groupies for the male 8-9s. Admittedly, perhaps all these women fall into the unrestricted spectrum, but many seemed to consistently prefer being part of a higher SMV guy’s harem rather than something more substantive with a more equally matched SMV male.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    I don’t have anything profound about male loyalty from evo-psych beyond the need for it out on the battlefield and hunting grounds where you’re putting your life in each other’s hands. As long as these companions/friends are not cowards and do their job to a reasonable degree then you cut them some slack on how they act at home as long as they’re not messing with your female relatives.

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

      you cut them some slack on how they act at home as long as they’re not messing with your female relatives.

      I had this exact convo with a group of my daughter’s guy friends one time. I knew all these kids growing up, and one of them turned out to be a real cad. He was ugly, too, but he did very well with girls. In any case, He really hurt some young women I knew with his lying and cheating. I challenged the other guys when I heard them talking about him. They were friends with his victims too, so I asked why they wouldn’t have clued these girls in to what was really going on. They awkwardly squirmed and looked down. A couple mumbled something about having grown up together, and then one guy said, “I will say this. I wouldn’t let that kid anywhere near my sister.” And the rest of the guys agreed. That was as much as I was going to get out of them.

  • HanSolo

    What I do find fascinating about many males is the ability to be fighting each other, even in a death match, and then somehow the wave of hate and violence blows over and they come to respect each other and can become allies even. Kind of like how Big and Aidan fight in the mud at the cabin and then laugh it off after.

    Admittedly, I’ve never seen the death match in person but I have seen less severe conflicts end in respect. Also, some guys are just tools and can’t come to respect the other guy. But overall, I think more guys are able to overcome a grudge than women are.

  • HanSolo

    Maybe tribal men were expected to primarily defend their close female relatives (mother, daughter, sisters) and it wasn’t there place so much to defend females that weren’t their close relatives as much(like 2nd cousins). However, if men outside the tribe started interfering with non-relative females of the tribe or things got way too abusive then the men would defend them, especially when it came to physical protection. Back then, fertile females were more valuable than males and so you wanted to keep them alive no matter what. That’s a distinction from not squeeling on your hunting buddy sneaking off with some other woman.

  • HanSolo

    And maybe a lot of the men wanted to be able to sneak off with other women while maintaining their main woman so it was kind of a code of silence to allow a certain amount of intra-tribal philandering, of course as long as it didn’t involve your own wife!

  • Mike C

    I say I’m unrestricted because I took that test and got 8 out of 9 on each of the 3 categories. However, you shouldn’t mistake that for what one is capable of or what one wants most. I was a voluntary religious virgin up til about 30 and then kind of had a lot of women after that. But my deepest desire is to get married, be faithful and have 4 kids. So, I would gladly trade in all those lays for having one awesome woman to marry and be in love with. Basically, I’m a dual-track male, superficially unrestricted in the sense of taking flings or STRs as they come but really wanting a lifelong and loving marriage with kids at my deeper level.

    Han,

    I’m going to cosign and add to this. I think there is a big difference in ones “core nature/orientation” and then kind of the “active” decision making on how you live life. I’ll give a related example. Both my fiancee and I LOVE food….I mean we just love food and desserts. But we live a fairly “restricted” food lifestyle and have actually dialed that up a notch since we both have weight/bodyfat goals to hit by our November wedding. But we both eat very “restricted” daily diets that basically consist of lean proteins, vegetables, fruits, and then once a week we go f’n crazy with garbage carbs and fats.

    The same principle could apply. One could have an unrestricted orientation yet in practice live a more restricted lifestyle. In my case, my N is lower because in my adult life I’ve had two long periods of faithful monogamy (and there were numerous opportunities during those time frames) but I’ve also engaged in some highly unrestricted behaviors. One encounter was on a spring break vacation and I wasn’t even sure what her first name was (at a certain point I couldn’t really ask for confirmation). Point being, my entire sexual history is kind of an odd combination of long bouts of restricted behavior mixed in with some stuff that ranks pretty high on the unrestricted spectrum…I’d probably get stones thrown at me if I mentioned another example.

    By the same token, it seems clear to me that some “restricted” people orientation wise actually engage in unrestricted behavior such as quickly moving to sex in hopes of getting the relationship. I recall Megaman who proudly displays his neon Team Restricted badge on his shirt at all times talking about getting sexual somewhat quickly although I wasn’t sure when he said that how quickly was quickly (3rd date?).

    In any case, I agree that most are in the “mushy middle” with only a minority at the extremes (Hope and Anacoana might be good examples of pure restricted, I can’t think of a good example of pure unrestricted). Like alpha/beta they are useful descriptive adjectives but the more you try to categorize people into binary extremes the less useful and more misleading they become. In terms of pairings for example, I suspect that I have a much more unrestricted orientation than my fiancee. I know that one of her unrestricted experiences is something that she didn’t have any positive feelings towards after the fact. So I think pairings can work either way as long as you are not talking the extremes.

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

      I recall Megaman who proudly displays his neon Team Restricted badge on his shirt at all times talking about getting sexual somewhat quickly although I wasn’t sure when he said that how quickly was quickly (3rd date?).

      This is not a fair characterization. Aside from the mocking tone, it’s inaccurate. A man can have a very limited sexual history (or even be a virgin), be willing to have sex only with someone he anticipates an LTR with, be unwilling to disconnect sex from love, and have zero desire for sex with strangers or a number of different partners, all by the third date. Or even the first date.

      Getting busy with someone you have an immediate strong connection with, and who you indeed go on to marry after several years of dating and monogamy, does not qualify as unrestricted in any way.

  • Mike C

    I was a voluntary religious virgin up til about 30 and then kind of had a lot of women after that.

    BTW, I have to say…..you really are making up for lost time! :)

  • Emily

    >> “In contrast, I think women are more prone to lie to each other based on wanting to keep good feelings. I’d actually be curious how often women will tell another woman “girl, he is out of your league”. I could be wrong, but I doubt it happens that frequently. ”

    I’ll admit that it happens VERY rarely (if ever). There have been times when I’ve wanted to or where I’ve tried to subtly hint that they should lower their standards. But if I were to state it outright, I’d probably end up losing friends.

  • Mike C

    I think I figured out what you mean, that my unrestrictedness or high-N will make it less likely to find a woman who is not unrestricted for marriage.

    From my personal experience, I think that there is a small amount of truth to that but not much. First of all, my rough sense is that women will give men leeway of about 2 or 3x as high as men will give women. If men think 10 is about the limit women would be more around 20 or 30, though in the end as we’ve seen with many of the men on here accepting higher N in women than they’d like, falling in love with someone will make the N a bit less important than it does in the abstract. But I recognize that those women who value a not too high N in men may rule me out.

    The last example where this came up was where my N was about 7x higher than hers. She was kind of shocked because she knew of my Mormon background ****but then after a few minutes moved on and kept dating me.***

    Han,

    I agree. Consider a simple 2×2 matrix of attractive versus unattractive along with restricted versus unrestricted. An attractive man is still an attractive man is still an attractive man. I remember when you put up a variety of pictures. I think the general consensus was you are a very good looking man. So if you have a very good looking man of an unrestricted orientation with perhaps a somewhat higher N that doesn’t cross into manwhore territory (let’s call that 25-40) I think the overwhelming majority of women including those who tilt “restricted” are not going to rule you out immediately. I think the only ones who will categorically immediately filter you out from any sort of consideration including LTR possibility are the most super extreme restricted. I don’t know what that percentage is but I’m relatively confident it is pretty small.

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

      So if you have a very good looking man of an unrestricted orientation with perhaps a somewhat higher N that doesn’t cross into manwhore territory (let’s call that 25-40) I think the overwhelming majority of women including those who tilt “restricted” are not going to rule you out immediately.

      I think this is right, and in part Pluralistic Ignorance explains it. Most young women would guess that the mean number of sexual partners in the population is much higher than it is (and most young men would as well). So even if a woman is slightly put off by a number of 20, say, she’s going to tell herself that no good looking guy has a number lower than that. We see men do this all the time when they do indeed commit to sluts.

      In the cases I’ve heard about directly, the woman did not rule the guy out immediately, but it did serve as a red flag. A woman in this position, if she is restricted herself, will carefully watch for signs of sketchy behavior. In the most recent case, she communicated her disappointment, and the guy was very eager to demonstrate that his casual sex days are over. We’ll see.

  • Mike C

    I’ll admit that it happens VERY rarely (if ever). There have been times when I’ve wanted to or where I’ve tried to subtly hint that they should lower their standards. But if I were to state it outright, I’d probably end up losing friends.

    Interesting. I get this picture that female friendship has a sort of “political diplomacy” aspect to it where you always have to give second thought to what you can and cannot say. It makes me think of the work environment and talking to co-workers. All communication has to be filtered through perceptions. It is so different from male friendship. I’d say that one of the things most refreshing with my really close male friends is we basically can say whatever to each other knowing 10 minutes later it won’t be a big deal. I can’t imagine losing a close friend because I “offended” him.

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

      I get this picture that female friendship has a sort of “political diplomacy” aspect to it where you always have to give second thought to what you can and cannot say

      Well, we learn the script early on.

      Not OK: Your ass looks fat in those jeans.

      OK: Hmmm, those are not my favorite, to tell you the truth.

      Not OK: Those look great on you!

      A good friend will steer you in the right direction in a very diplomatic way.

  • Mike C

    Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the rose-colored glasses for the alpha! It’s funny how despite our past behavior and even self-reported desires doesn’t matter. You really do get a “free pass” based on looks and success.

    OTC, I actually think you are wrong here. I think you are identifying the wrong driver. It isn’t about “alpha”. I think Han would be the first to concede he isn’t “alpha” in the sense that the term is usually used. And I don’t think it is about “looks and success”. It is about likability and demeanor. In this case, anything and everything Han says objectively first passes through the filter of “I like him”. Once it passes that filter, it can be redefined. I think there is actually a lesson in there for men in dealing with women successfully in any facet of life. Get them to like you…really like you. Once you’ve done that, you can state the sun is green and have them nodding in agreement. I’ve actually really figured that one out specifically due to my interactions here the past couple of years and observing various male commenters.

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

      @Mike C

      It is about likability and demeanor. In this case, anything and everything Han says objectively first passes through the filter of “I like him”.

      Speaking for myself, I can like a commenter very much and still wouldn’t want him anywhere near a girl I cared about. I have no desire to judge men by their N, although I do freely point out the risks associated with that. I’ve basically told every guy here with high N that I doubt he’s a good bet for monogamy. Same goes for guys with highly unrestricted sociosexuality.

      It’s the same in my focus groups. I didn’t dislike or judge the sluts – I am still close to a couple of them. But neither have I held back what I believe to be the costs of that behavior, and they know exactly where I stand.

      I don’t know Han’s N, and I think his case is unusual, what with the Mormon upbringing and all. What I do see is a very high level of emotional intelligence, high empathy, and strong commitment to principles such as honesty and loyalty. There is nothing “dark” or Machiavellian in Han’s reports, IMO.

      I also confess that I enjoy people here who are good at communication, and generous in their demeanor. I dislike conflict – the pay here isn’t high enough for that :P My thinking has been influenced significantly by people I initially disagreed with because of their ability to communicate effectively. I’ve also been unwilling to listen to anything some people have to say because they’re just so damned unpleasant. (I do not mean you.)

      So in short…

      Get them to like you…really like you. Once you’ve done that, you can state the sun is green and have them nodding in agreement.

      Revised: Be likeable. Be open-minded. Once you’ve done that, you’ll find that people are a lot more willing to listen to what you have to say, and much less likely to feel they’re wasting their time by engaging you.

      Driving home an agenda again and again, never varying? That’s no fun for anyone.

  • Mike C

    I was never denying that I am unrestricted. I am. To the tune of 8/9 on the survey. But my point was that people are more complex than a one-dimensional variable and that being unrestricted doesn’t mean one doesn’t want to marry for life and be faithful. I don’t think I ever said that I was restricted at a deeper level, just that I want to get married at a deeper level.

    FWIW…what I find fascinating and this ties back into some of OTC’s comments, but there are some comments where there is sort of a subtle subtext that what is going on inside one’s mind, their thoughts, perhaps instinctual drives is actually of greater importance or has more “nobility” than the actuality of one’s life choices, behaviors, and day to day living.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C and OTC

    I don’t think I am an alpha in the sense of being the gregarious guy who dominates the room. At best I could be described as a lesser alpha, greater beta mix. Or in Vox’s terminology, I think I would be more of a mix of a lesser-sigma and a greater beta. My niche area is with females that like smart and romantic guys with a reasonable amount of confidence, life success, dominance and game. That said, there are a lot of attractive women, though a minority of attractive women, that are looking for someone like me. I am not very good in approaching women in bars and giving off the jock/player vibe because that’s not my personality, though I am a fairly good athlete.

    Mike, by your numbers I’m a manwhore. lol About a 1/3 were 8-9′s in looks, a third 7-7.5 and a third 6-6.5. And, I will admit, there was one 5.5 and one 5! (Looks down in shame.)

    I used to have a lot of anti-game back in my Mormon days and though I could get dates (I suppose because I would approach and ask girls out and had reasonably good looks and was interesting enough to talk to) the anti-game neediness and over-eagerness would come out sooner or later and ruin things. And in the cases where I somehow didn’t do wild with the anti-game or the girl liked me anyway then I would get too picky for now dumb to me reasons like she wasn’t righteous enough! God, I feel like a tool! I wish I had read double your dating when I was 16!

    I still have some anti-game but have removed a lot of it.

  • Mike C

    For me there are two ladders for sex. On one ladder the women I love, like a lot or could grow to love will receive emotional bonding beyond lust (and lust is an emotion). On the other ladder, lust, excitement and maybe some small amount of affection.

    Han, LOL…as you describe your attitude here I have pretty much exactly the same attitude. Put more bluntly, your two ladders are identical to mine. I just wanted to note that given some of the previous conversation.

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

      @Han

      For me there are two ladders for sex. On one ladder the women I love, like a lot or could grow to love will receive emotional bonding beyond lust (and lust is an emotion). On the other ladder, lust, excitement and maybe some small amount of affection.

      This, combined with your earlier comment about having a threesome with “two women I care about” makes you very high risk indeed. Add in your acknowledgement of N > 40 and I do believe we have enough red flags here for a Communist parade. :)

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    And I don’t dislike the girls on the casual ladder. In fact, I tend to stay friends with those of them that are willing to. They often have quite nice personalities. They’re usually just not pretty enough to be on the marriage/gf ladder. And there are a few hot ones that started on the gf ladder but moved to the casual ladder due to their less-likeable personalities.

  • HanSolo

    Or we weren’t compatible.

  • Mike C

    Mike, by your numbers I’m a manwhore.

    That is OK because your heart is in the right place :)….I’m just playin.

    At best I could be described as a lesser alpha, greater beta mix. Or in Vox’s terminology, I think I would be more of a mix of a lesser-sigma and a greater beta.

    FWIW….I really hate categorizing myself….it feels so limiting, but if you put a gun to my head this is how I would categorize myself. I think I have some strong sigma tendencies based on how Vox describes it. I have some interesting dynamics with “alpha” types either learned or natural. I find in many cases they will recognize me as their equal or even higher status especially one on one or a smaller group whereas in a much larger group they can take over and dominate because of their extroversion. We could take this offline to e-mail if you find it interesting but it is exactly some of my interactions and dynamics with more alpha extrovert charmer types that leads me to conclude that the male hierarchy and that rank order can be different from how women on the outside can perceive it. Put more bluntly, a man will take a “lower” position or show some deference/respect to another man based on factors that I don’t think women recognize.

    My niche area is with females that like smart and romantic guys with a reasonable amount of confidence, life success, dominance and game.

    If there is one thing a guy should do is figure out his niche. Usually, a particular type of woman will respond to a particular type of guy.

    I wish I had read double your dating when I was 16!

    Ha! You and me both. Of course, it didn’t exist in the mid to late 90s. If it had, I’d probably be at your “manwhore” number LOL

  • Mike C

    And I don’t dislike the girls on the casual ladder.

    Me neither. Of my casual experiences, I liked them quite a bit. 2 of them I kind of liked, but they had some very annoying tendencies so I could only be around them in small doses (they both were kind of flings/FBs). I think it is a misconception that men “dislike” women they have casual sex with. For whatever reason, they simply are not serious relationship material, but that doesn’t mean they are not likable or can’t be likable.

  • mr. wavevector

    Is there any way to get validation from women without deceiving them and betraying my girlfriend?

    I haven’t had time to read all the responses, so perhaps someone else has mentioned this: JJ can learn to read the subtle Indications of Interest (IOI) from women. This will help him gauge his attractiveness without having to initiate.

    It’s been observed that men tend to be overly optimistic in evaluating women’s IOIs, but in this case, that’s a positive. If he’s looking for a bit of an ego boost, and not a hookup, female affirmation will still be effective even if largely imaginary.

    I’m not as hard on JJ as some of the others here. Most people want some affirmation of their attractiveness to those they are attracted to.

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

      I’m not as hard on JJ as some of the others here. Most people want some affirmation of their attractiveness to those they are attracted to.

      I agree. As I said in the post, I think his feelings are normal and natural. He’s awfully young and has just had his first serious relationship and sexual experiences. Why shouldn’t he want to assess his market value?

      JJ emailed me a response, but I’ve asked him to post it directly. If he doesn’t, I’ll put it up under my name. He’s a good kid.

  • mr. wavevector

    @HanSolo 181,

    In part, this is why men that try to pursue a relationship with such women get shot down and seen as lame. Who fills in the gap? Players that don’t want anything serious. What do the LTR-seeking guys then do after getting shot down a few times? They start to act more like players.

    I think that’s very relevant to JJ’s question in the OP. He’s immersed in an environment of non-commitment (often driven by the women) and valorization of players. That makes it hard for him to appreciate what he’s got, because his relationship is not commensurate with these expectations. 50 years ago, when the expectation was to get married right out of college, he probably would have been perfectly content.

  • OffTheCuff

    Ana: “But I was not using this measures. I think this is a bit too simple for something a lot more complex, YMMV.”

    Yours doesn’t appear to be more complex, as the SOI gauges three axes of behavior, attitude, and desire. Your definition seems to be “perfect LTR monogamy with no fantasies = restricted, everything else = degrees of unrestricted”. It’s an LTR success factor, though, it’s not clear how long an LTR has to be before it “counts”.

    Of course, by your definition, pretty much everyone in the world is unrestricted. Lots of men “watch” porn and women “read” romance novels, which is… fantasizing about (“mindfucking”) a person they’re not married to.

    Here’s the way I see it. The SOI appears to have a normal of around 3, so thats where most people are, mid-stricted. Less than that, you tend unrestricted. To the right, tend restricted. On either end, restricted or unrestricted.

    I guess it comes down to what we consider restricted vs. un. It seems silly to classify perfection as “restricted”, and the whole world as “unrestricted”. It’s that kind of binary religious sin/virtue thinking that made such a giant mess in the first place.

  • YaYouKnowIt

    Open relationship.

  • Escoffier

    “Getting busy with someone you have an immediate strong connection with, and who you indeed go on to marry after several years of dating and monogamy, does not qualify as unrestricted in any way.”

    I dunno. At a minimum, the person has taken a huge risk, with no foreknowledge of how it will pan out. The story could just as easily end within a few weeks, your N is +1 with only a fling to show for it.

    The willingness to take that risk qualifies as at least partially “unrestricted” or let us say “less restricted.”

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

      The willingness to take that risk qualifies as at least partially “unrestricted” or let us say “less restricted.”

      None of us ever knows for sure how something will pan out. What’s relevant is one’s feelings about the sex. If he knew in his heart “she is the one for me,” then having sex is not unrestricted at all, the way it is defined in the SOI. Here are the parameters:

      The SOI assesses three facets of sociosexuality:

      A. Past Behavior in terms of number casual and changing sex partners

      1. With how many different partners have you had sex within the past 12 months?

      2. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse on one and only one occasion?

      3. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse without having an interest in a long-term committed relationship with this person?

      B. The explicit Attitude towards uncommitted sex

      4. Sex without love is OK.

      5. I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying “casual” sex with different partners.

      6. I do not want to have sex with a person until I am sure that we will have a long-term, serious relationship.

      C. Sexual Desire for people with whom no romantic relationship exists.

      7. How often do you have fantasies about having sex with someone you are not in a committed romantic relationship with?

      8. How often do you experience sexual arousal when you are in contact with someone you are not in a committed romantic relationship with?

      9. In everyday life, how often do you have spontaneous fantasies about having sex with someone you have just met?

      If, out of these 9 parameters, a man was only uncertain about #6 because it was early days, I believe he would still score in the bottom quintile.

  • J

    I haven’t had time to read all the responses, so perhaps someone else has mentioned this: JJ can learn to read the subtle Indications of Interest (IOI) from women. This will help him gauge his attractiveness without having to initiate.

    Good advice. He can get the validation he wants and still stay out of trouble.

  • J

    It’s that pesky threesome. OTC has engaged in a behavior only 14% of Americans have engaged in. My guess is that a very, very tiny percentage of marrieds are in that group.

    Indeed. A threesome is sort of a marginal sexual activity. I’m sure there are many high N folks who would still balk at a threesome. It makes OTC’s protestations of low SMV and restrictedness hard for me to swallow. It’s not so much that I disbelieve the stated facts; I just don’t see how the ability to talk two women into a threesome–with all the connotations of sexual use of the women- meshes with low SMV and restrictedness.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Be likeable. Be open-minded. Once you’ve done that, you’ll find that people are a lot more willing to listen to what you have to say, and much less likely to feel they’re wasting their time by engaging you.”

    You must realize that a facet of human biology is that attractiveness and genetic worth directly correlate to how a person is perceived.

    There are people that, no matter how opened minded and likeable, will have people who absolutely hate them. That is do to low genetic worth to that individual (this tends to be reciprocal unless your inbred).

    Also, the more attractive an individual, the more genetic worth they have to others in an indirect sense (especially in mate value) and are therefore going to have an easier time interacting.

    You can actually run the numbers based on an individuals value to another (and vice versa) and determine the type of interaction they would have.

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

      @Lokland

      There are people that, no matter how opened minded and likeable, will have people who absolutely hate them. That is do to low genetic worth to that individual (this tends to be reciprocal unless your inbred).

      The beauty of online debate is that the element of looks is removed, unless people volunteer their photos.

      The most popular guy in an online forum may or may not be physically appealing.

      In any case, I like people who behave well and add productively to the conversation in my virtual living room.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “Indeed. A threesome is sort of a marginal sexual activity. I’m sure there are many high N folks who would still balk at a threesome.”

    Hypothetical question, is a woman with an N=3, two women and her husband in two separate threesomes more or less restricted than a woman N=10-12 with multiple ONSs.

    The lines are quite blurry and as I’ve stated before, an utterly useless metric that means absolutely nothing because its neither explanatory nor predictive.

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

      Hypothetical question, is a woman with an N=3, two women and her husband in two separate threesomes more or less restricted than a woman N=10-12 with multiple ONSs.

      In my view, there is no comparison. The woman who has engaged in a threesome is in a class of her own. I would heartily advise everyone to not even consider partnering with someone who has had a threesome. FTR, I feel the same way about open relationships, polyamory, swinging, etc. I would advise men to avoid women who have been strippers or prostitutes, or who have dated older men for money. I would advise anyone to avoid at all costs anyone who has trolled for anonymous sex online.

      Will every person who has done these things make a poor mate? No, but the odds of infidelity and mental instability are much higher, IMO.

      This is the first and most important filter for everyone.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “There is a whole spectrum of women. Some fly close to the sun, some stand back from the campfire with the marshmallow at the end of a long stick, and some find that the microwave makes delicious melty marshmallows without risk of injury or the hard work of constantly maintaining a fire.”

    You kind of missed the point.
    We don’t have space ships that fly close to the sun.
    A woman encountering an N=20 man is a rarity (at least in terms of overall population) so those mushy middle girls who would settle for N=20 are of course being incredibly unrealistic.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    I never fail to be amazed when people claim that no one wants betas. Who do people think women are marrying?

    Yes, but they don’t really want them. Certainly don’t desire them. They’re placeholders, sometimes for decades, and if the woman has no options, for life!

    Getting busy with someone you have an immediate strong connection with, and who you indeed go on to marry after several years of dating and monogamy, does not qualify as unrestricted in any way.

    The facts: we knew each other first (after being introduced), had a high degree of (non-sexual) compatibility, and established mutual exclusivity within a few months, all before third base. Hell, if that makes me unrestricted, who isn’t? I suppose just wanting to have sex qualifies.

    As for neon signs, let’s not forget the right honorable Ted. I’m not the only irrelevant outlier from another planet around here… :shock:

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

      @Megaman

      Thanks for clarifying. I felt sure your ears would burn and you would show up. :)

  • Sassy6519

    @ SayWhaat

    Did you and your boyfriend break up? If so, I’m sorry to hear that.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I never fail to be amazed when people claim that no one wants betas. Who do people think women are marrying?”

    Thats because you define beta differently than most of the men here (and in the manosphere).

    Cooper, INTJ, myself, Ted and quite a few others are most definitely lower than your definition of beta yet still have quite a large number of beta traits. (Though I realize unlike them I’m so kind of lecher who likes having sex with multiple woman.)

  • J

    Susan–

    At the risk of endlessly repeating myself on the subject of guilt vs. shame, I believe that shaming is counterproductive and never appropriate. Inflicting shame on others is nearly always an attempt to manipulate and control. As the Lewis quote says, it is an attack on another’s very self. IME, shaming also re-entrenches bad behavior as it redefines the person involed as a bad person, who is not really capable of changing their nature. Guilt applies to particular actions who can be changed. IWO, if your kid comes home drunk, you can see it as a bad or dangerous behavior that shouldn’t be repeated or you can call your kid a drunk. It might feel good to vent that emotion, but if you manage to convince your kid that he is indeed a drunk, you will have contributued to creating a life long condition of alcoholism.

    This is why I cringe when the ‘sphere vents its spleen about shaming the sluts. It shifts the focus from fixable bad decision making to irremediable bad character.

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

      @J

      OK. How do we control behavior in society if we can’t shame bad behavior?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “In any case, I like people who behave well and add productively to the conversation in my virtual living room.”

    I’m not suggesting you do yay or nay. Merely pointing out some very basic human dynamics that are largely considered unPC.

    As an example, HS obviously had very high value based solely on commentary but that effect was increased after the photo shoot.

    I highly doubt my commentary would be more valued if I posted a picture of me and my wife. Same for 90% of the population (if not some experiencing a negative effect).

    Beyond that, humans stereotype and build mental images quite readily. Another factor worthy of consideration.

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

      As an example, HS obviously had very high value based solely on commentary but that effect was increased after the photo shoot.

      Can you support this claim? That is, can you demonstrate that HS’s commentary was more positively received by the same readers after we saw his photo? I don’t think so. As you say, the value of his commentary was high from the start. In addition, here are some things that HanSolo does regularly:

      1. He is not combative. He is extremely persistent and tenacious when he has a point to make, and he generally provides supporting data or evidence for his argument. Throughout the debate his tone remains cordial – he does not ridicule or mock others, he does not give high 5′s to others who he perceives are scoring points for his side. His demeanor is extremely collaborative.

      2. He regularly supports other readers. He has generously given advice and been a good listener for both men and women on the threads. He is not judgmental.

      3. He speaks in a language that women understand – the language of emotion. For all you guys who can’t figure out why women like hipster emos, this is the reason. I mean, this is a guy who adores Jane Austen and wants to discuss her books!

      All of this has been true from the start – and for me at least, Han’s photo had zero effect on my perception of him. But I’d be interested to see whether there is evidence to the contrary.

  • FeralEmployee

    @Anacaona, 191

    You really don’t know a lot about secularists, do you? Always amusing when people perform wishful thinking just to elevate themselves morally. Dream on.

  • J

    Hypothetical question, is a woman with an N=3, two women and her husband in two separate threesomes more or less restricted than a woman N=10-12 with multiple ONSs.

    That’s a crwzy question to me, Lok. It’s a whole other level of taboo. To stretch the point, what if N=3, but it’s three toddlers? Three dogs? Two cats and a squirrel?

    I’m not equating a threesome to pedophilia or bestiality, but it is a step away from the monogamous, one at time norm Western civilization is based on. The further away from the norm a behavior is, the less N is relevent and the more the character of the act is relevent.

    OK, I gotta run. Not trying to dodge debate but I need to go help my sick friend.

  • Abbot

    Feminists are waking up, opening their news feeds…and freaking!

    The catfighting of the chimpanzee: Females pander to males but act aggressively towards their own sex, say scientists

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2288342/Female-chimps-suck-act-aggressively-males-chimpanzees-affected-social-pressures.html

    .

  • Escoffier

    In that case, Susan, I think the test is a little out of whack. A truly “restricted” person would wait until s/he knew, or at least had very high certainty, that things were going to work out. In other words, certainly not the first date and longer than the third.

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

      A truly “restricted” person would wait until s/he knew, or at least had very high certainty, that things were going to work out. In other words, certainly not the first date and longer than the third.

      But this is a man we’re talking about. The gatekeeper of commitment. I think you have a point if it’s the woman.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “That is, can you demonstrate that HS’s commentary was more positively received by the same readers after we saw his photo? I don’t think so. ”

    No, obviously I cannot.
    I can provide indirect evidence for it of course (given adequate time to research and either yay or nay my assumption, and yes it is an assumption based on indirect knowledge.)

    I’m stating a really basic point that is well understood which is hotter=better reception. There is no reason to suspect the same dynamics would not apply in this situation.

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

      I’m stating a really basic point that is well understood which is hotter=better reception. There is no reason to suspect the same dynamics would not apply in this situation.

      Hmmm. I don’t think so. I’m going to make a matrix of male commenters here:

      Hot & Likable

      Not hot & Likable

      Hot & Not Likable

      Not hot & Not Likable

      Obviously, I won’t share it but my guess is that for me at least, there is no correlation between looks and likability. If anything, I suspect a negative one.

  • Escoffier

    A foriori the woman but it works for the man too. I mean, we would agree (presumably) that men are on average less restricted than women. But if “restricted” has an intrinsic meaning, it would seem to apply to both sexes in much the same way.

    As a practical matter, I know you are right, that lots of guys with low N, who are not players, push for and get early sex and then stick around for a long time. But I wonder if they are truly restricted? Or are they merely men with fewer options, so when one comes through, they stick with her?

  • Mike C

    I never fail to be amazed when people claim that no one wants betas. Who do people think women are marrying?

    Yes, but they don’t really want them. Certainly don’t desire them. They’re placeholders, sometimes for decades, and if the woman has no options, for life!

    Ha. I know you are being sarcastic here, but the irony is at least for some group of women you are spot on right at least in terms of behavior.

    I think few people dispute who women are marrying. I think the more relevant question which is the elephant in the room I hope you both will directly address but WHO ARE THE GUYS who eventually find themselves needing to head over to Athol Kay’s MMSL to try and fix their unhappy marriage? Are those the “betas” women are in fact marrying and strongly desire? Or is that some other segment of guys. I don’t know how many copies of the book he has sold or what his traffic is like, but he was able to quit his job to pursue that full-time so clearly he is meeting some market need out there for men/betas who “women wanted and married”. We don’t know how many others simply exist in relationships of quiet desperation, and I’m skeptical of any survey on self-reported “happiness with the relationship”. So in my opinion, it is irrelevant who women are marrying. What is relevant is the breakdown between women who act in their marriage as if they truly value and appreciate being married to that beta versus the women who simply tolerate his existence. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what that breakdown is, but I am absolutely certain the latter category isn’t miniscule.

    As for neon signs, let’s not forget the right honorable Ted. I’m not the only irrelevant outlier from another planet around here… :shock:

    Ehhh…you missed the point. Ted isn’t self-righteous and pretentious. Ted and I have little commonality on our sexual attitudes, but I have no doubt he and I could go for a beer, swap stories, and actually be friends. You on the other hand, and feel free to correct me if I am off-base, strike me as the type who thinks he is “better” because of his sexual attitudes which personally I think is an absolutely moronic thing to take self-pride in. BTW, I wish I could collect a nickel for every smart ass snarky emoticon you finish every post with. It is a very feminine thing to do.

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

      @Mike C

      WHO ARE THE GUYS who eventually find themselves needing to head over to Athol Kay’s MMSL to try and fix their unhappy marriage?

      This is not a good metric. Their number is no doubt dwarfed by the number of alphas whose wives are leaving them for infidelity. It’s probably fair to estimate that around .0000000001% of married men have visited MMSL, and perhaps a tenth of that have bought the book. That’s still an awesome accomplishment for Athol, but hardly evidence for your view.

      Megaman has shared data repeatedly on the percentage of men who describe themselves as “very happy” in their marriages. IIRC it’s around 2/3. Fair to say that’s mostly betas, right? I don’t know why you’re skeptical of surveys, but do you have another source for the belief that many men are living lives of quiet desperation?

      What is relevant is the breakdown between women who act in their marriage as if they truly value and appreciate being married to that beta versus the women who simply tolerate his existence. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what that breakdown is, but I am absolutely certain the latter category isn’t miniscule.

      What is relevant is the breakdown between men who act in their marriage as if they truly value and appreciate being married to that woman versus the men who simply tolerate her existence. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what that breakdown is, but I am absolutely certain the latter category isn’t miniscule.

      You on the other hand, and feel free to correct me if I am off-base, strike me as the type who thinks he is “better” because of his sexual attitudes which personally I think is an absolutely moronic thing to take self-pride in.

      This is hypocrisy. You have championed unrestricted male sexuality as the norm, and even defended it as superior, something for guys with more options.

      BTW, I wish I could collect a nickel for every smart ass snarky emoticon you finish every post with. It is a very feminine thing to do.

      Stop being an asshole or I will ban you. This is precisely the kind of remark that makes you unpopular at times.

      Debate Megaman on the merits of his arguments and stop the solipsism.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I have not had a threesome. I was responding to OTC’s speculation on what was more unrestricted. See my comment 203.

    So, the N is 40ish but they were all one-on-one.

    I’m totally fine with you pointing out risks about high N men and women. I did the deeds, I have to own the consequences of how I will be perceived. That will rule out a few or 10% of the most restricted women. I don’t have any (measurable) STDs and have been and will be faithful in relationships. To any girl worried about my ability to be faithful the only thing I can do is share how I’ve acted and tell her to judge my sincerity and how I have treated her up that point and do so in the future. I’m confident I’ll be faithful. I’m certainly not out trying to trick any woman into marrying me since that would be very counterproductive to my goals of a loving and faithful marriage.

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

      @Han

      I’m confident I’ll be faithful. I’m certainly not out trying to trick any woman into marrying me since that would be very counterproductive to my goals of a loving and faithful marriage.

      FWIW, I believe you are sincere and wish you all the best. I do like you and the risks I point out are nothing personal – you know that. And I will admit that your high EQ mitigates the risk, IMO.

  • Escoffier

    Han, if I were you, I would tell the truth if asked but I wouldn’t volunteer any info.

  • HanSolo

    Also my comment 207.

  • Mike C

    I dunno. At a minimum, the person has taken a huge risk, with no foreknowledge of how it will pan out. The story could just as easily end within a few weeks, your N is +1 with only a fling to show for it.

    The willingness to take that risk qualifies as at least partially “unrestricted” or let us say “less restricted.”

    Exactly. I was trying to find a way to articulate that. Clearly, there is a very REAL and SUBSTANTIVE difference between say the scenarios that Susan lays out for say quick escalation to sex even on a first date compared to the processes that say Hope and Anacoana went through before physical/sexual escalation with their future spouses. I’d argue that the “restricted relationship oriented” person having sex with someone on a date 1 in hopes that it will materialize to a relationship is actually a lot closer in sexual nature to me than Hope or Anacoana and therefore to label them both as “restricted” sort of makes the term meaningless as a descriptor because it is encompassing such a wide range of sexual behavior/attitudes. There is no comparison between someone having sex on a date 1 with hopes of a relationship and a supposed emotional connection and what Ana and Hope needed before getting sexual. Also, I’m skeptical of the assertion that one can even have some deep emotional connection/bond on a date 1, the notion is somewhat absurd to be honest as an emotional bond takes time to develop. Someone having sex with someone on date 1 or even date 3 or date 4 is actually exhibiting some aspect of “unrestricted” irrespective of whatever the intent is.

    My concern is if we are going to play the “morality” good/bad game which I really am not interested in I just find it a bit convenient where the line gets drawn…which is basically anything goes and any time frame is “restricted” as long as the intent is a relationship. If we are going to attach restricted = good and unrestricted=bad, I just find it interesting that I think people want to draw the circle around the target that whatever they engaged in still fits within the boundaries of “restricted” such as one-night stands because they want to be part of the “good club”. I’m actually empathetic and can greatly respect a view that says much time is needed or solid committment before sex takes place such as what Hope and Ana did. That model is logically consistent.

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

      Also, I’m skeptical of the assertion that one can even have some deep emotional connection/bond on a date 1, the notion is somewhat absurd to be honest as an emotional bond takes time to develop. Someone having sex with someone on date 1 or even date 3 or date 4 is actually exhibiting some aspect of “unrestricted” irrespective of whatever the intent is.

      This is just not true according to the paramaters of the SOI. You can’t rewrite the instrument to suit your bias.

      People can enter a limerent state very quickly. Love at first sight is real – the love is of course not a fully formed bond or attachment but the state of being “in love” can happy almost immediately. That feeling is one of total commitment. You also do not allow for the fact that people can know one another before dating, and may even be in love before going on one date.

      I knew the first time I laid eyes on my husband that I wanted to marry him. Obviously, there was a huge amount of projection there, because I didn’t know him. Yet every single one of my assumptions was correct. By the time we had a ONS, I was already totally in love with him, despite the fact that the emotional bond was one-sided at that point.

  • HanSolo

    @Escoffier

    That’s been how I have acted usually. It invariably comes out that I was a virgin until ~30. Only one woman asked me my N because she is very worried about STDs. So, I told her–she was surprised but since her worry was more about STDs, once I got a new STD test done and was free of measurable ones then she was totally fine.

    When I was first sexually active I would end up telling women about how I was a virgin until recently and the found that fascinating that a man could voluntarily stay a virgin until that late in life. My 2nd gf after losing my virginity told me I shouldn’t share so many details with any woman in the future though she was fine with it.

  • Sassy6519

    As an example, HS obviously had very high value based solely on commentary but that effect was increased after the photo shoot.

    HanSolo is definitely hot, but my feelings about his commentary have not changed. I don’t agree with everything that he says, and I’m sure that the feeling is mutual.

    Would I diddle him? Yes.

    Does that make his commentary any better? No.

  • Lokland

    @Susan, J

    “In my view, there is no comparison.”
    “That’s a crwzy question to me, Lok. ”

    Well unfortunately the SOI is not based upon opinion but a set of measurable quantitates. in the ONS vs. threesome case only the ‘past’ behaviour and attitude towards sex matter. (We obviously cannot measure section C.)

    “A. Past Behavior in terms of number casual and changing sex partners

    1. With how many different partners have you had sex within the past 12 months?
    2. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse on one and only one occasion?
    3. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse without having an interest in a long-term committed relationship with this person?

    B. The explicit Attitude towards uncommitted sex
    4. Sex without love is OK.
    5. I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying “casual” sex with different partners.
    6. I do not want to have sex with a person until I am sure that we will have a long-term, serious relationship.”

    Assuming 1 threesome (with a relationship partner, no ONSs as per example) and 1 ONS.

    1. Threesome within relationship= 2
    ONS= 1
    2. Threesome= 1
    ONS= 1
    3. 3some=1 (scissoring of course, this could also be zero :P)
    ONS= 1

    4.Threesome= yes
    ONS= yes
    5. Threesome= yes
    ONS= yes
    6. Threesome= no
    ONS= no.

    So as you can see, only on #1 is there an applicable difference that makes the threesome worse than the ONS. Now of course, as any guy who wants a threesome can tell you, ONSs are far more common than threesomes meaning that we can assume a higher rate of accumulation for the ONS party than the threesome within a relationship party.

    I’m not an expert but given the numbers it would appear a woman capable of ONSs is more or less equally unrestricted as the woman willing to have a threesome within (out of is a different matter) a relationship. Entirely dependent upon the frequency of such events (also at threesomes greater than 2, the value of question one drops to 1 making them equal.)

    Did I mention I though SOI was an absolutely useless metric?

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

      @Lokland

      It seems kind of silly to argue about what is unrestricted and what isn’t, since everyone will bring their own values and standards to that question.

      For me, a threesome is a dealbreaker, but an N of 25 would not be. Perhaps this is because I know that I would/have had a ONS but would never in a million years have a threesome.

      I am extremely intolerant of non-monogamy in my personal life, have zero sympathy for excusing cheating with the fact that men are hardwired to crave variety, and would leave my husband in a nanosecond if he cheated.

      But I don’t presume to represent all women.

  • Sassy6519

    @ HanSolo

    So, the N is 40ish but they were all one-on-one.

    Holy Shit!!

  • Sassy6519

    That is one high partner count you have there buddy. Jeebus.

    20 I can tolerate (notice how I said tolerate), but over 40 is too much, in my opinion.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Hmmm. I don’t think so.”

