Matthew Hussey on Men and Commitment

June 6, 2013

HusseyI just finished reading Matthew Hussey’s Get the Guyand I have to say it’s about the best book on dating and relationships I’ve ever read. I’m not alone – his rating on Amazon is a 4.8 out of 5. I strongly encourage you to buy it here. 

(Speaking of ratings, he’s adorable – sort of a cross between Ryan Gosling and Daniel Radcliffe.)

He started out running bootcamps as a dating coach for men, and it’s clear from his writing he is well versed in Game. However, smart guy that he is, he flipped over to running bootcamps for women, and has coached something like 100,000 of us at this point. And he’s only 26!

This guy is all about Girl Game, and he makes a great deal of sense. I agree with him on almost everything – my only nitpick is that some of his conversation starters sound really cheesy, but maybe when girls approach guys what they say isn’t actually very important. :)

I’ll be writing on several topics in the book that I found particularly strong or interesting. Today I want to share his explanation on how men view commitment, because it closely parallels a lot of the writing I’ve done here on short-term relationship guys vs. long-term relationship guys, cads vs. dads, etc. 

Hussey describes two distinct kind of men, whom he names Mr. Bachelor and Mr. Relationship. No matter what you do on your end, a man’s willingness to commit depends on the emotions he associates with commitment. These emotions may have any number of sources, but it doesn’t really matter – every man is either Mr. Bachelor or Mr. Relationship. It’s hard-wired, or baked in, or something, and you have no control over this.

For Mr. Bachelor, the idea of “settling down” conjures up an image of a bored couple sitting at home on a Friday night watching soap operas, or spending all day Saturday doing household chores. Committing to a relationship looks like the end of all the fun. This perception is reinforced because every guy has a friend who [describes this life].

Essentially, Mr. Bachelor suffers from FOMO, and Hussey describes his preoccupation with chasing variety, adventure and excitement in his 20s, figuring he’ll settle down and bite the bullet when he reaches his 30s. Predictably, in his 30s he realizes he still hasn’t surfed in Thailand or hiked in Nepal. And there’s still so much poon to slay! He figures he’ll still have it going on in his 40s, he should enjoy life while he’s still young!

In contrast, Mr. Relationship experiences these same desires very differently.

Even though Mr. Relationship might miss and even grieve his single life, he understands without a doubt that his perfect woman makes his life much better than it was before. 

Mr. Relationship loves sexual variety, adventure and excitement as much as Mr. Bachelor does, but Mr. Relationship associates these aspects of life with being in a relationship. To Mr. Relationship, having a steady girlfriend, fiancée or wife means having fantastic sex, since having a committed partner means having regular sex with someone who knows his every quirk and turn-on.

He views the woman in his life as someone with whom he can share amazing adventures and experiences. With her, he experiences companionship and the joy of going through life with someone who understands him at the deepest level. To him, relationships are the ultimate pleasure…the single life equals boredom, loneliness, and awkward ONSs with the occasional girl who doesn’t really know what turns him on sexually.

Hussey describes how two men with the same history will reflect very differently on their single days. Mr. Bachelor remembers the poker parties, the occasional unexpected ONS with a stranger, the freedom of not having to explain himself to anyone. Mr. Relationship recalls the endless weekends of boredom when there were no chicks around, the bad sex followed by the unpleasant morning discovery of a hungover stranger in the bed. He likes having girl stuff around the apartment. 

Mr. Bachelor and Mr. Relationship both have the same needs: sexual satisfaction, adventure, excitement. It’s not as if Mr. Bachelor needs more sexual partners or Mr. Relationship needs more intimacy and connection. It’s not that one guy needs a more adventurous lifestyle while another craves a more domestic lifestyle. The only difference between Mr. Bachelor and Mr. Relationship is the emotions they associate with commitment.

Let’s discuss. Here are some questions to start us off:

1. Do all men have the same “needs?” We tend to describe men as universally horny and preoccupied with sex most of the time. Does Mr. Bachelor actually want or need sex more than Mr. Relationship does? Does Mr. Relationship want or need connection more?

2. The data clearly shows that single men have sex less frequently than married men. Does Mr. Bachelor forfeit frequency for novelty while Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for frequency?

3. Can these needs be met in different ways? Hussey suggests variety can occur both within and outside relationships.

4. How do emotions play a role? Do these divergent outlooks correspond with pessimism and optimism? Or cynicism and hope? 

5. Is Mr. Bachelor a good bet for marriage when he reaches his 40s? Or can no woman hope to hold his attention and suppress his “wanderlust?”

6. Should women who want to marry ever date Mr. Bachelor? If so, why? If not, why not?

7. Is there an analogous divergence of women? Ms. Bachelorette vs. Ms. Relationship? Or Ms. Career vs. Ms. Family? If so, how do these different types of women recall their single days?

Talk to me in the Comments!

Filed in: Uncategorized
  • Escoffier

    “Does Mr. Bachelor actually want or need sex more than Mr. Relationship does? Does Mr. Relationship want or need connection more?”

    Possibly on the former, though I doubht it. Probably on the latter.

    As I have said, I think the desire for variety is biologically present in almost all men, but we do have it to varying degrees and also we respond to it differently. I think the bachelor not only feels it more strongly but other factors are also at work. Roissy makes this point: he likes the chase. Whereas relationship guy really dreads having to make approaches. Bachelor probably gets bored very quickly whereas RG, if he has chosen well, does not. (Though even a RG can get bored quickly if he has not chosen well. I had a couple of GFs whom I ditched quite quickly because there was just nothing there.)

    Re: 2, I don’t know that I would say RG forfeits novelty so much that novelty isn’t such a viable option for him. Now, that may be changing with game. But still, only a minority of men will ever be able to be players. RG likely knows he’s not one of them. Also, as much as he may theoretically enjoy variety, he also knows that he does not enjoy the hunt and may suffer from approach anxiety. So locking down one and staying with her makes a lot of sense and it’s not really “forfeiting” anything.

    Not sure what 3. means. Variety here I take to mean lotsa babes. You can’t have that without either playing or cheating. Unless it means “variety of bedroon experiences with the same person,” which is great, but that’s not the variety I thought we were talking about.

    4 could be argued in many different ways, not sure there is a pattern. Eg, the player could be cynical because of his view of women or he could be optimistic because he believes or knows that he can bang a new babe whenever he wants.