    Indirect evidence (as stated).

    “Good Looks, Good Grades? An Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Students’ Physical Attractiveness on Grading by Teachers

    Author(s): Dunkake, I (Dunkake, Imke)[ 1 ] ; Kiechle, T (Kiechle, Thomas); Klein, M (Klein, Markus)[ 2 ] ; Rosar, U (Rosar, Ulrich)[ 3 ]
    Source: ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SOZIOLOGIE Volume: 41 Issue: 2 Pages: 142-161 Published: APR 2012

    Times Cited: 0 (from Web of Science)

    Cited References: 129 [ view related records ] Citation Map

    Abstract: Many educational studies like PISA have shown that school performance is not purely determined by scholarly achievements. Apart from students’ efforts, there are other criteria that influence school grades. One of these is the physical attractiveness of students, an aspect that has largely been ignored in national educational studies up to now. Based on a sample of three secondary high school classes in a large German city we tested the extent to which school grades are affected by the physical appearance of students and whether this effect is moderated by the so-called “beauty is beastly” effect. The results of our empirical analysis show that school grades are significantly influenced by physical attractiveness. We could, however, not find any support for the “beauty is beastly” effect.

    Physical attractiveness and its relation to unprovoked and reactive aggression
    Author(s): Bobadilla, L (Bobadilla, Leonardo)[ 1 ] ; Metze, AV (Metze, Amanda V.)[ 1 ] ; Taylor, J (Taylor, Jeanette)[ 2 ]
    Source: JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN PERSONALITY Volume: 47 Issue: 1 Pages: 70-77 DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.09.004 Published: FEB 2013
    Times Cited: 0 (from Web of Science)
    Cited References: 62 [ view related records ] Citation Map
    Abstract: Studies have linked facial attractiveness to positive outcomes and unattractiveness to negative ones. However, no study has examined whether attractiveness and aggression are related, even though there is a relationship between unattractiveness and risk factors for aggression like neglect and bullying. In this study, 78 men and women engaged in unprovoked and reactive physical aggression tasks, and reactive derogation of a fictitious opponent. The participants were graded on attractiveness by a group of independent raters. The results indicated that for male participants, unattractiveness predicted unprovoked and reactive aggression as strongly as callous/unemotional psychopathic traits. Among female participants, attractiveness predicted derogation of the opponents more strongly than any psychopathic trait. Implications from gene-environment correlation and social role theory perspectives are ”

    —————————————–
    Key note from second paper.

    The results indicated that for male participants, unattractiveness predicted unprovoked and reactive aggression as strongly as callous/unemotional psychopathic traits.

    ————————————–

    Now, I realize the first was done in Germany and on an unrelated topic but it gets to the heart of the matter which is a better reception for attractiveness.
    I believe these things are applicable across our species with regional modulation on what is deemed attractive.

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

      Lokland, I do not dispute the fact that good-looking people enjoy all sorts of perks in life, including warmer receptions from others. I do not believe it follows that HanSolo’s commentary is found more valid because several female commenters found him handsome.

      If anything, I think very good looking people are assume to be less intelligent in general, e.g. dumb jocks, blonde bimbos.

  • HanSolo

    @Sassy

    Sorry to disappoint you that they were all one-on-one! lol j/k

  • Lokland

    Btw, HS, I like you and enjoy your commentary.
    Your just exceptionally useful for making a point atm.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Escoffier

    this issue of resentment has come up before. I do think it’s true that, in general, men are more likely to resent women merely for looking. That is, being obvious about the fact that Jake over there is a total hunk, or having posters of big stars on your wall. Whereas women sort of expect men to drool with regularity. In my youth it was very common for guys to have posters of the hot babe at the moment (I’m a little too young for the Farrah poster but the Heathers Locklear and Thomas were big in my day). Girlfriends did not resent this but guys were not so forgiving of the converse.

    However, today it goes much further. Guys don’t seem to resent girls just for looking, they resent them because so many girls can now get the equivalent of the male model on the wall (for a short time) that many of them ignore all the guys who, 25 years ago, would have been their boyfriends. That’s what pisses men off.

    Hmmmmm, interesting.

  • HanSolo

    No prob, Lokland.

  • Escoffier

    “Their number is no doubt dwarfed by the number of alphas whose wives are leaving them for infidelity”

    This sounds way off to me. The overall number of cheaters is still low, lower than 20%, and that’s just those who admit to it. So the number would have to be lower for those who A) get caught and B) get divorced (categories not necessarily coterminuous).

    My guesstimate is that the % of married men with unhappy sex lives is multiples, not to say orders of magnitude, larger than the % of married women cheated on by alphas.

  • Bells

    I literally had the exact same reaction as Sassy. It was like a force hit me that made me beyond physically repulsed. Plus I rounded your number out to a min of 45 since you said “-ish”.
    You’re a very intelligent and likable man but dang that’s a lot of women to work through in a short period of time, ~8 years (I assume that you are in your late thirties). From now on, I’m picturing you as a suave rico with a honey-coated tongue.

  • Escoffier

    Sassy, I am afraid it’s true. So if you meet a guy you want to keep, I would not enthuse with his earshot about other men you find hot, even if they are unatainable celebrities. On the other hand, if you ever feel the need to make your man jealous, that is one way to do it.

    But Susan is against “dread” game, so …

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

      On the other hand, if you ever feel the need to make your man jealous, that is one way to do it.

      But Susan is against “dread” game, so …

      Most importantly, I don’t think playing the jealousy card works. It’s a strictly short-term patch.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If anything, I think very good looking people are assume to be less intelligent in general, e.g. dumb jocks, blonde bimbos.”

    Intelligence is positively associated with attractiveness. Do I need to find a reference for that to sensei?

    @HS

    ” I do not believe it follows that HanSolo’s commentary is found more valid because several female commenters found him handsome.”

    I agree largely because his commentary could not be more valued than it was prior. That does not imply that a general trend exists which you have no acknowledged (which I assume means you realize they will also get perks here if people know what they look like).

    As long as thats all on the level, I’m good.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Mike C

    Although I’m not sure exactly what category less attractive would be. A 6 is less attractive than a 9.

    This is a combination of speculation, personal observation, and direct personal experience, but I think a good chunk of the casual low investment sex takes place between male 8-9s and female 6-7s because female 6-7s are probably the most prone to mistake male sexual interest for something more or think they can win the guy with sex or if they are unrestricted simply find appealing the idea of having sex with a “hot” guy. For the male 8-9 the female 6-7 is low hanging fruit that may not take much effort, but yet is attractive enough to make the experience visually enjoyable but they are not going to cross down into 4-5s.

    This is what I have noticed as well.

    I’ve been in bars/clubs often enough to see women aim for men who are clearly out of their leagues. The women throw themselves at them, and the men don’t have any immediate reasons to turn them down.

    Awhile back I was sitting at a bar, and watched as two couples entered in. The two guys hung back while their ladies approached the bar to get drinks. It just so happens that a very hot bartender was serving drinks that night, and both girls practically lost their minds. They flirted with him shamelessly right in front of their men. Eventually, the ladies went to the bathroom together while the guys stayed behind. Almost instantly, both of the guys came up to me and started chatting me up. I knew exactly what they were doing. They were chatting with me to try to make their girlfriends jealous, and to get back at them. I actually told them that I knew they were trying to make their girls jealous, and they looked shocked that I called them out on it.

    The girls eventually came out of the bathroom, saw their guys talking to me, and stormed over. They confronted me, calling me a bitch/whore, and asking me what I was doing with their guys. I remember, to this day, telling them that their guys started talking to me to make them jealous. I also told the women that it was payback for them flirting obviously and shamelessly with the male bartender. Both women instantly shut up once I said this. I asked them if they cared for their guys. They said that they did. I asked them why they felt the need to flirt with the bartender if they cared about their boyfriends. They didn’t respond.

    I actually asked them to apologize to their men, and they actually did. They left the bar shortly after, and the male bartender came up to me and asked me about what had gone on. I told him, and he laughed. He said that he knew the ladies were attracted to him/hitting on him, but he initially didn’t know that their boyfriends had seen everything.

    I know the bartender well (He and I actually dated each other for a bit), and he was way out of their leagues. The women were probably 6s, while he is a solid 8-9. I found their conduct totally disrespectful, but not at all shocking. Those girls were “thirsty”, and he was a tall drink of water indeed. With that being said, they shouldn’t have acted that way since they had boyfriends. I also didn’t appreciate being drug into that mess to begin with.

  • HanSolo

    @Bells

    It’s closer to 40 and it was during a 5-year period.

    Damn it! ;) When is Tom going to pop in and start telling you and Sassy to stop being so insecure about a man’s N???

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    “If everyone was selfishly self-absorbed with their needs, I don’t think civilization could last very long.”

    If you haven’t noticed Western civilization is on a steep slope and OMFG….MOUNTAIN!!!!!!!!

    QFT.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Thanks for the ammo.

    “This is just not true according to the paramaters of the SOI. You can’t rewrite the instrument to suit your bias.”

    “It seems kind of silly to argue about what is unrestricted and what isn’t, since everyone will bring their own values and standards to that question.”

    Three comments apart. Which is true?

    Of course everyone brings their personal bias to the situation but the SOI is a quantitative measure not an opinion.

    I demonstrated that a threesome is roughly equal in terms of unrestrictedness as a ONS.

    People can like or dislike whatever they want. I’m merely pointing out some of the ridiculous inconsistencies that appear between the observable world and the SOI marking scheme.

    As I said, useless hunk-o-junk.

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

      @Lokland

      “This is just not true according to the paramaters of the SOI. You can’t rewrite the instrument to suit your bias.”

      “It seems kind of silly to argue about what is unrestricted and what isn’t, since everyone will bring their own values and standards to that question.”

      Three comments apart. Which is true?

      Well, the problem is that the authors don’t attach restricted scores to a wide range of behaviors, they accept that attitudes and desires predict behavior. In the link I provided earlier I had highlighted one other study of sociosexuality where specific behaviors were found to be more prevalent in the top quintile. However, I have been unable to actually see a distribution of scores or how they relate to specific behaviors so it’s impossible to delve any deeper.

      If the authors could tell us where the line is between restricted and unrestricted for their instrument, I’d be happy to abide by that guideline. In the absence of that information, I maintain that it makes no sense to say that a threesome is “not that unrestricted” or “not any worse than a ONS.” The best shortcut I have found, and I think it’s a decent one, is comparing percentiles in the population. ONS: 47%. Threesome: 14%. Threesomes are rarer, and therefore more unrestricted.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Abbot 287,

    Interesting article. It reminds me of something I read last weekend:

    Female chimps:

    She found that female chimpanzees displayed more aggressive signals and ‘apologised’ less when they were communicating with other females.

    By contrast, the males’ behaviour did not change with the gender of their companion.

    Female humans:

    In 2010, the Workplace Bullying Institute, a national education and advocacy group, reported that female bullies directed their hostilities toward other women 80% of the time—up 9% since 2007. Male bullies, by contrast, were generally equal-opportunity tormentors.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Escoffier

    Sassy, I am afraid it’s true. So if you meet a guy you want to keep, I would not enthuse with his earshot about other men you find hot, even if they are unatainable celebrities. On the other hand, if you ever feel the need to make your man jealous, that is one way to do it.

    But Susan is against “dread” game, so …

    Yeah, I’ve made that mistake a few times. No matter how secure I believed a man to be, I was always proven wrong by his reaction to such comments. Some guys have even asked me if I thought a particular guy was attractive, then became upset when I said that I did. There is no way to get out of such a situation unscathed, except for lying.

  • Sassy6519

    @ HanSolo

    You racked up that many bodies in 5 years?

    This story just keeps getting worse and worse, doesn’t it?

  • HanSolo

    @Bells and Sassy

    FTR, I respect your right to feel repulsed at a man’s high N and I respect a man’s right to feel repulsed at a woman’s high N, wherever that repulsion sets in.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    If I had to boil sociosexuality down to one question, it would be whether one believes sex is ideally a feel-good recreational activity or an emotional, even spiritual union between two people who love one another. Of course, there’s no validity to this in terms of the SOI metric – it’s just my sense of where the line is drawn for most people. Despite your unrestricted scores, my sense is that you are in the latter camp.

    I must unrestricted then. I see sex as a feel-good recreational activity (and a way of reproducing). I don’t see it as an emotional union or any of that touchy-feely weirdness. On the other hand, since it’s such a intimate thing, it’s one of those feel-good recreational activities I’d only want to do with someone I have mutual love and commitment with.

  • Sassy6519

    @ HanSolo

    I think back to high school and how many (I won’t say most) of the hottest girls were rather feral (not with me!) and has sex with a lot of guys. One badass Mormon girl in my ward who was an 8.5 or 9 has sex with 8 guys over one summer. Another girl who was more of an 8 but had the queenbee personality slept with like 12 different guys over a summer, all who had gf’s, and then in the fall when the rumors broke the gf’s confronted her and beat her up! lol However, most of these guys were the alpha jock types. There were other such goings on. We can speculate as to why they did it: wanting validation, loving to exercise their sexual power, horny, etc.

    Now, maybe these were just the 20% most unrestricted of the hot girls or they had really low self esteem or were narcissists, but it definitely raised my goody-goody Mormon eyebrows at the time.

    Did any of these supposedly high SMV “feral women” ever have boyfriends? Did any of the high SMV men that they slept with commit to them? If not, the high SMV men were out of the leagues of the women. If the guys were not committing to them, their SMVs/MMVs were not high enough to warrant it. In my opinion, the SMVs of the men and women in your story were mismatched.

  • Escoffier

    Intellectually, I am not sure if a ONS or a 3-some is worse or if they are equivalent. Like Susan, I have a much more viscerally anti- reaction to a 3-some. But unlike Susan, I also think a ONS would be a dealbreaker.

    Or, a 3-some I simply could not get past. If I knew a girl had had one, I would DQ her with no possibility of changing my mind. A whole year of weepy repentence in a convent wouldn’t do it. A ONS, I might be able to grant a dispensation, but she would have to be very regretful of it.

  • INTJ

    @ Bells

    Most women in their twenties tend to primarily date men within their twenties to early thirties. Dating these men presents a great risk-factor that all women must take up. These younger men are not completely financially secured, some are emotionally unstable, and some are douche players. I can’t deny the appeal of a semi-finished young project; if given the opportunity, I would jump with glee to buckle myself with him. But unfortunately, that’s not always possible. Truthfully, it would be financially better for all women to be with men in their late thirties who are already settled in their careers. But we don’t. So yes, I do believe that most women are investing in the potential of younger men.

    I think most women (NAWALT, you being an example) fall into two camps. Women in the first camp are more interested in provider traits and prioritizes intelligence, financial security, and status in the larger society, and tend to go after older guys in their 30s or sometimes late 20s. The other tend to prioritize raw attraction and tend to be interested in player-type guys in their early 20s.

    So yes, many women are interested in younger men, but not in their potential.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Susan,

    would leave my husband in a nanosecond if he cheated

    Now that’s what I call a hasty decision!

    Cheating is anything you do in secret because you know it would hurt your girlfriend. Is secretly texting a cute girl the same as having sex with someone else? No, but both actions are on the cheating spectrum.

    And since you use a broad definition of cheating, where would you draw the line?

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

      @mr. wavevector

      And since you use a broad definition of cheating, where would you draw the line?

      That’s a fair question. I would leave my husband for having sex with another woman. I would not leave him for having an online chat with his college girlfriend if he failed to mention it. I think an emotional affair would be very difficult, but if it had not turned physical I would be willing to work on the marriage.

      FTR, I would also expect to be left immediately if I cheated. Both of us are well aware that it would be a total dealbreaker. Then again, I don’t think either one of us has ever come close. If it had happened when my kids were young that would have been terrible. I don’t know if I could have split up the family, but I would have definitely been emotionally finished with the marriage.

  • HanSolo

    @Sassy

    Hmmm, I’d say their SMV was about equal with the guys they had sex with. The Mormon rebel was an 8.5 or 9, quite or very hot–not sure about her bf history. The queen bee 8 had several boyfriends over the years. In Jr. High she dated the quarterback/point-guard alpha male (who was ironically Mormon, not sure if they had sex). The qb guy definitely had a higher value than her but it was junior high so whatever. I think the rebel had kind of low self esteem and that the queen bee loved to exercise her sexual power with guys with gf’s to show that she could get them to cheat.

  • Jackie

    @Susan, J
    ” Inflicting shame on others is nearly always an attempt to manipulate and control. As the Lewis quote says, it is an attack on another’s very self. IME, shaming also re-entrenches bad behavior as it redefines the person involed as a bad person, who is not really capable of changing their nature.”
    ===
    J’s comment #282 is so valuable. And I think the question of how do we change behavior without shame is extremely important. (Interestingly, the people championing shaming — including Lokland and Abbot– have had their own lives negatively affected by the practice.)

    Shaming doesn’t really change behavior as much as it drives it underground, where, like mold, it festers and continues to grow even more toxicly.

    In the case of promiscuity, I am finding out more and more about its correlation with sexual abuse and/or inappropriate behavior at a young age that tends to be generational. (For both women and men, by the way.) The more I learn, the less inclined I am to use the “s word.”

    Behavior change falls into the category of “simple not easy,” for me at least. There are so many correlated behaviors that are intertwined that, like a Gordian knot, it’s tempting to just hack through and leave it in pieces and shreds. In my experience it requires:

    1) Openness, the freedom to be honest
    2) Small, incremental changes
    3) Encouragement
    4*) The more the behavior is practiced by those around you, the quicker it is absorbed

    I think the best way to start change *now* is Gandhi’s adage of being the change you wish to see in the world. I think pro-behavior works better than anti-. For example, instead of anti-promiscuity I am personally pro-”waiting and affectionate.” (I suppose some people call it chaste, but that is a pretty loaded term.)

    The more you live your life this way, the more change you make. I’ve never broadcast it (except in the comments here, ha ha!) but I’ve observed that people who start to talk about promiscuous or offensive subjects will just stop and apologize, unprompted. I also stand up and publicly support those who are going against the grain– even just an off-hand comment, “I think he’s awesome” etc.

    That is my 0.02. :) I think as long as we have zero-sum, everyone-for-themselves mentality, it will be hard. But the more we foster community (like HUS) the better we will be.

  • Bells

    @Hansolo,
    I’m far from being insecure. Just viscerally grossed out. A 5 year period is even worse than the 8 that I imagined.
    I’m sry to seem rude; I don’t respect you any less. But dang. I would warn all my girlfriends to stay away from you. It’s always the smooth charismatic men that you have to watch out for.

  • HanSolo

    @Bells

    I wasn’t calling you insecure. It was a joke about a commenter, Tom, who used to argue a lot with guys that didn’t like women with moderate or higher N. He hasn’t been around much lately…hence the joking cry, “Where is Tom?”

    And as I said, you’re completely within your right to feel grossed out.

    Intellectually, I’m curious why you feel grossed out and why you would warn your friends. You can talk about it in a general way or me specifically, whichever, if you choose to respond. Is it the thought that such a man wouldn’t be faithful? Or you view sex as something that needs to only be engaged in within an LTR/marriage? I actually once felt that way myself, during all those years of virginity. Don’t worry about offending me. I’m just curious.

  • HanSolo

    Furthermore, FWIW, the whole lot of us would all be seen as sinners back in my Mormon days, since masturbation was viewed as a sin. Sex outside of marriage was a sin, no matter whether it was an LTR or not. It’s fascinating to me that most of the people commenting here are on the restristed-in-behavior side (with a lot holding those attitudes too) but even that level of behavior wouldn’t be sufficient to be a faithful Mormon.

  • HanSolo

    And I’m not implying masturbation is seen by Mormons nearly as seriously as sex…more just musing on where I was and where I am now.

  • Escoffier

    Han, not just for Mormons. They’re just the one of the few religions left that takes these rules seriously. But really, all biblical religion–Christian and Jewish–holds that any sex outside marriage is a sin.

  • Jackie

    Aww! I’m not “repulsed” or “grossed out” by Han Solo’s number. Not any more than I would be by a girl of the same, especially if she was former Mormon or Fundamentalist. I want him to find the Princess Leia who believes the same things he does. :)

    Maybe OTC can chime in on this, but black-and-white religions can *really* mess with people’s sexualities. I remember reading a transcript of Mormon talk given to young men in the 1970s urging them to tie their arms to the bedpost at night so they wouldn’t be tempted to masturbate. :(

    For me, not only did my mom start talking to me about sex at a young age, but she let me know it was *my* decision. She hoped that I wouldn’t go immediately into sex with the first guy that was interested in me, but I was ever the prude even then. 8-)

  • HanSolo

    Escoffier, I’m aware of the doctrinal rules but I’m more of the opinion that a rule unenforced isn’t really a rule. So there are some Christian religious communities that still “enforce” things but a lot don’t.

  • Mike C

    This is what I have noticed as well.

    Sassy…yeah….I don’t make up the shit I say out of the blue. I’ve got firm basis for all my claims rooted in many years of keen observation.

    I’ve been in bars/clubs often enough to see women aim for men who are clearly out of their leagues. The women throw themselves at them, and the men don’t have any immediate reasons to turn them down.

    Yeah….this is a very real problem. The easy answer is these are ALL the super unrestricted sluts….maybe that is true…I don’t know, but the question is why don’t these women simply pursue a more appropriately matched SMV male for a relationship? What you are seeing there is the pernicious effect of unrestrained hypergamy.

    Awhile back I was sitting at a bar, and watched as two couples entered in. The two guys hung back while their ladies approached the bar to get drinks. It just so happens that a very hot bartender was serving drinks that night, and both girls practically lost their minds. They flirted with him shamelessly right in front of their men. Eventually, the ladies went to the bathroom together while the guys stayed behind. Almost instantly, both of the guys came up to me and started chatting me up. I knew exactly what they were doing. They were chatting with me to try to make their girlfriends jealous, and to get back at them. I actually told them that I knew they were trying to make their girls jealous, and they looked shocked that I called them out on it.

    The girls eventually came out of the bathroom, saw their guys talking to me, and stormed over. They confronted me, calling me a bitch/whore, and asking me what I was doing with their guys. I remember, to this day, telling them that their guys started talking to me to make them jealous. I also told the women that it was payback for them flirting obviously and shamelessly with the male bartender. Both women instantly shut up once I said this. I asked them if they cared for their guys. They said that they did. I asked them why they felt the need to flirt with the bartender if they cared about their boyfriends. They didn’t respond.

    I actually asked them to apologize to their men, and they actually did. They left the bar shortly after, and the male bartender came up to me and asked me about what had gone on. I told him, and he laughed. He said that he knew the ladies were attracted to him/hitting on him, but he initially didn’t know that their boyfriends had seen everything.

    God bless you! Serious props!!! I just love that you called them out on their bullshit especially after they had the audacity to attack you. Sadly, that entire scenario you describe I think is more typical than atypical. FWIW, I’ve always really liked you. I find your comments refreshing….I think it is that I really appreciate your bluntness and directness which of course this story epitomizes. I really hope you find the right guy for you. Don’t let anyone tell you what they think is “right” for you. Follow your own path being authentic to yourself and your own nature. I do think you need to do a hard assessment of what you really need to have out of a guy and what you can do without.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Thanks for the well wishes.

    I didn’t even masturbate until my late 20′s and then felt terribly guilty and ashamed. I never tied my arms to the bed but I did try things like wearing a baseball cup so I couldn’t touch myself during the night while semi-conscious. I also had a calendar I’d mark of how many days I had gone without. All futile in the end….

  • Mike C

    This is hypocrisy. ***You have championed unrestricted male sexuality as the norm, and even defended it as superior*** , something for guys with more options.

    Susan, this is a distortion and inaccurate characterization of the totality of my views, but I don’t think it would be a productive use of my time to try and correct this. I think you’ve made up your mind on what you *think* I believe and that is OK. That said, there is most definitely a certain segment of men where the maxim “making necessity a virture” applies and I can usually recognize them because they are ego-invested in their “principles”

    Stop being an asshole or I will ban you. This is precisely the kind of remark that makes you unpopular at times.

    Meh…do what you will. Look, I told you that I would be more civil and less combative ***WITH YOU***. I intend to abide by that even when you fire bullets like “asshole” at me. That didn’t extend to Megaman. Speaking of hypocrisy….ahem….Megaman has repeatedly and consistently attacked INTJ with numerous barbs with a frequency and magnitude WELL IN EXCESS of my single statement here without nary a peep from you. The most recent one that comes to mind is accusing INTJ of not having a brain. I suspect you’ve said nothing here, because you find INTJ annoying from time to time and therefore don’t feel compelled to hold Megaman to the same standard with INTJ that you apparently want to enforce on me with respect to Megaman.

    Debate Megaman on the merits of his arguments and stop the solipsism.

    FWIW….Megaman is a big boy or at least I think he is. The truth is he doesn’t need you to white knightness for him. I can appreciate that you personally don’t want to have more combative interactions. I can also appreciate that you don’t want male commenters going after female commenters as most can’t handle it. But I’d respectfully suggest that you do NOT need to police the tone and tit for tat between male commenters strictly between themselves. At the least, if you are going to go down that road, then at least be consistent and don’t look the other way when Megaman takes repeated potshots at INTJ. Otherwise, leave the boys to be boys when talking directly at each other. Megaman can fire back at me if he wants. I won’t break.

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

      @Mike C

      Meh…do what you will. Look, I told you that I would be more civil and less combative ***WITH YOU***. I intend to abide by that even when you fire bullets like “asshole” at me. That didn’t extend to Megaman

      Again, I’ll ask you to view this space as my online home. Would you come to my house and refuse to have a beer with Megaman? I want to have a positive group discussion, not a Crossfire match.

      I suspect you’ve said nothing here, because you find INTJ annoying from time to time and therefore don’t feel compelled to hold Megaman to the same standard with INTJ that you apparently want to enforce on me with respect to Megaman.

      I believe INTJ is the only person Megaman disrespects here, and it is not without provocation. It began when INTJ made a rude, generalized statement that I believe hit a sore spot for MM. He could have apologized, but instead he dug in his heels. Nor is Megaman alone in his frustration with INTJ’s commentary. It’s not just that he is annoying – he can be rude and snarky, but worst of all he’s lazy. When I engage him I wind up resenting him for wasting my time with his false claims and inconsistencies.

      In your case, I do not think your criticism of MM is fair, nor do I believe you have been willing to engage him on the merits of his arguments. Which is exactly the problem with INTJ. You essentially dismiss and attack him with snark for being restricted in his sexuality.

      Otherwise, leave the boys to be boys when talking directly at each other.

      Sorry, no can do. Every conversation that takes place her takes place in mixed company. You’re not in the locker room here, and I’m uncomfortable with hyperagressive tactics, whether or not they’re OK with the guys. I know they make the women uncomfortable, and in any case, forceful debate is not the problem. It’s gratuitous insults, name calling, etc.

  • Joe

    @Sassy

    Those girls were “thirsty”, and he was a tall drink of water indeed.

    Great story, and what you wrote seems like the best definition of hypergamy I’ve ever seen.

    So I haveta ask: Was it your intention to provide such a definition???

  • Jackie

    @Esco

    “Han, not just for Mormons. They’re just the one of the few religions left that takes these rules seriously. But really, all biblical religion–Christian and Jewish–holds that any sex outside marriage is a sin.”
    ===
    Esco, what do you believe about this? I can’t remember if you’re a practicing Christian or not?

    Your post is very interesting to me, since many MANY Christians want to promote anti-gay attitudes “in defense of Traditional Marriage.” But, to me, promiscuity and an oversexualized culture are what has hurt traditional marriage more than anything. No gay guy has ever hurt me the way a cheating or manipulative straight guy has.

    Any way, I appreciate your thoughts and thought your posts on Thucydides were awesome. 8-)

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

    Guilt and shame…this polarity was written about by anthropologist Ruth Benedict in the early 1940s. She identified “shame” as what someone feels based on the actual or expected reaction to their behavior **by other people**, whereas “guilt” is what one feels based on a comparison of behavior to their own internal standards.

    She identified Japan as an example of a shame-based culture…this was written at a time when Japan and the U.S. were at war, so she was obviously unable to do field work and used only written sources and interviews with Japanese-Americans.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Mike C

    God bless you! Serious props!!! I just love that you called them out on their bullshit especially after they had the audacity to attack you. Sadly, that entire scenario you describe I think is more typical than atypical. FWIW, I’ve always really liked you. I find your comments refreshing….I think it is that I really appreciate your bluntness and directness which of course this story epitomizes. I really hope you find the right guy for you. Don’t let anyone tell you what they think is “right” for you. Follow your own path being authentic to yourself and your own nature. I do think you need to do a hard assessment of what you really need to have out of a guy and what you can do without.

    Thanks for the well wishes. :)

    I’m definitely blunt, sometimes to a fault. I also have no problem with addressing my own flaws, or owning them. I don’t see how I could ever improve myself if I didn’t.

    I don’t want to use ignorance as a way to abdicate myself of responsibility. I hold others to the same standard. Sometimes I’m amazed at the things that I have managed to get away with saying to other people. That story is a prime example. I was honest with those women and shot a flashlight at their wrongdoings. I can only hope that their boyfriends learned from that night and dumped their asses afterwards. They can’t claim ignorance about the ways of their girlfriends after that fiasco. It’s up to them to use that knowledge in ways that they see fit.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Joe

    Great story, and what you wrote seems like the best definition of hypergamy I’ve ever seen.

    So I haveta ask: Was it your intention to provide such a definition???

    Haha! It wasn’t my intention. That’s just what I came up with.

  • Escoffier

    Jackie:

    I would not presume to speak for God. I am, however, just presumptuous enough to attempt to speak for Socrates.

    My interest is philosophic. Traditional philosophy agrees with Biblical religion on the nature of marriage for many of the same reasons. On neither terms would gay marriage be countenanced or allowable.

    They very way you are phrasing things indicates that you are approaching the issue from wholly modern presuppositions. I.e., opposition to gay marriage is “anti-gay” and you accept that libertarian argument that if some behavior does not result in a direct injury to another, there is no sound or justified reason for a third party or society to object. Biblical religion and traditional philosophy would reject both of these claims.

  • Bells

    @Hansolo,
    I do consider your high N to be a great liability for a stable marriage. I know you’ve previously mentioned that you would much rather have a family than to have continuous sex partners. Yet, your background makes me doubt how strong this conviction would be able to overpower your habit of new women. The women here consider you to be good-looking, you’re charismatic, intelligent—I’m surprised to hear that there was only one woman in your past remotely close to forming a long-lasting relationship with you. Very high quality women (in personality and looks) should have been lined up and more than willing to form a union. So that disjunction just doesn’t add up.

    I did give you some leeway because of your repressed mormon indoctrination. However, I didn’t expect your number to be so high. That’s why I was shocked.

    I also think it would be terrible to sneer and take away the hopes of people. Far be it of me to be the judgmental end-all. I don’t have enough details to form that opinion and I’m personally not “sin-free” enough to be able to make that call. If a woman wanted to form a relationship with you, that’s great. I just wouldn’t let my friends near you because I consider you to be too high of a risk.

  • Sassy6519

    The women here consider you to be good-looking, you’re charismatic, intelligent—I’m surprised to hear that there was only one woman in your past remotely close to forming a long-lasting relationship with you. Very high quality women (in personality and looks) should have been lined up and more than willing to form a union. So that disjunction just doesn’t add up.

    I’m guessing that the reasons HanSolo isn’t involved with anyone seriously right now (despite being mid-to-late thirties, and having a plethora of options supposedly) are similar to my reasons. He is picky, perhaps overly so, and plagued by the paradox of choice.

  • Jackie

    @Mike C
    Hey Mike C,
    How is your Mom doing? I have been thinking about you and her. (It just reminded me to call my Dad, in fact! ;) )

    This is only my experience, but for what it’s worth: Recently I almost lost my Dad and pretty much cheated death with my own car accident. Since then, I have pretty much laid down the sword in regards to battles IRL and online.

    (Maybe it’s personality type? I am ENFP and you are [I believe?], ISTJ, which are direct opposites. My brother is very similar to you, and the sense of personal justice is very real to him, so maybe this is off base.)

    Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking since then and I realized the only regrets that I have in my life were 1) I didn’t spend more time with the people that I love and 2) Fear kept me from pursuing some really cool things. All the stuff that used to drive me crazy pretty much fell away.

    I think you, Susan and MegaMan are all incredibly cool; and I learn from each of you even though your viewpoints are all strikingly different from my own. I am promoting peace for Lent, so that may be why I am on about this. ;-)

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    This is just not true according to the paramaters of the SOI. You can’t rewrite the instrument to suit your bias.

    And yet you call OTC unrestricted for his threesome even though the SOI wouldn’t measure him that way.

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

      And yet you call OTC unrestricted for his threesome even though the SOI wouldn’t measure him that way.

      I specifically said that I was owning that opinion as a personal one, not one the authors of the SOI would necessarily agree with. Nor do I claim to speak for others.

      Having said that, I do think the prevalence or rarity of a behavior in society is a good indicator of what portion of the population is oriented toward that behavior.

  • HanSolo

    @Bells

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    One correction. There have been more than one woman in my past that wanted to form a long-lasting reln. with me. There have also been more than one that I wanted to. In hindsight, I had too much anti-game with some, was too picky with others, and there were others that were IMO too picky with me. I think I have removed some less-important things from my list so I am less picky now yet still selective enough for what I need in a relationship.

    I do interpret the comments here understanding that most of the women tend to be on the restricted side of the spectrum (though not the extreme end) and that they are likely to not want a guy with a high N. Amongst the women I’ve interacted with in real life, many of whom have low N, they just never asked me my N and the one who did didn’t hold that as a deal breaker. So, I think I’ll be fine. But I have likely ruled out 5, 10 or 20% of women due to my N. I would put my money on about 10%.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Sassy:

    Yes, we broke up a couple weeks ago. It just wasn’t working out. It was mutual and amicable though.

  • HanSolo

    @Bells

    FWIW, I have had 4 gf’s since losing my virginity.

  • HanSolo

    I wanted to marry one. Two wanted to marry me. The other mutually fizzled out.

  • Jackie

    @Esco
    “They very way you are phrasing things indicates that you are approaching the issue from wholly modern presuppositions. I.e., opposition to gay marriage is “anti-gay” and you accept that libertarian argument that if some behavior does not result in a direct injury to another, there is no sound or justified reason for a third party or society to object. Biblical religion and traditional philosophy would reject both of these claims.”
    ===
    Escoffier, I think you have hit on the heart on my dilemma.

    I am committed to waiting until marriage, even though it has not been the easiest route. The being cheating on and shaming really suck, to use the common vernacular. :( But I can’t discriminate against gay people (poly or trans for that matter).

    This is digressing, but I feel like there is no place for me: I willingly abide by waiting, go to church and confession each week, pray my Rosary daily and give of my time, money and talents. But I can’t put down gay people, promiscuous people or those who’ve had abortions. Also, poor people need to be cared for, not just get lip service about “prosperity gospel.”

    Doctrinally, my Christianity is a piece of crap :( but I am trying so hard, Esco. Even though I feel okay with God, it just seems there is no place for me at the table. Thanks for listening to all this. :)

  • SayWhaat

    @J

    OK. How do we control behavior in society if we can’t shame bad behavior?

    David Brooks’ most recent column dealt with the subject of “brutality cascades”, ie. the most brutal actors set the laws of action. He related it to Chinese/US trade or cyber security relations as well as Obama’s negotiations with the GOP.

    He suggested that there were 2 ways to fight back. The first being to wage war against the brutal competitors and crush them. The second being to create “friendship circles”, or smaller circles where everyone agrees to a status quo, and lets outsiders know the benefits of joining would be immense, but there would be no tolerance for rule-breakers.

    I think the latter method can be applied to the SMP, if it hasn’t already been happening.

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

      @SayWhaat

      The second being to create “friendship circles”, or smaller circles where everyone agrees to a status quo, and lets outsiders know the benefits of joining would be immense, but there would be no tolerance for rule-breakers.

      I think the latter method can be applied to the SMP, if it hasn’t already been happening.

      Interesting, I’d love to hear more of your thoughts on this? How would this look?

  • Escoffier

    Being opposed to the legalization of gay marriage is not equivalent to “putting gays down.” Ditto with abortions. I mean, Jesus was very kind to Mary Magdaline (of course, she was repentant) but that doens’t mean he waived all objections to harlotry, nor did he concluded that all anti-prostitution laws had to go.

    One must separete personal acts of kindness from macro policy. As a practical matter, sin or wrongdoing has to be outlawed and sanctioned. You can still forgive individual sinners. How they are to be treated, however, will depend on whether they repent. “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

  • Sassy6519

    @ SayWhaat

    Yes, we broke up a couple weeks ago. It just wasn’t working out. It was mutual and amicable though.

    Sorry to hear about that. How are you holding up?

  • Ted D

    My ears are ringing again…

    “By that definition Ted is also restricted. Capisce?”

    By any definition outside of strict religious communities I am HIGHLY restricted. In mainstream America I might be right up there near Unicorn. But, if nothing else, it is a defining characteristic of mine that makes me stand out. Unfortunately it doesn’t necessarily make me any more popular with most women. :-p

    Mike C – if you ever make itmtomthe ‘Burgh you gotta hit me up. I think you and I have very similar views on sexuality, only we are on opposite sides of the SOI fence. Overall I agree with most of your points, I would simply use the information differently. That being said, since you are settling down (again lol) you may find my approach more useful over time. ;-)

    Re: megaman being “proud” of his restricted nature. That was me for most of my life. I truly felt like I was better than people that hooked up and/or had casual sex. In some ways I still do, but I also realized that no one else gives a shit, and my restricted nature does NOT add to my attraction. For a vast number of women it diminishes it. Hard to be proud of something no one else even acknowledges.

    When society valued chastity I would have been seen as someone to use as a role model for male sexuality. Now? I’m a relic from an age long gone, and I’m sure a source of amusement for the more unrestricted among us. (Which means a lot of folks…). I couldossibly do well with the religious fanatic crowd, but I’m way too heathen-like for them to take. And I’m not repenting because I have nothing to apologize for.

  • Abbot

    “Shaming doesn’t really change behavior as much as it drives it underground, where, like mold, it festers and continues to grow even more toxic”

    Until it is necessary for women to lie about their multipenis pasts to men who are marriage prospects. Stop the lying. If you feel the need to lie, then let that man go find a woman more in line with what he considers worthy as a wife.

    No more Dupe Culture!

    .

  • Jason773

    Sassy,

    The women were probably 6s, while he is a solid 8-9. I found their conduct totally disrespectful, but not at all shocking. Those girls were “thirsty”, and he was a tall drink of water indeed. With that being said, they shouldn’t have acted that way since they had boyfriends. I also didn’t appreciate being drug into that mess to begin with.

    I have so many stories of this from the bartender’s perspective. I used to not care, but now, for some reason, I have a bit of empathy when a guy looks like his dog just got shot because his girl (or date) is obviously flirting with me. I actually feel bad for the guy and try to end things quickly when I notice this situation.

  • OffTheCuff

    Wow, this thread got interesting fast.

    Sue: “The threesome is sex with someone you may love, but it’s also sex with someone who is there strictly for recreation – a masturbatory aid.”

    Perhaps you misread what I meant. With my purely hypothetical question, I was asking of the *third* is someone you’ve known and loved for years, not some stranger.

    I thinks its pretty presumptive to assume that the other person is necessarily viewed as somehow inhuman, or a mere sex toy, that there must be an absence of emotion, feelings, or even love. That’s what they used to say about unmarried sex! “You’re just using the other person!”

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

      @OTC

      Honestly, I don’t believe you and I will ever see eye to eye on the subject of threesomes. I can in no way relate to the idea of group sex among people who feel love for one another. I’m pretty sure that when the SOI measures one’s agreement with the statement “Sex without love is OK” it is not including the third party who you “love” in your own way.

      It’s very clear that most people do not engage in this behavior – it’s way “out there.”

  • Escoffier

    When I was in college, there was a miniseries about Hemingway (staring Stacy Keach!) that was heavily promoted, as in, a promo every 15 minutes for weeks. One of the lines played over and over was “Ernesto” saying “Can’t a man love two women at the same time?”

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    HanSolo, 30 years of celibacy and no masturbation. Geez. Unimaginable. My husband grew up in the Mormon capital and thought sex was a bad word, but he had an agnostic upbringing, so he didn’t have the same sorts of religious inhibitions, but he still had some. We had to work through those in the beginning.

    I wish you luck in starting a family. If you want a success story, I know a former Mormon guy who married in his 40s after lots of ONS and debauchery, and his wife is almost 10 years younger. Maybe as karma would have it, he has a daughter. :P

    Sassy, kudos to you for calling those girls out on their bad behavior. I don’t think I’d have the gumption to do it. I’m very averse to confrontation. You are a very blunt straight-shooter, and that is pretty darned cool.

    SayWhaat, the friendship circles idea is very interesting. People are definitely doing this online, where people can easily find others to discuss topics and get suppport. Niche things then sometimes snowball into big things.

    Re: SOI and restrictedness. I’m less restricted than Anacaona, Jackie and probably others here, but I did score very low (like 1-2) in the SOI survey. I have kind of a “only love should lead to sex” view of things, which is not as strict as “sex only in marriage.”

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    And maybe a lot of the men wanted to be able to sneak off with other women while maintaining their main woman so it was kind of a code of silence to allow a certain amount of intra-tribal philandering, of course as long as it didn’t involve your own wife!
    Unless you were an Spartan and your friend was a tall imposing Alpha ;)

    I think there is actually a lesson in there for men in dealing with women successfully in any facet of life. Get them to like you…really like you. Once you’ve done that, you can state the sun is green and have them nodding in agreement. I’ve actually really figured that one out specifically due to my interactions here the past couple of years and observing various male commenters.

    +1000 Jennifer Lawrence vs Anna Hathaway syndrome, is all female driven and the best way to succeed in the herd. Be likeable all the time and you can get away with murder.

    Of course, by your definition, pretty much everyone in the world is unrestricted. Lots of men “watch” porn and women “read” romance novels, which is… fantasizing about (“mindfucking”) a person they’re not married to.

    Err I read porn and romance novels I don’t fantasize about those people I mostly see “I can do that to my hubby or he can do that to me” and I think many women at least do the same.

    I guess it comes down to what we consider restricted vs. un. It seems silly to classify perfection as “restricted”, and the whole world as “unrestricted”.

    Did you ever read me type the words perfect in relationship with this definitions? This is your personal hangover.
    You are just more of a risk for a lifelong marriage than Megaman or Ted can you admit that? or does it bother you that some men are more LTR apt than you?

    It’s that kind of binary religious sin/virtue thinking that made such a giant mess in the first place.

    I’m getting the feeling that this another differentiation of restricted vs unrestricted . Maybe the mess is because many of the unrestricted feel cheat out think that you would had been happier of allowed to run free sexually?
    I also find funny you can admit some people being more attractive, smarter than you why is such a problem to admit that some people are morally/sexually better than you too?
    Just curious and this is a general question for anyone that wants to chime in. I really don’t see why is different any woman that married a virgin is better and more morally superior than I am. And I don’t have illusions of going to heaven. I’m okay with that why is such a hard pill to swallow here?

    A woman encountering an N=20 man is a rarity (at least in terms of overall population) so those mushy middle girls who would settle for N=20 are of course being incredibly unrealistic.

    Girls don’t know that, remember? Feminism has told them that men can just get sex with tons of women so that is a factor to take in account when they balance the imaginary number.

    You really don’t know a lot about secularists, do you? Always amusing when people perform wishful thinking just to elevate themselves morally. Dream on.
    I live surrounded by then now. Feel free to correct me if you have proof of the opposite.

    This is not a good metric. Their number is no doubt dwarfed by the number of alphas whose wives are leaving them for infidelity. It’s probably fair to estimate that around .0000000001% of married men have visited MMSL, and perhaps a tenth of that have bought the book. That’s still an awesome accomplishment for Athol, but hardly evidence for your view.

    Athol had a couple of recent posts that the male commenter barked at because he noticed that this “sweet cheat out Beta husbands” were leaving out important info like “the man my wife left me was one we had regular threesomes out of the equation”. My feeling is that there is a lot more Alphas marrying unrestricted hot girls having problems in their marriages with time because they stopped bringing the excitement than Betas that married averages girls having trouble. I mean women that married Betas won’t be expecting him to Alpha up would they? I think even Ted admits he was more of a badass when he conquered his first wife and he relaxing and becoming more domestic ended his marriage. It would be interesting to study this in deep but I do think is not as “Poor Beta guys are being cheated on by their average wives” not in the highest proportion at least, YMMV.

    And I will admit that your high EQ mitigates the risk, IMO.

    Disagree with that. He can easily start caring so much about this female friend that I need to stick it in her vagina. Again I had seen all sorts of cheating men are capable of having emotional affairs first that become full fledged ones with the right circumstances. Even very restricted Hope keeps her contact with male friends limited even if she knows she will never cheat, high EQ people can also connect with other people in unappropriated ways unless they are vigilant about it.

    (Interestingly, the people championing shaming — including Lokland and Abbot– have had their own lives negatively affected by the practice.)

    I champion shame too and it didn’t harmed me. Of course with the caveat that I think some people need more shame than others to correct their behaviour. Some people will be eating babies if it was not because of the Brim and Firestone talk. Problem is the individualize this treatment. Hard to do with our limited time and resources.

    But really, all biblical religion–Christian and Jewish–holds that any sex outside marriage is a sin.
    Well depends an unmarried man could visit a prostitute and if you had sex with a woman and married her afterwards that was also valid at least in the old testament.

    What you are seeing there is the pernicious effect of unrestrained hypergamy.

    I think unrestricted and hypergamy are correlated, that will explain a lot.

    @Bells @Sassy
    Is so funny I got this WTF! With Han long ago when he started to mention his sexcapades here and there. He reminds me of Michael Bluth in Arrested Development. He was playing the nice sensitive widow trying to find love but every week he had a new girl in bed by two months time the whole “I’m just looking for love, but meanwhile I will bang any available woman” was kind of obviously an irony of how he was supposed different to his womanizer brother GOB, who was actually lower in numbers than him.

  • Jackie

    @Abbot
    ““Shaming doesn’t really change behavior as much as it drives it underground, where, like mold, it festers and continues to grow even more toxic”

    Until it is necessary for women to lie about their multipenis pasts to men who are marriage prospects. Stop the lying. If you feel the need to lie, then let that man go find a woman more in line with what he considers worthy as a wife.

    No more Dupe Culture!”
    ===
    Interesting, coming from the man who encouraged men to lie and misdirect in order to get casual sex.

  • Mike C

    Hey Mike C,

    How is your Mom doing? I have been thinking about you and her. (It just reminded me to call my Dad, in fact! ;) )

    Hi Jackie. Thanks for asking….I appreciate that. She has actually shown some improvement and begun intensive physical therapy. Its really unreal how much function you lose lying in a hospital bed for 5 months especially if a good chunk was unconscious or semi-conscious. The ability to swallow, stand, even sit, all gone. She can’t even hold a cellphone to dial. Its hard to see her so frustrated by what she cannot do. How is your Dad doing? I hope he is doing OK.

    Since then, I have pretty much laid down the sword in regards to battles IRL and online.

    FWIW, Jackie, it was a comment of yours that motivated me to reach out to Susan by personal e-mail and offer up an olive branch to dial it back. That said, I am a high T aggressive guy…that is my temperament, and I don’t do well when I feel like I give some ground and the person takes more territory and then I cede some more ground, and then they take more territory. I’m just not the type of guy and get on the floor and let you walk all over my back. Re Megaman, I’m sure he is a good husband, and fine upstanding citizen and all that, but I don’t like him. Some people in life just rub you the wrong way. There are two traits I don’t like in general, but I find them particularly revolting in men and that is passive-aggression and snark. Call me misogynist if you like, but they are the standard tools of bitchy women. Men should not use them. Full stop. The truth is my disdain for passive-aggressive behavior probably goes back to my relationship with my Dad. We have a very poor relationship, and he engages in a ton of passive aggressive behavior and conversation. When I witness it, it is like nails on the chalkboard to my sensibilities.

    (Maybe it’s personality type? I am ENFP and you are [I believe?], ISTJ, which are direct opposites. My brother is very similar to you, and the sense of personal justice is very real to him, so maybe this is off base.)

    Yes, I am an ISTJ. I can’t find the link now, but I recall reading that justice was our highest virtue. I’ll admit I am a very strong believer in the ends justify the means, and thus if I can see a just outcome at the end of the road, I can pretty much get onboard with whatever path we have to take to arrive at the just outcome. I think this is where Susan will often think I straddle the line ethically or advocate some unethical behavior. She is looking strictly at a particular behavior or tactic whereas my focus is on the final destination. One of my favorite TV shows was 24 and I can tell you I was pretty much always 110% on board with whatever Jack Bauer had to do. There was a movie with Samuel Jackson where he played an extreme interrogator torturing a terrorist who had planted nukes in American cities. I was totally onboard with what he had to do to potentially save millions of innocent lives. At the end of the movie, they brought in his wife and kids as leverage. Honestly, I think I could see putting a bullet in one of his kids if that was the only way to get him to talk and save a million other lives. One can play this moral dilemma game all day long. There is the old question would you lie about hiding Jews to the Nazis. Everyone probably has different points of what they consider “justifiable” for a greater good, but I’ll say my point is pretty darn extreme. I think I could be capable of some pretty extreme stuff if I was absolutely, unequivocally convinced there was some greater good/just outcome at stake.

    I think this sense of justice all applies heavily when it comes to consistent application of rules/principles. I’d say I am a keen observer when I believe situations are not being held to the exact same standards, especially when it is due strictly to personal relationships. That offends my sense of justice. Rules are rules, or they are not. But I don’t like picking and choosing when to apply certain rules and standards and when to look the other way. That strikes me as grossly unfair. I’d say I carry this over to SMP analysis in that I view certain things as male and female analogues and so I get deeply offended when I perceive that a certain male behavior is being harshly judged or demonized while a corresponding female analogue behavior is not, and one example of this is how the sexes may or may not exercise their “options” and because their drives are different…variety versus hypergamy…you have to compare the correct analogues.

    Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking since then and I realized the only regrets that I have in my life were 1) I didn’t spend more time with the people that I love and 2) Fear kept me from pursuing some really cool things. All the stuff that used to drive me crazy pretty much fell away.

    Wise words. I am trying to visit my Mom more while I balance all the other stuff going on in my life (job, business, trading, trying to exercise enough to lose weight for the wedding).

    Jackie, you have a way about you as OTC pointed out. You are a poster that even when I disagree you make me take a step back and at least think.

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

      @Mike C

      There are two traits I don’t like in general, but I find them particularly revolting in men and that is passive-aggression and snark.

      Every time you say you find some of the comments by other commenters “surreal,” you are being passive aggressive. High 5′ing people who agree with you is also PA. So is referring to someone else as wearing a neon Restricted badge. All passive aggressive.

  • HanSolo

    @Anacaona

    But Michael Bluth can’t be all that bad because he (Jason Bateman) was James Ingalls in Little House on the Prairie! :D

  • HanSolo

    Actually, that was James COOPER Ingalls. Anyone with Cooper in their name must have some good in them! ;)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    But Michael Bluth can’t be all that bad because he (Jason Bateman) was James Ingalls in Little House on the Prairie!
    Never watched Little House on the Prairie. I’m immune to his country charms :p

  • Escoffier

    My mother used to say that I looked like Albert on Little House.

  • HanSolo

    @Escoffier

    Well then, you can’t be all that bad either! ;) Albert did have a rough patch of drug addiction but cleaned up and became a doctor and upstanding man.

  • Ted D

    FWIW add me to the group of “insecure” thus that get jealous of any guy my wife claims is attractive. I don’t care how much she loves me, or even that I know beyond all doubt she does. Anytime she comments on a guys relative hotness I feel a tinge of it. I used to think it was lack of faith in my ability to keep a happy relationship, but even when faced with overwhelming evidence that my marriage is rock solid, it still bothers me.

    In my defense, I never ever mentioned another woman’s hotness to my ex-LTR mates. I saw it as a disrespectful move. My current wife just can’t grok that concept. So I no longer hide my appreciation for beautiful and/or hot women. Thing is, it doesn’t bother her at all, which bothers me more. Lol.

  • Escoffier

    She also said I looked like Pete Sampras, which seems better somehow.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Han Solo:

    Amongst the women I’ve interacted with in real life, many of whom have low N, they just never asked me my N and the one who did didn’t hold that as a deal breaker. So, I think I’ll be fine.

    Just curious, this one girl who found out about your N – was she Latina, by any chance?

  • HanSolo

    She was half white, half Bangladeshi, born and raised in the west.

  • Jackie

    @Mike C
    Hi again Mike C,

    I just wanted to say thank you for responding to me with such a thoughtful comment :D — I will make sure to get back to it later, since it has given me a lot to think about and digest.

    And it is great to hear your Mom is starting to improve. Not being able to swallow or sit up sounds beyond difficult. I can’t begin to imagine the frustration. :( If it’s okay with you, I will light a candle and say a rosary today for her healing.

    My dad was not quite in that situation but my brother moved in with him and had to do stuff like help him bathe, get dressed, anything that requires arms. (i.e. a LOT!) He also has been cleaning, shopping for him and driving him to his appts (PT, etc).

    (It makes me think… Once, there was a time when my brother and I were in the same boat: Completely helpless and dependent on my dad (and mom) for our every need. I hope I can be as patient and kind as my folks were to me, you know? I’m pretty sure I must have drove them CRAZY sometimes. :shock: )

    I am helping, too, with cooking and moral support. 8-) Even a phone call means so much.

    Mike C, you, like my brother, have a very different style of thinking and communication from me. But the same sense keeps you thirsting for justice, also has him devoted to my dad, unstintingly and matter-of-factly without complaint. So I am so grateful that he and you are both around. :) Peace–

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Well, the problem is that the authors don’t attach restricted scores to a wide range of behaviors, they accept that attitudes and desires predict behavior. ”

    No. I suspect they specifically designed it to quantitate any behaviour based on actual numbers/ideas specifically so they didn’t have to go through as assign a restricted-unrestricted spectrum ranking to every combination of people that make up an action.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “The best shortcut I have found, and I think it’s a decent one, is comparing percentiles in the population. ONS: 47%. Threesome: 14%. Threesomes are rarer, and therefore more unrestricted.”

    Seeing as the labels of restricted-unrestricted mean absolutely nothing as they neither predict future or past behaviour we could arbitrarily use a ONS to determine unrestrictedness. 50% of the population being more unrestricted than the other 50% is logical.

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

      we could arbitrarily use a ONS to determine unrestrictedness. 50% of the population being more unrestricted than the other 50% is logical.

      That sounds pretty reasonable to me! ONS smack in the middle of the bell curve.

  • SayWhaat

    Sassy, I am holding up fine. I do miss him, but I still think we made the right decision. The other day I checked out his website and saw a promo for his most recent show. I felt so proud of him, and then immediately felt sad that he’s gone. Needless to say, I’ll be policing myself more strongly in order to not get hung up on the past! :)

    In the meantime, I’ve been throwing myself into pursuing my dream career. I just submitted a spec for a highly competitive fellowship (wish me luck!), am working on a new script, and just applied for advanced improv classes. Keeping busy!

  • Lokland

    @Jackie

    “(Interestingly, the people championing shaming — including Lokland and Abbot– have had their own lives negatively affected by the practice.)”

    Shaming ruined my life because I was the only one that got the message that hitting on a woman who hadn’t shown clear and obvious IOIs was immoral or some form of rape.

    If the playing field had been level it wouldn’t be a problem.

    As it stands I realize that standard is too strict but that doesn’t change that people should feel ashamed when they do an action that directly or indirectly hurts others.

  • SayWhaat

    SayWhaat, the friendship circles idea is very interesting. People are definitely doing this online, where people can easily find others to discuss topics and get suppport. Niche things then sometimes snowball into big things.

    Agreed. The drawbacks are that this method can easily lead to groupthink and echo chambers.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Anacaona, you have a point about people speaking of attractiveness on a scale of 1-10, but not suitability for marriage 1-10.

    Mike C, yeah, Jackie is awesome. :)

    Ted D, I never ever comment on another man’s hotness to my husband. Even when he seems to fish for it, like he mentions how the guy who plays James Bond is seen as attractive by women (I forget his name, but he’s the one in Sky Fall; I really just don’t care that much), I just wax philosophical about the reason behind why he helps to bring box office success. I suppose it is becaue I am firmly a one-man woman.

    So why does your wife not grok that it’s disrespectful?

  • SayWhaat

    She was half white, half Bangladeshi, born and raised in the west.

    Interesting. Was her father the Bangladeshi?

    I think much of the tolerance for high male N comes from PI. If more women were aware of the statistical realities, I suspect their reactions would be much different.

  • SayWhaat

    (It makes me think… Once, there was a time when my brother and I were in the same boat: Completely helpless and dependent on my dad (and mom) for our every need. I hope I can be as patient and kind as my folks were to me, you know? I’m pretty sure I must have drove them CRAZY sometimes. )

    My parents drive me insane, and I’m sure the favor is returned. I never visit home for longer than a few days if I have to, because I get stressed out way too much.

    That being said, when the time comes, they will be living with me when they are no longer able to take care of themselves. I refuse to even entertain the notion of putting them in a home. Same goes for my future in-laws.

  • Old Bloke

    There is a misunderstanding going in in here about how shaming works. It is not shame itself that serves as a tool of behavior control; it is the fear of shame. Men shame cowards but, really, what use is it to shun those who ran in battle once our side has been defeated, our men have been slaughtered and our women enslaved?

    However, when I am in the frontline of the phalanx and I see a wall of spear points heading directly toward me, every fiber of my being is yelling at me “run, run, run like the wind” but if I do, I know I will forever be branded as a coward and lose everyone’s respect. All of a sudden, the spears don’t look as bad and I keep my place in line.

    Slut shamming works the same way. The sluts will be shunned and marginalized and quite possibly confirmed in their behavior but the ones contemplating slut-hood of their own will have to face down the horrifying prospect of being expelled from the herd.

    Shame may be applied as punishment but it works as preventative.

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

      Shame may be applied as punishment but it works as preventative.

      Good point – it’s a deterrent to others. An obvious example would be the stocks in the American colonial period.

  • Tasmin

    “From now on, I’m picturing you as a suave rico with a honey-coated tongue.”
    Lucky guy.

    @HanSolo
    “Amongst the women I’ve interacted with in real life, many of whom have low N, they just never asked me my N and the one who did didn’t hold that as a deal breaker. ”

    +1. Most women are just not asking in general. Maybe they don’t want to know. But many also know that the # will probably not be a deal breaker anyhow, so they focus on clearing the STD hurdle and leave the rest alone. And those are the low N women.

    The higher N women have even less interest in having the convo in the first place. Double standard and all. But it is really fascinating to see how revealing your N has flipped the N discussion. Some women here have found you to be too “risky” with N inspiring “visceral” reactions – even coming from Sassy who has her eyes on men with *options*. Bravo for walking the gauntlet, but I’d also say that a lot of your comments make a little more sense now as well.

    Your history is fascinating because you have truly seen both sides of the fence. And it is that very transition, especially happening in your 30′s (peaking SMV and within an SMP going off the rails into hookupland) that affords you the external validation and sexual confidence that eludes the majority of true Beta men who don’t have your chiseled jaw and 6 foot handsomeness. Or hair. Yet 30 years of institutional and personal discipline resulting in celibacy and all of the corresponding Betatudes is also part of your wiring.

    Coming back to JJ, we can talk about how bad/irrelevant external validation is or claim how it doesn’t/shouldn’t matter, but it is important to keep in mind that a relationship is basically the culmination of someone else (external) valuing your attributes and validating them in the form of sex, commitment, exclusivity, and ultimately the desire to breed with YOU over all of their other options. He is an R=1, N=1. For good or bad there are going to be some challenges in terms of how he sees himself.

    Men swimming in it and attractive women typically downplay just how powerful any kind of positive acknowledgment from the opposite sex can be because to them its never out of reach – in fact for many it is everywhere. Sure there are downsides to it, but it is a matter of filtering through a constant stream as opposed to not being in the stream at all. Its like asking a fish to describe water. To guys like JJ who have been living on dry land, those first few sips/breaths are absolutely loaded situations.

    IME, I have found that very few women can relate to the male experience of “discovering” one’s (potential) SMV; it tends to come slowly and well past the point at which we have formed pretty solid images of ourselves in the absence of most of that external (SMV/sexual) validation. And there is always that nagging difference between potential SMV and realized SMV; the delta is naturally going to consist of external validation, primarily through action/experience with women.

    In your case perhaps you can speak to that. Your picture and EQ have a nearly unanimous “I would do him”, but most men don’t even get that feedback and the few that do would tell you that it falls into the category of all those moms and teachers who called you a catch and what really matters is where the rubber hits the road.

    Eventually knowing without experiencing can take hold, but just how much and what kind of “experience” it takes to get to that point can vary widely. In your case, you can probably speak well to this and have mentioned some of your early on experiences, post 30 y/o. But yet you have also obviously accumulated a lot of “feedback”. You have some beta history and celibacy by choice, but have overwritten much of that since your change of views/values. That process is a long way from N=1, R=1.

    In any case, IMO the development and internalization/awareness of one’s SMV is a fundamental difference between men and women that can get overlooked and/or downplayed. The SMV vs MMV issue that many women face is a function of external (sexual) validation that is often extrapolated into relationship/marriage value, which is in many ways a similar challenge: women must work to actively demonstrate, compete, and test their MMV whereas much of what constitutes their SMV (for good or bad) has basically been handed to them since age 14.

    Perhaps this is why men understand/relate to this concept more so than many women. Most men have to actively seek out and continually compete for and test their SMV through the action-reaction relationship with women. Male MMV is just a natural extension whereas women’s MMV requires effort/action that is not always a natural extension. Just rambling, but in a nutshell, most women just can’t relate to how men come to view themselves re: SMV. Marginalizing/removing the role of external validation in terms of “experience” from this understanding is like talking about how men living indoors should just make more vitamin D already. All that sunshine out there doesn’t matter…

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

      Perhaps this is why men understand/relate to this concept more so than many women. Most men have to actively seek out and continually compete for and test their SMV through the action-reaction relationship with women. Male MMV is just a natural extension whereas women’s MMV requires effort/action that is not always a natural extension. Just rambling, but in a nutshell, most women just can’t relate to how men come to view themselves re: SMV.

      This is a good insight, I think it makes sense. The sexes experience mating from opposite poles, really – sex vs. commitment. We see this play out again and again in discussions.

  • SayWhaat

    Wishing a speedy recovery to both Jackie’s dad and Mike C’s mom!

  • OffTheCuff

    Ana: “You are just more of a risk for a lifelong marriage than Megaman or Ted can you admit that?”

    Sure, of course I can admit this. I’ve never disputed that unrestricted folks who try LTRs have a higher likelihood of it falling apart, that’s kind of obvious, isn’t it?

    Then again… I’m not *actually* divorced, am I?

    Ana: “Did you ever read me type the words perfect in relationship with this definitions?”

    In all honesty, you said there’s “restricted” which allows for no mistakes, no ONS, no casual, and heck no stray FANTASIES — and everything else is degrees of unrestricted. That sure sounds like “perfection” to me to qualify.

    Sue: “If the authors could tell us where the line is between restricted and unrestricted for their instrument, I’d be happy to abide by that guideline.”

    That would be helpful. I see it as left or right of normal, but it’s a good question.

    Sue: “Threesomes are rarer, and therefore more unrestricted.”

    Not sure I follow this logic. If only 5% of people use vibrators, or sleep in separate beds, does make them restricted? What about Sassy, who likes to be *bit*? How many people like to draw blood? Is that more unrestricted?

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

      @OTC

      Sue: “Threesomes are rarer, and therefore more unrestricted.”

      Not sure I follow this logic. If only 5% of people use vibrators, or sleep in separate beds, does make them restricted? What about Sassy, who likes to be *bit*? How many people like to draw blood? Is that more unrestricted?

      Definition of unrestricted:

      1. free of restrictions on conduct; “I had unrestricted access”

      2. unexclusive: accessible to all

      Synonyms: unlimited, absolute, unbounded, limitless, boundless, illimitable, free

      IOW, unrestricted is more of “anything goes.” Of the examples you gave, enjoying being bitten to the point of bleeding and pain strikes me as unrestricted, but none of the other behaviors does. The vibrator example makes no sense because the percentage of people using them is much higher than 5%. If it were only 5%, then yes it would be on the unrestricted end of the spectrum. Remember, the spectrum is the range of human behavior. So if you’re in the top 5%, you’re 2 SDs from the mean. Sociosexuality is relative.

  • SayWhaat

    Oh and J, I saw that your friend is very sick. Best wishes to her as well.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    I sent you a couple emails. One about alpha males and one about a stock that I think is going to soar soon. :D

  • Emily

    >> “My mother used to say that I looked like Albert on Little House.”

    I have a hard time believing that women don’t like you. I think you probably just suck at noticing IOIs.

  • Escoffier

    I would say biting has a high corellation with unrestrictedness, yes.

  • HanSolo

    @SayWhaat

    Yes, he was.

    It could be. I’m not sure a lot of median women want to go there though and shed light on it because it might make men feel empowered to start to care more about female N too. I suppose that low N women could benefit from knowing the typical N’s and advertising that they like low-N men.

    Anyway, I’m not too worried personally because most never ask and the one that did didn’t care.

  • INTJ

    @ Sassy

    I also didn’t appreciate being drug into that mess to begin with.

    Well you managed to handle it rather well. :)

  • Ted D

    Hope – So why does your wife not grok that it’s disrespectful?

    Because she sees finding people attractive a natural consequence of breathing, and doesn’t see anything wrong with letting it be known. She has certainly cut back on vocalizing it, but only because she knows it bothers me. She doesn’t understand why I see it as disrespectful because she doesn’t consider it so. Like I said, I can comment about some young woman looking hot, and her usual reply is “yeah she does look smokin hot!” It just doesn’t bother her in the least.

    I guess I’m just an insecure beta at heart. :-p

  • Iggles

    Super long comment ahead.. Slowly catching up so bear with me :lol:

    @ OTC:

    Of course, by your definition, pretty much everyone in the world is unrestricted. Lots of men “watch” porn and women “read” romance novels, which is… fantasizing about (“mindfucking”) a person they’re not married to.

    Reading romance novels is not the same thing as “mindfucking”.

    If you replace yourself with the main character — like most men do when they watch p0rn — then yes it is. But if reading about what the characters are doing turns you on, you are not thinking about YOURSELF having sex with randoms.

    You may view that as a small difference, but that difference is as big as having sex in your room when other people are in the house vs having sex in the same room as other people in your house!

    @ SW:

    It’s that pesky threesome. OTC has engaged in a behavior only 14% of Americans have engaged in. My guess is that a very, very tiny percentage of marrieds are in that group.

    Unrestricted measures behaviors but also attitudes about sex, and whether one pairs sex with love as a value. OTC’s experience flips that switch, at least for me.

    + 1000

    And again, I’m not trying to be combative, but for restricted folks a threesome is a big deal!

    @ Bells, Sassy

    I literally had the exact same reaction as Sassy. It was like a force hit me that made me beyond physically repulsed. Plus I rounded your number out to a min of 45 since you said “-ish”.
    You’re a very intelligent and likable man but dang that’s a lot of women to work through in a short period of time, ~8 years (I assume that you are in your late thirties). From now on, I’m picturing you as a suave rico with a honey-coated tongue.

    No offense HanSolo — I do think you’re a great guy — but a number that high gives me a visceral response as well. It is repulsion, I think that many restricted and mid-restricted girls may identify with having. (Obviously, a good deal of mid-restricted and unrestricted women would not care and snatch you up anyway! :-p )

    But as a restricted woman have an N close to 40 is just.. No. Kills any lady-tingles I would have for a real life crush. And certainly, would not pursue a relationship with a man who racked up that number within 5 or so years!

    @ HanSolo

    Damn it! ;) When is Tom going to pop in and start telling you and Sassy to stop being so insecure about a man’s N???

    You’re a good sport. Hope you realize we’re not judging you personally! We’re sharing thoughts on those actions, specifically how would handle a guy who has a similar history of N.

    I agree with Susan that you’re going to have little trouble finding a woman who isn’t phased by it. I just don’t think it’ll be from the restricted pool, but I’m sure there are a ton of other reasons why a restricted woman would not be the ideal compatible match for you anyway.

    FWIW, I know a guy with Ted D or Megaman’s outlook is a much better fit for me than a guy with Mike C’s. To each their own!

  • Abbot

    “Interesting, coming from the man who encouraged men to lie and misdirect in order to get casual sex.”

    Lying to dupe a man into a life long marriage has far more dire ramifications than a quick fun-for-both romp

  • Escoffier

    Serious question: how many women are going to ask Han’s N? We know that men are much more concerned about this than women are and, I would assert, much more likely to ask. (I was not shy about asking.)

    But I can’t recall a single instance of a woman asking me.

    So, isn’t it as least plausible that he will find a girl he likes who will simply never ask? And then they get married, he’s true to his word, and everything turns out OK?

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

      Serious question: how many women are going to ask Han’s N? We know that men are much more concerned about this than women are and, I would assert, much more likely to ask. (I was not shy about asking.)

      But I can’t recall a single instance of a woman asking me.

      Among young people, the conversation is nearly ubiquitous unless there is no need. That is, if you can gauge a person’s sexual history by their behavior or reputation, you’ve already filtered on that basis. We have also seen many men here with high N specifically state that they don’t care all that much about female N. I’m sure the reverse is also true.

      In my experience of hearing these accounts, the woman usually initiates the DTR, and the guy usually initiates the N convo. However, in the N convo, the exchange of information is always mutual. Occasionally I hear of men who don’t want to know, or who don’t want to say. A reader here recently reported such a situation. My sense is that those men are men with very high N – they feel confident the woman couldn’t possibly match them.

      I have been present for a lot of discussions about male promiscuity with the focus groups, and the disgust is expressed in physical terms. I do not know what N this happens at – and I don’t think the girls do either. But when they talk about guys who they know hook up casually, they do use words like “trash dick,” “petri dish,” etc. They also share their mutual disgust at the idea of having a dick inside them that’s been in a lot of other vaginas – some have mentioned not wanting to kiss a guy who’s gone down on a ton of girls.

      These women were more toward the unrestricted side, I would say.

      However, and this is the big caveat: If they fell hard for a guy, and he disclosed a high number but also his desire for a real relationship, most would not pull the plug. It might give them pause, but they’re not going to DQ the guy on this basis. Some will still feel a nagging sense of disquiet though – in this way I think it’s very similar to the male experience. Women have fuck phantoms too. We may not be able to be literally cuckolded, but we have a great deal to lose through male infidelity.

  • INTJ

    @ SayWhaat

    Yes, we broke up a couple weeks ago. It just wasn’t working out. It was mutual and amicable though.

    Holy crap. :( I didn’t realize you were talking about opera-dude when you referred to your ex. :( :( :(

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    HanSolo, I agree with the other ladies here. I flipped out about an ex’s N and kept bringing it up, to the point where he called me a “judger” with a “gavel” because I was so judgmental about it. No other woman even cared to ask. And his N was not near yours…

    But I think the type of woman hanging out here is definitely rarer, so why worry what we think, right? :P

    Ted D, I must also be an insecure beta then, because I’d have the same reaction. Fortunately my husband and I are two insecure beta peas in a pod. I thank my lucky stars to be with a guy who doesn’t care about celebrity names or culture. 99% sure he doesn’t know who Christina Hendricks is, hehe.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    When society valued chastity I would have been seen as someone to use as a role model for male sexuality. Now? I’m a relic from an age long gone, and I’m sure a source of amusement for the more unrestricted among us.

    I think I was born several decades too late.

  • SayWhaat

    Reading romance novels is not the same thing as “mindfucking”.

    If you replace yourself with the main character — like most men do when they watch p0rn — then yes it is. But if reading about what the characters are doing turns you on, you are not thinking about YOURSELF having sex with randoms.

    You may view that as a small difference, but that difference is as big as having sex in your room when other people are in the house vs having sex in the same room as other people in your house!

    Ah, forgot to address this, but your explanation is probably better than how mine would have turned out. +1 :)

  • Lokland

    @Iggles

    So basically male porn is bad, female porn is okay?

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Escoffier, if Han’s sample is statistically significant, then 1/40 asked, and 0/40 cared. I’m going to guess that it’s probably on the order of 1/1000 women who would ask AND care. Maybe less.

    In other words, we’re not important. /sniffle. :p

  • SayWhaat

    Serious question: how many women are going to ask Han’s N?

    I don’t know. Perhaps I am just more inquisitive than others, but I not only knew the N of the guys I dated, but the N of the girls they dated as well. I do know that N is a bigger deal for girls than some here would think. One of my co-workers specifically stated she would not date an older guy (we’re talking 4-5 years older) because she did not want to be with someone more experienced than she was.

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

      I do know that N is a bigger deal for girls than some here would think.

      FWIW, I do not know a single young woman in a relationship who does not know her SO’s number. That doesn’t mean she knows the real number, but all have inquired or been told.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Escoffier

    Serious question: how many women are going to ask Han’s N? We know that men are much more concerned about this than women are and, I would assert, much more likely to ask. (I was not shy about asking.)

    But I can’t recall a single instance of a woman asking me.

    I have asked about the partner counts of every man I have been with. I have no qualms with asking. I’m blunt, and that is information that I want to know about someone I am dating.

    When I found out that the last ex-bf had a partner count of over 20 women, including a threesome, I was totally shocked. I actually couldn’t hide my visceral facial reaction of disgust towards him. He noticed it, and felt judged. I was judging him, and he knew it. He would bring it up more often than I thought he would too. He would apologize for his number, and ask me to stop judging him for it.

    Ultimately, hearing that answer whittled away at some of the trust I had for him. That, as well as a few other reasons, was a determining factor of my decision to dump him.

    So, isn’t it as least plausible that he will find a girl he likes who will simply never ask? And then they get married, he’s true to his word, and everything turns out OK?

    Only time will tell.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Then again… I’m not *actually* divorced, am I?
    No. It doesn’t change that you are more of a risk is just means that you are so far an exception?

    In all honesty, you said there’s “restricted” which allows for no mistakes, no ONS, no casual, and heck no stray FANTASIES — and everything else is degrees of unrestricted. That sure sounds like “perfection” to me to qualify.
    That is how defining things work. A mistake from a restricted person would be having a ONS/Threesome not enjoying it, regret it and not doing it ever again. If they just consider it just something they did for whatever reason then they surely are in the spectrum.
    Let’s use another example. If a man sleeps with another man ONCE and doesn’t feel is a mistake he might not be homosexual but he cannot claim to be pure heterosexual either, can he?
    Although God knows they try. I wonder where Herb is according to him this actually makes sense. It doesn’t to me but whatevs…
    Anyhow, if you want to define yourself as more restricted than whoever person you have in mind. Is a free Internet after all but “I did it for love no sex, it doesn’t count” looks a lot like hamsterizing, YMMV.

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

      If a man sleeps with another man ONCE and doesn’t feel is a mistake he might not be homosexual but he cannot claim to be pure heterosexual either, can he?

      Oof, while we’re on the subject of DQing. Run, don’t walk, away. You can’t compete if you don’t even have the right equipment.

  • HanSolo

    @Hope

    0/40 or 1/40 isn’t quite right.

    I told a bunch of them when I was at low N that I was low N and some of them felt honored that they could help “break me in”. Also the prolonged virginity and honesty helped the girl I told about 40 feel okay with it, especially once the test came in clean.

    I would guess about 10%-30% of women care in the abstract, but as with guys, when they meet someone they love, it won’t be as important. However, it will be a deal-breaker for maybe 5% of women I am guessing.

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

      I would guess about 10%-30% of women care in the abstract, but as with guys, when they meet someone they love, it won’t be as important.

      According to the CDC just 1.3% of men have more than 25 partners. That’s probably a bit high, since men tend to round up and also exclude prostitutes. So the question is whether women will happily partner with a man in the top percentile. I agree that Pluralistic Ignorance works in a guy’s favor here – I seriously doubt many women know the statistical reality.

      However, there has been some research done on how women (and men) feel about prior sexual experience in their mates:

      The mate-selection questionnaire paradigm often has been used to examine what traits young adults would desire in a partner (e.g., Buss & Barnes, 1986; Sprecher et al., 1994). However, only a few mate-selection studies have included an item that refers to the potential partner’s level of sexual experience (e.g., Buss, 1989; Hill, 1945; Hoyt & Hudson, 1981). We extended the mate-selection literature by examining preferences for level of sexual experience in a partner.

      …The results indicated that chastity, regardless of whether it characterized a potential date or a potential spouse, was rated as significantly more desirable than both moderate and extensive sexual experience. Furthermore, moderate sexual experience was desired more (or was considered less undesirable) than extensive sexual experience. These findings are consistent with other person perception studies, which have also generally found that low levels of prior sexual experience are considered more desirable in a mate than are high levels (O’Sullivan, 1995; Sprecher et al., 1991)…The finding that chastity was perceived to be more desirable than sexual experience in a partner is consistent with complementary predictions from both the evolutionary and the scripts/social factors perspectives. From an evolutionary perspective, chastity would be desirable because of paternity certainty (a concern for males) and concern about future paternal resources (a concern for females).

      Surprisingly, we did not find gender differences in how the different versions of the sexuality item were rated. Both men and women preferred chastity in a partner most and extensive prior sexual experience the least. This lack of gender difference is consistent with results from prior mate-selection studies examining preferences for chastity (Hoyt & Hudson, 1981). However, our results are inconsistent with those of person perception experiments (e.g., Sprecher et al., 1991), which have shown some evidence for a “reverse double standard,” such that men report a preference to date highly sexually experienced women, whereas women report a preference for sexually inexperienced or moderately experienced men. Theoretically, one could argue that socialization experiences and the content of sexual scripts for men and women are becoming more similar.

      For women only, sociosexual orientation was related to preferences with respect to sexual experience in a potential date or mate. Specifically, women with an unrestricted orientation to sex (i.e., those who have more positive attitudes toward casual, uncommitted sexual activity) gave higher desirability ratings to moderate or considerable sexual experience in a partner than did women with a restricted sociosexual orientation. Conversely, the restricted women rated chastity in a partner as more desirable than did unrestricted women. Women with extensive sexual experience (one dimension tapped by the SOI) should be more willing to consider a sexually experienced person as a partner. More specifically, they would be unlikely to have negative impressions of a sexually active (hence, similar) other (Smith et al., 1993), would assume that they (and others like them) are “uniquely invulnerable” to sexually transmitted diseases (Brehm, 1992), and may be guided by a specific, adaptive mating strategy (e.g., Simpson & Gangestad, 1992).

      http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Preferred+level+of+sexual+experience+in+a+date+or+mate%3a+the+merger+of%E2%80%A6-a020536041

  • SayWhaat

    Holy crap. I didn’t realize you were talking about opera-dude when you referred to your ex.

    Yep, that’s him. He’s very gifted and talented. I fantasize about the day I see him perform at the MET, unbeknownst to him. If he’s disciplined enough, I know one day he will make it. :)

  • Escoffier

    Hope, my guess is that some significant % of women will have a problem with 40. Maybe not 50%, I don’t know, but easily 20%.

    However, my guess is also that very few would ever ask outright in a way that demanded a number. Some might poke and prod to see what kind of experience he has had. In that case, if he keeps it vague, doesn’t lie, acknowledges some flings and such, he can probably get away with it.

    I don’t see how it’s in his interest to cop to 40 unless he’s asked point blank. In which case, he can either bail or tell the truth or try to plead the fifth. Lying is out. I doubt pleading the 5th would work.

  • Sassy6519

    What about Sassy, who likes to be *bit*? How many people like to draw blood? Is that more unrestricted?

    I don’t know. Perhaps.

    I would say biting has a high corellation with unrestrictedness, yes.

    Well, there you go. :D

  • Escoffier

    Sassy,

    I suppose it’s important to ask these days because the % of people with really high Ns is much higher than when I was young. I have no way of knowing but I suspect that N>40, or even 20, were as rare as Martians 25 years ago. So, women didn’t really need to ask because they could be reasonably confident they their guy was not a supa-playa. All the real players were rather obvious.

    Sigh.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan “how would this look?”

    A dating site specifically for restricted folks? I wonder if such a thing exists. I could even make one…

  • Escoffier

    I also never had anyone demand/require that I submit proof of an STD test. Is that common these days?

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

      I believe that asking is common, usually when the guy wants the condoms to come off. I have yet to hear of any woman actually demanding to see test results. In any case, the most common STDs, and the least curable, are HPV and genital herpes. Testing doesn’t cover either. It’s a total crap shoot.

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

      I also never had anyone demand/require that I submit proof of an STD test. Is that common these days?

      I have discussed this at length with young women. Every one of them asks the question and not a one has ever told me they actually required test results in hand. Generally the discussion is precipitated by a guy requesting that they lose the condoms. TBH, the most incurable STDs, and the most problematic for women – are HPV and genital herpes. Standard testing doesn’t reveal either in men. So it’s basically a crap shoot.

  • Bells

    “From now on, I’m picturing you as a suave rico with a honey-coated tongue.”
    Lucky guy.

    My words weren’t meant to be taken in a positive sense at all. I tend to be very distrustful of smooth-talking lady-charmers because I can sense that they are able to take words/morality and twist them in any way that best serves them.
    My demeanor comes across as being unassuming and naïve at times. And it’s easy for people to trust me. So I’m very aware of the ways that I can take advantage of people’s trust and successfully get away with it. But I don’t. I would feel waay too bad, morally guilty, and conflicted if I ever did such a thing. Calling someone a honey-coated charmer isn’t a good thing. It’s akin to sending out a flare signal for other girls to tread carefully.

  • HanSolo

    @Hope

    That Chinese online dating article I linked to had a very popular site where the people had to agree they were looking for marriage and not hooking up.

  • HanSolo

    Come on Bells. Just call me a fly-by-night charlatan. You know you want to. :D

  • HanSolo

    I’m actually pretty honest and blunt with women. For better or worse, I tell them if there’s no hope for a relationship, some hope or if I’m highly interested (though I’ve toned down letting them know I’m highly interested too soon because women don’t like that so I wait to see if their interest grows more first).