    5. Totally depends. I will say this, I know more players who settled down and are happy than players who are still playing at that age. So, they can.

    6. Only if he’s completely past that stage.

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

      Not sure what 3. means. Variety here I take to mean lotsa babes. You can’t have that without either playing or cheating. Unless it means “variety of bedroon experiences with the same person,” which is great, but that’s not the variety I thought we were talking about.

      Hussey says that men want sexual variety and that there are two routes to it:

      1. Sex with different people.

      2. Different sexual experiences with the same person.

      I found this interesting, because the sphere only allows for 1. Again, this may correlate to U vs. R.

      Hussey states that a man’s deepest desires and fantasies cannot be explored and fulfilled to maximum satisfaction without a deep connection. So the tradeoff is better, more “customized” sex for different bodies.

  • BuenaVista

    What does “FOMO” mean?

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

      What does “FOMO” mean?

      Fear of Missing Out

  • Anacaona

    *grabspopcorn*

  • http://davidvs.net/ davidvs

    *Takes a handful of popcorn.*

  • Anacaona

    @davidvs
    I hope that wasn’t from my bag. Who knows where that hand has been 😛

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

      I hope that wasn’t from my bag. Who knows where that hand has been

      ROFL!

  • Escoffier

    I am not so sure about this. I think that it’s true that the best possible sex can only happen with a deep connection, at least that is true for me. But fantasies?

    So, I am not going to say what any of mine are, that would be kinda creepy, but suffice it to say that to the extent that they involve variety, then by definition they cannot be explored or fullfilled through a connection with one person.

    Regarding different experiences with the same person, there’s only so much one can do. I mean, I lack the anal fixation of today’s porn-raised generation, so no interest there. I don’t really have any interest in tying or being tied, either. Whips, nope. Kinkier stuff, definitely not. Perhaps I also lack imaginiation, but I don’t see a whole lot of avenues for “variety” in actualization.

    Variety of partners is another matter.

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

      So, I am not going to say what any of mine are, that would be kinda creepy, but suffice it to say that to the extent that they involve variety, then by definition they cannot be explored or fullfilled through a connection with one person.

      Are fantasies meant to be fulfilled? What purpose do they serve? They seem like an expression of the desire for sexual variety, but perhaps the experience of fantasizing (and masturbating or perhaps pretending your partner is someone else) is gratifying in its own right?

      In general, I think it’s dangerous to equate having a fantasy with having the desire to live it, much less the intent to carry it out.

      Obviously, a fantasy about one’s own partner is another matter.

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

      @Escoffier

      Come now, I’m already conjuring up activities for you involving food. 😉

  • Sassy6519

    Is there an analogous divergence of women? Ms. Bachelorette vs. Ms. Relationship?

    Yes. I consider myself a “Ms. Bachelorette”. Although I’ve been in relationships, I either feel trapped in them or begin to long for my single days while in them. My fondest memories are often tied to my single days.

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

      @Sassy

      Yes. I consider myself a “Ms. Bachelorette”. Although I’ve been in relationships, I either feel trapped in them or begin to long for my single days while in them. My fondest memories are often tied to my single days.

      Now you’ve surprised me! You are clearly very ambivalent and even appear confused about what you want. Getting to the heart of that is the key for you, I think.

  • Escoffier

    “Are fantasies meant to be fulfilled?”

    For me, definitley not. They are just things that sort of pop into my head unbidden. Some of them used to bother me but I have learned to live with them.

  • BuenaVista

    “… my only nitpick is that some of his conversation starters sound really cheesy, but maybe when girls approach guys what they say isn’t actually very important.”

    All a woman needs for an opener is a sincere “Hi. How’s your day going?” and a man with any social skills will handle it from there. It amazes me how few people, hoping for a brief conversation, struggle to make eye contact and say hello. But then I was one of them for all the years that I was a “good man”, so amazement is likely the wrong reaction.

    “No matter what you do on your end, a man’s willingness to commit depends on the emotions he associates with commitment.”

    This is true in my experience, as far as it goes. Where it doesn’t go, as summarized above, is in distinguishing a guy who might appear to be on the bachelor track, but in fact is merely a gunshy relationship-track man. I was drinking at Midway with a Marine and a soldier last week. Only the soldier had lost both of his legs below the knee; suffice to say, he was not outwardly on the hoorah track, but few men would be, and his cynicism belied what he was actually doing, which was attending a Sig Sauer seminar on a new weapon. The Marine just kept his thoughts to himself, other than saying that he no longer fought for the country that had sent him into the shit a few times and then changed its mind about winning. Men are more comfortable evaluating their situations on the basis of action being character, and character being fate.

    Bachelor-track behavior (I exclude PUA manifestations, which strike me as deranged) may simply be a defense against the void that is some prior experience of divorce and parental alienation. My example is probably my son, who is a child of precipitous and unexplained and unforeseen divorce, and consequently lives a lone wolf existence, with his books and his bikes and his mountains, riding 100 miles like other people drive to the 7-11, and writing of avalanches and sleeping in snow caves like the metro boys discuss the virtues of Nolita v. Williamsburg. His yearning is probably for what he had before it was taken away, in five minutes on a Sunday morning, but the risk of having it taken away a second time may cause him to appear the perfect bachelor, which he is not. Like my soldier friend, he may prefer avoidance and bluster to losing the rest of his limbs. He prefers, I’m sure, the fairness of an avalanche to the illogic of hypergamy. I do believe that there is a generation of young men out there who may not have gone their own way yet, and know all the cool spots in all the cool towns, but would prefer the personal defense of a bachelor ethic to revisiting a central, and unpleasant fact, of a previously exploded family relationship. I don’t think there were a lot of these young men when I came of age. Now I think they are everywhere. I meet them most every day.

  • Emily

    Hi Susan!

    If you haven’t seen this talk yet, you need to check it out:

    http://www.ted.com/talks/meg_jay_why_30_is_not_the_new_20.html

  • mr. wavevector

    The data clearly shows that single men have sex less frequently than married men. Does Mr. Bachelor forfeit frequency for novelty while Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for frequency?

    Yes. But more importantly, Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for a high quality relationship.