  • Sassy6519

    Because she sees finding people attractive a natural consequence of breathing, and doesn’t see anything wrong with letting it be known. She has certainly cut back on vocalizing it, but only because she knows it bothers me. She doesn’t understand why I see it as disrespectful because she doesn’t consider it so. Like I said, I can comment about some young woman looking hot, and her usual reply is “yeah she does look smokin hot!” It just doesn’t bother her in the least.

    See, this is the kind of dynamic I have had with a few men. I don’t become upset if they tell me that they find another woman attractive. When I say something similar about another man, however, their reactions are not the same. They get jealous, and it strains the relationship.

    This isn’t directly related, but it’s somewhat similar.

    My recent ex-bf and I had hung out once with some of his work buddies. One of his friends was the most douchey guy I have ever known, by far. This guy was married with children, yet still hitting on any woman in his path. When I met him that night, he tried to work his charm on me, but I wasn’t buying it. When he saw that I wasn’t impressed with him, he decided to up the ante by complimenting my appearance in front of my boyfriend at the time. I was really uncomfortable with the entire interaction, but the ex-bf thought it was funny. He told me that his buddy was doing it to get a reaction out of me. I asked him if he was okay with his friend attempting to flirt with me, and he said it was cool. He thought it was all in the name of fun, and he also claimed that he wasn’t the jealous type.

    Fast forward to later on in the evening when we all went to a bar with a dancefloor. My ex-bf didn’t like dancing, so I didn’t expect to get on the dancefloor that night. Surprisingly, his buddy asked me to dance. I looked at the ex-bf, but he didn’t give any opposition. I agreed to dance with the friend, and he and I danced for about 15-20 minutes. When we got back to where the ex-bf was, I could tell by his facial expression that he wasn’t pleased.

    Over the course of the next few days, he would continually ask me whether or not I had fun dancing. When he said it the first time, I thought he was only curious to see whether or not I had actually enjoyed myself. I said that I did like dancing that night, and I thought that would be the end of it. Every time he asked me subsequently about whether or not I had fun dancing, I said that I did have fun. I noticed after some time, however, that he didn’t want to hear that answer. I guess I was supposed to say “No, I didn’t like dancing with your friend”. In my opinion, however, he shouldn’t have asked for information that he wasn’t prepared to hear. Don’t claim that you aren’t the jealous type, then become jealous. Jeebus.

  • Tasmin

    Don’t worry Bells, I knew exactly what you meant. But as a guy it is always a little bit funny to hear the incredibly effective things like a honey-tongue viewed so negatively. Particularly in light of the fact that prior to the N>40, that very tongue had so often eloquently tickled the females here into quite a frothy lot.

    The reality is that the majority of women respond positively to suave, charm, wit, and all kinds of honey-tongued approaches. Nobody likes a salesmen when they are being sold up the river, all women love the salesmen who is taking them sailing down the river.

    But as an often quiet, witty, shy/introverted, non-salesman, I’ll be over here in the corner waiting for all of those women who are wary of, distrustful of, or hold disdain for the handsome salesmen types to come on over. zzzzzzzzz.

    I get that the obvious slick-jobs are a turn off, but who cares about those guys, its the good-looking suave confident golden-throated guys that women don’t see coming that matter. And guess what? Women go weak in the knees for those guys. And given that a great many women will not want to know or not ask about N or rationalize it away because of his overall greatness, then how does one really separate the negative honey from that sweet sweet nectar they all crave?

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    A dating site specifically for restricted folks? I wonder if such a thing exists. I could even make one…

    Heh I would help you out. Sexwithlove.com or something like it. Problem would be filtering out the liars. Most of our SMP I think come from people that want their cake and eat too since even the most promiscuous men want a lower N woman so they wouldn’t care to join if they get what they want and many women assume all men have high numbers so they probably start accepting those men thinking there are not alternatives. We will need a huge questionnaire, STD’s tests and some form of monitoring…No I haven’t spent hours trying to think how to get the restricted folks to meet and mate, not at all. :p

  • Ted D

    I just want to say: what guys watch porn and put themselves in the scene? The allure of porn for me is watching other people have sex. I have never once in my entire life watched porn and mentally “put myself” in on the action.

    Watching people screw turns me on. That doesn’t meant I have ANY desire at all to join in on the action, and if history is any indicator watching porn just makes me want to sex up my wife/LTR mate more, not less.

    I would have guessed women “put themselves” into their romance novels far more often then guys trying to imagine being Ron Jeremy in a porn scene.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy, 430

    Though I agree he handled the problem like a 4 year old I can understand the response.
    I would have been pissed if your answer had been anything other than an instant no.

    Of course, I make no lie about being jealous and willing to end relationships over it.

  • Tasmin

    @SayWhaat
    “I think much of the tolerance for high male N comes from PI. If more women were aware of the statistical realities, I suspect their reactions would be much different.”

    I think some, but I don’t think we can ignore the role that preselection plays in this as well as the continued cultural celebration of unrestricted male behaviors and shaming of the restricted male viewpoint. I also think it is a function of the targeted audience. If women are focused on the top 10-20%, then they are indeed going to be confronted with higher male N, but then that is part of the point too – if a woman can “get” a 10%er, she is also going to be much more willing to overlook or chose not to look at his N.

    PI impacts both men and women’s view on this I’m sure. I often have the feeling that my preferences are “out of the market” but also that what I bring to the table is also out of the market, but not because of its perceived rarity, but rather because IME it is basically irrelevant, a non-issue.

    I have never once been asked. Granted, fairly small sample size, but in every case, if anything, the woman has assumed that I have been at some point or another playing the field or manwhoring a bit. Not because of my vibe, but because I am 40, single and apparently good-looking enough to have stirred up some trouble.

    In fact more than once the history conversation has come up because she either reveals, volunteers, or otherwise waves some red-flag about her history – perhaps trying to relate to this false image of me they hold. It has been awkward more than once to unwind it all. I’ve encountered both the revelation of a past that I’m not comfortable with as well as the (apparently – I’ll never really know) false image manufactured by a restricted woman to appear unrestricted because she “thought thats what men wanted to hear”. That was the worst.

    It gets pretty muddled when men are encouraged to project an alpha image that is easily translated into high a probability of sexual conquest and women are encouraged to project an image that welcomes such conquest. I limit myself because I advertise through my actions. I don’t hook up, people around me know that. I am probably limiting some of the potential of a unrestricted/restricted pairing, but given the continuum of R/U and the role that the culture and communication-language-posturing that has become commonplace in the SMP plays, I might be better off advertising to a broader market. This is something, however, that I think restricted women need to do less of. Fishing with the wrong bait is rampant IMO.

  • Sassy6519

    While I’m at it, why don’t I take it a step further?

    One of the deciding factors of why I dumped the recent ex-bf is because he started to show signs of controlling/possessive behavior.

    At one point, he started commenting on my clothing. He actually asked me to change my clothes a few times when I was getting ready for work. He said that my outfit was too risque. He actually asked me whether or not I was trying to get a promotion or raise from my boss, dressed the way I was dressed. I can assure everyone that my clothing was not slutty/risque in the least.

    Even better was when he started trying to control who I could see or what I did with my time. When we went to the gym together, I kid you not, he started pressuring me not to go to the weight room. He had no problem with me doing cardio alongside him, but he didn’t want me to lift weights in the weight room. When I told him that I would work out the way I wanted to work out, he followed me into the weight room and tried to “mark his territory” by putting his hand on my lower back or trying to kiss me. Let me remind you that this was in the weight room at a gym. Who does that? I found it to be very insecure of him and controlling. What was I going to do, jump on the dick of the guy using the bench-press?

    All the blame doesn’t rest with him though and I know it. Somehow, I am drawn to and continue to pick men like him. I keep picking them, and such men continue to bite me in the ass (not in a good way).

    Come to think of it, my recent ex-bf reminded me a lot of the ex-bf that I dated for a year. They were so similar, and that’s probably why I was so attracted to them.

    I don’t like overly jealous/possessive/controlling men, but I must be attracted to them on a subconscious level. I have crap attraction triggers and faulty character filters, I tell you.

  • Escoffier

    “ONS smack in the middle of the bell curve.”

    That, to me, is the most depressing comment of 2013 (so far).

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    I would have guessed women “put themselves” into their romance novels far more often then guys trying to imagine being Ron Jeremy in a porn scene.

    It depends on the novel, erotica probably does this more often than clean romance. Also reading people screw turn some women on as well. Again you need to ask I personally enjoy reading about people fall in love and I fall in love with their love.
    Of course that is probably different than the bitch that wrote Lost in Austen and their ilk.

  • Escoffier

    Sassy, Athol uses the phrase “mate guarding” to describe semi-jealous behavior, mostly by men vis a vis their women, which he says helps establish an alpha frame (or whatever) and turn the woman on. Many, many men on his forum describe success using this and many, many women claim to like it.

    Would you say that this practice just doesn’t work on you at all, or rather that your ex simply took it too far?

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin

    Thanks for your thoughtful-as-always comments. I enjoy reading what you have to say.

    In high school and jr. high I had acne and big nerdy glasses and a lot of anti-game. I never had much female attention as a child or teen. Never got more than a few valentines put in my pouch in front of my desk in elementary school while the more swaggering, popular boys got tons.

    College was a phase shift in that at least I was getting high-quality, pretty girls to accept to go out with me for a date or two but my over-eagerness and romanticism killed things off. My acne largely went away to stop hiding the chiseled jaw. :)

    After my mission, I was too picky with a few great girls (mostly latinas that liked the romance more than their more hardened white sisteren) and anti-gamed my way out of contention with many more. I mean, I really feel like a fuck-up that I couldn’t get a Mormon girl that I liked to marry me since the ratios were so in my favor and that I fucked it up with the few that in hindsight were very marriageable by being too picky–there was one gorgeous latina that said she wanted to marry me but I thought she was too young. I really wish I could go back in time…. lol

    As I was leaving the church, I started to feel like a loser for being a virgin. The 40 y/o Virgin made me think, “Fuck!!! That’s going to be me!” Well, I guess not, in hindsight.

    As to the positive feedback, most of it came from latinas who would say they thought I was good looking. I never got that from white women so combined with my teen-acne phase I just figured I must not be too attractive (who knows, maybe I’m not as much to white women). Hearing it from latinas was very reassuring and so for various reasons I started focusing more on dating them. One white Mormon woman, about 7.5 in looks, (before I left) told me I was the hottest guy she’d ever made out with and I just seriously thought, “you must not have made out with any hot guys then.” That was my attitude. Even on here, recently, hearing the favorable opinions of some of the women was surprising to me. No BS.

    Some of my N was acquired due to feeling very inadequate, thinking that I wasn’t having sex with enough women and that everyone was out there getting laid while I wasn’t. HUS has been helpful in disabusing me of that notion. And it made my N surprising to me, in that it was a lot higher relative to the median than I imagined. I would say I am less focused on looking for sex now and much more focused on trying to be and find the right person–but don’t mistake that as having completely jumped back into restricted territory.

    I agree with your take on male and female S/MMV. Males have to have a combination of things going on to achieve SMV whereas women mostly have to look their best. Men have to clear the SMV hurdle in a more active way to be considered for marriage whereas women have to work more on filtering out the men that will consider them for sex but not for marriage.

  • http://www.decoybetty.com Deidre

    One of my first boyfriends – who I wasn’t having sex with, but anyway – once went on a date with another girl while we were dating because “he never thought he could get a girl like her.”

    I was totally the safety net and while we on and off dated for a while, eventually I couldn’t handle being the one he turned to when he had no other options (when we broke up he told me “I thought we were going to get married one day”).

    He basically lowered his value so much by that one date early in on in our “on and off” again relationship that I could never ever consider him as a serious boyfriend.

    I think if JJ has these questions, he needs to break up with his girlfriend. Figure them out. Start anew.

  • Iggles

    @ HanSolo:

    Intellectually, I’m curious why you feel grossed out and why you would warn your friends. You can talk about it in a general way or me specifically, whichever, if you choose to respond. Is it the thought that such a man wouldn’t be faithful? Or you view sex as something that needs to only be engaged in within an LTR/marriage? I actually once felt that way myself, during all those years of virginity. Don’t worry about offending me. I’m just curious.

    Event though this is directed towards Bell, I’ll answer.

    Abbot and some of the other guys have talked about with a high N woman, picturing her with a bunch of dicks. Same deal here. Too many vaginas and too many other breasts. Skeeves me out to think about it, AND it would make me super jealous/ uneasy that my potential man (I say, “potential” because there’s no way I would commit to a guy knowing this information!) had been with so many other other women!

    Also, with some many past partners it would really devalue intimacy with that person in my mind. The feeling that you’re just one of many. Sure, you could be “the one” for them, but there’s a larger chance you won’t be. Past is prologue. The chances of you be discarded for someone else, or even the possibility of someone else is mighty high.

    TL;DR – Find it gross that the guy has been in so many different women. Wouldn’t feel special. Not on same page about sharing physical intimacy. High risk of being dumped and/or relationship not working out.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin

    Don’t worry Bells, I knew exactly what you meant. But as a guy it is always a little bit funny to hear the incredibly effective things like a honey-tongue viewed so negatively. Particularly in light of the fact that prior to the N>40, that very tongue had so often eloquently tickled the females here into quite a frothy lot.

    Hmmm. From fairly early on here, I communicated that I had two phases, the voluntary virgin phase and the after-party phase with quite a few flings and so on. I guess that didn’t get translated into a high N, even when I said I had a high N. Except for Anacaona, that sniffed me out upon the first mentions of my flings.

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

      @Han

      I guess that didn’t get translated into a high N, even when I said I had a high N.

      I figured N of 20 tops. That’s high for a late starter. 8 girls a year for 5 years? That takes serious focus and work, even for a player. Roosh doesn’t do half that well.

  • Ted D

    Sassy – I don’t consider myself over jealous at all. I don’t mind when guys chat up my wife, and in fact I often find it amusing. She doesn’t realize how many of those random conversations are guys trying to “open” her, so she chats away oblivious. I certainly don’t try to control her behavior to minimize any “risk” of cheating, because I’m not worried she will cheat.

    But, there is something deep down in my being that DETESTS knowing my wife finds any other particular man attractive. And I’m not talking regular Joes on the street. She has never once pointed out or commented on a guy we see or know in real life. No, it’s usually a comment about Adam Levine (Maroon 5) or maybe some actor that sets my panties firmly in a bunch. I sometimes have to resist the urge to say so,etching snarky like: “as if you’d have any shot with him!” But, I realized pretty early on that she DOES NOT see those types of comments the way I do. For a woman, she has a pretty solid ability to separate love and sex, which is a trait I am completely lacking in. Don’t get me wrong, I have complete faith in her ability to remain faithful, but her views on sex are far closer to Mike C’s than my own. In fact, she may be a female Mike C! I have total faith in his ability to remain faithful to one woman as long as his needs are met, despite the fact that he has a relatively unrestricted view of sex.

    Being that my POV on the subject is so different, I’m sure you can see why I had some serious trust issues early on. My wife has a rather unrestricted outlook, but is VERY serious about keeping her word and her vows. She has no problems remaining faithful even when she is unhappy in a relationship as proven by her first marriage. She was miserable and he was cheating, but she refused to sink to his level and break her promise to him, even after he broke his to her.

    For a woman she really does a good job of living by a code of honor and staying true to her commitments. (Intentional snarky comment about women. Its humor, please relax!) She just behaves very differently when single than I do. It’s a little unsettling to be honest, but I have faith in her. And now that I have found this wealth of manly knowledge, I’ll make sure she never gets anywhere near unhappy enough with our marriage for it to be a concern.

    It would be nice to see the world from her POV though. I always have difficulty accepting things I cannot rationally understand. And I simply can’t understand the unrestricted mindset.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Escoffier

    Sassy, Athol uses the phrase “mate guarding” to describe semi-jealous behavior, mostly by men vis a vis their women, which he says helps establish an alpha frame (or whatever) and turn the woman on. Many, many men on his forum describe success using this and many, many women claim to like it.

    Would you say that this practice just doesn’t work on you at all, or rather that your ex simply took it too far?

    I have 2 major problems with mate guarding/jealousy from a man, with regards to myself.

    1. Outward displays of jealousy, in my opinion, are a a sign of weakness. I don’t think all women respond to mate guarding/jealousy this way, but I do. It bothers me, and it makes the guy look less secure in my eyes. If a guy feels jealous, that is completely normal. What I have a problem with are guys who outwardly display their jealousy in actions and words. I’d like a guy to keep that to himself. Have I ever experienced jealousy? Sure, a few times. It’s hard not to when the men I date often have a few women buzzing around them with flattery/attention. Do I ever show it? Nope.

    I play it cool. I have been witness to women approaching ex-bfs and trying to flirt with them. I’ve also been witness to how women who had crushes on my guys have reacted once the men introduced me to them for the first time. That kind of situation has happened probably 3-4 time. I’ve never reacted poorly, or even acted remotely phased. I consider that strong and classy behavior. I’m not insecure, and I believe that most guys would be lucky to have me on their arms. To become upset or unhinged at the sight of potential competition doesn’t register for me. It may sound bitchy but I’m not phased by most other women. I guess I want a guy who has a similar reaction towards other men. Perhaps I’m asking for too much.

    2. I don’t like it when mate guarding/jealousy impedes on what I want to do in my life. The worst thing a guy can do is to attempt to tell me how to dress, in hopes that I’ll dress in ways that are viewed as less “provocative” to other men. I know how I dress, and I don’t dress in a slutty fashion. I also don’t like it when a guy tries to tell me who I can and cannot see, or how/where I can workout. I just find such behavior weak and absurd.

  • Morgasm

    “But IRL guys are notorious for being non-judgmental – they’ll usually separate a guy’s value as a buddy from the way he treats girls. ”

    Non-judgemental, my ass. Such “guys” lack any ethical framework whatsoever.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I’m pretty sure that when the SOI measures one’s agreement with the statement “Sex without love is OK” it is not including the third party who you “love” in your own way”

    I honestly put that as 3/5, right in the middle. It’s sometimes OK.

    I don’t say it’s “never OK” and then weasel out to define anything as “love”. Doesn’t anyone else score in the middle on these things?

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    There is a flaw in your analogy in number one.

    Boyfriend has other women try to flirt with him.
    Friend asks you to dance.

    Now, in the you example, you respond positively by saying yes to dancing (btw, he may have tested you).

    The equivalent to him not getting jealous in such a situation is not just in the friend asking and not showing jealousy but not responding with jealousy to you wanting to dance with another guy.

    I assume not being jealous of your boyfriend getting hit on when he doesn’t respond is different than if he had responded positively.Or at least I imagine how most people will be wired.

  • Morgasm

    ” I’m sure there are many high N folks who would still balk at a threesome.”

    Even polygamous/polyamorous people often balk at it.

    Do we really think that all the polygynous/polyandrous families in the more traditional areas of the world are having group sex?

    I’ve seen the documentaries and the topic never surfaced. Not only that, in one tribe I visited the husbands all had their own huts and the wife waited until her period came and went before she moved on to the next husband’s hut. This is how they keep track of paternity.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    There is a flaw in your analogy in number one.

    Boyfriend has other women try to flirt with him.
    Friend asks you to dance.

    Now, in the you example, you respond positively by saying yes to dancing (btw, he may have tested you).

    The equivalent to him not getting jealous in such a situation is not just in the friend asking and not showing jealousy but not responding with jealousy to you wanting to dance with another guy.

    I assume not being jealous of your boyfriend getting hit on when he doesn’t respond is different than if he had responded positively.Or at least I imagine how most people will be wired.

    I asked the ex-bf if he would mind if I danced with his friend, twice in fact. He said he didn’t mind both times, even going so far as to tell me that I should go dance. I guess he wanted me to reject the offer outright. Perhaps I was being shit-tested and I didn’t even know it. :P

    Any other time I have encountered a man’s jealous behavior, I didn’t do anything to provoke such a reaction except be hit on. I never went along with the flirting. I never flirted back. I never agreed with requests for my number or potential dates. Getting hit on/cat-called/looked at was often enough to send the ex’s into jealous fits.

    I consider that kind of behavior weak.

  • Morgasm

    ” If a man sleeps with another man ONCE and doesn’t feel is a mistake he might not be homosexual but he cannot claim to be pure heterosexual either, can he?”

    “Oof, while we’re on the subject of DQing. Run, don’t walk, away. You can’t compete if you don’t even have the right equipment.”

    Susan didn’t you write here before that there’s some sort of bizarre pressure on young women or college women to “make out” with other women? (even for the bizarre purpose of “male pleasure”, which makes zero sense). And the FFM threesome might include such activity.

    So just because a hetero woman might be stupid enough to succumb to such bizarroness, it doesn’t mean they would leave a boyfriend for a woman, not does it mean they are homo or even bi, does it?

    Also, bisexual people are not necesarily going to leave their opposite sex partner for a same sex one.

    The lines are blurry here.

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

      @Morgasm

      Susan didn’t you write here before that there’s some sort of bizarre pressure on young women or college women to “make out” with other women?

      It’s prevalent in pop culture, the media, and especially porn, but I can’t say I’ve ever heard a woman say she felt pressured to do this. I do think that very slutty girls do this voluntarily to attract attention and sexual validation, along with lots of other promiscuous behaviors.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Maybe among the Millenial generation the N conversation is more common to have?

    Anacaona, unfortunately online dating has a high probability of turning lame. People love to troll those sites and put up fake profiles. No way around it really.

    Sassy, you do sort of have unrealistic standards for men. My husband for example has commented that I shouldn’t wear too revealing clothes outside and it’s for his eyes only, but I don’t see it as controlling.

    I think your desire for aloofness is somewhat rooted in your past, almost as if you don’t want to be cared for deeply by a man… could be indicative of attachment issues. The way you don’t want to show weakness or jealousy could be related to that as well.

    This topic is on my mind because they’ve shown lots of behavior later in life go all the way back to babyhood. Makes me paranoid about parenting. I’m all like “omg don’t mess this up,” wanting to make sure our boy has a secure attachment style and all that jazz.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “I never flirted back.”

    Yeah, this makes all the difference.

    Story time.
    I was standing on the corner waiting for a bus (long time ago, early undergrad) and one of the girls got cat called.

    Her boyfriend actually got pissed off, wouldn’t speak and stared the guy down the street.

    Was really fucking funny at the time but he turned out to be a nut.

    “I guess he wanted me to reject the offer outright. Perhaps I was being shit-tested and I didn’t even know it. ”

    Yeah, this. I don’t like my women touching another man, period. (obvious life necessities exempted of course)
    I would reject a woman who even considered it.

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

      “I guess he wanted me to reject the offer outright. Perhaps I was being shit-tested and I didn’t even know it. ”

      Yeah, this. I don’t like my women touching another man, period. (obvious life necessities exempted of course)
      I would reject a woman who even considered it.

      This is definitely the most common form of male shit testing.

  • Morgasm

    “Shaming doesn’t really change behavior as much as it drives it underground, where, like mold, it festers and continues to grow even more toxic”

    The underground can form their own sub-cultures and those who want to live like them are free to join.

    “So basically male porn is bad, female porn is okay?”

    Romance novels are not dependent on global sex trafficking.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Except for Anacaona, that sniffed me out upon the first mentions of my flings.
    In my defense I have a huge database of male behaviors and a good memory.The winks, notches,smiles and the poetic wax don’t distract me. In fact the most charming the most wary I get. Also picking Han Solo instead of Luke as a handle = Nerdy Red Flag :p

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Yeah, this. I don’t like my women touching another man, period. (obvious life necessities exempted of course)
    I would reject a woman who even considered it.

    Interesting, in my culture touching and kissing people on the cheek is so common that not doing makes you look weak. Dancing with a MOS is also considered completely innocent…Odd how that works.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Eh I didn’t pay much attention to HanSolo except that he was flirting with Jackie and also talking about love/marriage, so I was like yeah go for it. Apparently major fail on my part! >.<

    In my defense they are both NF, happy and loving types, so would have been a great match if he had been a bit over 10 years younger and still a virgin waiting for marriage. Though, maybe the religious differences would have come into play.

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

      Eh I didn’t pay much attention to HanSolo except that he was flirting with Jackie and also talking about love/marriage, so I was like yeah go for it.

      Me too, I was a Jackie/HS shipper! They bonded over Austen early on, I thought it was on.

  • Ted D

    Ana – choosing Han is a red flag?! Luke was far too pansy even in my Blue Pill days. Between him and Anakin, I can relate far better to father than son. In fact, I think part of the reason I have such a skeptical view of authority is I could see myself falling prey to the same trap Anakin did to become Vader. If I truly believed in a cause, I could be talked into doing almost anything for it. And I would believe I was doing the right thing, even if the act performed goes against my moral code.

    When it comes to the true greater good, I can be convinced that a small immoral action is necessary and right. For example: killing one individual to save thousands. If I truly believed that person is capable and planning on a mass attack, I would have no moral dilemma with killing him in cold blood. And I’d feel like I was doing good for the world in the process. Scary stuff, which is why you won’t find me hanging out with cultists. Red Neck militia types are as far as I’d go, and I don’t get too chummy. I think I could be fairly scary if I were to fall into the wrong hands. :-p

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    Yeah, this. I don’t like my women touching another man, period. (obvious life necessities exempted of course)
    I would reject a woman who even considered it.

    Would you ever put your woman in situations where you appear to not mind her touching another man in any way? Would you ever make it seem like you are completely fine with such physical contact, even though you aren’t? Are such “shit-tests” okay for men to use on women?

  • Lokland

    @Ana

    “Interesting, in my culture touching and kissing people on the cheek is so common that not doing makes you look weak. Dancing with a MOS is also considered completely innocent…Odd how that works.”

    Other funny story.
    When first dating my wife one of her roommates was an exchange student from Spain.
    When being introduced she came to kiss me on both cheeks, which was of course awkward (to me) and we were sitting on a couch and became even more awkward when I tried to back up and she fell on top of me.

    I don’t think I’ve ever turned so red in my entire life.

    My wife is from a culture where touching in general is limited (hugging her mother is a challenge) and apparently this girl had never done it to anyone else (apparently only guys and I was the first to show up).
    I’m from a no PDA family background as well.

    We were both doing a wtf? Laughed it off and got caught up on cultural differences but still, surprising.

  • Tasmin

    @HanSolo
    Absent the Mormon aspect, my youth was similar. Years of being shy, small, and awkward meant no female attention until my 11th year when a series of extremely fortuitous events revealed an aptitude in sport. And I grew ever so slightly which netted me one GF. College was good, but a lot of work, almost no free time. I was fit and smart and all of that work netted me one GF.

    My 20′s and half of my 30′s were sunk into a career and one relationship. I guess that is why young men like JJ pique my interest. They are getting all kind of messages thrown at them at a time in which they are just barely emerging from an SMV vacuum. Entering into those first relationships happens on very shaky ground in terms of self-assessment of SMV which makes it exceedingly difficult to feel like you are making informed decisions.

    I guess that is part of my point about what constitutes that information. I think a lot needs to come from within but it is disingenuous, particularly when coming from attractive women or the alpha-ish guys to discount the instability of most men at those decision points. The scarcity to abundance transition can take a decade – or more, if ever. And while we can debate how much of a role external female validation plays in this as opposed to whatever those self-produced efforts might be, it still matters.

    This doesn’t have to mean ONS and racking up N, but plenty of men will agree it is in the vein of what women say vs do and if they are not doing (or willing to do) you, not a whole lot else matters.

    And it can take a while to overwrite that rigid image of ourselves we painted in the dark, particularly when things like PI – as you have stated in your experience, can further warp that image, even to the point of a perpetual out of reach situation. Which is where I do think self-improvement and the practice of weening off of external input is an important part of growth. But there are a lot of men who do what they do, career or otherwise, because so much of life is about ‘getting the girl’ so we need to be careful how we approach this relative to young men who have only begun to ‘get the girl’.

    As for your N, I think the reaction supports that other people construct some image or placeholder for things like N based on your other revelations. A few hookups? ONS? well most women chalk that up as part of being an attractive man. But then it gets quantified and the image placeholder no longer holds. Its not just some history of shedding the restricted, some oversteering, and a bit of exploring your options, its 40+ vaginas and that is unacceptable. I think women who feel this way need to be waaaaaay more active about making their feelings known. Part of what keeps PI going is the fact that too few people challenge that loud minority viewpoint – or even provide their viewpoint at all. The silent majority needs to stand up and be heard. And given that in the mainstream and man who desires low N woman is marginalized, it is up to women to enforce their standards in voice and action.

    Given what Susan reports on the N discussions, I think I’ve probably got some PI regarding the how/when/where of the discussion coming up. Could be my age group too. I know with my last GF I was the only – or first in a long long time to even broach the sexual history in terms of N. And I did that because she gave me reason to (a sexually liberated/empowered modern women who used language and anecdotes in support of that image). By the time we sorted it out she claimed to actually be rather restricted (no ONS, N=10).

    But I could never get over that initial image because she was obviously trying to be attractive to a man that valued that image and I couldn’t trust her truth because it came in the shadow of that initial image, well after she was aware of where I stood on those matters. She was of the “numbers don’t matter” mindset even though her number was not all that high (or was it?), but because she chose to employ imagery over truth, her number became something that was needed to sort it all out. But because of all of that my ability to trust her entire history came into question. So it was still not really about the # as much as it was about appealing to that loud minority as opposed to her true self and trusting that there are men out there who value those things. Stupid Sex and the City. Or maybe I dodged a bullet. I’ll never know. It gets much tougher in the 30′s when there are babies at stake, that is for sure.

  • Morgasm

    POS to women:

    “I don’t like it when mate guarding/jealousy impedes on what I want to do in my life. The worst thing a guy can do is to attempt to tell me how to dress, in hopes that I’ll dress in ways that are viewed as less “provocative” to other men. I know how I dress, and I don’t dress in a slutty fashion. I also don’t like it when a guy tries to tell me who I can and cannot see, or how/where I can workout. I just find such behavior weak and absurd.”

    If any boyfriend shows the above signs; dump immediately. No questions asked or answered.

  • Bells

    Re: Spanish culture
    I’m close to a couple of Spanish families that kiss people on the cheeks upon meeting. At first, when I was younger, it was weird for me. My family is relatively touchy-feely but not that much. But now I love it! It makes me feel much more welcomed and accepted.

  • Iggles

    @ OTC:

    Perhaps you misread what I meant. With my purely hypothetical question, I was asking of the *third* is someone you’ve known and loved for years, not some stranger.

    Dude, that’s even worse!!!! It’s smacks of polyamory. Being in love/having romantic feelings and acting on it for more than one person!

    I’m honestly gobsmacked. A restricted person does not share — both physical intimacy & emotionally intimacy is given to one person.

    @ Ana:

    And I will admit that your high EQ mitigates the risk, IMO.

    Disagree with that. He can easily start caring so much about this female friend that I need to stick it in her vagina. Again I had seen all sorts of cheating men are capable of having emotional affairs first that become full fledged ones with the right circumstances. Even very restricted Hope keeps her contact with male friends limited even if she knows she will never cheat, high EQ people can also connect with other people in unappropriated ways unless they are vigilant about it.

    Excellent point! I didn’t think of that. It makes it even more risky in some ways :(

    @ All,
    Wow, this thread keeps growing! Will catch up to the rest when I get hope.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “Would you ever put your woman in situations where you appear to not mind her touching another man in any way? Would you ever make it seem like you are completely fine with such physical contact, even though you aren’t?”

    No and no. However, early on in a relationship when I am not yet clear on a woman’s affections I would not prevent such a situation if it were to spring up naturally.

    However, she would be well informed about what I find acceptable beforehand.

    ” Are such “shit-tests” okay for men to use on women?”

    If it works and it can be gotten away with, yes.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    If it works and it can be gotten away with, yes.

    Hmmmm. Interesting.

  • HanSolo

    @Anacaona

    Yes, HanSolo is more fitting for me than Luke. I have a bit of a past, just like Han, but I have a good heart and will end up married with kids, just like Han left Jabba and smuggling behind.

    @Hope

    The flirting wasn’t just one way, FTR! ;) And love and marriage are two of my highest long-term priorities, N aside. I was giving her my POV that a virgin didn’t mean there weren’t men that wouldn’t be turned off by that. I would to this day not rule out a woman for being a virgin. I don’t think it was a fail on your part. We’re not compatible but I still think she’s a great person. I won’t put words in her mouth but I get the sense she feels the same way.

    @Ted D

    I love having you here! You never cease to come up with great lines that make me LMAO:

    choosing Han is a red flag?! Luke was far too pansy even in my Blue Pill days

    Luke was too whiney in episode IV, and V for that matter.

    I would have no moral dilemma with killing him in cold blood. And I’d feel like I was doing good for the world in the process. Scary stuff, which is why you won’t find me hanging out with cultists.

  • Morgasm

    “He thought he could do better, but he can’t.

    As karma would have it, he started losing his hair not long after the break up. Dude is still under 30 and he has lost so much of his looks. ”

    LOL! I luuuuuurrrrrrrve how karma is such a bitch!

  • HanSolo

    “LOL! I luuuuuurrrrrrrve how karma is such a bitch!”

    Only karma?

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    I always have difficulty accepting things I cannot rationally understand. And I simply can’t understand the unrestricted mindset.

    You and me both pal. But I don’t understand logarithms either and yet the bastards exist.

    Excellent point! I didn’t think of that. It makes it even more risky in some ways.

    I really don’t like to put more or less risky in one side. Both are risks. IME relationshipS that last people are the ones that connect mentally, emotionally and spiritually. You cannot just rely in one thing keeping your relationship together and cheating proof. Regular sex and regular emotional connection and being guarded from forming this connections outside your partner is the only thing that works in the long run.
    I might add that during the assortative mating age I would had been a bit more lenient on risks. Limited amount of single people, strong punishments for cheating,divorce and poaching would had make only the most risky prone and unrestricted guys a risk, so I probably wouldn’t be so harsh. Now we live in an age were sexual misconduct is considered normal and human so I will say is better to err in the side of precaution, YMMV.

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

      I might add that during the assortative mating age I would had been a bit more lenient on risks. Limited amount of single people, strong punishments for cheating,divorce and poaching would had make only the most risky prone and unrestricted guys a risk, so I probably wouldn’t be so harsh.

      I agree with this. Society kept both sexes in line. Infidelity is increasing pretty dramatically:

      University of Washington researchers have found that the lifetime rate of infidelity for men over 60 increased to 28 percent in 2006, up from 20 percent in 1991. For women over 60, the increase is more striking: to 15 percent, up from 5 percent in 1991.

      The researchers also see big changes in relatively new marriages. About 20 percent of men and 15 percent of women under 35 say they have ever been unfaithful, up from about 15 and 12 percent respectively.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/health/28well.html?_r=0

  • Morgasm

    Susan: If I had to boil sociosexuality down to one question, it would be whether one believes sex is ideally a feel-good recreational activity or an emotional, even spiritual union between two people who love one another. ”

    – Spiritual in what sense?

    Susan: “Despite your unrestricted scores, my sense is that you are in the latter camp.”

    OTC Reply: “Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the rose-colored glasses for the alpha! It’s funny how despite our past behavior and even self-reported desires doesn’t matter. You really do get a “free pass” based on looks and success.”

    Reverse Osmosis: “Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the rose-colored glasses for the Hot Beautiful Babe! It’s funny how despite their past behavior and even self-reported desires doesn’t matter. They really do get a “free pass” based on looks”

  • Joe

    @Susan (to Mike C.)

    Every time you say you find some of the comments by other commenters “surreal,” you are being passive aggressive. High 5′ing people who agree with you is also PA. So is referring to someone else as wearing a neon Restricted badge. All passive aggressive.

    I’m not trying to be snide here, but I really don’t understand the term “passive aggressive”.

    This is one time when Googling doesn’t seem to help – all the definitions seem either ad. hoc. or contradictory to me. The only consistent meaning I see is “That thing you do? That’s passive-aggressive.”

    And honestly, it seems to be some sort of invective hurled at men a majority of the time.

    Can anyone help me out here? Is asking the question me being passive-aggressive?

  • Morgasm

    Lokland, “Hypothetical question, is a woman with an N=3, two women and her husband in two separate threesomes more or less restricted than a woman N=10-12 with multiple ONSs. ”

    If the threesomes where at the husband’s initial request and not her’s, then he would be the one we see as un-restricted.

  • Escoffier

    Well, WADR, I think Susan is wrong about Mike C here. First, I don’t think agreeing with others is aggressive at all, passive or otherwise. Second, the other two things she cites are just straight out active-aggressive. Mike spoke directly to those he was calling out.

    Passive aggressive is indirect. So, say there is a poster “Jim” who always says a certain thing (“Vanilla is the best, chocolate is terrible”) and then “Scott” likes to post that chocolate is the best and vanilla is terrible and everyone knows it, except for certain idiots. And he does this every time Jim voices his opinion. Then when Jim says, “Come on dude, you got a problem with me?” Scott says, “What, don’t be paranoid, man, I didn’t say anything about you.”

    That’s passive aggressive.

  • Escoffier

    Sassy, suppose you had a guy you really liked but there was something he wanted from you, like, tone down the clothes a little. Would you always take that as a sign of weakness or could you imagine liking some guy enough that you agreed to bend his way a little, even if you thought the clothes you were worried about were perfectly fine?

  • Morgasm

    “I also never had anyone demand/require that I submit proof of an STD test. Is that common these days?”

    Oraquick is the first in home HIV test that allows you or your partner to get results in 20 minutes!

    http://www.oraquick.com/

    Available at Wal-mart, CVS, Walgreens, etc.

  • Joe

    @Esco

    Passive aggressive is indirect.

    Sure. Thanks.

    But I get into trouble then, using your example, when passive-aggressive is used as a knock against politeness. Person A means to say that the politeness of person B is beyond extreme and into the region of phony, but has decided to stretch the meaning because the person B is just disliked.

    Sigh.

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

      @Joe

      Passive aggressive comments are those made in apparent earnestness, though the speaker has an agenda. For example:

      PA: Some of the comments here strike me as surreal.

      Real Message: You people are totally out of touch with reality.

      PA: __________, I really respect your honesty about the hypergamous nature of women. Few women are candid enough to admit they’d cheat on their husbands in a heartbeat if a movie star offered them a ONS.

      Real Message: Women are feral creatures who have no sense of loyalty and cannot love a man fully.

      Do you see? Women are experienced practitioners of this dubious art. It’s not often I see men use it.

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

    I think that an important component in the male restricted vs unrestricted continuum debate concerns opportunities. Restrictions may be imposed by the environment rather than by some internal compass that would, to raise a hypothetical and extreme case, have a restricted, single man turning down a 3some opportunity with Alice Goodwin and Kate Upton because he doesn’t love them.

    I’m not cynically suggesting that all men would be players if they could, but I do feel comfortable saying that idealized male sexuality is generally more
    unrestricted than is comparable female sexuality. There are some unusual well-disciplined male restricteds here at HUS.

  • Escoffier

    The essense of passive aggressiveness is plausible deniability. The more overt it is, the less passive it is. Then again, the more covert it is, the greater the chance that the target won’t feel attacked and get annoyed, which is the whole point. It’s like all form of subtlety in communication. You can be so subtle that absolutely nobody picks up on what you’re getting at.

    Like so many things, there are trade-offs.

  • Morgasm

    “Many educational studies like PISA have shown that school performance is not purely determined by scholarly achievements. Apart from students’ efforts, there are other criteria that influence school grades. One of these is the physical attractiveness of students, an aspect that has largely been ignored in national educational studies up to now. Based on a sample of three secondary high school classes in a large GERMAN city we tested the extent to which school grades are affected by the physical appearance of students and whether this effect is moderated by the so-called “beauty is beastly” effect. The results of our empirical analysis show that school grades are significantly influenced by physical attractiveness. We could, however, not find any support for the “beauty is beastly” effect.”

    Wow, that’s interesting, but Germany? Really? They are not generally a good looking stock of people so it makes sense that on the odd occasion a good looking student does surface, he or she would be favored because its so rare.

    I’d like to see the same study conducted in a more aesthetically gifted country.

  • Morgasm

    Deidre March 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    One of my first boyfriends – who I wasn’t having sex with, but anyway – once went on a date with another girl while we were dating because “he never thought he could get a girl like her.”

    I was totally the safety net and while we on and off dated for a while, eventually I couldn’t handle being the one he turned to when he had no other options (when we broke up he told me “I thought we were going to get married one day”).

    He basically lowered his value so much by that one date early in on in our “on and off” again relationship that I could never ever consider him as a serious boyfriend.

    I think if JJ has these questions, he needs to break up with his girlfriend. Figure them out. Start anew.
    __________

    Wow what an a**shole, Deirdre!

    I’m beginning to think that perhaps JJ is correct in his thinking that he in fact does not deserve his girlfriend and she could indeed do better, if he is thinking of what his options might be while declaring un-dying love for her.

    Set her free and allow her to find a sincere man.

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

    I can believe the attractiveness/grading stuff. I feel it sometimes tugging at me, like psychic gravity, when I am grading a student’s exam or paper. Active counter-measures are necessary: I personally have to mask the names on all of the tests before I grade them.

    There are whole volumes of experiments in the social science literature that show how pronounced these types of biases really are. Fascinating stuff.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan, thanks for sharing those parts of the study. I think those would be the in-the-abstract results that people say. However, when the rubber meets the road, things are likely to get stretched a bit.

  • HanSolo

    ADBG

    Wherefore, wherefore art thou?

    You asked me to say what could be done to change things and I answered and not I’m curious what you think.

    Cheers.

  • Morgasm

    BB, ”

    I can believe the attractiveness/grading stuff. I feel it sometimes tugging at me, like psychic gravity, when I am grading a student’s exam or paper. Active counter-measures are necessary: I personally have to mask the names on all of the tests before I grade them.

    There are whole volumes of experiments in the social science literature that show how pronounced these types of biases really are. Fascinating stuff.”

    Isn’t there a tipping point though? Like an acceptable threshold of attractive looks that are considered signs of intelligence but once a man or woman gets to the “too attractive” or “extreme good looks” level, he or she is considered kind of dumb, or someone that only got by in life based on looks alone?

  • Mike C

    Mike C, you, like my brother, have a very different style of thinking and communication from me. But the same sense keeps you thirsting for justice, also has him devoted to my dad, unstintingly and matter-of-factly without complaint. So I am so grateful that he and you are both around. :) Peace–

    Jackie,

    I remember reading once some of the characteristics of ISTJs, and one of the things we are known for is a strong sense of duty. I think we tend to very much believe there is a “right” way and a “wrong” way. Sometimes, that probably comes across as stubborn, but with an ISTJ you know what you get. This may sound odd, but one of the things that has been toughest on me with my Mom is the inner angst and turmoil of am I fulfilling my duty to be a good son versus balancing having the time to do the things I know I must do to reach my own personal goals. I hope this doesn’t sound selfish but I was very frustrated in Oct through December….the heart attack occurred in early October. I had dropped nearly 20 pounds from July through end of September, and when this happened my exercise schedule and diet went to hell and I basically gained it all back by end of December. Since the beginning of 2013, I’ve lost about 15 pounds and I want to lose another 30-40 pounds by my wedding date. I’m lucky in that I’ve can maintain a very high muscle mass level with ease, but I am very unlucky in keeping my bodyfat down. I pretty much have to exercise 5 days a week, 1.5 hours per day to lose bodyfat, and keep it off. I want to visit my Mom and support her recovery because I do feel that sense of duty, but I very much want to get this weight off for both my own health and to look my best on my wedding day.

    Saywhaat,

    Thanks for the well wishes towards my Mom, and I am sorry to hear your relationship didn’t work out. IIRC, this was your first serious and sexual one I’ve been there and I remember being depressed for probably like 3-4 months. That sadness eventually ends. I know that sounds cliche, but it is true. Try to keep yourself busy so you don’t dwell on it, and do lots of activities with friends.

    Tasmin,

    Phenomenal comment. Your points about that realizing SMV value are so accurate. I went through a similar process to Han where my looks didn’t develop until my early twenties, and I felt like I needed that validation of being attractive. The fact is you cannot really believe it unless you actually have real women demonstrating it to you. If I have time, I want to come back to alot of your comment later.

    Interesting stuff on SOs talking about other people being hot/attractive. I have to admit that it really doesn’t bother me one bit although it might depend on the specific reference and how it is brought up. If we were out and about on our daily lives, and she said “hey, check out how hot that guy is” that would bother me, but she routinely remarks on celebrities. I know she thinks Hugh Jackman and Josh Duhamel are both hot, and I’ll often joke when Josh Duhamel comes on “Hey, your boy is on TV”. She’ll point out hot chicks to me on her fitness magazines or other fitness competitors and I’ll simply agree “Yeah, she is hot”.

    Re Han’s N. Perhaps it is a generational thing with Millenials and Gen Xer’s being different in this regard, but I was almost never asked my N. I think the difference between what is being stated here by the women versus what Han has actually experienced is very, very, very, very, very telling. There is a lot you can draw from that divergence. Suffice it to say, the more obviously attractive a man is like Han the more most women will simply assume he probably has a high N and not bother asking. I’m trying to remember our conversation, and I think my fiancee only asked because I asked hers, and I remember her being surprised how low my number was. IMO, what happens here is that for women where a highish N is likely to be a dealbreaker they are going to immediately filter out guys that look like Han right off the bat. The women who it isn’t a dealbreaker but are attracted to what is obviously an attractive guy are simply going to go with the flow without asking as Han’s direct experience attests to.

    Susan,

    Would you come to my house and refuse to have a beer with Megaman?

    Probably, but he probably feels the same.

    I believe INTJ is the only person Megaman disrespects here, and it is not without provocation.

    That is your judgement about their being sufficient provocation. I could easily make the same claim. In any case, it’s gone overboard, to the point where some other commenters felt necessary to chime in and tell Megaman to cut that shit out with INTJ (I forget who it was). I’m going to ask you to rethink carefully whether you really think it comes across as fair-minded on your part to turn a complete blind eye to Megaman’s repeated attacks on INTJ, yet to threaten me with “banning” for one single attack on him. That is the sort of thing that seems very arbitrary and makes it looks like you have two sets of rules, one for your “favorites” which Megaman is now part of, and one for other people.

    You essentially dismiss and attack him with snark for being restricted in his sexuality.

    This is absolutely, categorically false. I don’t attack him for being “restricted”. I would introduce as exhibit 1 into testimony the totality of my commenting towards Jackie, Ana, and Hope as prima facie proof that claim is utterly bogus. In Hope’s case, I’ve sung her praises along with Jackie. Being unrestricted, if I were single, if the world was full of Jackies and Hopes that would work against my direct self-interest, yet I would hold them both up as models that women should aspire to. There would be alot more happy relationships and marriages if I could just clone them over and over again. So…no…it has nothing to do with restricted…it has to do with his tone, and for God’s sake the stupid emoticons he ends every post with. It is the equivalent of reading a female comment filled to the brim with lulz.

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

      @Mike C

      I’m going to ask you to rethink carefully whether you really think it comes across as fair-minded on your part to turn a complete blind eye to Megaman’s repeated attacks on INTJ, yet to threaten me with “banning” for one single attack on him.

      Fair enough, I will give this some thought. I do feel as if Megaman has often been fighting a one-man battle for the truth. He is a non-Game person, but an incredibly thoughtful and well-informed person. He has provided 100 times the support for his arguments than all the “anecdotal evidence” fans put together. He does the legwork, and he shares his findings. I appreciate his effort very much. Because his factual evidence often convincingly refutes your anecdotal evidence, I believe you feel threatened by him and defensive about his presence.

      However. That does not mean he should not be held to the same standards of conduct. On one occasion I did chastise him for stepping over the line. HanSolo is the one who came to INTJ’s aid and argued with Megaman re some stats on one occasion.

      So…no…it has nothing to do with restricted…it has to do with his tone, and for God’s sake the stupid emoticons he ends every post with. It is the equivalent of reading a female comment filled to the brim with lulz.

      It’s true you’re nice to the restricted women, but you definitely distance yourself from all the restricted men. You’ve called them outliers on numerous occasions and generally failed to comprehend their POV – I think this is solipsism, though, not a real attempt to put them down.

      Re Megaman’s comment style, what’s it to you? Who are you to say what’s female in online communication? If you don’t want to read his comments, don’t. Personally, I don’t care for your bolding phrases with three asterisks on each side – it’s the equivalent of shrieking. Yet I’ve never mentioned it before, I just ignore it.

      Bottom line: I don’t like it when people are confrontational and mean. I promise to apply that standard equally in future, and you can call me out if I fail to do so.

  • JJ

    Thanks for featuring my email on your blog. I really appreciate the diversity of comments from your readers. Obviously some comments are more helpful than others but there was something to learn from each of them. I saw your email yesterday night but I’d felt that it’d be better to send a reply after reading more comments.

    “JJ resents or might resents his low N”

    Being in a college environment, especially with knowledge of the hook-up culture makes it seem like the sky’s the limit when it comes to meeting and dating women. Furthermore, with the ability to meet dozens of new women each term in class and at events, it’s very tempting to extend one’s rod and see what picks up. My main motivation was probably to want what others have including careers, academic success, and women. I know it’s unhealthy but nowadays, especially with social media, it can seem a bit overwhelming.

    However, I don’t regret having a low N. It seems like an arbitrary statistic. I’d rather have had the chance to date my high school crush than to have done it with 10 random girls.

    “JJ wants a better girlfriend”

    I’m quite happy with my girlfriend and the relationship we have. She’s the first girl in which I have experienced attraction without feeling overly obsessed and insecure. I guess that’s also why she likes me more than any girl have shown in the past. Sometimes I do envy guys with more attractive girlfriends, but I also realize that my girlfriend is probably more compatible for me than those more attractive girls. I think love is not mutually exclusive with temporary moments of doubt. Also, I’ve only known my girlfriend since October so I don’t think it’s realistic for me to fall in love with her or seriously contemplate marriage. I like her a lot but a lot of you seem to think that I’ve already decided that I won’t marry her… How can I even make a decision when we’re both young (she’s even younger than me) and haven’t known each other that well?

    Reading all those advice has made me feel more comfortable in my current situation, especially since I was probably more insecure than usual when I’d written the email two weeks ago. Obviously, I’ll definitely remain in my relationship (without cheating). After the incident, I realized that whatever “ego-boosting” I’ll get from females will be risky and ultimately a waste of time.

    Susan’s post #93 was probably the most helpful. I’d use to think that cheating only occurs when there’s sex involved. However, I now agree with Susan’s definition of cheating. It seems too likely to proceed past the point of no return… and I hate being a hypocrite.

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

      @JJ

      Thanks for leaving a comment. I know it must feel strange to be the subject of such scrutiny. The thing I would stress is that you are still very young. You will have plenty of time to date as much as you want to, and also to apply yourself to career pursuits. Your SMV will only rise over time. I agree with Han – don’t throw away something of great value. Life will intervene soon enough and potentially separate you when you graduate. If you behave with honesty and integrity you will have nothing to regret.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Escoffier

    Sassy, suppose you had a guy you really liked but there was something he wanted from you, like, tone down the clothes a little. Would you always take that as a sign of weakness or could you imagine liking some guy enough that you agreed to bend his way a little, even if you thought the clothes you were worried about were perfectly fine?

    It may sound harsh, but I would probably always take such suggestions as a sign of weakness. I like the way I dress. While in a relationship, I know that I don’t dress in ways to intentionally solicit outside male attention. It will happen, however, regardless of what I wear or do. I can’t help that.

    What I don’t like is for a man to try to exert his will over my wardrobe. I like the way that I look. I don’t think that I dress provocatively. If a man isn’t comfortable with my wardrobe, perhaps he shouldn’t date me. I don’t see my taste in clothing changing any time soon. Whenever a man has tried to make me change my outfits or wardrobe, I instinctively push back. I don’t like it when a man tries to control what I wear.

    In my opinion, a man wants to control what I wear for two reasons.

    1. He doesn’t like the male attention I receive from how I dress myself.

    2. He doesn’t trust me or trust how I will react to the aforementioned men that give me attention.

    Both scenarios scream insecurity to me. If a man can’t trust that I will remain faithful to him, despite what I wear, I consider that a problem.

  • Mike C

    Well, WADR, I think Susan is wrong about Mike C here.

    LOL…I appreciate you pointing this out….but remember last time :) ….this didn’t end well with you defending me. (humor)

    First, I don’t think agreeing with others is aggressive at all, passive or otherwise.

    Yeah, this makes no sense as an example of aggression. It is a bit odd as well…because numerous people here routinely post COSIGN to posts or + 1 or + 1000 or whatever INCLUDING SUSAN HERSELF, but when I do it, it is an “act of aggression”? C’mon now.

    Second, the other two things she cites are just straight out active-aggressive. Mike spoke directly to those he was calling out.

    Yeah, I’ll cop to this. I am aggressive or at least can be. I’ll own that. I’ve got no problem admitting that. I actually do try to tap it down quite considerably when I comment here. I’m like Ted though…if we unleashed our full frontal verbal style then you’d really see what aggression is. If one takes note though, there are certain commenters who I almost never get aggressive with. For example, Hope and I have responded to each other a great number of times in the few years we’ve both read and posted here. I think she would tell you I’ve never gotten aggressive with her ever. I’m not a verbal bully just for shits and giggles, but if you push me I push you back 100 times harder. The best way for me not to be aggressive is do NOT get aggressive with me first either active or passive. I think where things can get really, really bad really really fast is when someone locks horns with me and decides they have to keep upping the ante and escalating rather than just back down. But I really am going to try hard to avoid that escalating spiral.

    Passive aggressive is indirect. So, say there is a poster “Jim” who always says a certain thing (“Vanilla is the best, chocolate is terrible”) and then “Scott” likes to post that chocolate is the best and vanilla is terrible and everyone knows it, except for certain idiots. And he does this every time Jim voices his opinion. Then when Jim says, “Come on dude, you got a problem with me?” Scott says, “What, don’t be paranoid, man, I didn’t say anything about you.”

    That’s passive aggressive.

    Good example, and if I were inclined I could dig up a ton of examples of exactly this sort of thing taking place.

  • HanSolo

    @JJ

    You sound pretty reasonable.

    On one hand you say it’s quite good but on the other you don’t seem jumping off the walls ecstatic. That’s life. Do to many factors a lot of people may never find that “perfect” person but they can find a really good one.

    I think it makes sense to see where a good thing can go. That doesn’t mean you have to marry her (or that she will even want to down the road) but take it from someone who was too picky back in the day and it’s definitely worth giving a good thing more of a chance to see if a stronger and deeper love can develop.

    Good luck.

  • Sassy6519

    I figured N of 20 tops. That’s high for a late starter. 8 girls a year for 5 years? That takes serious focus and work, even for a player. Roosh doesn’t do half that well.

    I thought HanSolo’s N count was somewhere between 15 and 25 partners. I was not expecting 40ish. That number is insane.

  • Morgasm

    “Being in a college environment, especially with knowledge of the hook-up culture makes it seem like the sky’s the limit when it comes to meeting and dating women.”

    Since you’re in college and mention hook-up culture, Susan here, as well as myself, have posited that its a minority of students who are hooking up with each other, rotating amongst themselves, while most other students are in boyfriend/girlfriend relationships or friends with benefits.

    So the conclusion, here at least, is that the promiscuous, partner rotating, pussy coaster/cock carousel riders are coasting and riding on each other, within a small pool.

    True or false?

    “Furthermore, with the ability to meet dozens of new women each term in class and at events, it’s very tempting to extend one’s rod and see what picks up.”

    Extend one’s rod?

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

      Extend one’s rod?

      I got a chuckle out of that one myself.

  • Mike C

    I think that an important component in the male restricted vs unrestricted continuum debate concerns opportunities. Restrictions may be imposed by the environment rather than by some internal compass that would, to raise a hypothetical and extreme case, have a restricted, single man turning down a 3some opportunity with Alice Goodwin and Kate Upton because he doesn’t love them.

    Bastiat, yup, we are on the same page here. This is exactly what I meant with my comment about some guys “making necessity a virtue”. It is somewhat convenient to say “Well, I don’t really want X anyways”, when the fact of the matter is X isn’t a realistic option anyways. That isn’t to say I don’t believe some guys are authentic with their principles. I can be pretty confident that Tim Tebow isn’t blowing smoke up my ass when he talks about choices he has made. It is a bit more unclear if the super dork at the comic book convention is simply backwards rationalizing the only reality he could possibly have.

  • Iggles

    I’m home, just mopped and am waiting for the floors to dry. Perfect time for HUS :lol:

    @ SayWhaat:

    Ah, forgot to address this, but your explanation is probably better than how mine would have turned out. +1  :D

    Thanks!

    @ Lokland:

    @Iggles
    So basically male porn is bad, female porn is okay?

    No. I did not give a morality judgments. Just pointing out for a lot of women reading romance novels =/= mindfucking, because they arent picturing THEMSELVES having sex with strangers or men they know in real life. What turns them on is reading about the fantasy couple having sex.

    Case in point, I’ve read a ton of gay male erotica over the years (thank you dial up internet). I’m the wrong gender to be one of the protagonists and I don’t picture myself “jumping in”. It’s very different from a woman reading a romance novel and envisioning herself as the main character. Now, I don’t have numbers but I’d venture that a large number of women do the former and smaller group do the latter (case in point, Twilight fans are notorious for “Mary Sue” fan fiction stories!).

    @ SW:

    Nor is Megaman alone in his frustration with INTJ’s commentary.

    No flames, but I do see a kernel of truth here…

    @ Ana:

    Let’s use another example. If a man sleeps with another man ONCE and doesn’t feel is a mistake he might not be homosexual but he cannot claim to be pure heterosexual either, can he?

    Although God knows they try. I wonder where Herb is according to him this actually makes sense. It doesn’t to me but whatevs…

    Good analogy! Oh, the mighty male hamster is strong with this one..

    I wouldn’t call a man who has had a sexual encounter with another man and enjoyed it straight. Nor would I call a woman who has made out/had sexual contact with another woman straight.

    If both cases I’d see them as bisexual, albeit they may lean more towards the opposite sex.

    @ Sassy:

    See, this is the kind of dynamic I have had with a few men. I don’t become upset if they tell me that they find another woman attractive. When I say something similar about another man, however, their reactions are not the same. They get jealous, and it strains the relationship.

    I try to avoid commenting about other men’s attractiveness around my boyfriend. I don’t think he needs to know every time I find a guy hot. I don’t want to know when he finds girls hot.

  • Mike C

    I figured N of 20 tops. That’s high for a late starter. 8 girls a year for 5 years? That takes serious focus and work, even for a player. Roosh doesn’t do half that well.

    I think Han is much better looking than Roosh. I’m believing that the more “unrestricted” a woman is, the more her sexuality resembles a typical male and therefore she is more visually oriented than the average girl. If this is true, and I think it is, than a good-looking man with even mediocre to just slightly above average game should actually have a much higher success./close rate with unrestricted women than an ugly guy like Roosh who has super tight Game. I wonder if this hypothesis has been tested. It would settle once and for all the Looks versus Game debate that many guys will debate to the death.

    I have to admit I’m surprised by the number given the fact that I think Han said he doesn’t really hit the bar/club scene. I don’t know where else you could possibly meet that many prospects that you could approach, try to get the number, meet up, etc.

  • Bells

    I was also surprised by the N as well. I was expecting the crazy but not bat-shit crazy.

  • Morgasm

    “No. I did not give a morality judgments. Just pointing out for a lot of women reading romance novels =/= mindfucking,
    “because they arent picturing THEMSELVES having sex with strangers or men they know in real life. ”

    - I’m sure some must be, maybe even a lot.

    “So basically male porn is bad, female porn is okay? ”

    “No. I did not give a morality judgments.”

    - Why not?
    Books don’t involve real people and are not dependent on preying upon broken people when they’re down and out, even at their lowest point in life, for the purpose of exploiting them via the sex industry. Books also do not depend upon the international sex trafficking trade.

    I don’t understand this “no judgement” culture.

    ” I’m believing that the more “unrestricted” a woman is, the more her sexuality resembles a typical male and therefore she is more visually oriented than the average girl. ”

    - You’d be right but probably not in the way you’re thinking.
    We’ve already established that most men probably have lower sex partner numbers than most women in general, right? So those females who are more visually oriented than the average girl have lower numbers than them, numbers closer to the average man, simply because exceptionally good looking men are rare in the population and it is even rarer to get a relationship, or even sex, going with them.

    Therefore those of us who hold aesthetics high are the most restrictive.

  • Escoffier

    Roosh can’t pull 8 girls/year? Seems way low to me. Though, he is never very clear on how well he does, but the impression he leaves is that it’s a lot higher.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    (case in point, Twilight fans are notorious for “Mary Sue” fan fiction stories!).
    Everybody accuses Twihards of being the best example of hypergamy when this is only the minority. And I had been a twihard since 2009 90% of fanfiction are various ways in which Bella and Edward end up together or expand on the parts we didn’t saw in the books. The twihards that try to insert themselves in the story are minority and usually mocked by the sane ones, specially when they are not even good at hiding it.

  • Morgasm

    “Don’t worry Bells, I knew exactly what you meant. But as a guy it is always a little bit funny to hear the incredibly effective things like a honey-tongue viewed so negatively. Particularly in light of the fact that prior to the N>40, that very tongue had so often eloquently tickled the females here into quite a frothy lot.”

    Its because the readers here correlate N with character.
    The men will be happy to receive attention from a physically attractive female, well overjoyed is more like it, and they might even try to bed and will certainly bed her if she initiates that, but they would think twice before committing to her based on her looks, charm, etc, alone.

    Same goes for the women readers.
    The readers here don’t value high N in either sex.

  • Morgasm

    “Few women are candid enough to admit they’d cheat on their husbands in a heartbeat if a movie star offered them a ONS. ”

    I know that was just an example to illustrate another point about PA, but I wonder how many men are candid enough to admit the same?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    Sassy, you do sort of have unrealistic standards for men. My husband for example has commented that I shouldn’t wear too revealing clothes outside and it’s for his eyes only, but I don’t see it as controlling.

    I think your desire for aloofness is somewhat rooted in your past, almost as if you don’t want to be cared for deeply by a man… could be indicative of attachment issues. The way you don’t want to show weakness or jealousy could be related to that as well.

    I understand that I may hold men to somewhat unrealistic standards. I don’t know what standards I can let go of and still be happy with a guy, however. I need to whittle down my checklist a bit, and I get that.

    I will contest the notion that I don’t want a man to care about me deeply. I definitely want a man that cares about me a lot. I would just like a guy to show me that he cares about me in ways that I understand. I know that people have different ways of communicating their affections, or showing their affections. I simply don’t understand or appreciate too much clingy behavior or controlling behavior. I’d like to meet a guy who communicates his feelings for me in ways that I like and understand. Some people like gifts. Others like compliments. I like physical affection and spending quality time together. I understand those. I don’t understand or like a man trying to control how I dress. I may like a somewhat more aloof style of love because I understand and appreciate it.

  • Lokland

    @Iggles

    “Just pointing out for a lot of women reading romance novels =/= mindfucking, because they arent picturing THEMSELVES having sex with strangers or men they know in real life. What turns them on is reading about the fantasy couple having sex.”

    This makes a couple of large assumptions, most of which are unfounded;
    a) most women don’t place themselves in the book;
    b) most men place themselves in the porn;
    c) reading the book (as a first or third party) has no negative effect on that persons relationship ; (this is what I would argue, both for porn and romance novels, regardless of first or third person view).

  • SayWhaat

    I have yet to hear of any woman actually demanding to see test results.

    I did…I asked my ex to get tested and he showed me his most recent test results. I still have that email somewhere.

    I’m pretty paranoid about STDs. Does this mean that I will look strange for requesting paperwork? What if I show him my paperwork as well?

    I am not looking forward to dating again.. : /

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

      @SayWhaat

      I’m pretty paranoid about STDs. Does this mean that I will look strange for requesting paperwork? What if I show him my paperwork as well?

      It’s 100% legit! All of the women who find out they have caught STDs are the ones who did not ask! (Or who didn’t have all three HPV vaccines.)

      I’ve mentioned before that my BFF is the head doc at Tufts University Student Health Services. We discussed the STD question recently, because it’s a common reason for students to make an appointment. Here’s the bottom line:

      HPV: The vaccines cover the four most common strains, but there are 80 strains in all. Guys cannot be tested, and it is contagious from the thighs and abdomen – a condom serves no purpose here. The good news is that the kind that causes the most cervical cancer is covered by the vaccine. Women who don’t get all three might as well be totally unprotected.

      Herpes: Many men are silent carriers – perhaps as many of 80% of men infected have never had an outbreak. Women can also be silent carriers, but are more likely to suffer outbreaks. Many people who know they have herpes fall back on the plausible deniability of being a silent carrier when they transmit the disease. My friend believes that it is extremely rare for anyone to confess to being infected up front. For those who are silent carriers, and really don’t know, only a blood test can detect the antibodies. However, my friend does not believe it is warranted or even desirable to test everyone’s blood, because it would create an enormous pool of people who are silent carriers and sharing the virus who would suddenly be forced to confess herpes infection before any sexual encounter. When in fact, many people who do have the antibodies will never have symptoms.

      Bottom line: these are the two incurable STDs (also HIV, but this is increasingly rare among college students). Every other STD can be treated, in which case a test result is nice, but the worst can happen is an antibiotic horse pill. I have literally seen women praying for a chlamydia diagnosis. In fact, I took a girl to the ER and she was earnestly praying for chlamydia, gonorrhea or syphilis. She knew she had something, and when it was chlamydia she collapsed into my arms in relief.

  • SayWhaat

    How did Roosh not do well in London? My understanding was that they are more promiscuous than we are! Lol.

  • Morgasm

    “I’m pretty paranoid about STDs. Does this mean that I will look strange for requesting paperwork? What if I show him my paperwork as well?”

    What worries me is that someone mentioned up thread that there comes a time in a dating relationship when the man asks to go “condom free” or has Swoosh would say, “raw dog”.

    Seriously?

    I’ve got to make a judgement call and say any woman who allows that is completely foolish.

  • Tasmin

    @Iggles
    “I try to avoid commenting about other men’s attractiveness around my boyfriend. I don’t think he needs to know every time I find a guy hot. I don’t want to know when he finds girls hot.”

    I’ve known some couples that seem to enjoy the constant reference to others in terms of sexy/attractive, etc. and those also tend to be the ones who are more open, comfortable with bringing up past lovers. Whatever works, but it should start from the golden rule. Personally, I find it distasteful and disrespectful so I just don’t do it. I’ve had a GF pry it out of me because I am so silent on the matter, but even then I was like “that girl in that movie with Clint Eastwood, the one with the…” because I can never seem to remember their names. I just don’t see how revealing any of that is useful, even just plain old nice.

    Couple of other important points. First, there is a huge difference between her saying “I think Hunky McHairdo on the VapidVampire Dairies show is hot” and “My boxing coach is hot”. There is a fantasy and reality line; you cross into the reality line and its a hop skip and a trip from PinV. One thing just lead to an other. Everyone has mental movies, random thoughts, and attraction is not turned off with the flip of a switch – with the caveat that indeed your taxi light should be off. FTR, my last GF’s boxing coach was hot, but she never said as much and I appreciated that very much.

    I tend to think that there is just as much subtle and not so subtle inappropriate attention seeking that drives jealousy as there is insecurity and other frailties. Controlling, possessive borderline abusive posturing by either men or women aside, many people just can’t kick the juice of that attention. I loved my last GF because she was only interested in MY attention and made that so very clear to me in all kinds of ways. That backless dress may have drawn the eyes of other men, but they went unmet. I only have eyes for you. Is even better in practice.

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

      Re how to dress around a man you really care for:

      Once you really like someone, err on the side of caution. One young woman asked me recently what to wear on a first date. She thought the guy was on the restricted side (my words, not hers), and she had high hopes for the date. She has a bangin’ body, but I said No Cleavage. Something that shows off your nice bum, and legs are good, but not too short a skirt. Anyway, they’ve made it to date 6 or so, and she told me that he recently said, “I like how you dress. It’s attractive, but classy.” Translation: no one would ever think you are a slut. Classy is what girls should be aiming for.

      This is important to men. A woman has the right to wear whatever she wants, of course. But that’s not necessarily the best strategy. Not if she’s looking for a LTR. Keep your assets under wraps, make him earn access, and don’t give any views away for free to other men.

  • Morgasm

    @Iggles
    “I try to avoid commenting about other men’s attractiveness around my boyfriend. I don’t think he needs to know every time I find a guy hot. I don’t want to know when he finds girls hot.”

    The reality here in the States is that there is a much larger percentage of objectively looking “hot” women than there are hot men.

    I seethed inside every time I caught my boyfriend from some years ago checking out other women or making comments about this one or that one. I was always thinking, “I’ll get him back next time we go out and I see a hot guy”. Problem is, I never saw a hot guy! LOL.

    My boyfriend was actually the hottest looking guy around (in my opinion).

    Sure I could have pretended to think some were hot just to piss him off, but then I’d have to bear him thinking I had bad taste.

    There was one time though when I actually stuttered when asking directions from a hot man and he did make fun of me for that. That was just one time in 2 years of dating him.

    But otherwise when he saw or suspected some men of being interested in me, he was never jealous. Perhaps because those men were not hot?

    Hot guys are rare and its not fair.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Han

    Wherefore, wherefore art thou?

    You asked me to say what could be done to change things and I answered and not I’m curious what you think.

    Cheers.

    I was working today. Don’t know what the rest of you bums do all day long :P
    Plus this isn’t the only website I visit. I have also been following a naval blog about possible cuts to naval aviation, and in particular I have been hearing disturbing rumors about the USN becoming a 6-carrier force. We might as well be French.
    There is also the need to discuss the “nuclear phantom.” What most people don’t realize is that nukes are not as destructive as they imagine, and that nations like France/UK/China are pursuing a minimal deterrence strategy, not a “destroy the enemy” strategy. The UK cannot destroy Russia, it can kill enough Russians that it does not advantage Russia to attack the UK.
    The US and the USSR are, of course, exceptions, and built their nuclear forces around the idea of fighting and WINNING a nuclear war. Because of this, the USSR at its height in the 1970s was quite capable of defeating the entire world combined, if not for the US nuclear arsenal.

    ANYWAYS, on the stuff that you are asking me about:
    I agree with you full stop, change the Alpha Mares and the whole herd shifts. Targeting individual women and trying to siphon them off is great for some of us beta guys that want to work at the margins, but the majority of women will never betray the herd and the Alpha Mares are the ones that lead the herd.

    If they and families continue to push this notion of sex-before-intimacy, career-before-all-else, etc, things will continue to get worse. If the gender war dynamic is given full faith and credit, Beta Men will be treated as enemies and pain will continue longer than necessary.

    And indeed the narrative needs to shift, but, ultimately, how do we make it in the interest of Alpha Mares to not allow this level of promiscuity? You would think they would already put the breaks on it! Letting 7s slut up THEIR men makes their men unwilling to commit and causes them to lose power.

    So that brings me to, maybe convincing the Alpha Mares isn’t enough. Maybe the problem is that Alpha Mares have lost control of this whole damn thing and can’t control the herd.

    Maybe not, maybe the Alpha Mares are just doubling down and that just leads me back to the narrative, and that is…

    Women seem to think they can “win.” They can “have it all.” If they just keep up the barrage, they can force men to commit, they can force men, in general, to cater to them, they can remake society to being more feminine, etc.

    And feminists encourage that, and those stats like 60% of women in college is just more evidence of “winning.” Come, come! Victory is just over that hill! With me!

    I would suggest not encouraging women to see men as the enemy and vice versa. I would also suggest sex before intimacy automatically will entail hurt feelings and will stop this process from occurring.

    On the other hand, the older generation is very, very dumb, and utterly clueless about what is happening. My parents have no idea what the term “casual sex” could even mean. My GF’s mother and one of her sisters are of the impression that since I believe in sex before marriage, she should break up with me and consider finding a “real” man.

    And like I said, she lives in the middle of a town where the average age is over 50, the bachelors are barely high school educated and barely employed, and there are only 17,000 people. The girls there are also quite pleasant, I would like to bring some of them down to Chicago and introduce them to my Beta friends.

    I have no idea how to make an overall strategy to change things, unfortunately. I am going to go with one person at a time.

  • Anne

    Susan – I have never actually read anything by Roosh or visited his blog until now, but I was intrigued by your links. Is it him in the “London sucks” video?

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

      @Anne

      I have never actually read anything by Roosh or visited his blog until now, but I was intrigued by your links. Is it him in the “London sucks” video?

      Yes. Ew.

  • Tasmin

    @SayWhaat
    “I’m pretty paranoid about STDs. Does this mean that I will look strange for requesting paperwork? What if I show him my paperwork as well?”

    I’d put this in the same box as other things that work to both satisfy what your need to be comfortable as well as communicate through your actions where you stand on such an important matter. IOW, losing (or inconveniencing or making them feel awkward) guys because you ask is filtering out men who either have something to hide, are not interested in you for the long haul, and/or do not otherwise share your views on sex.

    Like my 8th grade health teacher always said: “What’s more embarrassing/inconvenient/awkward, asking, testing, checking, or pissing liquid hot magma and/or waking up to a budding ecosystem on your johnson and going to the Dr. and finding out you have a new friend for life.”

    I ask. But I also do so in the context of providing mine. IME most women ask the question, but most are just going through the motions without the actual test happening and disclosure of results. Its a no-doc stated-income mortgage. Look how well those worked.

    I’, always impressed and encouraged when a woman took your position – and when I respond positively to their question, with actual back up, the overall comfort level elevates quite nicely on both sides. Hang tough.

  • Tasmin

    “The reality here in the States is that there is a much larger percentage of objectively looking “hot” women than there are hot men.”

    “Hot guys are rare and its not fair.”

    Holy shit. Susan, can we frame these somewhere. Comment of the thread. Sums up what is wrong in so many ways, too many for me – even armed with my meandering verbose prose to cover. Comments like these juts make me sleepy. I’m going to go do some push-ups and then eat a steak. Rare.

    Morg, here’s your chance to delete it before it becomes formal record.

    PS Where are all of the good men?

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

      @Tasmin

      Relax, it’s only Plain Jane venting. I was going to strenuously object to her claim, but then I figured why bother.

      For crying out loud, that claim makes zero sense. I’m quite certain that the distribution of good looks in the human population is identical between males and female in every country.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Two things in regards to Plain Jane:

    My boyfriend was actually the hottest looking guy around (in my opinion)

    “Hot guys are rare and its not fair.”

    Do you think being the “hottest guy around” is perhaps a major factor in “hot guys being rare”? Do you think that if you do not meet many men on a daily basis, you are more likely to consider each individual one attractive?

    Framing is everything and presentation is everything.
    http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/7800000/The-Wedding-Planner-justin-chambers-7838671-1024-576.jpg
    The guy on the right is the ugly, weird guy from the Wedding Planner

    http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3av7aq2Y51rv1i5yo1_500.jpg
    Here is how he is when Calvin Klein wants him to look good

    And this is how he is when he is a jerk on Grey’s Anatomy:
    http://static.tumblr.com/wiisx5i/Uaomc89nx/alexk.jpg

    But he reallllllyyyy has a heart of gold, don’t you know…
    http://natasharoses.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/6×08-alex-karev-9015889-1280-7202.jpg

    Perhaps part of the reason you find hot men so rare is that you are exposed to too many men, and many of us regular joes just look ugly in comparison?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    One comment in moderation. Damn links. I am sure the women will like them.

    Another thing to Plain Jane: The goal in finding a mate is not to optimize hotness. At least, that’s my philosophy

  • Tasmin

    I know. But the scary thing is that her views on this are not as rabid or rare as they should be.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Susan re: “friendship circles”

    To some extent, I think that this is already happening in that people self-select who they associate with based on IQ, shared values, etc. One issue is that Millennial women are very averse to judging. However, I do think that this judgment is implicit when they invariably “phase out” girlfriends from their social circles who don’t align with their group’s status quo, so you eventually end up with social circles more similar to yourself than you realize, especially as you age.

    So, I dunno…I think that it’s a gradual process that will accumulate over time. Girls will say “I don’t want to judge strippers”, but then they’ll do their damned best to make sure their own daughters don’t end up emulating Ke$ha. Hopefully a lot of girls have realized that their own casual sex experiences weren’t great, and will go to lengths to make sure their daughters don’t have to go through the same heartache.

    I think that Millennials will be more savvy than previous generations when it comes to talking to their children about the “birds and the bees”, which might mean that future generations will stumble less in the dark. We’re already seeing the double standard merge into the single standard shaming promiscuity, we might just be in the phase right now where sexual mores are still transitioning to another equilibrium.

  • SayWhaat

    (P.S. Thanks for the well wishes, Mike C.)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @Hope
    What is people is so afraid of trolls in the net? I was discussing an idea for an internet business with hubby and he told me that trolls will destroy it before it gains any momentum. I know PJ has managed to get away with it but many people have internet businesses it cannot be that bad, can it?

    (also HIV, but this is increasingly rare among college students)
    And the cure might be around the corner! :)

    @Sassy
    Had you considered that you might be the one that is a control freak about yourself? I mean everyone has to comply with some things in a relationship EVERYONE.
    My husband started to get professionals haircuts because his usual “I take the machine and chop it off in one minute” makes him look awful so he pleases me by spending some money in cutting his hair. I stopped wearing heels because he doesn’t like them, mostly because they are very unpractical for the average woman. He was quite impressed of how much I can walk and do stuff on them but he still doesn’t want me to wear them in a regular basis. I complied because is a small thing and I’m not the clothes I wear…Are you the clothes you wear? You seem death set on not changing an inch when you are in a relationship that is impossible. Unless you clone yourself and made a sex change operation on your clone.

  • SayWhaat

    But the scary thing is that her views on this are not as rabid or rare as they should be.

    Add-on to my comment about friendship circles. The few times I have brought up the issues of the SMP in conversation, people rarely disagree. It surprises me. Seems like a few people have manage to figure out the bullshit, even without HUS!

    In fact the only time I have ever encountered vehement disagreement from women is…wait for it…online. :)

  • Ted D

    Susan – “It’s true you’re nice to the restricted women, but you definitely distance yourself from all the restricted men. You’ve called them outliers on numerous occasions and generally failed to comprehend their POV – I think this is solipsism, though, not a real attempt to put them down.”

    Sorry Susan. I call BS here. I am by far one of the most restricted men at HUS, yet Mike C and I share a reciprocal beer agreement should we ever be in the same place at once. I’ve never once felt like he distances himself from me, but it may be my solipsism leading me to feel special…

    I’m honestly not picking sides, as I personally have no issues with Mike, Mega, INTJ, or for that matter anyone here. (Even PJ and Tom. Where is Tom anyway?). I have no desire to pick a side in any of this, but good grief can we at least keep it real? I think the issue for you (with both Mike and myself from time to time) is our aggressive communication style. And as Mike pointed out, you really have no idea of how aggressive he and I can get. I’m not proud of it, but I’ve made people burst into tears without raising my voice OR even intending to hurt their feelings. If I can manage that with no ill will or intent, a focused effort to verbally assault someone can get downright vicious. I have only ever done so a few times in my life, and it scared me a good bit. I’m rambling…

    My point is: I get that you sometimes feel like Mike C and/or I am attacking you with words. I promise you that for my part it is never intentional. I do my best to communicate here as if I’m holding a puppy or kitten. By that I mean I use a good to great deal of restraint here. I’m fairly certain Mike does the same. I don’t say this to get your thanks or appreciation though. I truly hope you understand that this is who I am, and it is largely why I’m so introverted. (Or maybe I have cause and effect backwards here…) it takes a great deal of effort on my part to be around “normal” people, because I really do just offend and piss them off often. And all with no ill will or intention on my part.

  • SayWhaat

    One more point about the friendship circles.

    The biggest thing for this method’s success is to make the benefits of being part of the circle clear and immense, and to enforce no tolerance for those who defect against the status quo. How that is implemented, I don’t have a real good idea. But it’s something to think about.

  • SayWhaat

    JJ,

    You seem to have a good head on your shoulders. It seems as though this relationship is really working for you. Even if it does end, you will have given it a fair shot and won’t have many regrets. Good luck. :)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    My impression is that Sassy comes across as emotionally distant yet very sexual and able to get high quality men. This might trigger slut-alerts in male hindbrains.

    Sorry Sassy :(

    Men do loyalty test their women and will be on the lookout for any sign of disloyalty. Any sign of disloyalty will result in escalation until the relationship ends or the man is satisified with the situation.

    So, yes, you answered incorrectly when you said you enjoyed dancing with him. The better answer would be frowny/pouty face, it was okay, but you need to get your ass on the floor next time.

    FTR, my GF did dance with another man once in my presence for about 30 seconds. It was a former dance partner of hers, and a real, REAL omega guy, so I wasn’t that concerned. I didn’t bring it up immediately because it wasn’t that big of an issue at the time and I did not want to seem jealous. Plus I had other, bigger issues to deal with, and so, you know, bigger fish to fry first. I knew that, EVENTUALLY, I would have another chance to make a slight rebuke, and since she doesn’t see a lot of guys, the offense was unlikely to occur again.

    She brought up the conversation that I should not be dancing with other women. This is a concern of hers. She likes to say she doesn’t get jealous…but that depends on the situation…she didn’t care about my past sex partners until she met a model that was friendly with me and instantly started prying to my best friend, who, like a best friend does, did not say a word.

    (Answer: yeah, I hooked up with her up, it was fucked up, and I do not want to repeat it. My GF does not know this, but she never specifically asked…)

    Anyways, I reminded her that she danced with one her college friends. For a moment, it seemed she was about to hamster, but then it stopped, she apologized, and said it wouldn’t happen again.

    I may be a little passive-aggressive in that I didn’t confront the problem immediately, like your boyfriend didn’t, but I do believe that was the best case for me, especially since the situation resolved itself exactly how I imagined it would. And was resolved amicably.