    Mr. Relationship loves sexual variety, adventure and excitement as much as Mr. Bachelor does

    No he doesn’t. He’s clearly sacrificing these things. There’s no way you can sugar coat that. But he makes these sacrifices for things he values more – sexual reliability, intimacy and emotional closeness.

    To Mr. Relationship, having a steady girlfriend, fiancée or wife means having fantastic sex, since having a committed partner means having regular sex with someone who knows his every quirk and turn-on.

    And that’s the sugar coating. I love having sex with my wife – it is sensuous and pleasurable and deeply emotionally satisfying. It is also regular and frequent and mutually orgasmic. But it lacks variety and novelty. And no, mrs. wavevector does not know my every quirk and turn-on. I know where her boundaries and comfort zones are, and I don’t push beyond them. But beyond them are where some of my quirks and turn-ons lie. And there they will lie forevermore, because I am not of the Dan Savage school of sexuality that says all quirks and kinks must be explored.

  • Escoffier

    wave, you can only “sacrifice” something if you have a reasonable prospect of attaining it. I don’t think that applies to most Relationship Guys.

  • mr. wavevector

    Are fantasies meant to be fulfilled? What purpose do they serve? They seem like an expression of the desire for sexual variety, but perhaps the experience of fantasizing (and masturbating or perhaps pretending your partner is someone else) is gratifying in its own right?

    Being Mr. Relationship means choosing to sacrifice sexual variety. That may be in the variety of women he has sex with, or the variety of sexual acts his wife is willing to perform. Fantasy is a way to scratch that itch, and can be very gratifying in its own right. Indeed, particularly when stimulated by porn, it can be much too gratifying to the point of killing desire and performance for real sex, as we’ve discussed before.

  • Jesse

    But it lacks variety and novelty.

    I would’ve thought that’s your job.

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

      But it lacks variety and novelty.

      I would’ve thought that’s your job.

      Ha, nice comeback from the pup!

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Escoffier,

    wave, you can only “sacrifice” something if you have a reasonable prospect of attaining it. I don’t think that applies to most Relationship Guys.

    I disagree. Most of us had variety before we committed, and many of us here have discussed opportunities we’ve had after we committed that we passed up.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Jesse,

    I would’ve thought that’s your job.

    Like I said, my wife has certain boundaries and comfort zones that I respect. I see it as my job to work within those so the experience is mutually enjoyable.

  • Escoffier

    Meaning what, though? If N>1, then a person has had variety. That’s achievable for the vast majority. What is not achievable is variety over the long haul, with regularity, more or less on demand.

    As Susan has noted, even “successful” players have to endure long dry spells. R-oriented guys have to endure more and longer.

    Beyond this, I remain surprised by all the claims of married guys being hit on, it never happens to me. And I am very tall, reasonably fit, full head of hair, very well dressed and (I’m told) can pass for five or even 10 years younger than I am. Perhaps Roissy is right, chicks can smell the beta.

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

      As Susan has noted, even “successful” players have to endure long dry spells. R-oriented guys have to endure more and longer.

      This is precisely what Hussey is arguing against. He’s saying that R guys don’t try for it because they’re not as interested in it.

      The research on the Dark Triad traits often notes the correlation between these traits and a higher number of sex partners. However, the media naturally assumes causation and leads with headlines like “Why Women Love Psychopaths.” However, the explanation for the correlation is that Dark Triad males don’t do monogamy – they’re always, always, pursuing new women, working it, cheating. They may have the same success rate as everyone else, but if they hit on 100 women a year, they may have sex with 5.

      It seems that motivation might be a factor here in the same way.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I’m only 26 and female mate competition is fierce, so it’s expected girls are going to be batting their eyes once in a while, Escof. Dunno about you…

    Do not think I could give up the sexual “variety.” I consider it one of the perks of being in a relationship, actually, I have someone to be kinky with. Sometimes it’s chocolate syrup, sometimes it’s a hot tub, sometimes it’s the women’s locker room, sometimes it’s a tent, sometimes it’s a playground, sometimes it’s 69, sometimes it’s writing porn stories, sometimes it’s picking up pictures, sometimes it’s strip tease night, sometimes it’s strip UNO, sometimes…

  • Escoffier

    I have played strip chess in the past but that’s pretty tame …

  • mr. wavevector

    Escoffier,

    Sacrificing variety for a faithful married man means he will never have sex with another woman never have a sexual experience that his wife won’t participate in. He will never go to N+1. Regularity or having sex on demand are beside the point – we’re talking eternity here, man. It’s a long time!

    I am perfectly happy making that compromise. But it’s ridiculous to try to gloss over the fact that a significant compromise is being made, as some of Hussey’s verbiage that Susan quoted seems to do.

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

      But it’s ridiculous to try to gloss over the fact that a significant compromise is being made, as some of Hussey’s verbiage that Susan quoted seems to do.

      I think he’s very good, but I admit the thought crossed my mind while reading that he is writing for a female audience, one that pays him to provide an upbeat and realistic game plan. There may be a certain amount of hope being sold here – at the expense of realism.

      I’m sure Hussey would acknowledge that even R men feel a certain loss when they agree to lifelong monogamy. And Bachelors may feel lonely at times, or even envious of their married friends. I don’t think he’s suggesting that either Mr. R or Mr. B gets everything they want in their chosen lifestyles.

      Interestingly, he does not tell women to seek out and date Mr. Relationship. He doesn’t even begin to address some of the political stuff we get into here like delaying marriage, fertility window, etc.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    I’ve gotten laid more by my steady GF in the last month than i did my entire life of being single (or my marriage for that fact)

    Filter filter filter.

    Discuss sexual drives early on, what things you’re into (and not), and make sure you match. Great way to weed out incompatibilities and pump n dump setups.

    Mr. Relationship

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

      @M3

      I’ve gotten laid more by my steady GF in the last month than i did my entire life of being single (or my marriage for that fact)

      That’s the best Field Report we’ve had in a while! Congrats, that is such excellent news. I was just asking someone where you’ve been – so glad you stopped in!

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Now you’ve surprised me! You are clearly very ambivalent and even appear confused about what you want. Getting to the heart of that is the key for you, I think.

    Ambivalent is definitely the right word to describe it.

    As much as I like the idea of relationships/monogamy, there are parts of it that deter me from it, or even make me sabotage my relationships while I am in them. I worry about becoming bored with someone. I don’t necessarily like having to answer to somebody. I worry that I may not be completely satisfied with only one person sexually for the rest of my life. These issues are always nagging me in the back of my head whenever I start dating someone new, and it’s part of what makes me “jump ship” early from relationships.

    One of my biggest fears is getting married to someone that I ultimately will become unhappy with. I wouldn’t want to divorce them, since I know how devastating that can be for people, but I also wouldn’t want to be trapped in an unhappy union. I’m so picky because I am trying to avoid that, but my own pickiness does not seem to be enough. Even when I meet men that appear to meet all of my requirements, I still end up feeling like something is missing.

    Ambivalent is definitely the right word.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    @ Escoff

    “Beyond this, I remain surprised by all the claims of married guys being hit on, it never happens to me. And I am very tall, reasonably fit, full head of hair, very well dressed and (I’m told) can pass for five or even 10 years younger than I am. Perhaps Roissy is right, chicks can smell the beta.”

    Do you innocently flirt with girls? You need to do something first to be noticed.. use Dannyfromthe504 game. That always works.

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

      Do you innocently flirt with girls? You need to do something first to be noticed.. use Dannyfromthe504 game. That always works.

      I do not want HUS to play any role in getting Escoffier to step out! Mrs. Escoff would never forgive me. Cease and desist!

  • Emily

    Congrats on the gf M3. 😀

  • mr. wavevector

    @M3,

    Discuss sexual drives early on, what things you’re into (and not), and make sure you match.

    Given sexual dimorphism, the odds are that the man has a higher sex drive, is less restricted and has a higher appetite for novelty than his female partner. Sure, you can try to optimize your mate selection based on these factors but that would likely be a mistake. There are more important things to select for in a marriage. Get what you need, but don’t feel entitled to getting everything you want.

  • Sassy6519

    On a side note, I’m downloading a copy of Matthew Hussey’s book on my Nook right now. I figured I would check it out after your positive reviews Susan. :)

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

      @Sassy

      I’ll be interested to hear what you think of it! I took notes while reading it, so that I could return to a variety of concepts for discussion here.

  • Sriracha Hot Sauce

    “Given sexual dimorphism, the odds are that the man has a higher sex drive”

    That depends on age.

    “is less restricted”

    I thought women had more oppurtunities, and took them, for sex then men in this culture?

    ” and has a higher appetite for novelty than his female partner. ”

    Novelty’s Tale

    Him: Honey can we have a three some?
    Her: Sure, when are you invited Mike, over?
    Him: Forget it.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Congrats M3! Find a sheath for that sword! 😉

  • Anacaona

    @M3
    Felicidades! :)

  • Fish

    First of all, surprisingly according to this definition I am totally Mr Relationship. Pretty much with everything, so I can’t really speak for Mr. bachelor.

    “2. The data clearly shows that single men have sex less frequently than married men. Does Mr. Bachelor forfeit frequency for novelty while Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for frequency?” Pretty much

    I agree with everything Wavevector said in 17.

    Re: Variety
    I like sex, I’ve had a lot of it. Lots of variety. It has been my experience that even people who are awesome in bed have a few “go to” things that are staples. Maybe another Pareto breakdown here, 80% of the sex comes with minimal variety, that other 20% maybe novel or other. And, as long as your desires are compatible and you have good communication, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that (however those are 2 pretty big provisos). I don’t think you can ever have TRUE variety in a relationship. Theres nothing wrong with that. I love sushi. I could eat it every day and not get tired of it. I like other foods too, but given a choice, I will always pick sushi. Some people just aren’t wired that way and need a tall blonde one week and a short asian woman the next.

    Re: Mr bachelor & marriage
    I think we know the answer to this. Women should never marry Mr Bachelor because if he offers, he sees that his value is slipping. Its not from a genuine desire to be with the woman, its a good enough proposition. Nobody wants to be the one someone is just settling for. Eventually you will find out and it will wreck the relationship. Maybe I hold marriage to an unattainable standard, but I’d like to think that I would never marry someone where my first thought in the morning and last thought at night wasn’t “damn, my wife is awesome” not “man, if I was only 25 again, I could have nailed her and had a new chick by lunchtime”

    I think there is a segment of women who are not relationship seeking (generally career/school oriented) who might be perfectly fine to date Mr Bachelor. I do not think he is right for the segment of women looking for something substantial. . .

  • Fish

    And Re: sex in a relationship
    I can say that I probably had more sex this year in Feb & March than I did all of last year (great sex too), from being in a relationship with a chick.

    While sex in LTR does tail off, even at the lowest depths of my engagement, we still had sex 1-2x a week, which is more than I’m getting now as a single guy.

  • Escoffier

    wave, still not buying it.

    I think the sphere meme, which Susan appears to agree with, is mostly right: the majority of men who get married are not doing so lamenting the pussy they will never have–they pretty much know they weren’t going to get it anyway. Rather, they are locking down a steady, reliable supply of sex even if it’s one partner unto death.

    Not to rule out love as a motivation, of course.

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

      I think the sphere meme, which Susan appears to agree with, is mostly right: the majority of men who get married are not doing so lamenting the pussy they will never have–they pretty much know they weren’t going to get it anyway.

      I don’t agree with that, I’m not sure why you think this. See my comment above. It sounds like you’re claiming a massive Sour Grapes effect. I would be very distressed to hear that my husband married for this reason. Fortunately, I saw the evidence he did not, and he is very definitely a one woman man. So I think the sphere is off a bit here, but that’s expected, because the sphere hates a beta more than anything, and does not accept that a beta male could be loved by a quality woman and content in his life.

  • Anacaona

    I think the sphere meme, which Susan appears to agree with, is mostly right: the majority of men who get married are not doing so lamenting the pussy they will never have–they pretty much know they weren’t going to get it anyway. Rather, they are locking down a steady, reliable supply of sex even if it’s one partner unto death.
    I remember that in “How to marry the man of your choice” the author said that every woman hoping to get married have to fight their man’s harem whether imaginary or real.
    I do think this is a temperament issue and some men do think of their imaginary girlfriends as real possibilities. While others understand that if they were real they wouldn’t had given them the time of day.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Sometimes you meet a woman–or maybe this was the last century–with whom you crave a relationship, sex to follow. Even if it follows at some distance.
    This has been excavated as being repressed sexual longing. Or puppy love. But as one of Heinlein’s characters (If This Goes On) said, whatever it is, it hurts.
    For real. Sometimes guys really, really want a relationship with a particular woman. Problem with that is they don’t go any alpha, any dominance, any not-needy. So maybe it never, or almost never, ends in a relationship, unless it’s terribly unbalanced. Or perhaps they’re matched. Running down the probabilities here, toward most unlikely.
    But they do.