    I just felt like sharing, no real point to that story :P

  • Sassy6519

    @ Anacaona

    My husband started to get professionals haircuts because his usual “I take the machine and chop it off in one minute” makes him look awful so he pleases me by spending some money in cutting his hair. I stopped wearing heels because he doesn’t like them, mostly because they are very unpractical for the average woman. He was quite impressed of how much I can walk and do stuff on them but he still doesn’t want me to wear them in a regular basis. I complied because is a small thing and I’m not the clothes I wear…Are you the clothes you wear? You seem death set on not changing an inch when you are in a relationship that is impossible. Unless you clone yourself and made a sex change operation on your clone.

    I’ve never liked or tried trying to change a person that I’m in a relationship with. If there is something about them I don’t like, I either accept it and deal with it or I break up with them. I’ve never considered trying to change how someone is.

    As an example, the recent ex-bf drank a lot more than I am comfortable with. I don’t drink too often, but he liked having alcohol everyday. I also don’t drink to get drunk. He would drink to get drunk on occasion as well. I could have told him that I didn’t want him drinking so much, but I didn’t. Honestly, who am I to tell a grown man what he can and cannot do? If I don’t like something about a guy, and it’s a big issue or problem, I would rather leave than try to change him.

    What I ended up doing was telling him that he should hang out with his friends whenever he wanted to drink a lot or get drunk. I didn’t tell him that he needed to stop. I simply told him that I wouldn’t feel comfortable with him doing it in my company. If he wanted to get drunk, I told him simply not to invite me to hang out with him on those nights. Problem solved.

    I don’t try to control men, so I don’t appreciate it when they try to control me. I either accept a guy as he is, tolerate aspects of him that I may not wholeheartedly endorse, or leave him. I remember that Hope mentioned convincing her husband to stop smoking for her. Although that may have worked for her, I would never dare demand a guy do that for me. I would either only date non-smokers, or accept the fact that a particular man is a smoker instead. I would never tell a guy to change something like that for me.

    I couldn’t imagine doing something like that, so I guess that’s why I hate it so much whenever some guy tries to change me.

  • Sassy6519

    @ ADBG

    My impression is that Sassy comes across as emotionally distant yet very sexual and able to get high quality men. This might trigger slut-alerts in male hindbrains.

    Sorry Sassy :(

    It’s okay. I respect the honesty.

    I don’t try to be emotionally distant. I think that I always appear that way in comparison to other women, who are very emotional compared to me. I look like an emotional desert in comparison to the the various emotional water fountains surrounding me.

    Men do loyalty test their women and will be on the lookout for any sign of disloyalty. Any sign of disloyalty will result in escalation until the relationship ends or the man is satisified with the situation.

    So, yes, you answered incorrectly when you said you enjoyed dancing with him. The better answer would be frowny/pouty face, it was okay, but you need to get your ass on the floor next time.

    The question he specifically asked me was “Did you have fun dancing?”. I answered yes because I like dancing in general, not because I liked the partner. I could have been dancing with another woman, or a really old man, and the answer would have been the same. I like dancing for dancing’s sake. If he had asked “Did you have fun dancing with my friend?”, I probably would have responded differently. I would have said that although I enjoyed getting to dance, I thought that his friend was a major douche. That answer probably would have alleviated his concerns/jealousy/insecurity.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I think there’s a difference between demanding and nurturing. When I think of how much I have improved in the last two years, a lot of it is due to my GF helping light a fire under my ass, on issues I already knew were problems.

    She realllllyyyy does not demand anything. Wouldn’t work with me. But she does offer suggestions.

    On some issues though I just don’t give a shit. I do not care to speak French.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I would have said that although I enjoyed getting to dance, I thought that his friend was a major douche. That answer probably would have alleviated his concerns/jealousy/insecurity.

    Probably. Oh well, live and learn. You’re a lot better with men than most men are with women, if that is any consolation at all. Though…look at Cooper…sorry Cooper! Love ya!

    I respect you a lot, Sassy, you strike me as a well-balanced girl, and there are not many of those. The only thing I honestly hope you reconsider is the whole kids thing, cause I wouldn’t mind some lil-Sassies running around some day. ;)

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    It began when INTJ made a rude, generalized statement that I believe hit a sore spot for MM.

    Actually, it began when he complained about how you ran your own blog. If he had left it at that, I wouldn’t have bothered. It then extended to calling 40+ of your sources of factual information (i.e. your time and effort) “crap”. Again, if he had apologized just once, I wouldn’t have bothered. But to this day, he just keeps shoving his foot deeper and deeper down his throat. I’ll admit we’re both stubborn, but for very different reasons.

    If it had been my blog (and I’m not qualified to have one), he’d have already faced the firing squad, with extreme prejudice. I mean, NASA doesn’t have to tolerate the Flat Earth Society, does it?

  • Jackie

    Regarding Captain Solo:

    Han really is a great guy. Can you blame any girl who flirted back with him? :mrgreen: Once I wrote a Austenian Treatise, “In Defense of Colonel Christopher Brandon” from S&S. After seeing some rather unkind comments (“insane,” “batshit crazy”) I may have to do one for HS!

    Regarding his N, like all of us, that will be between him; his future wife and God.

    HS’s story is one of a swashbuckling scoundrel with loads of charm who seeks to win the heart of Princess Leia. My story is more like the British novel “North and South” where Margaret Hale is the clergyman’s daughter who stands up against injustice (and wins the heart of Richard Armitage :) ).

    They are different stories but you want to see them both get happy endings. :)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Anyone is qualified to have a blog, they just aren’t able to manage the comments. I suspect Susan has a streak of ENTJ in her. Quite a bit of stubborness, but with compassion, a strong vision, a subtle sense of social dynamics that has been hardened by experience.

  • HanSolo

    @ADBG

    I think some of the alpha mares can be changed. One set is the feminist-inspired PC ideal of what a girl or woman should do. These feminists are more concerned with continuing on their battle to elevate women (once that strove for equality and some common sense, but no longer) than trying to snag apex alphas. So, I think they can be replaced. It will simply take people to stop listening to them and having the courage to disagree with them.

    As to the pop-culture alpha mares, that will be more difficult and take longer. But I think that if you can make it seem like a good goal for girls to grow up thinking they want to have a more balanced life, including education and career on one hand and marriage and children on the other, instead of the constant drumbeat for just educ/work then that will get these girls/women thinking, how do I go about it earlier and better? That will help them reward the realistic guys in their league more with relationships at somewhat younger ages instead of postponing that and either not dating really or hooking up.

    With somewhat more relationship-focused girls that are expected to not be brash victimized bitches but pleasant empowered ambassadors of feminine goodness and achievement, they will have a slightly lower desire to pay for the raunch culture and they will demand a slightly more positive kind of pop culture.

    So, work on isolating and exposing victimization-pushing and superiority-seeking extreme feminists and replace them with more balanced alpha mare messengers that still champion education and work for women but in a healthy balance with relationships and children. IOW, really give women the right to choose, whether that be high-powered career, stay-at-home mom or a hybrid of less-prestigious career with more time for family.

    Thoughts?

  • Jackie

    @MegaMan

    At the risk of sticking my nose in… ;)
    Regarding INTJ (who I think has many good qualities), the dynamic between you always reminded me of the younger brother who is determined to usurp the older brother’s place in the hierarchy. I like INTJ (even though I wish he would change his communication style) and he seems to fit the younger brother archetype in many ways.

    In that kind of familial squabbling, it really isn’t about the factual information or even argumentative style… it’s about winding up on top of the dogpile. In my family, it always ended up being the same disagreement– it was like a rigged wrestling match. You knew who was going to come out with the piledriver or the flying scissor-kick, and you always knew how it would end. Even before it started. ;)

    When I looked at things in that spirit, I could have a much better sense of humor about the whole process. That’s my 0.02, MM, hope I haven’t overstepped anything. :)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @Sassy
    You never answered the question: are you the clothes you wear?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Anacaona

    You never answered the question: are you the clothes you wear?

    Yes, to some extent.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Han

    Thoughts?

    I am drinky and therefore have many thoughts. In the past hour I have been juggling sexting/porn with GF, guitar, this blog, and nuclear strikes against the Chinese.

    I’ll share more coherent ones tomorrow…maybe…

    I am just going to read and perhaps make sexual comments for the rest of the night :P

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Thanks for the kind words. You have a great heart full of kindness and empathy. I hope that you soon win Sir Richard’s heart.

  • HanSolo

    @ADBG

    You naughty perv! j/k haha

    Also, on the navy issue, I think that carriers are quite vulnerable to current and upcoming technologies. I think that way too much money is spent on defense and that most (not necessarily all) of the troops should be brought home from Europe, Japan, S. Korea and elsewhere. I used to be quite the hawk during the end of the cold war but am more concerned about financial security and it’s time for those cheap-ass countries to pay for their own defense and defend themselves.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Who are you to say what’s female in online communication?

    Style over substance? Honestly, I don’t feel attacked, but I also don’t feel obligated to respond to someone who doesn’t care what I think. Aside from being an outlier, I’ve had words put in my mouth numerous times, even been called a weasel for using facts to support an argument… all since late 2011. Why would I take anything personally anymore?

    For the record, I take no pride in being restricted. There are millions of guys in that club, I’m not special. I do take pride in being married to a beautiful, intelligent woman. Maybe a little payback for being looked down upon by the unrestricted (for want of a better word) crowd back in college. I opted out of the hookup scene, to the detriment of my social life. Found better friends, though. Silver lining, maybe?

    Though the crack about emoticons… does that qualify as “alpha cred” or just a personal problem? :?:

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    More drinky confessions:

    Threseeoms do not impress me as much as they used to.

    Junior year of high school after turnabout, my “girlfriend” at the time started giving me a handjob, and another girl was quickly kissing me.

    Not pleasant. Very awkward. Later hooked up with the girl who was kissing me. Also not pleasant. Very awkward.

    Two of my coworkers have discussed threesomes with me. Very fun at the time, but just discussion. I did not enjoy them rubbing their chests against me. The one girl is frequently upset with her boyfriend, who was a “loser unemployed” guy for a while and did not even show up to her birthday.

    I once discused 50 Shades with her, felt uncomfortable, mentioned it to my GF, and my GF asked me not to discuss the 50 Shades with her anymore.

    The other girl is single, and apparently does not know what she is doing. Very attuned to social approval, very narcissistic, often plugged to her iPhone.

    I do confess that I once thought of trying to set up a threesome with my current GF and one girl that I was friends with in college. She is the one that I alllued to earlier, that grabbed my crotch over 4th of July holiday, because she was also upset with her boyfriend and wanted to explore other options.

    Obbviously, current GF has at least mentioned the subject in her past…the other friend is confirmed bisexual.

    I instead cut off all contact with the bisexual college friend, because she did not respect my relationship (or hers, for that matter), when she decided to grab my crotch.

    Tying it back to restricted vs. unrestricted, in some behaviors and fantasies, I would be decidedly unrestricted. Yet, I do not think I truly enjoyed a single sexual experience until I met my GF. She is a LOT of fun.

    To JJ: you seem like you have a good head on your shoulders. A good girl is extremely hard to come by. I would advise you not spoil it by trying to chase other girls unless your current girl has fucked up somehow.
    But you have already reached this conclusion, so, like I said, good head on your shoulders.
    You will never be able to completley quiet your taste for variety. That however, does not mean you do not love your GF very much. It just means you’re a dude.

    Good luck, bro.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Han

    Also, on the navy issue, I think that carriers are quite vulnerable to current and upcoming technologies. I think that way too much money is spent on defense and that most (not necessarily all) of the troops should be brought home from Europe, Japan, S. Korea and elsewhere. I used to be quite the hawk during the end of the cold war but am more concerned about financial security and it’s time for those cheap-ass countries to pay for their own defense and defend themselves.

    I don’t disagree with you, but the biggest issue is that these other nations do not foot the bills of their own defense and often times do not foot the bill of their own defense in a way that actually helps them project power. The ABCA countries (Australia, Britain, canada, America) appear to have a lot of power projection, but France seems more focused on flashy weapon systems than the logistics to actually support them.

    So, they apparently had to power UK transports to project power to Mali, but those airframes were over worked and broke down in use.

    It is also difficult to get all the Western countries on the same page. France did not support the 2003 Iraq invasion, which, okay, they may have been right, but it shows the West was not unified. Germany outright refused to help at all in the Libya invasion, and that involved a dictator murdering his own people en masse. So you can’t rely on the other Western powers to shoulder thier burdens, or help US interests.

    We need to cut defense spending, if just because our public finances are a mess, but goddam. The way the West projects power is pathetic. We went from contesting the USSR, which has 300 division backed up by tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, to running out of smart bombs while attacking Libya.

    Something there is just wrong.

  • HanSolo

    @ADBG

    I think they’ll foot their bill a bit more if the US isn’t always just there. On Iraq, I was in favor of it at the time (taught me a lesson to not just believe what everyone says) and I’m glad Saddam is gone but I think they should have just declared war and then tried to capture/kill Saddam (not easy I know) instead of remaking the whole country. Anyway, OT, so let’s leave it there unless you have something profound you are just dying to say. I’ll let you have the last word on the subject.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Jackie

    When I looked at things in that spirit, I could have a much better sense of humor about the whole process.

    Yeah, I see what you mean vis-à-vis brothers. I never had a contentious upbringing with mine, he’s like a decade older than me. More like a very close uncle, strange as that may sound.

    You’re a much kinder person than I am. I’m going to mull over your advice, though I’m pretty sure he won’t!

  • HanSolo

    Jackie, you peacemaker, you!

  • Jackie

    @Mike C

    Regarding your Mom– I know she can’t hold the phone right now, but can her nurse put it on speakerphone or assist if you call at a certain pre-arranged time? I ask because with my Dad, just getting a phone call from me can make his day. (He calls me “The Angel of Mercy” ;) and my brother is “The Guardian Angel” or sometimes, a Seraphim, I think.)

    I call my Dad at the same times, twice a day for 5-10min, just to check in and see what’s up, share something interesting or funny that happened, listen to his PT prognosis. Also, I listen to his complaints with tons of sympathy. (They’re not that bad, in his defense, and I like hearing what he has to say, regardless.)

    You could also make your Mom a CD of music she likes to listen to, or find her a book on CD of an author she likes. Even knowing that you are thinking about her and making an effort is enough.

    Your Mom knows you love her and are doing the best you can. If you could do better, you would. And that is enough, even if you always feel like you should be doing more. :)

    Mike C, I apologize if this oversteps– you just remind me of my brother in many ISTJ ways. My brother has been like a guardian angel to me, too (taking a day off just to help me move, took care of everything when my car got decimated by the DD).

    Something about my brother: He can be so keen in his pursuit of justice that sometimes he will be like Inspector Javert from Les Miserables. My sister told him, You can be so determined to be right that you may win the argument but it will come at a price.

    I had to learn to approach things differently with him, as we used to get in *intense* disagreements, similar to you and Susan. He had to change, too. It’s not my place to make a pronouncement other than this:

    Susan is like the Fairy Blogmother of HUS. She has been extremely generous, especially to me when I thought my Dad might die. She is cool and awesome and works hard to make HUS nice and fun. Whatever disagreements there are, she believes in love and wants each of us to have it.

    Now I’m done and will butt out. ;)

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Yes, to some extent.
    Okay. Thank you for the answer.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Anyway, OT, so let’s leave it there unless you have something profound you are just dying to say. I’ll let you have the last word on the subject.

    Jeez, man, all I want to do is gush about my GF and try to help people out, carriers aren’t that important :P

  • Mireille

    So many comments since I left!

    I think the star of this thread became Han Solo, lol.

    But really, I think I almost had a stroke reading N=40 in 5 years, I really felt dizzy and nauseous for a second. I don’t remember seeing a picture of the guy around here to judge how killer those looks are but really it really would just be for some type of “WANTED” reference.

    Now I wonder who those alpha racking up numbers are if even “regular” guys can reach such numbers? Are talking about beefed-up douches high-fiving each other and doing keg-stands or puppet masters looking to make women squirm with desire and shame?
    IDK but I have to say, The Han Solo type is the one I have always feared the most: charming nice guy who probably looks like someone you can take to your parents, but has a huge body count.

    The truth is when you have average taste and take notice of a guy, there are certainly other women who also did so there is little to do with eliminating the competition. There will always be women lining up so while some restricted females like myself can be outraged or shocked, I’m pretty sure that would make no difference.

    I’m kinda worried now; since I moved to the US, I had an idea that American men were quite liberal about sex but having a sort of number put on it from a regular guy is quite frightening. I can’t really put my N=2 against a guy’s N=25+ and feel ok about it. This is why women don’t ask; not because they don’t care but because what you don’t know won’t hurt you (except herpes and all its friends). I mean, how can I imagine giving the best sex to a guy who has been with the rainbow of women? Probably will be very boring to him. Ugh!

    Mind shanked!

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

      I mean, how can I imagine giving the best sex to a guy who has been with the rainbow of women? Probably will be very boring to him. Ugh!

      Note how this is exactly what men say. Same with the comments by women who are grossed out by the visual of so many vaginas…

      It lends credence to this point from the study linked upthread:

      Theoretically, one could argue that socialization experiences and the content of sexual scripts for men and women are becoming more similar.

  • HanSolo

    @Mireille

    I wouldn’t categorize myself as a “normal” guy in many ways. So don’t let that scare you off from the truly normal guys here.

    Also, the best sex I had was with the gf I loved and wanted to marry. It was good with many of the others but nothing mind blowing. So, I don’t really have this “greatest hits” flowing through my mind. In fact, it reaches a point where it’s all pretty similar (good for the most part) and so what will distinguish it for me in the future will be love. The two track mentality is real for me, FWIW. I can’t speak for other guys but sex will not be boring for me and I won’t be sitting there thinking about other women I’ve had sex with. Haven’t really ever done that yet so I don’t see why I’m going to start with someone I love.

    Remember what the median N is for guys. It’s 6.1 for males aged 25-44 per the cdc, measured a few years ago.

  • Mike C

    My sister told him, You can be so determined to be right that you may win the argument but it will come at a price.

    Jackie, I will ponder this.

    Sincere best wishes to you and your Dad.

  • J

    OK. How do we control behavior in society if we can’t shame bad behavior?

    Guilt, not shame, is the right tool. Guilt goes to the behavior, not to the core of the person. It’s perfectly legit to call people on bad behavior.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Susan, I’m new around here, but I have to hand it to you, this is quite a blog. I’ve never seen so many dedicated commenters!

    Morgasm:

    “there’s really no reason for a young person to dump his/her boyfriend/girlfriend just so they can try failing at dating a multitude of people. … fix something that ain’t broke?”

    But it is broke. That was the whole tone of JJ’s letter. He’s not entirely satisfied, he’s afraid he doesn’t measure up, and he wants more “validation” from other women. That’s broke or very close to being broke as far as I can tell.

    I don’t think anyone should dump their bf/gf if they are truly happy. Good for them. Keep at it. But the fact is, most young people do not know what makes them “truly” happy, which is why they should be more cautious with these things before committing their whole heart and soul to another human being. The fact is, most young people who think they are “in love” are really in lust, and they are swept up in it. (In fact, science has proven this in a way, but that’s another topic.)

    Susan:

    “Occasionally I hear of men who don’t want to know, or who don’t want to say… My sense is that those men are men with very high N – they feel confident the woman couldn’t possibly match them.”

    For me (and this is only my personal worldview, probably not common among men), I really just don’t care. A number is a number. Age is another meaningless number. If I’m attracted to a woman and I think she’s hot, why would I care about her age? What matters is not numbers. What matters is the bond and connection you feel with that person.

    Many single men and women in this culture are so paranoid about not being “good enough.” That is why they are obsessed with numbers–because they enable them to compare themselves to others and rank people, which gives them a sense of control over a process that otherwise feels quite capricious and unfair to them.

    The girl I mentioned earlier who had had 6 partners before me (I don’t know if you consider that “high” or “low”), at that point I had had many fewer partners. So most men would probably feel “inferior” compared to this woman (she was beautiful to boot). I was just like “whatever, sweetie.”

    People need to stop judging others according to criteria that make no sense just so they can feel better about themselves, and start embracing their own strengths and accepting their weaknesses. They can get what they want, but only if they do not project negative energy into every interaction with the opposite sex because of their real or perceived “inferiorities.”

    Mireille:

    “I mean, how can I imagine giving the best sex to a guy who has been with the rainbow of women? Probably will be very boring to him.”

    Two things. First, does your relationship with an amazing guy have to be based on sex? Shouldn’t it be based on mutual values, feelings and compatibility?

    The problem with the traditionalist outlook was that it made sex the be-all and end-all of everything in love and dating. When sex is kept under lock and key so tightly, men will do and say almost anything to get it (which is exactly what they did for decades in America). But when sex is relatively easy to get for men, you as a woman benefit because you know where a guy stands more easily. You will very quickly weed out the guys that are not compatible with you, or not looking for the same thing.

    Now that sex has no real value in the “SMP”, relationship-oriented people are free to focus on what they should have been focusing on all along: emotions, values, chemistry, connection, personality.

    Secondly, the fact is, many women suck at sex. Even the ones that are really good still are not mind-blowing. So don’t fret on that count. But more importantly, if you’re in a committed relationship with a man who loves you, if he really does love you, he will be more than happy to “teach” you (for lack of a better term) how to be a great lover, so it’s really no big deal. Again, IF he loves you, which is kind of the point. Unlike women, men are quite simple when it comes to the actual act of sex.

  • J

    @Han

    I didn’t even masturbate until my late 20′s and then felt terribly guilty and ashamed.

    Do you think there is a relationship between your high N and the shame?

  • Mireille

    @ IP,

    I agree with you; however, you can be the best wife possible and still have a guy stray just because sex is boring compared to some mythical lay he had before you or just not as exciting as it should be. That would be one of my worries, that all this time I could have gotten the “experience” necessary to keep a man interested, at least sexually; even though, really I could only relax with someone I truly care for and who’d feel the same about me.

  • HanSolo

    @J

    Not sure. Not a direct one at any rate but I’m open to thoughts. I really would have married the Mormon gf when I has N=0. I also would have married the other gf when my N=6. Maybe I’m missing something but I’ve tried to be as sincere as possible, that I like casual sex sometimes when I’m single but I’d prefer a good relationship. I have explained why some of those relationships didn’t work, sometimes my fault for being too picky, sometimes theirs, sometimes just not right for each other.

  • J

    Wishing a speedy recovery to both Jackie’s dad and Mike C’s mom!

    me too. I glad to see that things are slowly getting better for both.

    @Say Whaat

    Thanks for the kind wishes re my friend. Things don’t look good, but she is trying to stay positive.

    @Jackie

    Thanks for the kind words.

  • HanSolo

    @J

    And attraction-killing behavior on my part at times like falling too in love with the girl and not giving her enough space.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Mireille:

    Sex is a learnable skill. There are endless resources out there for improving your sex skills and having a more exciting sex life with your partner. And, if you’re in a committed relationship, you have the advantage that you know exactly what to do with him (personalized attention) which other women will not have. Relationships take work, and sex is one of the things everybody needs to work at in their relationships.

    Cheating will always be a risk in any relationship. Having a man with very few partners is by NO means a solution to that problem. In fact, on the flip side, many men who have had lots of women and have chosen to settle down with one special woman, have gotten it out of their system and are less likely to stray for that reason. Whereas, a guy who has only had a few crumby sex partners before settling down might wonder about “what could have been.”

  • J

    Roosh can’t pull 8 girls/year? Seems way low to me. Though, he is never very clear on how well he does, but the impression he leaves is that it’s a lot higher.

    Roosh has books to sell.

  • J

    Anne: I have never actually read anything by Roosh or visited his blog until now, but I was intrigued by your links. Is it him in the “London sucks” video?

    SW: Yes. Ew.

    Me: Despite my love of swarthy guys, Roosh always looks like he needs a bath to me.

  • Jesse

    Beta,

    “I really love and want to marry you, but first I need to chase other women and bang them. I’ll be back in a few years.”

    I meant more in the sense of “I’m young and don’t know what I want, so let’s stay on good terms” rather than “you wait here while I paw at the other broads and I might come back when I’m done, if I don’t find anything better that is.”

    I am drinky and therefore have many thoughts. In the past hour I have been juggling sexting/porn with GF, guitar, this blog, and nuclear strikes against the Chinese.

    See, if you were really drunk you’d have said you were juggling your guitar, plotting nuclear strikes against Hooking Up Smart and sexting with the Chinese.

  • Jesse

    Susan – I have never actually read anything by Roosh or visited his blog until now, but I was intrigued by your links. Is it him in the “London sucks” video?

    What, are you going to show him that London doesn’t suck after all?

  • J

    Anyway, they’ve made it to date 6 or so, and she told me that he recently said, “I like how you dress. It’s attractive, but classy.” Translation: no one would ever think you are a slut. Classy is what girls should be aiming for.

    IME, quality men like the classy look.

  • J

    @Han

    Fair enough. Thanks.

  • Jesse

    Thinking aloud:

    The men talking about high numbers may be envisioning using their Casanova-like powers to seduce comely maidens left and right.

    The women may be envisioning pathological dumpster diving for 5′s at the local bar. In that light their retching is understandable.

    Possible slight failure of communication.

  • Jesse

    I get the feeling that quality women will not appreciate indiscriminate men.

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

      @Jesse

      I get the feeling that quality women will not appreciate indiscriminate men.

      That’s true, but we define indiscriminate as getting with women who have casual sex. I think the idea that women don’t care if the chicks are hot is wrong. In fact, in some ways it’s worse – you’re now comparing yourself to porn stars!

      From what I’ve heard women say it really is the idea of all that vagina juice (so gross). Showers just can’t wash away that image. Just picture the woman you love with the semen of all her past lovers slowly dripping out of her and creating the biggest wet spot ever.

      I do think that indiscriminate women like indiscriminate men, and vice versa.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Jesse:

    “The men talking about high numbers may be envisioning using their Casanova-like powers to seduce comely maidens left and right. The women may be envisioning pathological dumpster diving for 5′s at the local bar.”

    Exactly, great observation. Many women think like that, and they don’t fully grasp that men simply cannot get hard for girls that we don’t find pretty.

    I don’t think anyone–from an undersexed beta, to a big man on campus, to a globe-trotting playboy–finds dumpster diving for the 5s particularly impressive or something worth striving towards. Even if they may indulge in it from time to time.

  • Lokland

    @ADBG

    “canada,”

    Da fuq is my capital?

  • Lokland

    “(In fact, science has proven this in a way, but that’s another topic.)”

    Science (whatever that means) has never proven anything ever in its entire history.

  • Iggles

    @ PJ:

    LOL! I luuuuuurrrrrrrve how karma is such a bitch!

    Yep, me too! It’s great when jerks get their just desserts!

    @ JJ:

    Also, I’ve only known my girlfriend since October so I don’t think it’s realistic for me to fall in love with her or seriously contemplate marriage. I like her a lot but a lot of you seem to think that I’ve already decided that I won’t marry her… How can I even make a decision when we’re both young (she’s even younger than me) and haven’t known each other that well?

    Thanks for writing in JJ. I hear you that you’re young, but I think given the amount of time you dated there has been enough time to fall in love. My current boyfriend and I starting dating last January. We met 3 weeks prior. By April we told each other I love you for the first time. With my college boyfriend, we exchanged those words even sooner, but we knew each other longer (two semesters. We got closer a few weeks at the end of the second one).

    How long have you two been officially dating? Knowing each other 5 months isn’t a long time, per se but when you know, you know! I would be wary if you’re still not sure about love after 8 or 9 months.

    @ SW:

    In any case, the most common STDs, and the least curable, are HPV and genital herpes. Testing doesn’t cover either. It’s a total crap shoot.

    Really? I had no idea. That’s so scary!!

  • mr. wavevector

    Several of the men here seem to believe that unrestricted male sexuality is the norm, and those men claiming to be restricted are merely rationalizing a lack of opportunities – sour grapes, even. I disagree. Let me share my experiences turning down sexual opportunities despite having very limited opportunities.

    I went to a religious-affiliated university that was 80% male at the time, and where many of those scarce women still had ideas of “saving themselves for marriage”. I majored in the most male-dominated physical science. I’m a bit shorter than average and my looks are middling. So I know all about limited opportunities.

    I was lucky enough to have a girlfriend from the same high school most of my first two years. (She eventually wised up to her opportunities and dumped me for a tall dark handsome varsity athlete.) She was the first and only girl I had sex with during college.

    Nevertheless, in the following two years I turned down overt sexual advances from 3 different girls (being pulled to the bedroom type of advances). Why? I didn’t really like them. One was slutty and aggressive, one was slutty and stupid, and one was a tightly wound bundle of neuroses. It was OK with kissing and making out, but when it appeared that sex might be imminent, my emotional discord became too strong and I bailed out.

    I’m not an anomaly. Humans, like many animals, exhibit multiple reproductive strategies, with some individuals biased towards one or the other. For men, the two major ones are Cad and Dad (there’s also Rapist, but we won’t talk about that). I’m definitely a Dad. My instinct is to find a woman who will give me exclusive reproductive access in return for a heavy emotional and resource investment. Since I’m going to invest heavily, I need to be selective and make a good choice.

    For me, there is no barrier between my sexual desire for a woman and my emotional rapport with her. Both have to be working together for me to want sex.

    Do I sound kind of like a chick? My high-investment mating strategy is not too different from the most common female strategy, so it makes sense that my emotional responses to mating are not too different either.

    There are a lot of men like me. All my male friends are Dads. My father was a Dad, my grandfathers were Dads, my brother is a Dad, as are my uncles and male cousins, and as far as I can tell, my nephews too. My female relatives married Dads. All the men on my wife’s side are Dads. I don’t know a single Cad in my entire extended family.

    Why are Dads so common? Because it’s been an evolutionary successful strategy. Intensive agriculture is often a better strategy than sowing wild seeds.

    The valorization of the Cad in today’s SMP is a result of the market distortion created by feminist careerism, which has made the Dad strategy exceedingly unrewarding and frustrating for many young men. In this environment, the Dad strategy looks like a loser, so these young men are trying to learn game and act like Cads.

  • mr. wavevector

    From what I’ve heard women say it really is the idea of all that vagina juice (so gross). Showers just can’t wash away that image. Just picture the woman you love with the semen of all her past lovers slowly dripping out of her and creating the biggest wet spot ever.

    Good grief, Susan! Let’s not delve into all the disgusting sexual imagery the manosphere has to offer!

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

      Good grief, Susan! Let’s not delve into all the disgusting sexual imagery the manosphere has to offer!

      I confess I grossed myself out writing that. I’m just trying to speak in a way that will be understood :)

      I will cease and desist now.

  • Escoffier

    Susan,

    Porn stars are not hot. They are repulsive.

    At the very list, opinion is strongly divided on this question.

  • Escoffier

    “least,” drat

  • Lokland

    @mr wavevector

    “In this environment, the Dad strategy looks like a loser, so these young men are trying to learn game and act like Cads.”

    Which is of course problematic. Men have been selected for ~20,000 years as heavy Dad investment types (with a significant portion of time before that leading closer and closer to it).

    Most guys are by definition Dad types but trying to be Cad types. Its like trying to fit a square peg through a round hole.

    What your not considering if that selective pressure may be changing direction in which Cads have higher fitness than Dads. (Unlikely because of pill.)

    In either case, being a Dad is giving less of a payout than it did prior feminism and biology always works toward a higher payout.

  • Lokland

    “Porn stars are not hot. They are repulsive.”

    Most of them A+++ bodies with mediocre faces to only slightly above average faces.
    There are a few that are super hot however.
    Of course, I’d never put a cent down in investment…hot merely from a one and done perspective. (Which is of course merely hypothetical as I highly doubt I’ll ever run into one.)

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Mike C “For example, Hope and I have responded to each other a great number of times in the few years we’ve both read and posted here. I think she would tell you I’ve never gotten aggressive with her ever. I’m not a verbal bully just for shits and giggles, but if you push me I push you back 100 times harder. The best way for me not to be aggressive is do NOT get aggressive with me first either active or passive. I think where things can get really, really bad really really fast is when someone locks horns with me and decides they have to keep upping the ante and escalating rather than just back down. But I really am going to try hard to avoid that escalating spiral.”

    It’s true, I’ve never had you be aggressive with me here or elsewhere, and there were posters in other blogs who did so even though I wasn’t picking fights. For what it’s worth, I’ve always found you to be reasonable and rational, but you do have a temper. :P My husband has a temper, too, but he will become very cold and aloof, and will walk away before he uses it. I am very careful not to lock horns with him.

    Sassy “I don’t try to control men, so I don’t appreciate it when they try to control me. I either accept a guy as he is, tolerate aspects of him that I may not wholeheartedly endorse, or leave him. I remember that Hope mentioned convincing her husband to stop smoking for her. Although that may have worked for her, I would never dare demand a guy do that for me. I would either only date non-smokers, or accept the fact that a particular man is a smoker instead. I would never tell a guy to change something like that for me.”

    It’s not really about control, but about caring and also boundaries. If my husband thought I was trying to control him, he would have never been with me in the first place. I wasn’t demanding that he quit smoking, merely telling him it was a dealbreaker for me because I can’t stand it. So he started buying the nicotine gums and basically quit in the month and half that we were talking, before we met in person. He later told me that he knew smoking wasn’t a good thing, but he didn’t care enough to quit on his own. He was glad to have “an excuse” to quit.

    We all change throughout life, sometimes for the worse, and sometimes for the better. If a loved one can help us become healthier and happier, why not? Relationships are a two-way street. I’ve changed many things about myself for my husband, including facing some fears that I really wanted to conquer. I did those things with loving encouragement from my husband. He didn’t try to change me out of maliciousness or a need for control, but out of a genuine desire to see me become more capable, more independent, and all-around better. With the skills he taught me, I would be less reliant on him for certain things, whereas a guy who really wanted control would be all about making someone more dependent on him.

    I think you have a hard time letting go of your total independence, which is both admirable and troubling. Sure, the stereotypical feminine thing to do is nagging the man to try to change him. But the healthy dynamic is both people being self-aware and confident enough to be able to change themselves for the better, out of mutual love and respect, without the need for nagging or control.

  • Lokland

    @mr wavevector

    ” I majored in the most male-dominated physical science. I’m a bit shorter than average and my looks are middling. So I know all about limited opportunities.”

    I’m neither an engineer nor a physicist so there were some women around but other than that same idea.

    “My high-investment mating strategy is not too different from the most common female strategy, so it makes sense that my emotional responses to mating are not too different either.”

    This isn’t actually the question being debated.
    The fact is you (and me) had no other workable strategy. Which is not the case for some men.

    Our strategy had a fairly good run at the top but that does not mean it is or will remain so. What is wanted can change and those who are not capable die, thats just the way life works.

    Note: I’m not particularly worried about myself but my sons are going to be even shorter than me. I’m literally scared to have a son because I realize they will have to endure more pain and be lower status than I am already.

  • Bells

    Re: boundaries and changes
    I have an earnest question. I completely agree that you should take into account your husband’s likes and dislikes in order to strengthen the marriage. But to what extent should you make personal changes for a boyfriend?

    @ADBG
    I’m going to have to read 50 Shades of Gray pretty soon. Hearing from both men and women that it prompts sexual awakening has strongly piqued my curiosity…

  • Lokland

    @Bells

    “But to what extent should you make personal changes for a boyfriend?”

    The extent that it takes to get a boyfriend (who actually sticks around an you actually like).

    If every guy dumps you because your unwilling to change, you need to change more.

  • Escoffier

    I just find porn stars (to the extent that I ever see them) all repulsive. The bunnies of the 80s were beautiful and the trend of massive body mods had not yet begun. Today? Ick.

    Whenever I read about some bigtime celeb “dating” a porn star, I have to wonder what’s wrong with him. These are guys with enough status to get nearly anyone, and they want the town bike? Acutally, more like the bike of a major metropolis.

    Honestly, I don’t think I could even shake hands with one. Sex would be out of the question.

  • Escoffier

    Bells, before you waste time/money on 50 Shades, read Susan’s review. It was, um, negative.

  • Lokland

    @Bastiat

    “I can believe the attractiveness/grading stuff. I feel it sometimes tugging at me, like psychic gravity, when I am grading a student’s exam or paper. ”

    My TAs do most of the marking. They never really meet the students.
    I mark the difficult question I place at the end of the test which means I never need see the front page with the name.

    I’ll be quite honest when I say I see no problem with grading/hiring based upon attractiveness however. (Which is of course what occurs anyway, I’d rather just be honest about it.)

    Alas, this PC world makes me go to ridiculous lengths to avoid very natural reactions.

  • Lokland

    @Esc

    “Whenever I read about some bigtime celeb “dating” a porn star, I have to wonder what’s wrong with him. ”

    I’m lucky to know the names of most celebrities (or be able to connect name to face).

  • Bells

    @Lokland,
    I find your explanation to be a little vague. For example: if a boyfriend requested that I start wearing jeans instead of dresses all the time. I don’t think that I would completely respect his wishes. Instead, I would only wear jeans very occasionally. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I feel like a boyfriend’s wishes is not on the same level as a husband’s (or fiancé). However, within marriage, all holds are gone and I would work hard to ensure unity. But ’till then, is that a fine balance to walk?

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

      @Bells

      Personally, I think trying to change someone is a huge red flag. If they were attracted to you when they met you, and you haven’t changed, it’s not reasonable, IMO, for them to suggest any modifications. If he went for you in the slutty clothes, well, he got what he paid for.

      Your voluntarily making a change to please him is different. You may choose to dress more modestly to discourage admiration from other men, or you may ask him if he would like for you to grow out your hair, for example.

      For the best illustration of this EVER, from one of the best movies ever made:

      Vertigo – Judy Becomes Madeleine

  • Ted D

    Mr. Wavevector – I have similar experiences to you in terms of passing on opportunities for casual and my restricted nature. Unlike you, my biological father was a cad, as we’re both of my uncles. (Well until my aunts divorced them). Most of the men I know well may not be cads now, but certainly had a good run at it in years gone by. I don’t know a single other man that is as restricted as I am, and most are just slightly restricted. (Which is to say they want a relationship but won’t pass up freely given sex regardless)

    Perhaps it is a SES thing since I grew up in the LMC surrounded by mill workers and coal miners. Are there dads in Pittsburgh? Tons of them. But, I don’t for one moment believe they were all always dads, as many of them “sowed thier oats” prior to settling down. So to me, I am the outlier. I don’t have stories about having sex in the Carnegie museum after hours with a security guard. I never had sex on the bus returning from a band trip. The only place I could ever find more like minded people was in religious communities, and I’m far from religious.

    Perhaps this is all PI. All I can say is I simply don’t see much that indicates to me that being restricted is the norm for men. And even if its true, I’m still far further to the right than your average man. I’m sure it doesn’t help that the ‘Burgh is a very college oriented town, which means we have more than our fair share of college kids around. Between the college kids and the “mill town” mentality here, I just don’t see anyone championing the restricted lifestyle. I’m sure they exist, but like me they keep quiet and stay under the radar. So whatever the reality is, the appearance continues to be unrestricted = normal, restricted = outlier.

  • Ted D

    Re: N versus character – has it occurred to anyone that N IS a sign of character? I firmly believe people with high N have a character flaw. (Sorry Han. You are the shit, but I’d never date you with that N brother…). To me it shows a lack of control, a lack of long term thinking, and possibly a stronger desire to follow “feelings” than to think and choose rationally. I’ve never simply followed my feelings into any decision, and truth be told I tend to want to be with similar people for friendship and marriage.

    To me being able to control your reactions to external stimulus is a key character trait. Everyone wants to have sex, but learning to control that urge IMO is much better for character than following that urge down the rabbit hole. I understand why people have sex. I simply don’t understand why/how most people don’t learn to control it. I have to relieve myself several times a day, yet I manage to make it to the restroom to do so. Natural urges can be tamed, and learning to do so demonstrates many good character qualities. Can someone that has had lots of sex posses those qualities anyway? Yeah I’ve met enough people like that to believe it. But it certainly doesn’t advertise those traits to walk around with a high N.

  • Lokland

    @Bells

    “But ’till then, is that a fine balance to walk?”

    My answer basically meant do is as much as required and then no more.
    That is the answer you wanted to hear, no?

    There is no magical line between boyfriend-fiance-husband. They might be defined and bounded by individual events but the actual difference in terms of commitment occurs over time and not at those individual moments.

    So for example, if you think that your boyfriend of 2 years is equal to your boyfriend of two weeks and then suddenly elevates himself based upon proposal-engagement…you to put it mildly…really fucked up.

    So the degree of change should be proportional to the amount of commitment which tends to go hand-in-hand with the amount of time together, not the Facebook status. (Unless of course, as I said, your really fucked up and the FB status is what your after.)

    ———

    Some past examples from my life.

    Former girl I dated for two weeks asked for money for car repairs.
    No.

    Current wife needed money for rent 3 years into relationship. Yes.

    ———-

    Girlfriend of few months asked me to re-do my wardrobe. (I dressed like a college kid at the time, not surprising as I was in college but still she had a point.)
    No.

    Wife asked me to wear more colour.
    My socks look like a bunch of rainbows having an orgy.

    ———–

    So the degree of change should not depend upon your relationship status.

    (Imagine a man who had been with a woman for 10 years with kids but no ring being only equally as accommodating as your average boyfriend. Pleasant thought eh?)