  • Escoffier

    M3, no, not really. I don’t think I will start either, no point in tempting fate, (leaving aside temperamental unsuitability), I am mostly just curious how this works for others.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Escoffier,

    wave, still not buying it.

    I think the sphere meme, which Susan appears to agree with, is mostly right: the majority of men who get married are not doing so lamenting the pussy they will never have–they pretty much know they weren’t going to get it anyway.

    I don’t know what the majority of men think of this. Another interesting topic for a study! I can only speak to my own experiences and other men I know well enough to talk of such things. Some of them would agree with your perspective, and some with mine.

  • Sriracha Hot Sauce

    The beauty is now that people who want a steady supply of sex, love, home and family from a spouse and also some variety on the side, can now have both.

    Its called open marriage and more and more people are becoming open to it.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Fish:

    how would you characterize some of the go-to moves?

    Which ones did you like and which ones did you not?

    I think you are right, but I also think that this is because people settle into a sexual rut. Sometimes, they might be able to “switch-hit” and mix in some new moves? Maybe with just a little encouragement?

    Thoughts?

  • mr. wavevector
    As Susan has noted, even “successful” players have to endure long dry spells. R-oriented guys have to endure more and longer.

    This is precisely what Hussey is arguing against. He’s saying that R guys don’t try for it because they’re not as interested in it.

    I think there are three somewhat independent variables here:

    1) Do you desire a variety of sexual partners?

    2) Can you obtain a variety of sexual partners?

    3) Will you sacrifice a variety of sexual partners to have a good relationship with one woman?

    I answer yes to all three. That leaves me with an unsatisfied desire for a variety of sexual partners that I have good reasons to believe I could obtain. I’m OK with that. It is my decision and I’m happy with it, because what I gain in the relationship with my wife is so much more important.

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

      @mr. wv

      As usual, I sense that you are very similar to my husband, and our marriages have a similar dynamic.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Susan,

    I think he’s very good, but I admit the thought crossed my mind while reading that he is writing for a female audience, one that pays him to provide an upbeat and realistic game plan.

    That was my thought too. But it wouldn’t be prudent for him to reveal all the demons that those Mr. Relationships harbor. His lady customers would run off screaming. Even you have trouble facing those demons some times, Susan.

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

      Even you have trouble facing those demons some times, Susan.

      Very true, and I would not appreciate paying 18.95 to be served up some new ones!

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan.

    You a soprano? Reason I ask is I’ve never seen you and Sissel in the same room.

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

      @Richard

      I’ll take that as a huge compliment!

      Her voice is lovely – she reminds me quite a bit of Joan Baez.

  • Jesse

    Like I said, my wife has certain boundaries and comfort zones that I respect. I see it as my job to work within those so the experience is mutually enjoyable.

    The way I see it, you either married 1) married a woman who’s not a great fit sexually, 1a) have uncommon sexual tastes (those two are related of course), or 2) you don’t have enough control in the relationship.

    One reason why I want to be in charge in the relationship is that exciting experiences are much easier to create if I can do whatever I want with her, whenever I want, wherever I want. I’m not interested in having to convene a meeting and hash out an agreement. I don’t want to have to ask.

    This will work because, apart from being an attractive enough and considerate enough partner, and the fact that I believe plenty of women would enjoy such an arrangement, I don’t have particularly strange tastes sexually. I like breasts, butts, thin waists, cute faces – just generally hot women. I also have an interest in younger girls, older women, multiple women, and ‘taboo’ women’, and I may end up experiencing all those things, but I’m quite confident none of them are the source of lasting pleasure. Having two girls kiss and lick your penis surely feels amazing, but it’s just that – you enjoy it and then you move on. It doesn’t really produce pleasure beyond the duration of the act, so I don’t think I’d feel the need to return to that well.

    The most extreme thing I’m interested in is ‘rape,’ or ravishment. Even that I don’t consider very awkward, because it just means forcing myself on my woman, overpowering her, pinning her down and having my way with her. It’s just a continuance of the male dominance theme that I’m fond of, and from what I read there are plenty of women who would be down for that with a loving partner, so it’s not something I feel the need to hide. (I also tend to believe there is a link between interpersonal dynamics and sexual chemistry, so I have some confidence that a woman I mesh really well with outside the bedroom will have compatible desires inside the bedroom. They’re not separate things.)

    Furthermore, as you can imagine ravishment is the kind of thing that you can really only do with someone you trust, so the full expression of my desire for male dominance is only possible in a committed relationship. You can’t fully own and have your way with a casual partner.

    I don’t seem to have a strong need for variety of partners. I would much rather have one very attractive girlfriend to have lots of sex with rather than many less attractive women, because then I get sexual pleasure plus the enjoyment of her company. I want sex plus love when we’re in bed together.

    In sum, I don’t doubt that I can have plenty of exciting sexual experiences with my wife. I just have to lead.

    Now that the digression into my tastes is over… to return to you, either you two aren’t as compatible as you’d like or you need to take charge more.

  • Anacaona

    And another single person that think they know everything about how a marriage should be without reflecting on the fact they are not married themselves. *facepalm*

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

      And another single person that think they know everything about how a marriage should be without reflecting on the fact they are not married themselves. *facepalm*

      I tried to find out Matthew Hussey’s relationship status – not that it matters if he’s advising women on male psychology. He shares a lot of personal dating experiences in the book. Clearly, at 26, with a TV career, he has not settled down yet. I suspect he’s Mr. Bachelor.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Jesse,

    The way I see it, you either married 1) married a woman who’s not a great fit sexually, 1a) have uncommon sexual tastes (those two are related of course), or 2) you don’t have enough control in the relationship.

    The way I see it I married a woman who’s not a perfect fit sexually but is still really good, and is a damn fine fit in many other ways.

    You seem to suffer the delusion that many women do – that you can “fix” your partner to your liking – except you call it “control” and “leading” instead of “fixing”. You can’t make someone what they’re not. You can lead her, but only as far as she’s willing to follow.

    Here’s the thing – you don’t get a perfect fit in a marriage. Ever. You find the best woman you can have and then you work on making the best relationship you can with her.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    “I do not want HUS to play any role in getting Escoffier to step out! Mrs. Escoff would never forgive me. Cease and desist!”

    hehehe. i was just suggesting he keep his skills sharp so he can really get his wife’s juices flowin when he wants to really turn it on.

    i just draw chalk outlines on the ground for fun 😛

  • Escoffier

    Susan, that’s not to say that married R men don’t love their wives, I assume they do, at least at the beginning (and hopefully “forever”). But they also have a realistic sense of their ability to be players.

    I could never have been a player. But supposing I had the right personality for it. Would I have tried it? Biology would have been like the little devil on the shoulder urging me to go for it. But I don’t have the personality for it hence I never even tried to go in that direction.

  • Escoffier

    “This is precisely what Hussey is arguing against. He’s saying that R guys don’t try for it because they’re not as interested in it.”

    I don’t think that’s right, not wholly, at least not in my case.

    I am, and am not, interested in it. I am interested in it on a biological base drive level. I am not interested because I know my personality is all wrong for it and it would not make me happy. I also rather enjoy my pair bond.

    Since I am not an idiot, I don’t have a lot of trouble getting my brain to rule my johnson. Hence, what low nature wants, high nature says, “Nope, I rule.”

  • Anacaona

    Since I am not an idiot, I don’t have a lot of trouble getting my brain to rule my johnson. Hence, what low nature wants, high nature says, “Nope, I rule.”
    My husband puts this way “Mr Happy is stupid,it cannot be let in charge” 😛

  • Mike M.

    I think it’s more a matter of R-oriented men valuing affection as well as sex.

    I was participating in a discussion on another forum when the issue of attractiveness came up. With the usual Marilyn Monroe references. Viewed objectively, she was hot…but not uniquely so. But her on-screen persona radiated affection. A comfortable cuddle to go with the hot sex. And a lot of men want that balance, and will cheerfully trade sexual variety to get it.

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

      @Mike M.

      Affection – that’s a great point re the difference between casual sex and relationship sex. I don’t think Hussey mentions it, at least not in that way.

      It seems like the sex goddesses that radiate affection are the ones that tend toward the curvier body type. Even I would like a hug from those women. They seem feminine. The long, lean androgynous types don’t look like they’d offer much comfort or affection.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    Appreciate the kind sentiments from all.

    “That’s the best Field Report we’ve had in a while! Congrats, that is such excellent news. I was just asking someone where you’ve been – so glad you stopped in!”

    The key here was filtering. I filtered very hard and ended up with someone who’s very much as someone once wrote ‘a winning hand’. No need to ask the dealer for another card looking for blackjack, this one is a winner.

    Of course, drive is crucial, and i think i found a unicorn, because her drive is higher than mine!! But i’ve taken care of business and she’s completely smitten with me. Stamina, control, reading body language, communication, and a tongue that won’t quit. M3 stands for something eh 😉

    And she doesn’t just adore me for my body, but also for my logical mind and whimsical deadpan humor. But i don’t mind when she objectifies me 😛 i encourage it.

    And we discussed sex early, long before we actually got down to it. Likes, dislikes, frequency, style, etc.. was a great way to see if we matched sexually. I’d advise all women during the escalation phase to speak openly about, instead of jumping into bed on date one and find out he’s a jackhammer. The better he can articulate what he enjoys/does/can do/is willing to try, how he’ll do it… the more you will glean about his ability, and whether he’s into instant self gratification or if he treats sex like an artform (as yours truly does). And it will let your mind wander in anticipation.

    As to my departure from the scene.. I was gone for quite a while because i needed to detox from the ‘sphere’. Everything i know i owe to it.. including your site. Our headbutts aside, your site still provides redpill wisdom, fights feminism, and is on the side of team civilization as vox would say. While i cannot condone marriage in the current legal context, i’m not going to throw women under a bus. I’m still MGTOW but do recognize there are good women out there.. just learn to filter for them only.

    But having stewed in the bowels of the sphere for so long i had to go away for a bit and stop reading about every inane and asinine thing that came up in my news feed and reader.

    If all you know is the ghetto, you think the world is shit. If you live in Vienna, you think the world is beautiful. There’s still a whole host full of problems for guys in the legal arena, and for game-less beta men whom i speak for and try to help. But now i don’t live in the sphere anymore, i only rent.

    I left the ghetto for a bit to see the rest of the world.

    And yes.. it is much nicer to know i have someone out there who actually cares about me and wants to see me this weekend so she can bang my brains out AND watch Star Trek with vs. going out to a club or bar to play heads or tails with flaking drama queens and one night stand emotionless empowered women who think MultiPenis(TM Abott) is a good thing.

  • Fish

    @Beta Guy
    I dated a girl who loved on top, literally broke my bed from bouncing (I have a split boxspring due to a stairwell in my old house), Ive dated women who loved oral, woman who were receptive to anal, different positions, sex is sex. My ex fiance, sex was always the same, a little foreplay, her on top till she got off, then doggy style till I got off. She is attractive and despite being pretty much the same every time, I would still give her a solid B. My most recent ex I would say was in my top 5, we only used about 5-6 positions, but we probably had sex 2-4x a day 2-3x a week. And we just had really good chemistry.

    I may just be someone who doesn’t require variety. I don’t really have any boxes left to check on my sexual bucket list (3sum etc), I know what I like. I’m basically looking for chemistry and shared sexual interests. I believe I can get that in a relationship with the right girl.

  • LouiseC

    It sounds like an interesting book, I’ll have to add it to my summer reading list.

    I think he has a point with everything depending on a person’s emotional response to commitment and I think it does apply to women as well. The fact that more women want relationships is probably because society primes us to want them and to associate them with good feelings (Disney doing its bit for marriage rates and wedding costs all over the world).

    Also I would never date, be in a relationship or marry Mr Bachelor and I would be very worried about any woman who did.

    This man feels negative about commitment, the thought of a relationship makes him unhappy. I’m sure that therapy or time could help that but it’s not your job to save him. You’d be happier in the long run if you go for someone with a healthier attitude.