    But upon your level of commitment to said person. And of course what is initially required will largely depend upon the individuals.
    I had no problem changing minor habits for girlfriends (I’m quite demanding myself to be totally honest). And I was willing to change more and more (to an extent) until eventually you reach the point where your two halves of one whole and every thought an action effects the whole in someway.

    So continually slope, not three separate plateaus separated by events where the man declares further levels of commitment. (Gradual hill, no staircase nonsense.)

  • Lokland

    Bells, finale note.

    I have no idea about your relationship status but when a woman states that she will treat her boyfriend-fiance-husband according to those titles and not upon their level of investment (as you did) it sets off every alarm bell in every portion of my body saying GTFO.

    It makes your mate more of a status marker/accomplishment…you know…a partner.

    Best to say that you’ll be as accommodating as they are independent of relationship status (with reasonable timeframes for him to complete the proposal marriage acts, as I realize that does matter to woman). Saying you’ll treat your husband better than your fiancé makes you sound far to calculating and more self interested than giving.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Lockland,

    I agree that the Dad strategy is less suited to the current SMP than it used to be. But I don’t think the current distortions in the SMP are sustainable. There is too much unhappiness among both sexes for it to stay this way. Meanwhile I see a fair number of my younger acquaintances forming good marriages. The Dad strategy isn’t dead yet.

    @Ted D,

    Certainly the culture one grows up in has a big influence. I grew up in a restricted culture, which re-enforced my restricted proclivities.

  • Ted D

    Bells – like Lokland, I’ve “allowed” my wife to switch up almost my entire wardrobe. (God help me she wants to take me jeans shopping. She says the jeans I buy are too baggy on my ass.) The truth is, as long as I don’t feel ridiculous I really don’t care what I wear. (To the same extent that I don’t care what I eat in fact.) I need to wear clothes, so left to my own devices I buy frugally, not stylishly. But my wife cares how I look, and I care what she thinks of how I look. I never buy anything I dislike or won’t wear, but she puts far more effort into choosing than I do. (Mostly because my primary concerns are: does it fit? Is it cheap?)

    So tell me, am I wrong to make this concession? Am I somehow allowing my wife to “change” me? Because IMO it makes absolutely NO difference what I’m wearing. I’m still the same person. Clothes only changes other people’s opinion of you, and I really don’t give a shit of what most people think of me.

    How about my efforts to work on my communication style with my wife? Am I allowing her to mold me because I want to have a solid line of communication with her that requires some modification of my behavior? To me that is clearly a NO. I’m making these changes because it matters to me that she understands me. I suppose I could view it from the angle that makes it look like she is changing me. But I’m doing it voluntarily because it matters to her, and therefore matters to me.

    Relationships are supposed to be give and take. If your give is nothing more than modifying your wardrobe or learning not to raise your voice, count your blessings. Hang out at MMSL sometime to see just how drastic some people must get to save their marriages. It has done wonders for me to appreciate what I have instead of dwelling on the fact that my wife thinks it is perfectly reasonable to spend $30+ on one pair of jeans.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Lockland,

    The fact is you (and me) had no other workable strategy.

    Actually my point was the opposite: despite my disadvantages, I did have options. I turned down women initiating with me. I probably would have had even more options had I pursued more aggressively. But due to inclination and upbringing I didn’t find those options appealing.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Bells, it depends on what is being asked of you. I think of it in terms of “would I be interested in this change?” I’m generally open to new experiences and ideas, and I’m happy to “change” myself as I’m doing it constantly, due to influences from people that I’m not involved with, and I enjoy this process.

    Some examples of change for boyfriends in the past: Getting into roleplaying games, D&D and comic books. Reading good science fiction like Robert Heinlein and Dune series by Frank Herbert. Watching movies that appealed to guys instead of girly movies. Listening to new music like punk rock, indie rock, electronic music, etc. Playing Baldur’s Gate, Age of Wonders, Max Payne, Grand Theft Auto, World of Warcraft, Warhammer, City of Heroes, Diablo, etc.

    Some examples of change that don’t involve romantic partners: Reading articles and reviews about a number of different subjects including physics, psychology, sociology, technology, etc. Taking tips from reddit about fitness, nutrition and health. Finding new cooking recipes online. Stumbling upon the manosphere and changing my viewpoints via taking the “red pill.”

    Part of the growing process is change, and that is inevitable, so might as embrace it. :) I was open to the new things those guys were showing me. All of them, taken together, have made me a better long-term mate for ANY guy. Though that was not why I changed. I changed because I wanted to, and because I was emotionally involved with those guys and was truly interested in what they were interested in. I was not resentful to be changed… I am grateful that I was changed.

    Here’s a great song by Bad Religion whose lyrics I love, called Marked:

    if I’m a monster,
    I am a willing one,
    this roller coaster ride is an enticing one,
    on the tip of a continuum flowing wavelike
    through disorder carry me like a vessel to water

    everything you see leaves a mark on your soul,
    everything you feel leaves a mark on your soul,
    everything you touch leaves a mark on your soul,
    everything you make leaves a mark on your soul

    if I can touch it,
    I can destroy it,
    if it’s imaginable to some degree,
    I can become it,
    like a hungry turning vortex that just flickers to existence,
    consuming bits and pieces until I’m finally extinguished

    everyone you see leaves a mark on your soul,
    everyone you bare leaves a mark on your soul,
    everyone you touch leaves a mark on your soul,
    everyone you love leaves a mark on your soul

    That last line? Yeah, if you love, you’re going to change. And it’s going to be awesome.

  • Lokland

    @mr wavevector

    “Actually my point was the opposite: despite my disadvantages, I did have options.”

    Honest question, if the Dad strategy is so effective.
    Why even both defending the point that other strategies were available?
    Should that not be meaningless.

  • Mike C

    Porn stars are not hot. They are repulsive.

    Escoffier,

    I definitely grok their lifestyle being repulsive, especially the idea of monetizing their sexual appeal, and the number of men they have sex with. FWIW, me personally, I don’t find it repulsive as much as I find it ruthlessly mercenary. I could never fully trust a woman who views her sexuality as a commodity she trades for economic reasons, and can’t even conceive of making a commitment to such a woman.

    But repulsive strictly visually/physically? Do you really find her repulsive and not hot?

    http://content8.flixster.com/photo/13/97/53/13975366_ori.jpg

  • Escoffier

    Vertigo is awesome.

    In addition to everything else, that’s the most beautifully shot film about Northern California, ever. SF at that time was the most perfect place to live in the history of the world.

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

      @Escoffier

      I’ve always wanted to do a Vertigo walking tour of SF. It’s not practical – they shot it over a wide area of the city. But we’ve visited several of the locations on various trips, including the cemetery and of course the bay. The last time we were there we stayed across the street from the apartment building Kim Novak emerges from early in the film. It has not changed at all, it was perfect.

      I love everything about Vertigo.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ted

    Has it occurred to anyone that N IS a sign of character? I firmly believe people with high N have a character flaw.

    Now you’re just being pretentious and self-righteous. We restricted guys don’t have any strength of character (or so I’ve been told). Best not to be assertive or vocal about such preferences…

  • Escoffier

    Mike, the pic won’t load.

    But yes, the ones I see I do find repulsive. I suppose I only see the ones who break through and achieve “mainstream” success. However, they all look fake from head to toe. Fake hair, lashes, awful makeup, fake boobs, heavily pierced and tatted, fake tans, just awful. I don’t see the appeal at all but there must be some because I know it’s big business and the market must be getting what it wants.

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

      @Escoffier

      You are more discriminating than most men.

      (Yes, that was a passive aggressive statement.)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Sassy, that’s fair about not liking when a man wants you to change, and preferring an aloof style in a man. However, I think that most people who are secure attachment style will seem very “clingy” to you, because you seem to be very aloof. You might want to consider that these guys whom you keep running into aren’t necessarily abnormal or unhealthy. They just seem weird from your perspective.

    My husband and I are both “secure” in attachment style according to tests we took, and we both love it when the other “clings.” It makes us feel more loved. Studies of babies shows similar patterns. It’s natural and primal to form such strong bonds, and adaptive evolutionarily. When it becomes unhealthy is when the bond is one-way, mutually destructive, or overly smothering.

    I think you have the avoidant attachment style, which can make intimacy difficult:

    http://psychology.about.com/od/loveandattraction/ss/attachmentstyle_6.htm

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Here’s another article:
    http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1112746131/avoidant-attachment-blame-parents-121112/

    Notable quotes that sound just like you:

    These individuals demonstrate anxiety about intimacy, reluctance to commit to or share with their partner, or a belief that their partner was “clingy.”

    Dr. Dekel explains: “Avoidant individuals are looking for somebody to validate them, accept them as they are, can consistently meet their needs and remain calm – including not making a fuss about anything or getting caught up in their own personal issues.”

    Avoiding dependence on a partner is not an avoidance of intimacy for these people, Dekel adds – rather, it is a defense mechanism.

  • Ted D

    Megaman – self-rightious is my middle name! (Actually it is Allen, but that sounds much less cool.)

    I am what I am. There are plenty of other reasons I don’t feel like most people compare to me. Sexuality is but one small piece of that puzzle. I do my best not to allow my opinion to change how I treat other people, but the truth is most of the time I’m thinking anything at all about a coworker or acquaintance, it isn’t in a positive light. I have very high standards, but most of them aren’t the kind of thing you can suss out with casual conversation. My judging tendencies run very deep and constantly churn. I don’t have many close friends because very few people make it longer than a few months before the judgments against them outweigh the positives I like in them.

    In a warped and twisted way I think my wife appreciates this trait, and that she passed the two month mark. Lol. Being an extrovert she simply can’t understand why I find it so hard to like people. That is until she asks about a specific person and I verbally produce an outline of troublesome traits they have exhibited. At that point she either agrees, or tells me I think too much. However she also conceded that overall my judgments of people tend to be more accurate than her “feelings” about them. Sure they may feel like a great person, but if they live by a crappy moral code what good are they to me?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ted D “I simply don’t understand why/how most people don’t learn to control it. I have to relieve myself several times a day, yet I manage to make it to the restroom to do so.”

    Lol, this is too funny.

    I don’t like camping because there are no restrooms. :P

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

    Re: high N and character. I think it basically correlates with low-investment sexual opportunity. Not to sound like I am trying to justify any particular lifestyle, but the bar for “restricted” is being constantly moved around to accommodate cultural mores.

    At one time, a girl was “restricted” if she avoided pre-marital sex. These days, she is considered restricted if she holds out for >3 dates. In fact, she may still get the restricted title if she has a ONS, but did it with the *intention* of starting a monogamous relationship from it (however, a college relationship itself must fit within a semi-expedient, transitory template in order to satisfy the uneasy, competing demands of feminist edu-career prioritizing and family life/motherhood).

    I personally am kind of jaded and believe that these things are often pretty fluid. I have seen restricted types behave very differently when they came into some money and status. An alpha female temptress of SMV 9 or higher can break most men down; it’s a bit like combat in that everyone says that he’ll be a badass warrior, but no one really knows until the rounds start flying and men start dying.

    Discretion is the better part of valor. I’m currently trying the LTR thing and to give it a fair chance I know that I just can’t go out to high risk venues. I have to strap myself to the mast.

    For an unrestricted man who for whatever reason is fairly well-positioned to play the “Cad” role, the problem can be (my opinion) that you feel entitled to a very high-quality emotional and sexual relationship because you feel that you face relatively high opportunity costs for being monogamous. So your ability to put up with any sign of “neglect” or shit-testing or whatever is somewhat diminished. You expect things to be fun and romanticize the relationship too much.

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

      @BB

      I’m currently trying the LTR thing and to give it a fair chance I know that I just can’t go out to high risk venues. I have to strap myself to the mast.

      LOL, this image cracked me up!

      For an unrestricted man who for whatever reason is fairly well-positioned to play the “Cad” role, the problem can be (my opinion) that you feel entitled to a very high-quality emotional and sexual relationship because you feel that you face relatively high opportunity costs for being monogamous. So your ability to put up with any sign of “neglect” or shit-testing or whatever is somewhat diminished. You expect things to be fun and romanticize the relationship too much.

      That’s just the free market at work. People with sky high SMV get to be very picky. Of course, if you demand constant fun, then you will undoubtedly find that the early stages of lust leading to limerence are more gratifying than plain old attachment.

      FWIW, I do know several very high SMV men who are natural “dads.” They definitely have higher N than average, a result of sex literally falling into their laps. However, they’re more likely to tire of this sooner, and speak about the sex as awkward and unsatisfying, much the way mr. wavevector did. IOW, I do not believe that SMV and sociosexuality correlate perfectly. In fact, a lot of good looking beta guys can get ONSs, they have trouble later in sustaining the attraction.

  • Ted D

    Hope – I don’t mind watering bushes and trees, but I’m with you when it comes to the lack of restrooms when I have to drop trousers. Nothing feels less secure than squatting down in the woods with your pants around your ankles. Well at least when in the wilderness. Walking down some of the streets around here after dark feels about as safe. Lol

  • mr. wavevector

    @Lockland,

    Honest question, if the Dad strategy is so effective.
    Why even both defending the point that other strategies were available?
    Should that not be meaningless.

    My point s to counter the assertions of Mike C and others that restricted guys just can’t get laid. Your comment about “had no other workable strategy” actually re-enforces that. But I’m saying that’s not necessarily true – even guys like me who might look like they can’t get laid actually can. But some of us choose not to, at least some of the time. Why? In part, because we’re wired that way.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope
  • Escoffier

    “Madeline’s” apartment is the Brockelbank, which anchors one corner of (s)Nob Hill. The apartments inside are not that great, actually, but the building is gorgeous. Herb Cain lived there. On another corner is 1001 California, which has just about the most spectacular full floor apts in the city.

    Actually, most of the places they shot in the city on location are close. From her apt, you go down California then south to Union Sq./Maiden lane to the flower shop. Scotty’s Apt is on lower Lombard. Gavin Elster’s Club is the Pac Union (former Flood Mansion) on Nob Hill right by the apartment. Midge lives on Telegraph Hill. The Argosy bookshop was also in Union Sq. The McKittrick Hotel (sadly torn down) was a short hike to Eddy & Gough. Judy’s hotel was on Market, etc.

    Really the only three locations you couldn’t walk to are the Palace of the Legion of Honor (which is definitely worth a drive), Mission Dolores, and Fort Point, the south tower of the GG bridge. And, actually, they shot that scene on a soundstage.

    The muir woods scene was actually shot in Santa Cruz (Felton) but the Monterey stuff was shot in Monterey. They also shot a lot in San Juan Batista but Hitchock had to superimpose the tower because the real mission doesn’t have one. The rest was a soundstage.

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

      @Escoffier

      I’ve just clipped your Vertigo itinerary. Next time Mr. HUS has business out that way, I know how I’ll spend my day.

  • Lokland

    @mr wavevector

    “Why? In part, because we’re wired that way.”

    Or perhaps you subconsciously ran a cost-benefit analysis in which you realized three lays every 2 years was significantly less productive than the Dad strategy.

    Theres probably a tipping point at which the Cad strategy becomes better than the Dad strategy and it would be defined by the point at which the fitness in Cad exceeded that of the Dad (which correlates to the frequency of lays).

    Which means that being wired for the Dad strategy is actually just a realization that your options for the Cad strategy were lower in value than the Dad strategy.

    And of course, a different man, with more options, would choose differently.

    So not no but few options forcing the Dad strategy.

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

      @Lokland

      If sociosexuality is not hardwired, then why wouldn’t a man simultaneously pursue both strategies? Dad when possible but taking all opportunities for casual sex? A lot of men do exactly that, until they decide it’s incongruent with their nature, i.e. wiring.

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

    Iggles: “Dude, that’s even worse!!!! It’s smacks of polyamory. Being in love/having romantic feelings and acting on it for more than one person!”

    So let me get it straight, if you do this with someone you *don’t* care about, or even like, and never see then again, then it’s “using them as a sex toy” and dehumanizing them, and thus bad; but if you actually like them as a person, and a friend, and stay in touch, then it’s also bad?

    I’m not sure how we got on this topic, but, my point is not to promote such things, or insist that that ONE activity isn’t unrestricted (duh!), or that it shouldn’t be a deal-breaker to most people (perfectly fair). I’m saying that this one thing doesn’t make me 100% unrestricted and totally capable of viewing sex as a “sport”.

    I’m curious also in observing and learning the reactions of people, and understanding the mental calculus. Apparently, An ONS/fling count of 10 or 20 with people you barely know far much “better” than n=3 with people you do. Honestly, I think it’s just a taboo that was busted, and it’s “unpopular”. But if people read 50 Shades and go buy some “accessories”, however, that’s perfectly OK, though.

    BB nails it. It wasn’t too long that unmarried sex was “unrestricted”. Or homosexuality. Or BSDM. But in the last few years, we are witnessing gay rights and “50 Shades” becoming dinner topics.

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

      Honestly, I think it’s just a taboo that was busted, and it’s “unpopular”

      People have always had group sex, and most of society has always rejected it as acceptable. What’s annoying now is that polyamorists feel free to share their sordid tales with everyone else, and we’re supposed to “tolerate” or even celebrate their lifestyles!

      if you do this with someone you *don’t* care about, or even like, and never see then again, then it’s “using them as a sex toy” and dehumanizing them, and thus bad; but if you actually like them as a person, and a friend, and stay in touch, then it’s also bad?

      Group sex is bad. It doesn’t matter how you feel about the third wheel.

      But if people read 50 Shades and go buy some “accessories”, however, that’s perfectly OK, though.

      That’s all within the realm of monogamy. Monogamy is OK. Group sex and multiple concurrent partners: not OK.

      Note: I’m speaking for myself here.

  • Bells

    @Lokland,

    There is no magical line between boyfriend-fiance-husband. They might be defined and bounded by individual events but the actual difference in terms of commitment occurs over time and not at those individual moments.

    So the degree of change should be proportional to the amount of commitment which tends to go hand-in-hand with the amount of time together, not the Facebook status.

    Good points. Strength of commitment and timeline of investment should run foremost rather than simple titles. That makes sense and it clarifies my thoughts.

    I have no idea about your relationship status but when a woman states that she will treat her boyfriend-fiance-husband according to those titles and not upon their level of investment (as you did) it sets off every alarm bell in every portion of my body saying GTFO.

    No I’ve never had a relationship. The closest I came was to a make-out buddy (in sophomore yr) that looked like it was seriously leading into a relationship. But he graduated and moved far away for grad school. Thank goodness. My sexual frustration was almost over-riding my back of the head logic clearly stating that we weren’t as compatible in personality.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If sociosexuality is not hardwired, then why wouldn’t a man simultaneously pursue both strategies? Dad when possible but taking all opportunities for casual sex?”

    Perhaps not because they are wired to be Dads but that a CB analysis shows them that losing the mother of their children or her potential for reproduction (which will be of higher quality) is more costly than the benefit gained by those few (lower quality) lays with a low chance of pregnancy (even without the pill). Also, male infidelity rates vary tremendously across cultures with places where infidelity carries a low risk having higher rates of it.

    “A lot of men do exactly that, until they decide it’s incongruent with their nature, i.e. wiring.”

    Or the risk of the cost becomes greater than the benefit.

    I realize this is very cynical but I think it has a better explanatory power than wiring. And no, I will not test it to demonstrate its likeliness.

  • Lokland

    @Bells

    “(in sophomore yr)”

    What does this translate to in numbers? (dead serious)
    Also, does it apply to high school or university?

    And if university, you’ve never had a boyfriend/sex?

  • Bells

    Oh my bad, I meant university.
    No, never had sex/boyfriend. *flushes*

  • Lokland

    @Bells

    Thats not totally unbelievable. I know a couple of my wife’s friends were still virgins at graduation and met their husbands shortly thereafter.

  • Bells

    @Ted D,

    So tell me, am I wrong to make this concession? Am I somehow allowing my wife to “change” me? Because IMO it makes absolutely NO difference what I’m wearing. I’m still the same person. Clothes only changes other people’s opinion of you, and I really don’t give a shit of what most people think of me.
    How about my efforts to work on my communication style with my wife? Am I allowing her to mold me because I want to have a solid line of communication with her that requires some modification of my behavior? To me that is clearly a NO. I’m making these changes because it matters to me that she understands me. I suppose I could view it from the angle that makes it look like she is changing me. But I’m doing it voluntarily because it matters to her, and therefore matters to me.

    I feel like I kinda get your personality. You seem to be very strong-minded. So, I was just wondering..would you have made those same concessions when you were dating your wife?

  • Bells

    @Susan,

    For the best illustration of this EVER, from one of the best movies ever made:
    Vertigo – Judy Becomes Madeleine

    I’ve never heard of Vertigo before. But I’m a bit confused by the scene. Did she put her hair up solely because he preferred it? Or was she pretending to be two different girls: Judy/ Madeline?

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

      @Bells

      But I’m a bit confused by the scene. Did she put her hair up solely because he preferred it? Or was she pretending to be two different girls: Judy/ Madeline?

      By that scene, he has already totally remade her look to resemble a dead woman he loves. New clothes, different makeup, and dying her hair from red to platinum. When she objected to the hair color change he said, “Judy, surely it can’t matter to you!” This scene is her trying to hang on to her old hairstyle, and you can see how invested he is in her putting it up.

      Just see it!

  • HanSolo

    @Bells

    Don’t feel bad for not having had sex or a boyfriend. You’re young. Wait for sex until it’s in the right situation. You’re not a freak for being a virgin.

    As to the bf thing, well, it sounds like you’re doing positive things in your life and examining things you might do to improve your chances, so be patient, improve yourself and find a way to interact with the kind of guys that would be good bfs and sooner or later you’ll find someone.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, Judy’s hotel is now named the “Vertigo Hotel” and still open. It’s a flea trap, though, don’t stay there. Go back to the Fairmont (which is where I assume you were last time?) That was the hotel in the ABC series “Hotel” starring Connie Seleca.

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

      Go back to the Fairmont (which is where I assume you were last time?)

      Yes, my husband has a lot of points with them, and they always upgrade frequent travelers to a suite. Last time we had an incredible corner view that included both bridges.

      I loved staying up there, but made the mistake the first day of going for a very long walk downhill, which meant….

  • Escoffier

    Bells, there is no way to explain that scene without a major spoiler, so rent the movie!!

  • Bells

    @Hansolo,

    Don’t feel bad for not having had sex or a boyfriend. You’re young. Wait for sex until it’s in the right situation. You’re not a freak for being a virgin.
    As to the bf thing, well, it sounds like you’re doing positive things in your life and examining things you might do to improve your chances, so be patient, improve yourself and find a way to interact with the kind of guys that would be good bfs and sooner or later you’ll find someone.

    Thanks for the encouraging upvote. People are always surprised to hear that I haven’t been in a relationship because I seem to be a good candidate for wife material. To be honest, about two years ago I was way too focused on my studies and even though I had a good body, I didn’t dress well enough to appeal to the attention of men. But I think I’ve done a huge 180 degree flip since then, in terms of appearance. Still have a couple of things to work out, but I should get there soon enough :)

  • Escoffier

    Oh, and Susan, don’t walk alone to Eddy & Gough, Eddy between downtown and the Western Addition is the heart of the Tenderloin and one of the worst stretches in The City. Once there, though, go north on Gough, toward the Marina, some beautiful cityscapes that way.

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

      Oh, and Susan, don’t walk alone to Eddy & Gough, Eddy between downtown and the Western Addition is the heart of the Tenderloin and one of the worst stretches in The City. Once there, though, go north on Gough, toward the Marina, some beautiful cityscapes that way.

      Great, thanks. Restaurant recs are also always welcome. :)

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

    Sue: “People have always had group sex, and most of society has always rejected it as acceptable.”

    They said the same thing about homosexuals.

    Sue: “What’s annoying now is that polyamorists feel free to share their sordid tales with everyone else, and we’re supposed to “tolerate” or even celebrate their lifestyles!”

    You stated 14% of people have had a 3-way (actually way more than I ever expected). But something only 10% people are homosexual (isn’t is 6% men, 4% women?). What makes it more wrong than homosexuality, given that it’s more popular?

    Again, I don’t mean to get in to poly advocacy, I’m no activist. One of my favorite hobbies is taking the arguments for any certain position, and then applying the *exact* same arguments (freedom, human rights, being nice, tolerant) to a different position that they don’t like, and watching people squirm. Smart people like Escoffier would not fall for it, intellectually smack me upside my head in the kindest way possible, by arguing at entirely different level and I’d… learn something I never knew before. Sometimes trolling IS learning!

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

      You stated 14% of people have had a 3-way (actually way more than I ever expected). But something only 10% people are homosexual (isn’t is 6% men, 4% women?). What makes it more wrong than homosexuality, given that it’s more popular?

      Aside from the erroneous percentage, which Esco addressed, this is apples and oranges.

      “Have ever had a threesome” is not the same as living a group sex lifestyle.

      “Have ever fooled around with the same sex” is a far higher number than self-identified gay men or women, including as it does the populations of prisons, boarding schools and summer camps. :)

      Personally, I would DQ a guy for either, but that doesn’t mean they’re the same thing.

      You may recall that when Sassy learned her bf had had a 3 way I suggested that being lured into one as a drunk 19 yo is very different than planning and carrying one out with purpose. His had been the former, and she was still skeezed out.

  • Bells

    @Escoffier,

    Bells, there is no way to explain that scene without a major spoiler, so rent the movie!!

    I’m not really into old-school movies. But I’ll give it a go, one of these days!

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

    J: “Guilt, not shame, is the right tool. Guilt goes to the behavior, not to the core of the person. It’s perfectly legit to call people on bad behavior.”

    Guilt can easily cross into shame, internalized shame (“toxic shame”) is often an inwardly-driven process. The way I see it, the person applying the guilt is responsible for making sure it doesn’t turn into that. Very explicitly and repeatedly. Especially if they are a parent or in a position of authority over a child.

    For example: “Masturbation is bad, don’t do it.” Internal dialog: “Well, I must be a bad person since I do it. I failed again I better hide it more. I’m a horrible person”.

    Better: “Masturbation can bad if you do too much of it, do it in the wrong circumstances. There are downsides you need to be familiar with. But you know, pretty everyone does it from time to time, and it doesn’t make you a bad person. Don’t think for a second you’re the only one.”

    Big difference there, and I’m guessing Han didn’t get that second talk. Churches are really, really good applying guilt, and letting the shame take over automatically.

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

      Re guilt and shame, the four most powerful words I ever used as a parent were “I’m disappointed in you.” That phrase shaped the character of my children.

  • Mike C

    It’s true, I’ve never had you be aggressive with me here or elsewhere, and there were posters in other blogs who did so even though I wasn’t picking fights. For what it’s worth, I’ve always found you to be reasonable and rational, but you do have a temper. :P My husband has a temper, too, but he will become very cold and aloof, and will walk away before he uses it. I am very careful not to lock horns with him.

    Hope,

    Ha. You are correct. I do have a temper. I could tell you some stories with my ex-wife. It was a flammable mixture. She had a knack for inciting me every once in awhile into an explosive rage. Once in her car, I punched the dashboard and crushed it and cracked my hand. But as I’ve moved from my mid 20s to now 39 (I just turned 39 last week) I think I’ve gotten much better at keeping it under control. In the 7 years I’ve been with my now fiancee, I rarely lose my temper, and when I do it is nothing compared to my ex-wife. Plus, she has a way of disarming me quickly. She’ll look at me directly and simply state nicely, “please do not raise your voice to me”, and that is enough. A recent situation was when we were working through our long-term financial plan (next 5-10 years) and our forecast budgets for 2014 which calls for a significant increase in monthly savings, and reduction in expenditures. I started to grow increasingly frustrated when it felt to me like we were revisiting particular points that I thought had been previously agreed on. One pet peeve of mine is to discuss or debate again a previously “case closed” matter.

    It’s funny you mention your husband has a temper as well, and he sounds like he has found a way to deal with it. FWIW, you are very similar to my fiancee in many ways. She is a thinker while you are a feeler, and you are more restricted than she is, but when I read your comments about the dynamics between you and your husband it often reminds me of very similar dynamics that we have. I’m not sure if I am 100% correct, but my read is you have some sense of what constitutes “wifely duty” (and there is husbandly duty as well). Anyways, we all have flaws and strengths and weaknesses and my temper is definitely one of my flaws. That said, I think this a good example of a compatibility issue. I think men who do have tempers have to select carefully for LTRs to screen out women with personality characteristics that can feed into that temper like pouring gasoline on a fire. The worst combination I’d say is a pairing with a woman who exhibits “masculine aggressiveness” in her demeanor. That pairing could have catastrophic consequences even if there is strong attraction and chemistry otherwise.

    Perhaps I’m stating the obvious here, but I believe most relationship failures result from the matching of incompatible personalities/temperaments even if there is strong mutual attraction, common interests, and common background. Ultimately, personality differences will trump everything else. Whenever someone says relationships are “hard work” or we’ve worked through “tough times”, my first thought is on some level they have incompatible personality/temperaments. My current relationship is almost NEVER hard work, and is very easy because I think we have compatible temperaments.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Lockland,

    Theres probably a tipping point at which the Cad strategy becomes better than the Dad strategy and it would be defined by the point at which the fitness in Cad exceeded that of the Dad (which correlates to the frequency of lays).

    You are using the wrong metric for fitness. The Dad strategy has nothing to do with frequency of lays, and everything to do with finding a suitable mother for his children. The three women I rejected would have been unsuitable mothers in my opinion, and I didn’t want waste my emotional energy on them. So my cost benefit analysis includes the acknowledgement that I’m inclined to committed relationships with women and the high opportunity cost of committing to the wrong one.

    Which means that being wired for the Dad strategy is actually just a realization that your options for the Cad strategy were lower in value than the Dad strategy.

    At that time I had three Cad options and zero Dad options. If I were doing the calculation you suggest, I would have concluded the Cad was my best bet. Three girls in two years of college may not seem like a lot, but remember this was a religious school that was 80% male. In that context, taking those opportunities would have made me the stud of my peer group!

  • Escoffier

    OTC, actual % of homosexuals in the population put the upper figure at 3.5%. 10% was a propaganda claim from the late 80s/early 90s AIDS funding battles, long ago discredited.

    Regarding your relativism about various sexual perversions, that’s a debate I would love to have but I don’t know if Susan would welcome it.

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

      Regarding your relativism about various sexual perversions, that’s a debate I would love to have but I don’t know if Susan would welcome it.

      You’ve piqued my curiosity – I can’t wait.

  • Escoffier

    you can always take a cable car back up but but they have become insanely expesive, like $6/ride

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

      you can always take a cable car back up but but they have become insanely expesive, like $6/ride

      The whole afternoon I never saw a single one that had room on it.

  • Tasmin

    @MrWave
    Well put re: restricted @570.
    I can relate to your take on the opportunities. Bastiat makes some interesting and valid points about “Restricted” relative to culture and I do think there is indeed a continuum but at some point the R steps in, there is a hard stop. Whether that is in thought or behavior or both, the R people have to acknowledge their hard-wiring.

    This may be in terms of avoidance of a behavior but this can also come in the form of going against their wiring and then how they internalize that experience. I liken it a bit to Introversion. Which is where that relativism that Bastiat brings up comes into play.

    Restricted people within an unrestricted culture/environment are likely to behave or make choices that lean toward unrestricted out of perceived necessity or for a variety of other reasons because of how the extroverted traits are preferred (perceived or real) outright and/or advantageous. Just like introverts aren’t changing their stripes to “become” extroverted, they will selectively engage in or incorporate more extroverted traits in certain circumstances, particularly if the culture marginalizes or demonizes their natural dispositions.

    But there is a price for doing so, we feel it, we question it, and we have to weigh it all out in the end. Think group projects and presentations being the “norm” and how introverts feel about that and what they do re: avoid, selectively engage, and then have to come to terms with either choice.

    So there may be 3rd date sex now, where that would be decidedly unrestricted in the past, but I’d argue that most of those R people who slide down their continuum to engage in such do so with the full weight of that dissonance. And should that dissonance prove too much or that conscious foray out of their hard-wired comfort zone continue to yield poor results, there will often be a hasty retreat from those behaviors. Or like Introversion, when we have the power/control to construct our lives – environments in favor of our “I”, we are less likely to (have to) engage in those pesky presentations to satisfy the cultural preference for such. E.g. the natural burn off of hooking-up behaviors beyond the college years.

    But I also believe the other dimension of R includes how we view intimacy: as a component of a relationship or as a free-stranding act for its own sake. For me, intimacy requires greater depth in order to not just enjoy it fully but to feel good about sharing that part of me and vice versa. That depth comes in the form of the other aspects of a relationship. IOW, my concept of intimacy is entwined with my construct of relationships. The further the opportunity falls outside of that construct the more dissonance I feel and less likely I am to not only pursue it, but enjoy it. E.g. third date sex with a woman I view as being GF material still might be outside of my comfort zone as an R, it is sill 100x more likely to happen than a no-strings ONS with a woman who is decidedly not GF material – regardless of how “hot” she is.

    While the restricted orientation seems increasingly malleable when viewed through the lens of our changing culture, I do think on the individual level the dissonance for the restricted folks who are engaging in those intimate acts based on leaning toward the favored cultural values are bearing the cost in terms of personal reconciliation. This is particularly pronounced within the college populations where a great many kids hooking up end up depressed, frustrated, confused, etc. And that is not just because they didn’t get the relationship out of it or were duped by a cad, but I’d guess that for many it is due to that personal dissonance.

    Engaging in more unrestricted leaning behaviors for want of relationship isn’t just a hollow post facto rationalization but it speaks to how their restricted nature really doesn’t allow them to fully decouple intimacy from their relationship ideal without some discomfort. Some will attempt to ease that discomfort by means of projecting, constructing, *hoping* a great deal more into the relationship part of the equation than reality may warrant. They have to balance that scale, even if it means harnessing the hamster a bit. But to be fair, that process is quite different when done before as opposed to the after-the-fact rationalizations we tend to think of. The sex-relationship connection may be weak in terms of reality, but the R people still need it. The UR folks, not so much.

    For me the other dimension of R is definitely character related, which is to say that the fun, self-gratifying, ego-stoking, orgasmic pleasure of sex is just like many other behaviors, choices, consumables (Booze, a fat joint, pizza, ice cream, porn, etc.) that even if viewed as neither good nor bad on their own certainly carry with them risks, rewards, implications, and impacts in terms of both the short term and long-term. IOW, foregoing those short-term “highs” for their own sake and weighing the risks/benefits relative to what I want out of life is just one more test of character.

    Perhaps that is easier for people with other wiring like risk aversion and future-orientation; a package deal. And there are some R people without the package deal that end up making choices – supported by the cultural tail wind, that are more UR-like because they are lacking in other hard-wired governors in their decision making process. IDK, have the sociosexual orientation studies drilled into correlation with those other things? I’d think so, but can’t recall…

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

      @Tasmin

      You have eerily channeled my new post with your recent comment. I too have been thinking about what it really means to be restricted – and I say this as someone who was moderately unrestricted in my youth, or at least smack in the middle of the bell curve. My kids are both quite restricted – my guess is that I caught that tailwind of the Sex Rev and my general impulsivity reigned. As a parent, I worked hard to send the opposite message, so perhaps the “nurture” won out with my own kids. Or they might have different wiring.

      Anyway, the new post is a survey of all the relevant research, and the dissonance piece is well covered. The hard wiring not so much.

  • Escoffier

    Gary Danko is the best food in the City. The “hot” place right now is Benu, which is run by Cory Lee, formerly CdC at TFL. It’s very expensive and a little overblown but they appear to have worked out the kinks. Coi was the “hot” place a few years ago, molecular-gastro. I think it’s lame, actually but it’s still a tough ticket. Also avoid Michal Mina, super lame but very “hip.”

    For old school French, Masa is still quite good and La Folie is very good. Boulevard is great and slightly less formal. Fleur de Lys, which has been open since my mother was a kid, is no longer any good, sadly. Hubert Keller is too interested in being a celebrity chef to run a good kitchen. Sad, because that is the last of the top old SF institutions–Jack’s, Vanessi’s, Orsi’s, Canlis, and Ernie’s, which features in Vertigo, are all gone.

    There are other places to go just because they are old. John’s, e.g., open since the 20s and featured in the Maltese Falcon. If you remember the Original Pantry in downtown LA, John’s is like that. Sears Fine Food, where you wait in line two hours for pancakes. Also Tadich, which claims to be the oldest in California. Tadich is to SF like what Galatoire’s is to New Orleans. Also worth going because it’s the only place left on earth where you can still get San Francisco sourdough bread made according to the old Parisian Bakery (closed) recipe. Also, the Buena Vista at Aquatic Park, which claims to have invented Irish Coffee. Got in a major fight with my dad there once. The food at none of these places is spectacular but they are all unique and “occasions.”

    Aquarello is the best Italian. Farallon is good for fish. Slanted Door is not to be missed, a spectacular take on Vietnamese. For basic Chinese, R&G Lounge. For hipster Chinese, Mission Chinese. High class Chinese, Tommy Toy. For an honest-to-God Naples pizza, Una Pizza Napoletana.

    The very best places are outside The City. Chez Panisse in Berkeley (I have a story about that I will tell when the moment is right). Manresa in Los Gatos (really, really great). And, of course, TFL. Cyrus, which was awesome, closed. Meadowood is way overrated and not worth the dough. In Napa, Jeanty and Bouchon are both better, IMO, and a lot less money.

    I will be at Bouchon next month for sure. Danko too.

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

      @Escoffier

      Thanks so much for all the restaurant tips.

      Mission Chinese has been on my list for a while. I have ZERO interest in molecular cuisine, so I don’t have to be disappointed about not getting that.

      We tried and failed to get into TFL last time around – we went to Bouchon instead and had a great meal.

      My husband loves Slanted Door.

      We found a great breakfast place last time we were there – we knew it was good by the long line on a Monday morning. Just good food, nothing fancy. Dottie’s True Blue Cafe.

      Sadly, I have no trip planned! Perhaps I will give him a nudge this evening.

  • Escoffier

    Oh, and (I’m just piling on now), re: 10%, there is also the math problem that you can’t take 4% of one sex plus 6% of the other, add 4+6 and get 10. Assuming the sexes are 50/50 (they aren’t, exactly, but close enough for these purposes) you are taking 4% of one equal cohort and 6% from the other, so the % of the two added together would be 5%.

    Which, as noted, is still too high.

  • Morgasm

    “Morg, here’s your chance to delete it before it becomes formal record.”

    Why on earth would I want to delete the truth?

    “PS Where are all of the good men?”

    There are plenty of good men in the US.
    But there are not plenty of exceptionally good looking men.
    The comment was a response to the conversation some other commenters were having about jealousy when one’s partner checks out other “hot looking” people.

    The US has a fair amount of decent looking men, but we’re not talking about that. The word used in the conversation was “hot”.

    And “good” has to do with character which is independent of looks.

    You are confusing two entirely different categories, so just calm the heck down, son.

  • Morgasm

    A Definite Beta Guy March 6, 2013 at 9:25 pm

    Another thing to Plain Jane: The goal in finding a mate is not to optimize hotness. At least, that’s my philosophy

    540 Tasmin March 6, 2013 at 9:28 pm

    I know. But the scary thing is that her views on this are not as rabid or rare as they should be.

    Bejeezusfuckadychrist guys! Scroll up and read the friggin convo I was RESPONDING TO. They were talking about partners noticing hot women/hot men and whether or not they get jealous.

    Seems I touched a nerve. Do you really think there’s a lot of exceptionally handsome looking men in the US? If so, where exactly?

  • Morgasm

    A Definite Beta Guy March 6, 2013 at 9:25 pm

    Another thing to Morgasm: The goal in finding a mate is not to optimize hotness. At least, that’s my philosophy

    540 Tasmin March 6, 2013 at 9:28 pm

    I know. But the scary thing is that her views on this are not as rabid or rare as they should be.

    Bejeezusfuckadychrist guys! Scroll up and read the friggin convo I was RESPONDING TO. They were talking about partners noticing hot women/hot men and whether or not they get jealous.

    Seems I touched a nerve. Do you really think there’s a lot of exceptionally handsome looking men in the US? If so, where exactly?

  • Escoffier

    “my guess is that I caught that tailwind of the Sex Rev”

    I’ve been saying this for a while. I think you grew up just as the first big phase of liberation was peaking and then petering out. My generation, which followed you, grew up in a more “closed” era, call it the eye of the storm or whatever. But after us, the storm came back with a vengeance and now there are no restrictions on anything. It’s like the ’70s squared.

  • Ted D

    Tasmin – great post. Very well summed up my restricted “package” mentality. R + risk aversion + future orientation = feeling very out of step with humanity in general. Often like I’m the only person that ever looks up from the daily grind and sees the train coming at me while everyone else keeps playing on the tracks.

    Bells – I’m not dodging your question. But it’ll be long (imagine that!) And I’m forced to type on my phone when in the office now. :-(

  • Morgasm

    For example: “Masturbation is bad, don’t do it.” Internal dialog: “Well, I must be a bad person since I do it. I failed again I better hide it more. I’m a horrible person”.

    Better: “Masturbation can bad if you do too much of it, do it in the wrong circumstances. There are downsides you need to be familiar with. But you know, pretty everyone does it from time to time, and it doesn’t make you a bad person. Don’t think for a second you’re the only one.”