    Leaving aside the insulting nature (he’s settling in the worst sense of the word and you don’t want to be with a man who thinks “you’ll do”), a man who thinks relationships are supposed to be bad isn’t going to work and to fight to make them good. Wanderlust can often just be another way of saying running away.

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

      @LouiseC

      Welcome, thanks for leaving a comment!

      I’ll agree that Disney is a huge cultural influence, for better and worse.

  • Anacaona

    Clearly, at 26, with a TV career, he has not settled down yet. I suspect he’s Mr. Bachelor.
    A younger BB! 😛
    Also this is different is not saying how a marriage should be but how to filter for a LTR vs Pump and Dump.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    My brain sometimes gets veto power. . . sometimes. . . but I know who’s really in charge. Thankfully in matters of finance or anything with long term implications, little Fish does not get a say.

  • http://practicalpersuasion.wordpress.com Practical Persuasion

    “1. Do all men have the same “needs?” We tend to describe men as universally horny and preoccupied with sex most of the time. Does Mr. Bachelor actually want or need sex more than Mr. Relationship does? Does Mr. Relationship want or need connection more?”

    Men seem to have the same needs universally, at least on paper. But Mr. Bachelor’s traits might enable him to play with numbers: he’ll approach more women, he’ll go out more, he’ll go after women most men won’t (taken/married/models), or he’ll lower his standards. He’ll do whatever it takes. The variety of women you see him with is likely a result of this numbers game. Does that mean he wants sex more than Mr. Relationship? Who knows? It may only be that Mr. Bachelor seems to be working a lot harder for sex to someone who doesn’t share his psychological proclivities. Working harder for something doesn’t necessarily mean you want it more; it may mean that your process is inefficient. Mr. Relationship, on the other hand, is not as likely use those methods, so he seems like he is either getting laid less frequently, or that he wants relationships more than sex. He’s going after women he’s likely to have success with, women he knows, women who aren’t likely to reject him, women he’s studied carefully. The dry spells and lack of variety is probably a result of his method. Just looking at mens’ methods, it’s not really possible to determine who wants it more.

  • Sriracha Hot Sauce

    Sir Wavevector:
    “But it wouldn’t be prudent for him to reveal all the demons that those Mr. Relationships harbor. His lady customers would run off screaming. Even you have trouble facing those demons some times, Susan.”

    > What demons? Rejection? Unrequited love? We’ve all experienced it. Get it over it already.

    Jesse James:
    “I also have an interest in younger girls, older women, multiple women, and ‘taboo’ women’”

    By taboo women do you mean transwomen?

  • Esau

    M3: “someone out there who actually cares about me and wants to see me this weekend so she can bang my brains out AND watch Star Trek with vs. going out to a club or bar to play heads or tails with flaking drama queens “

    This really sounds like an excellent exemplar for the “Seeking” part of a man’s personal ad. Very well put! though I guess the woman who can assent to it honestly is rather rare (so, congratulations would be in order).

  • Sriracha Hot Sauce

    “Very well put! though I guess the woman who can assent to it honestly is rather rare”

    Plenty of women like sci-fi.

  • Aiva Laz

    “This is precisely what Hussey is arguing against. He’s saying that R guys don’t try for it because they’re not as interested in it.”

    They do not try for it because they cannot do it and know they cannot do it, it is most likely. Many R guys would try to pick up more different women if they could. And below them is that strata of men that Susan – and all other bloggers like her – have never, never written about: the irrecoverable SMP dregs for whom N = 0 and always will unless they pay.

  • Gin Martini

    Sue: “I do not want HUS to play any role in getting Escoffier to step out! Mrs. Escoff would never forgive me. Cease and desist!”

    But if Esc is right, he has nothing to fear, for two reasons. One, married men never get hit on by women, and two, he has no interest in it, so the plausable deniability of flirting leaves an out and he can just turn down any overt advances.

    Clearly, if he is correct, then a bit of fun Danny-game would falsify neither premise. After all, a tall, smart, well-dressed man who can cook…

  • J
  • Gin Martini

    Heh, read that article as if One Night Stands are reporting it.

    Maybe people who are happy get married, not the other way around?

  • Man

    As I am supposed to be a “Bachelor” myself, I am entitled to make some comments.

    Even though Mr. Relationship might miss and even grieve his single life, he understands without a doubt that his perfect woman makes his life much better than it was before.

    Mr. Relationship loves sexual variety, adventure and excitement as much as Mr. Bachelor does, but Mr. Relationship associates these aspects of life with being in a relationship. To Mr. Relationship, having a steady girlfriend, fiancée or wife means having fantastic sex, since having a committed partner means having regular sex with someone who knows his every quirk and turn-on.

    He views the woman in his life as someone with whom he can share amazing adventures and experiences. With her, he experiences companionship and the joy of going through life with someone who understands him at the deepest level. To him, relationships are the ultimate pleasure…the single life equals boredom, loneliness, and awkward ONSs with the occasional girl who doesn’t really know what turns him on sexually.

    Perhaps I am reading something different between the lines, but it seems that he is suggesting that Mr. Relationship, if he exists in the first place, is really deluded. Or perhaps he writes to validate the desires of his female readers. Women very often view themselves as so special, desirable as being a great contribution and addition to a man’s life. He seems to be validating the desire of his readership while at the same time suggesting that Mr. Relationship is very deluded. Very smart indeed.

    I am yet to find a man who confirms this fantastical portrayal of Mr. Relationship’s life, including those who were lucky enough to marry a remarkable feminine woman. I know two of these lucky guys and they are actually just average “dad” guys.

    That said I sometimes informally coach girls whom I talk with and complain about not having a boyfriend. I usually try to make them understand that most men are just invisible to women, including them, and that if she’s willing to acknowledge that there are a lot of men around who might be interested in a relationship with her, she can easily get one. I also advise them to go to places where they can find regular guys, not those with luxury cars, clothes and over-confident ones who would sweep them off their feet, in clubs and bars. I also tell them that going to dancing balls is a good bet.

    Once they are able to let go of their superiority complex and start to acknowledge that, well, men do exist and that many of them are willing to commit to them, they quickly find a boyfriend. It’s really interesting, but the main hurdle a woman has to “get the guy” is to feel any interest or attraction for him in the first place and be willing to have a relationship with normal, average guys. Susan has already written about it here, indirectly: Choose Attraction.