    —-

    What are the downsides to masturbation?

  • Morgasm

    “People have always had group sex, and most of society has always rejected it as acceptable. What’s annoying now is that polyamorists feel free to share their sordid tales with everyone else, and we’re supposed to “tolerate” or even celebrate their lifestyles! ”

    Polyamory is not the same as group sex.

  • Iggles

    @ OTC:

    Iggles: “Dude, that’s even worse!!!! It’s smacks of polyamory. Being in love/having romantic feelings and acting on it for more than one person!”

    So let me get it straight, if you do this with someone you *don’t* care about, or even like, and never see then again, then it’s “using them as a sex toy” and dehumanizing them, and thus bad; but if you actually like them as a person, and a friend, and stay in touch, then it’s also bad?

    Let me put it this is way..

    That’s like asking, “Would you prefer your spouse cheated on you with a random person or your best friend?” I would respond “Neither!!” Who would want their spouse to cheat? But, examining it as a hypothetical, if you chose to work things out wouldn’t it be easier to deal with infidelity without having to see the person who slept with your spouse again? There’s a difference from knowing your SO may find one of your friends attractive and knowing they slept with them!

    Let me revise again.. “Would you prefer your spouse cheated on your with a random person or your brother?” That probably gets a strong reaction, no? See the difference?

    The person we love having sex with someone we’re close to is messier to deal regardless if it was a three-way or infidelity. There’s less emotional distance when someone you know is involved and more room for jealously/possessiveness.

  • Escoffier

    Well, this is sure to be controversial.

    OK, well, OTC’s argument comes down to, “People have objected to behavior X on ground A, which I view as an illegitimate objection. Therefore, any objection to behavior Y on ground A is also illegitimate.”

    This assumes the equivalency of behaviors X and Y, which has not been demonstrated. He also has not demonstrated why ground A is an illegitimate objection.

    So, the issue at hand is, what limiting principle is there for sexual behavior at all? 99.9% of us would agree, anything non-consensual is out. But beyond that? Beyond that, in the modern age, most people will draw the lines in various places but without any coherence or consistency.

    This is my major disagreement with Susan. She draws a lot of lines, all of which I agree with, but then declines to draw many others, which I think she should. I believe that the lines she does draw, she draws out of good sense and good intentions. But there is not an underlying coherent case for why they are right and just—i.e., according to nature and not preference or will. Hence she can find herself as it were “disarmed” against arguments such as “You allow X, why not Y?” and “That’s what they said about Z in the bad old days.”

    A coherent case (that does not depend on but does agree with religious teaching) can be made for traditional sexual morality that is totally grounded in nature. It begins from distinguishing human nature from animal while recognizing that generation is the core of that nature. Such a case will however require ruling out a lot practices that modern man considers his right. Merely stating such a case will hurt a lot of feelings.

    Bottom line: nature, not consent, is the only true ground of morality. When you try to ground morality in the latter, the result is anarchy because the case is inherently incoherent and contradictory.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Mike C

    Ha. You are correct. I do have a temper. …One pet peeve of mine is to discuss or debate again a previously “case closed” matter.

    We all have tempers, just a matter of what triggers it. In my own case the biggest trigger is someone else who is angry. As for the “case closed” thing, it seems like most subjects of tension tend to come up over and over again, like a scab on an old sore that keeps coming off and re-infecting. Kind of like how the same topics keep coming up here and getting everybody riled up. :P

    “I’m not sure if I am 100% correct, but my read is you have some sense of what constitutes “wifely duty” (and there is husbandly duty as well). The worst combination I’d say is a pairing with a woman who exhibits “masculine aggressiveness” in her demeanor. That pairing could have catastrophic consequences even if there is strong attraction and chemistry otherwise.

    Yes, I agree with the wifely duty part. I have a somewhat masculine brain, which I try to channel productively as insights into the male psyche. My husband’s mother actually has a somewhat “masculine aggressive” demeanor, especially in her interactions with my husband (for example bickering with him, raising the middle finger at him — it’s not dysfunctional, just the way she tries to get him to do what she wants, and his rebelling against it). He has commented more than once that he’s glad I am somewhat like his mother in some ways, but not in that particular way.

    Whenever someone says relationships are “hard work” or we’ve worked through “tough times”, my first thought is on some level they have incompatible personality/temperaments. My current relationship is almost NEVER hard work, and is very easy because I think we have compatible temperaments.

    To some extent, I agree that compatible personalities make things much easier and smoother. I do think relationships are a lot of “work,” but it is mostly a lot of self-vigilance and self-control, which can be difficult. For example, I might get a touch annoyed that my husband is playing the music loudly while the baby is sleeping, but it passes quickly. I am hyper-aware of tone of voice, which also translates to the written word. If I ask him to turn down the music, I consciously pitch my voice in a nice, not bitchy/nagging tone. This is, however, different from the way that I used to be when I was younger. I had less self-awareness and felt quite entitled, as in “I am right; other people should just see that I’m right and do what I say.” I think there was a level of emotional maturity that needed to be reached before I could acquire a “good personality.”

  • Ted D

    “as in “I am right; other people should just see that I’m right and do what I say.” I think there was a level of emotional maturity that needed to be reached before I could acquire a “good personality.”

    Well hell. If losing that “I’m right” mentality is the key to having a “good” personality then I’m screwed. Lol

    I still believe I’m right 99% of the time. I’ve just modified how I express it. Maybe its immaturity on my part, but I actually think its because I simply don’t believe most people think much if at all. Most people seem to just react and/or wing it through life. I have little respect for folks that don’t think critically about everything. And its hard to like and trust people I don’t respect.

  • Morgasm

    Lokland, “Of course, I’d never put a cent down in investment…hot merely from a one and done perspective. (Which is of course merely hypothetical as I highly doubt I’ll ever run into one.)”

    And even if you did, what’s the odds she’d have sex with you?

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Escoffier:

    A coherent case (that does not depend on but does agree with religious teaching) can be made for traditional sexual morality that is totally grounded in nature.

    Many religious people argue this, and yet a coherent case for a more permissive sexual morality can also be totally grounded in nature–stemming largely from the fact that humans are not built to be monogamous creatures. Both men and women have evolved with polygamous tendencies. That is nature. The burden then falls on the traditionalist to justify why their morality, which contradicts much of humans’ actual nature, is objectively “better.” (Indeed, as men and women have become free from arbitrary cultural standards, they have been able to return to their “true nature” as it were, hence a large number of beta males failing to attract women and a decline in the “market value” of the physical act of sex.)

    You spoke of distinguishing humans from animals, and yet humans are one of the only creatures in existence who have sex purely for recreation. How does that impact the “traditionalist” morality?

    Finally, it’s interesting that you spoke of 99.9% of people agreeing on consent. And yet, if we go by a truly nature-based moral ethic, why should consent factor at all? If we are really talking about nature, we are talking about the law of the jungle, in which the strongest survive. Non-consensual acts are perfectly acceptable in that context. Because it’s about reproduction. Nature doesn’t give a rat’s ass who gets hurt who feels bad, as long as the genes are transmitted into the next generation.

    These kinds of internal contradictions have been essential to traditional sexual morality’s disintegration in the face of greater human freedom.

  • Ted D

    Morgasm – re: issues with master nation

    I was led to believe you could go blind and/or get hairy palms. Of course I learned otherwise but not before worrying that I’d cut my hands shaving them because I couldn’t see straight!

  • Ted D

    Rofl masterbation. That word isn’t in my phones dictionary it seems. Or my typing truly sucks.

  • Morgasm

    Bells, “I have an earnest question. I completely agree that you should take into account your husband’s likes and dislikes in order to strengthen the marriage. But to what extent should you make personal changes for a boyfriend? ”

    Not a very large extent. If the change is for the better (will improve your health, for example), do it. Not because he wants it but because you have concluded the change would increase the quality of your life.

    Boyfriends come and go. In this country pretty girls start having them at around the age of 12, maybe sooner. Boyfriends have not made any life long commitment to you nor have given you children or anything of consequence.

    Husbands are different.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier “Bottom line: nature, not consent, is the only true ground of morality. When you try to ground morality in the latter, the result is anarchy because the case is inherently incoherent and contradictory.”

    How do you define nature? Often the nature argument leads people to justify things like rape and murder because they are “natural.” If evolutionary psychology should become the basis of morality, then Lokland’s and Introverted Playboy’s arguments would be true. After all, people are just trying to spread their genes.

    I think the most compelling argument that is left is the spiritual/philosophical one. Unfortunately spirituality doesn’t hold much water in the secular world, and philosophy has turned for the worse ever since (as you said) Machiavelli. So Susan tries to appeal to individual self-interest via speaking of markets, economics and utility. I think it works for those who are not spiritually inclined.

  • Escoffier

    IP, your whole post is one unsupported assertion after another, starting with “humans are not built to be monogamous creatures.”

    The heart of the problem with your post is that you see nature as purely “low nature”, as in, what humans have in common with animals. The moraly signficant aspect of nature is rather what distinguishes us from the animals. If our nature were exhausted by what we have in common with the brutes, then there would be no morality at all.

    As for animals not having sex for recreation, I can only lol. What do you think two rutting beasts are thinking as they rut? Are they really contemplating the long term consequences?

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

      As for animals not having sex for recreation, I can only lol. What do you think two rutting beasts are thinking as they rut? Are they really contemplating the long term consequences?

      That reminds me of the stallion mating scene in A Man in Full.

  • Morgasm

    Ted D, “R + risk aversion + future orientation = feeling very out of step with humanity in general. Often like I’m the only person that ever looks up from the daily grind and sees the train coming at me while everyone else keeps playing on the tracks.”

    You mentioned you lived in a lower-middle class hood right? You mentioned a lot of the kids there are from single parents and there’s a lot of baby daddy/baby mama drama, right? That teens get preggers there quite often, right? That boys seem aimless and listless, right?

    That’s enough to make any sensible person restricted, risk averse and future time oriented.

    You’re not out of step with smart, cultured folk.
    You’re out of step with the uncivilized.

    Welcome to the club :)

  • Escoffier

    My conception of (human) nature is, or aspires to be, identical with Aristotle’s. That is, the order of sentient being goes God-man-beast. Man is lesser than God but greater than the beasts. He shares traits with both and is identical to neither. All his moral obligations arise from those traits that he shares with God and that lift him above the beasts.

    For those of a non-religious temperment, substitute “eidos of the good” or noesis noeosis (thought thinking itself) and the argument is the same.

    Bottom line: you think there is something in man higher than the beasts, or you think man is just the cleverest and most facile of the beasts. If the latter, then morality has no rational ground at all, the same way that no one gets upset at horses, dogs or apes for acting immorally. Morality arises from the ability to make concious choices and the ability to deliberate about the goodness and badness of those choices. That goodness and badness is grounded in nature, in the nature of man and the nature of things.

  • Morgasm

    Re: Nature.
    Homo sex is found in the animal kingdom also.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Ted D, I mostly hang around people who think a lot, think critically and think intelligently, so I’m usually open to other perspectives.

    Also, my husband and I both have respect for competence, even in people who may not be considered “smart,” for example those who know a lot about soil, trees, gardens, wood, steel, guns, electrical wirings, plumbing, construction, etc.

    My in-laws knew a guy who could find water sources like magic. Southern Utah is basically high desert, and the guy told them where to dig, and sure enough there was water. They live off-the-grid on well water, and that guy got them the water.

  • Morgasm

    “I think the most compelling argument that is left is the spiritual/philosophical one. Unfortunately spirituality doesn’t hold much water in the secular world, and philosophy has turned for the worse ever since (as you said) Machiavelli. So Susan tries to appeal to individual self-interest via speaking of markets, economics and utility. I think it works for those who are not spiritually inclined.”

    +1

    The problem with Western Civilization is even its philosophies have no concept of transcendence. That is why all western thinkers who sought a model for a being state beyond merely the physical and mental had to look Eastward for models, like Thoreau and the ne0-transcendentalists.

    This is also why Eastern traditions are so appealing to westerners today. They are asking, “is this all there is?” and intuitively sense its not.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Escoffier:

    Lol, it behooves you to take my arguments more seriously because my side is winning/ has won in the larger culture and your traditionalist side is losing or has lost. If you want to stick your head in the sand and dream of the good old days, well, to each his own.

    But that aside, there is plenty of support for my claims, particularly the monogamy issue. I just did not feel it necessary or practical to give a laundry list of biological and psychological articles. I reiterate that in the context of a free society, without cultural and legal restrictions of human sexual desires or behavior, witness what men and women do. Don’t you find it the least bit interesting that an array of legal and cultural regulations are necessary to keep that traditionalist sexual system in place? Either in America decades ago or in conservative Islamic societies today?

    “The moraly signficant aspect of nature is rather what distinguishes us from the animals.”

    And yet we are both human, and we are debating morality. And certainly other people are even further apart on morality than me and you.

    I do believe there are moral absolutes. But the basis of that is not “nature” per se, it is our reason and our ability to answer questions about morals and ethics rationally.

    On animal sex and pleasure, of course they are mating for momentary pleasure. But the point is that only humans and a few other species have been observed to mate when the female is not in heat, i.e. there is no chance of reproduction. Homosexual activity also supports this to a lesser degree.

    I find very little to disagree with in your post at 694.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Several of the men here seem to believe that unrestricted male sexuality is the norm, and those men claiming to be restricted are merely rationalizing a lack of opportunities – sour grapes, even. I disagree. Let me share my experiences turning down sexual opportunities despite having very limited opportunities.

    Thank you for pointing this out. This is the second part of the “I’m a loser that can’t get laid” meme. “If all men want to bang random hotties and I cannot I must be a loser/gay”. Quit saying what is normal for men unless you have proof of that, that is another piece of the SMP puzzle.

    But to what extent should you make personal changes for a boyfriend?
    Lokland did a great job explaining this to you, the level of emotional involvement dictates your desire to please your partner. Ideally this feels natural and you also feel comfortable enough to suggest some changes that will improve your interaction with your partner.

    Bells, before you waste time/money on 50 Shades, read Susan’s review. It was, um, negative.
    Reading is like sex, very personal likings even if Susan didn’t liked it she might. I say take a copy from the library and if you like it buy the whole trilogy. I personally will never read it (A journalism student with no e-mail!!!! ARGGGH can’t suspend disbelief for that) but I gave it as a present to a friend and so far she still speak to me so she must had liked it.

    Unlike you, my biological father was a cad, as we’re both of my uncles. (Well until my aunts divorced them). Most of the men I know well may not be cads now, but certainly had a good run at it in years gone by. I don’t know a single other man that is as restricted as I am, and most are just slightly restricted. (Which is to say they want a relationship but won’t pass up freely given sex regardless)
    Genes are a bit crazy Ted maybe the men in your family were a mix of Dad with Cad but some of them choose to take the Cad route out of pressure. Is not uncommon in my country for older relatives to tell their younger men to start “banging around”, because if they don’t they are not manly as they are or they are going to turn gay. And receive all sorts of encouragement when they score, cheat, get someone pregnant… Maybe you are more yourself than any of your relatives ever was, YMMV.

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

    Esc: “OK, well, OTC’s argument comes down to, “People have objected to behavior X on ground A, which I view as an illegitimate objection. Therefore, any objection to behavior Y on ground A is also illegitimate.””

    I think you have it backward. I don’t see it as an illegitmate objection.

    People often say “homosexual people should be able to have sex, because they have the right to have sex with whoever when it’s consensual, and they’re not harming anyone else”.

    As you note, consent and adulthood is the basis of their argument. But it ends there. It’s obviously incomplete.

    So, I am asking – if three consenting adults agree to an encounter, why is that wrong? It has all the exact same attributes they claimed that made homosexual sex is correct.

    Then, you: “Well, it’s three people not two! It’s different! Ewwww!” With no reason why it’s wrong. And it stops there.

    But again, I agree with the rest of what you wrote. Again, you are way smarter than me.

  • Morgasm

    Susan, have you seen the documentary about American MRAs in Brazil (looking for the “young and restless”)?

  • Ted D

    Morgasm – “You’re not out of step with smart, cultured folk.
    You’re out of step with the uncivilized.”

    Story of my life: born with a champagne taste and into a family living on a beer budget. I don’t know a single “cultured” person in real life. I know plenty of decent people, but even my IT friends came from blue collar worker stock. I don’t have much in common with the people around me, and “cultured” folks would not be very receptive to my lifestyle choices. :-p

    And just for the record, all the gang banging around me has developed over the last couple decades. In my youngest days Pittsburgh was booming from mill work and coal mining. Everyone still had that blue collar mentality, but Thu Gary was unheard of. It wasn’t until he late 80′s that thing really turned to shit mostly because he mill jobs vanished. Then there were a ton of men used to making big bucks with absolutely no marketable skill to start over.

    I’ve been risk averse and long oriented my entire life. I was one of the first latchkey kids because I was responsible and trustworthy enough at 10 to be left alone at home for a few hours after school. In fact I think I got MORE immature in high school!

  • Morgasm

    “Secondly, the fact is, many women suck at sex. Even the ones that are really good still are not mind-blowing. ”

    We can’t be any worse than men.

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    “We can’t be any worse than men.”

    True! Haha.

  • Mireille

    That’s because most western civilization can be summed up as “Control; Never surrender”. Of course that doesn’t work out for everybody, which is why you have a lot of violence, physical, psychological and the worse, structural. I think it is one of the reason the West did so well, harnessing the forces of the environment and all that great development. However, in the process, the illusion of control became “real” for some and realizing we’re not really in charge can be a tough buy. I’m not overly religious, though raise caths, but I definitely believe in God and enjoy church; that saved from a lot of dark thought, knowing someone was visibly looking out for me.

  • Ted D

    Ana – oh don’t worry. I’m not claiming some DNA based destiny here. My point is I grew up mostly surrounded by women and rather unrestricted men. My sperm sonar blew through 4 marriages and several extra kids before he passed by his own hand. My uncles were all married in, so they only served as a father “proxy” for me while they were around. Not that they were bad men, but they probably came close to cutting the “men are logs” stereotype so often thrown around.

    And my point was that my perception of R vs. UR is that restricted men are rare, because my local environment was mostly full of UR men. Not that they all cheated or abused anyone, but there is no doubt that they were all perfectly fine with casual sex. Some of them did cheat, some of them did abuse people. But the overall gist of growing up around UR men was: there was something wrong with me because I didn’t desire sex for sexes sake. Add to that a Catholic slant and the associated built at something as normal as masterbation, and its hardly a surprise I had/have sexual hangups.

  • Morgasm

    Ted D, “Story of my life: born with a champagne taste and into a family living on a beer budget. I don’t know a single “cultured” person in real life. I know plenty of decent people, but even my IT friends came from blue collar worker stock. I don’t have much in common with the people around me, and “cultured” folks would not be very receptive to my lifestyle choices. :-p”
    __

    Well by “cultured” I didn’t mean high financial class. I meant sensible people with sound ethics and morality. Money poor doesn’t necessarily mean morally poor.

    Sassy,
    “I’ve never liked or tried trying to change a person that I’m in a relationship with. If there is something about them I don’t like, I either accept it and deal with it or I break up with them. I’ve never considered trying to change how someone is.

    As an example, the recent ex-bf drank a lot more than I am comfortable with. I don’t drink too often, but he liked having alcohol everyday. I also don’t drink to get drunk. He would drink to get drunk on occasion as well. I could have told him that I didn’t want him drinking so much, but I didn’t. Honestly, who am I to tell a grown man what he can and cannot do? If I don’t like something about a guy, and it’s a big issue or problem, I would rather leave than try to change him.

    What I ended up doing was telling him that he should hang out with his friends whenever he wanted to drink a lot or get drunk. I didn’t tell him that he needed to stop. I simply told him that I wouldn’t feel comfortable with him doing it in my company. If he wanted to get drunk, I told him simply not to invite me to hang out with him on those nights. Problem solved.

    I don’t try to control men, so I don’t appreciate it when they try to control me. I either accept a guy as he is, tolerate aspects of him that I may not wholeheartedly endorse, or leave him. I remember that Hope mentioned convincing her husband to stop smoking for her. Although that may have worked for her, I would never dare demand a guy do that for me. I would either only date non-smokers, or accept the fact that a particular man is a smoker instead. I would never tell a guy to change something like that for me.

    I couldn’t imagine doing something like that, so I guess that’s why I hate it so much whenever some guy tries to change me.”
    ___

    I’m much the same. I learned quite quickly that its better to go without than to go with someone who is so far off base wrt my internal value system, even if they kind of sort of do want to change.

    I once dated a man who saw me as a motivational tool to improve himself and I thought “wow! I can mold this guy!”.

    Nothing doing.

  • Lokland

    @Ana, mr wavevector

    “This is the second part of the “I’m a loser that can’t get laid” meme. “If all men want to bang random hotties and I cannot I must be a loser/gay”. ”

    The problem with this argument is that it focuses on wants. Which do correlate with our needs but not entirely. We must examine the needs and not the wants which in the end is to reproduce and have our children reproduce.

    We then have to apply the biological standard of success, fitness, in the situation our species evolved in to determine what is interpreted (not what is) as being successful.

    Basically that means, imagine the pill didn’t exist and who would have more/better kids (we would quantify the quality of a child and then determine the highest score based on both values).

    ————–

    “You are using the wrong metric for fitness.”

    There is only one metric for fitness and that is the ability to produce offspring that are capable of reproducing.

    “The Dad strategy has nothing to do with frequency of lays, and everything to do with finding a suitable mother for his children. The three women I rejected would have been unsuitable mothers in my opinion”

    Of course but what would cause a man to choose the Cad vs. Dad strategy.
    I’m going to assume that you, like most men, get a better pay off from the Dad strategy.

    That does not imply that the Dad strategy results in higher payouts just that it gives out a more consistent number.

    The Cad strategy works occasionally and when it does it works well. If one were capable of doing it well it would make sense to pursue it over the Dad strategy. (And most men cannot.)

    “At that time I had three Cad options and zero Dad options. If I were doing the calculation you suggest, I would have concluded the Cad was my best bet.”

    Entirely possible, or you yet again, subconsciously chose the Dad strategy realizing the potential payout was higher than three lays (which would imply that you viewed the cost involved with those three lays on the Dad strategy as being worse than their Cad benefit.)

    —————–

    I come from a very Dad oriented family. All married, all with kids, no divorces and I assume low infidelity (I have tested and confirmed one case of cuckolding, suspicious bastard that I am).

    Most of those couples are/were N=1 (inferred from details not directly asked or known) on my mothers side.

    My fathers side spans the entire range from Dad (father) to super Cad (uncle).

    I am 100% positive the Dad strategy is more effective (7 grandchildren vs. 5, same number of children).

    That doesn’t alter that the super Cads on my fathers side are seen and interpreted as successful whereas the Dads are interpreted as mediocre (at best).

  • Escoffier

    “The problem with Western Civilization is even its philosophies have no concept of transcendence”

    Totally false. At best you could say that about modern philosophers, but it’s not even true of all of them. It’s flatly false re: the ancients and mediavals.

  • Escoffier

    IP, I spent few minutes looking at your blog the other day when I first saw you on Susan’s site (no idea what you’re doing here, honestly) and it took a very short time to get that your whole “philosophy” boils down to “if it feels good, do it.”

    As to your “winning,” that is a seperable question from what is true or false. As Plato pointed out in the Gorgias, pit a nutritionist in debate against a candy monger in front of an audience of children, the candy-monger will win every time. That’s hardly much of an achievement.

    And whether or not you will really “win” in the long run remains to be seen. Susan’s site is itself a powerful manifestation of the massive discontent out there with the “if it feels good, do it” message. It’s hardly the only one. A backlash may be brewing.

    And even if one isn’t, again, truth is more important than victory. It is better to go down to defeat flags flying for a noble cause than to profit from a sordid reality and wallow in it.

  • Morgasm

    Escoffier, you left a somewhat related comment elsewhere on an older thread to which I replied

    Morgasm March 6, 2013 at 5:49 pm

    ” That of course pre-dates Rousseau. From him they get the “back-to-nature” strain which holds that what is primal in man is best because it is elemental or “first” as in prior-in-nature-to, hence the most natural. So, all your basic bio urges are the “real” you, the essence of you and the reason you exist,. Therefore, to the extent that you deny or sublimate them, you are denying yourself and your true nature. Remember the analogy that begins the Second Discourse, the ancient statue that has fallen to the bottom of the sea and become encrusted with barnacles and the like. (Machiavelli’s Discourses also begins with an analogy about an ancient statue …) The barnacles are civilization. They are not part of man as man, as such. They are contrived additions. The “real” man is the unadorned statue underneath. Civilization is for Rousseau a tragedy, an irreversible one, one whose worst effects can be mitigated, but a tragedy nonetheless….

    Pretty much all subsequent “back-to-nature” thinking–including modern enviornmentalism, via Thoreau–has flowed from this. ”

    Actually, no. Thoreau was very much influenced by Dharmic (Hindu) thought in which the original being state of humans is transcendent to the physical. Thoreau sought nature because in a natural environment the sublime sentiments of transcendence and the life of the mind could be nourished and inspired.

    Rosseau and the vast majority of western “thinkers” (who are not influenced by eastern wisdom traditions) cannot but reach their pinnacle of thought at the biological urge because there is nothing in their civilization that speaks beyond it. Their cultures do not and did not have transcendent traditions so the possibility of a self beyond the primal urge is unthinkable, unless they turn eastward, as did Thoreau and other neo-transcendentalists.

  • Escoffier

    To delve just a little further, you write:

    “But the basis of that is not “nature” per se, it is our reason and our ability to answer questions about morals and ethics rationally.”

    OK, where do you think our “reason and our ability to answer questions about morals and ethics rationally” come from, if not nature? Why do humans have these abilities whereas animals do not?

    “Don’t you find it the least bit interesting that an array of legal and cultural regulations are necessary to keep that traditionalist sexual system in place?”

    No. The human soul, the Greeks teach us, has three parts: a desiring part, a pasionate or spirited part, and a reasoning part. A well ordered soul in one in which the reasoning part rules the other parts. Not, indeed, with an iron fist (unless that is necessary) but with firmness lest the other parts get out of control and ruin our lives.

    A great many, perhaps most, people will not have souls in which the reasoning part rules by default. They will rather succumb often to their appetites. For such people, outside sanction is both necessary and good.

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

      Anyone who debates Escoffier on matters of philosophy is a fool. Might as well pick up your ball and go home.

  • Bells

    @Hope

    I’m generally open to new experiences and ideas, and I’m happy to “change” myself as I’m doing it constantly, due to influences from people that I’m not involved with, and I enjoy this process.
    Part of the growing process is change, and that is inevitable, so might as embrace it. I was open to the new things those guys were showing me. All of them, taken together, have made me a better long-term mate for ANY guy.

    I’m also very open to trying exploring different things. I have no objections to learning more information of a man’s interests. I do draw the line at watching sports! I’d much rather go outside and play sports instead of sitting still and watching people do it on tv.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Hope – I don’t mind watering bushes and trees, but I’m with you when it comes to the lack of restrooms when I have to drop trousers. Nothing feels less secure than squatting down in the woods with your pants around your ankles. Well at least when in the wilderness. Walking down some of the streets around here after dark feels about as safe. Lol
    Restricted trait? I once hold out peeing for 8 hours just because we were in the middle of the jungle. “My vayjay isn’t going to get bitten my any bugs hell no! :D

    Perhaps that is easier for people with other wiring like risk aversion and future-orientation; a package deal. And there are some R people without the package deal that end up making choices – supported by the cultural tail wind, that are more UR-like because they are lacking in other hard-wired governors in their decision making process. IDK, have the sociosexual orientation studies drilled into correlation with those other things? I’d think so, but can’t recall…
    I observed many correlations with things like over indulging, shopping indiscriminately, other vices with being a slut or a cad. I know people make the argument that sexuality doesn’t correlate with anything else so people should be free of judgement but I wouldn’t be so sure. Never knew a slut that was not spending all her money on clothes she never wear or a cad that was not also borderline alcoholic/drug user or addicted to something else that was no good for him, I could be totally wrong but it will be interesting to see formal studies.

    This is my major disagreement with Susan. She draws a lot of lines, all of which I agree with, but then declines to draw many others, which I think she should. I believe that the lines she does draw, she draws out of good sense and good intentions. But there is not an underlying coherent case for why they are right and just—i.e., according to nature and not preference or will. Hence she can find herself as it were “disarmed” against arguments such as “You allow X, why not Y?” and “That’s what they said about Z in the bad old days.”

    I think Susan is being practical everyone knows that she was not a saint when she was younger she will lose a lot of credibility if she started preaching restrictiveness too much. She can correct me if I’m wrong in this assessment.

    @Hope and @Escoffier
    How about using the argument that is the best for “the common good”? Most people want to think that their choices are moral because they are making the world a better place by being personally happy. But showing that they are actually debasing civilization might make them less likely to do stuff that will add on. That the green movement argument “the power of one”.

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

      @Ana

      I think Susan is being practical everyone knows that she was not a saint when she was younger she will lose a lot of credibility if she started preaching restrictiveness too much. She can correct me if I’m wrong in this assessment.

      There is that aspect, of course. But even more important is the fact that I need to reach an audience to be heard. And I know for a fact that Escoffier’s approach would make him one of my few commenters. :)

      Remember, I started talking to high school girls because their own mothers were very restrictive and judged them. None of that prevented their underage drinking or sexually precocious behavior. It was only by addressing the issue strategically that I made any headway with them.

  • Escoffier

    You are just flatly wrong when you say that “there is nothing in their civilization that speaks beyond it. Their cultures do not and did not have transcendent traditions so the possibility of a self beyond the primal urge is unthinkable”

    Every western philosopher from Plato to Marsilius had a conception the transcendent, and many after them. The mainstream of modern thought (since machiavelli) has been to attack the transendent but some have stood outside that trend.

    In any event, in the West there was 2,000 years of uniform belief in the transcendent followed 500 years of divided opinion on it. So, in one form or another, it has always been here.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    I think you have a hard time letting go of your total independence, which is both admirable and troubling. Sure, the stereotypical feminine thing to do is nagging the man to try to change him. But the healthy dynamic is both people being self-aware and confident enough to be able to change themselves for the better, out of mutual love and respect, without the need for nagging or control.

    The problem I have had with most of the men in my past who tried to change me is that our value systems were not compatible. I don’t like it when a man tries to change things about me that I view as important to my personality/self-image. I like the way that I dress. I don’t see how a man could even believe that he has the authority to alter it. My clothing is an expression of who I am. It’s important to me. Changing my wardrobe would be changing a significant part of how I express myself.

    I also don’t like it when a man believes that his unsolicited opinion is somehow better than my own or trumps mine. That is the quickest way to get on my “shit list”. In my opinion, if a guy doesn’t like the way that I dress, he doesn’t have to date me. I’m sure there are plenty of other women out there with wardrobes that are more to his liking. He doesn’t have to stay with me. If he can’t handle not being able to change that aspect about me, he should move on.

    I’ve also dealt with 2 guys who have had problems with the fact that I’m a vegetarian. I have been a vegetarian for 8 years now. I let these guys know that I’m a vegetarian on the first date. I’ve even gone so far as to ask them whether or not it bothers them. They say no, but clearly they lied about it because they bring up my dietary choices later on. Later on in the relationships, they would try to convince me to eat meat or complain about the fact that I don’t eat meat. This frustrates me because not only are they trying to change me, but they also knew about that aspect of my life from day one. Just because I’m dating them, and just because I’m sleeping with them, does not mean that I would change my diet for them. They eventually see that I won’t change that and continue to complain, so I dump them. I really don’t have much patience for such bullshit.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ted

    I am what I am.

    That was a very dry, ironic joke on my part (see #294). Wouldn’t have you any other way. I’ll gladly accept the “restricted chump” label, provided others accept the “unrestricted thug” label. :cool: (haven’t used that one before).

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    Sassy, that’s fair about not liking when a man wants you to change, and preferring an aloof style in a man. However, I think that most people who are secure attachment style will seem very “clingy” to you, because you seem to be very aloof. You might want to consider that these guys whom you keep running into aren’t necessarily abnormal or unhealthy. They just seem weird from your perspective.

    My husband and I are both “secure” in attachment style according to tests we took, and we both love it when the other “clings.” It makes us feel more loved. Studies of babies shows similar patterns. It’s natural and primal to form such strong bonds, and adaptive evolutionarily. When it becomes unhealthy is when the bond is one-way, mutually destructive, or overly smothering.

    I think you have the avoidant attachment style, which can make intimacy difficult:

    When I went to a therapist a while back, the therapist had me take an attachment style assessment. I had 7 secure attachment aspects, 6 avoidant aspects, and 5 anxious aspects. I don’t think that I have an avoidant attachment style. I think that my ENTP personality just comes across as more rational, aloof, and methodical in comparison to other women. I’ve had several men tell me that I don’t act like a typical woman, and I think that they meant it as an insult. I’m not mushy or very emotional, so I come off as cold.

  • Morgasm

    “Every western philosopher from Plato to Marsilius had a conception the transcendent, and many after them. The mainstream of modern thought (since machiavelli) has been to attack the transendent but some have stood outside that trend.”

    Many concepts were borrowed from Eastward but not well fleshed out.

    “In any event, in the West there was 2,000 years of uniform belief in the transcendent followed 500 years of divided opinion on it. So, in one form or another, it has always been here.”

    2,000 years? Are you referring to Christianity here. That’s exactly what I’m talking about with its “everyone is born sinful” doctrine.

  • Morgasm

    “I’ve also dealt with 2 guys who have had problems with the fact that I’m a vegetarian.”

    Try dating only vegetarians, that’s what I do.

    The fun part starts when you date a vegan ;)

    And don’t even get me started on the “raw foodists”. Oh boy, what a hoot!

    But I got progressively healthier with each one!

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Bells, I don’t get watching sports either. But I will try things to see if I like it or not. I sat through a baseball game once with old coworkers and was bored out of my mind. They were drunk, so they were having a blast.

    Sassy, the guys trying to stop you from being a vegetarian is lame. Though, most guys seem to really love their meat. I’ve never met a male vegetarian in real life, and hardly any online.

    As for your attachment style, maybe you are a mix. Have you taken this one?
    http://psychology.about.com/library/quiz/bl-attachment-quiz.htm

    Perhaps you need to date an ENT* guy… just have prospective dates take the MBTI. :P

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Basically that means, imagine the pill didn’t exist and who would have more/better kids (we would quantify the quality of a child and then determine the highest score based on both values).
    Didn’t we had this discussion before? The Cads still lose out.
    a) Leaving a lady pregnant to fend herself in the wild= likely death offspring
    b) If the lady survive she has to find enough food and resources for her and the offspring to feed for at least 15 years so it can be mature enough to reproduce and we know that malnutrition delays puberty and stops periods = death offspring.
    c) Cads risk prone nature allows them for short lifespan = not enough time to make out for all the offspring that won’t survive.
    Really Lokland the Alpha Seeder only works successfully in animals that don’t need to wait decades to mature to reproduce and that don’t need a primary caregiver or render their mother helpless for months of time. If you think about it the fact that the most delicate stage of pregnancy are the first three months show that the ladies that had help of the father were most likely to carry to term and if she was well feed by him she was more likely to survive the birth and raise the kid. Let it go superficially trying to be Genghis Khan looks like the best strategy but there is only one Genghis Khan for a reason, YMMV.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Perhaps you need to date an ENT* guy… just have prospective dates take the MBTI. :P
    There is an App for that! http://www.typetango.com/

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Escoffier:

    I can see how you would characterize me in that way. My blog is focused on giving men the tools and knowledge to become more attractive to women, and therefore to have options. What they do with those options is up to them, whether casual sex or marriage is the goal. I write mostly about the particulars of attraction and dating, focusing mostly on the “what” and “how”, not so much the “why” or the “should.”

    But for me, it’s a little more than “if it feels good, do it.” I’m all for enjoying one’s life and having pleasant experiences. But true understanding and self-reflection is far more rewarding than giving in to directionless passions. My journey to improve with women and dating is part of a larger (ongoing) effort at personal development and growth. IOW, sometimes you should not do it, even if it feels good, for the sake of some larger goal in your life.

    And I will say that all relationships, for all people, whether permissive or traditionalist, whether ONS or marriage, basically come down to feeling good. If people don’t feel good in them, they stop the relationship or change it. To truly take traditionalism (for lack of a better term) to its logical extent, we have to go back not to the 1950s, but to earlier centuries where the feelings and desires of individual, autonomous people were fully irrelevant. That was the system that was sustained the world over for thousands of years. As long as you or anyone else on the “traditionalist” side embraces basic values like individuality and self-determination, you will always run of the risk of backsliding to my camp (for lack).

    As for what I’m doing here, quite simply I find human relationships and sexuality fascinating. What motivates men and women to do what they do, where attraction comes from, and dating in modern society. Perhaps I’m not as down on it as you are because of my different worldview.

    “truth is more important than victory.”

    Of course it is. My point was simply that to get at the truth, one should pay closer attention to the reality around, than you seem to be willing to do. To write it all off as degenerates giving into their base desires en masse may be comforting, but only scratches the surface.

    “where do you think our “reason and our ability to answer questions about morals and ethics rationally” come from, if not nature?”

    If you mean that it is our “nature” as thinking beings, then I would not disagree with that. For a second I thought you were referring to “God’s ordered nature” or some such.

    “A well ordered soul in one in which the reasoning part rules the other parts.”

    No disagreement there. The issue, again, is a question of degree (i.e. how much permissiveness is too much), not of kind.

    Susan:

    I’ve been called worse.

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

      And I will say that all relationships, for all people, whether permissive or traditionalist, whether ONS or marriage, basically come down to feeling good.

      No. The good feelings are the incentive to be in the relationship. They are not the goal. Nor are they consistent or reliable.

  • Lokland

    @Ana

    “If you think about it the fact that the most delicate stage of pregnancy are the first three months show that the ladies that had help of the father were most likely to carry to term and if she was well feed by him she was more likely to survive the birth and raise the kid.”

    The first stages of pregnancy are most delicate because its better to toss the fuck up in the garbage sooner rather than later. Thats simply from a resource investment perspective.

    A fetus that won’t survive is better tossed early so you waste less food on it.

    Women evolved to abort no go’s early for that reason.

    “Let it go superficially trying to be Genghis Khan looks like the best strategy but there is only one Genghis Khan for a reason, YMMV.”

    Actually, Ghengis Khan was the second most successful male in known history but thats a relatively unknown fact not worth pushing. I also can’t remember the name of the first (which supports that he is relatively unknown).

    —————————-

    I’m not sure what this comment means.

    ‘let it go’ implies I have a personal attachment to the outcome.
    I can guarantee you this is not true. The only option available to me is that of the Dad. Arguing for the Cad is at best neutral if not detrimental to my well being.
    That does not alter that the most successful strategy is that of the Cad. (Not based on average but on absolute values.) Which is why I argue it.

    My personal affiliation, ability and alignment are entirely separate from this argument (I am not making that claim for all my arguments).

  • http://www.introvertedplayboy.com Introverted Playboy

    Whoops, mistake with the italics command at the end there.

  • Morgasm

    “Anyone who debates Escoffier on matters of philosophy is a fool. Might as well pick up your ball and go home.”

    Mandana Mishra vs Shankaracharya?

  • Morgasm

    “Actually, Ghengis Khan was the second most successful male in known history but thats a relatively unknown fact not worth pushing. I also can’t remember the name of the first (which supports that he is relatively unknown). ”

    There’s a reason why the biggest in male Bollywood stars all have the last name Khan.

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

    Re: Eastern traditions, the self-help industry, etc. Is is just me, or has anyone else noticed the increasing frequency of a type of Eastern metaphysics peddler, usually armed with some misapplied pop-quantum mechanics references to attempt to bolster a speculative word view? I have an associate who went off to do boutique real estate dev deals for several months in Vietnam and he has returned with this tendency towards weird, condescending anti-materialism rants that lack any real depth or even coherence.

    I realize that his new, self-congratulatory, “I’m sooooo spiritual” pretensions are his way of somehow socially monetizing a trip that was probably heavy
    on the diarrhea, hash, bribes to pompous bureaucratic thieves, and “massage”, but who knows.

  • Morgasm

    Bastiat Blogger March 7, 2013 at 6:01 pm

    Re: Eastern traditions, the self-help industry, etc. Is is just me, or has anyone else noticed the increasing frequency of a type of Eastern metaphysics peddler, usually armed with some misapplied pop-quantum mechanics references to attempt to bolster a speculative word view? I have an associate who went off to do boutique real estate dev deals for several months in Vietnam and he has returned with this tendency towards weird, condescending anti-materialism rants that lack any real depth or even coherence.

    I realize that his new, self-congratulatory, “I’m sooooo spiritual” pretensions are his way of somehow socially monetizing a trip that was probably heavy
    on the diarrhea, hash, bribes to pompous bureaucratic thieves, and “massage”, but who knows.

    ————-

    I know exactly the sort you are talking about BB, and there a lot of them.
    However to be so hard, there’s an upside.
    A superficial pop-culture sort of interest in any one or a combination of Eastern wisdom traditions often segues into a very committed practice of a specific school later on.