    I just don’t know how to coach them about how to get me. :) Perhaps I am indeed the relationship guy dreaming with the “perfect” woman…

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

      @Man

      Interesting, Hussey’s description of Mr. Relationship is a pretty accurate reflection of several couples I know who have been married a long time. These happily married husbands are very satisfied in life, and have been heard to wonder in amazement how they ever snagged such a terrific woman. My husband regularly tells our kids he has no idea how he got so lucky. :)

      I wouldn’t say that the sex is always fantastic in LTRs, but it is generally regular, and it is far more likely to be fantastic than casual sex, precisely for the reason Hussey states – knowing your partner very well.

      Finally, re amazing adventures and experiences, I suspect, as I implied in the post, that Mr. Bachelor and Mr. Relationship define this very differently. For Mr. Bachelor, taking a kayak onto the Yangtze might be an exciting adventure. For Mr. Relationship, spending a week with the family on a dude ranch in Montana or skiing in the Rockies might be an exciting adventure.

  • Escoffier

    My wife and I bonded over Star Trek. We still do.

  • J

    Heh, read that article as if One Night Stands are reporting it.

    LOL. Me too.

  • Escoffier

    “One, married men never get hit on by women”

    I’m not saying it never happens, just that it never happens to me. So I wonder if its prevelance is exaggerated or if there is just something about me …

    I mean, I am in Manhattan surrounded by single women over 30 who, in the media meme, are desperate to get their hooks into someone, anyone, so …

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

      @Escoffier

      I’m not saying it never happens, just that it never happens to me. So I wonder if its prevelance is exaggerated or if there is just something about me …

      Yes there is something about you and it’s not your looks. I’ve told you numerous times that I think you’re very attractive. I don’t know what mr. wavevector looks like, but he describes himself as average looking, and he still has opportunities.

      Remember, you recently said that even when you were single, when women jumped your bones you freaked out, haha. I think you walk around with a huge blinking sign over your head that says, “Don’t even think of parking here.”

      M3 is right, you could try flirting and find yourself in a very different situation, but the truth is you’re not a natural flirt and don’t want to be.

      I recall Passer By sharing that he’d been hit on by junior lawyers in his firm – he noted that if he’d pursued it he could have given each of them a very memorable minute or two. :) And we know how he jokes around – of course his personality is the same at work. (Hopefully, he does some judicious editing.)

      On the spectrum of flirtatious behavior we have you on one end – oblivious to female attention and disturbed by your fantasies, and we have the “instill dread” sociopaths on the other end.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    “My wife and I bonded over Star Trek. We still do.”

    Now that’s the truest essence of love.

    Live long and prosper Esc :)

  • J

    Congrats on the gf M3.

    Ditto. I’m glad you found someone!

  • Escoffier

    Susan was saying something earlier about kink or fantasies or what have you, well here’s one I can share, I think she (mine, that is) would look really hot in a female Lt. uniform circa 1966. I have been promised that this will happen Halloween 2013.

    An Orion slave girl would be nice but impractical.

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

      @Escoffier

      OK, now you’ve cast your fantasy. What’s the storyline? 😉

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    Important bits to me:

    “since having a committed partner means having regular sex with someone who knows his every quirk and turn-on.”

    and

    “To him, relationships are the ultimate pleasure…the single life equals boredom, loneliness, and awkward ONSs with the occasional girl who doesn’t really know what turns him on sexually.”

    This is huge for me. (And should be for women too?) Back in ‘the day’ when i was blazing a trail through the gentleman’s clubs, there was no end of having to deal with 1. preconceived notions of what i liked because all guys like X. 2. dealing with women who tried TOO hard or didn’t try AT ALL 3. women who were asking for me to do things i certainly wasn’t into or up for (anal or rough slapping violent sex) 4. having absolutely no clue as to what turned me on or/did not care to see what i responded to.

    As a giver, i’m always asking, always gauging body language and reactions and amplifying when i’ve hit the sweet spot. I care about my lovers needs. I do expect the same courtesy. I simply don’t see how it’s accomplished when sex becomes a detached, emotionless monkey sex robo fuckfest. But that’s just me. Perhaps that’s the Mr. Relationship in me, less sociopath tendencies, zero interest in self gratification, user sex.

    Perhaps this also applies more heavily on Introverts than Extroverts? Granted, us Int’s can occupy our time with whatever we fancy and can rarely be bored.. but in the context of coming home to an empty home without someone waiting for you with a smile on their face, and simply feeling the emptiness and having to think of something to do to allay boredom. An extrovert lives to find excitement, so boredom is a welcome feeling for him/her because it means it’s time to find another adventure. The bachelors life suits a high option Ent just fine, it’s in their DNA.

    I feel a lot of what he’s describing are the dispositions of Int’s and Ent’s wrt to how they view their options.

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

      I feel a lot of what he’s describing are the dispositions of Int’s and Ent’s wrt to how they view their options.

      I have the same sense. Promiscuity is strongly correlated to extraversion. That’s not surprising, as extraverts are far more likely to approach strangers, and far more likely to “own the room.” Both sexes are attracted to extraverts, especially for short-term mating. Personally, I’m glad I married an introvert, but part of that is the “opposites attract” thing.

  • JP

    “Yes. I consider myself a “Ms. Bachelorette”. Although I’ve been in relationships, I either feel trapped in them or begin to long for my single days while in them. My fondest memories are often tied to my single days.”

    You are three standard deviations from the norm.

    This means that we can say, with significant certainty, that you are not “the norm”.

    This is actually helpful because we can add it to our list of “things that are not the norm”.

    See how the exception that proves the rule works?

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Susan,

    As usual, I sense that you are very similar to my husband, and our marriages have a similar dynamic.

    Thank you. That’s quite a complement!

    Very true, and I would not appreciate paying 18.95 to be served up some new ones!

    Especially when you get it every day here for free.

  • mr. wavevector

    complement compliment

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    From that article:

    “People are happiest in their youth and when they are older. Middle-aged people are the least happy because they have the most responsibility.”

    That explains us grumpy middle aged guys.

  • mr. wavevector

    I’m not saying it never happens, just that it never happens to me. So I wonder if its prevelance is exaggerated or if there is just something about me …

    I mean, I am in Manhattan surrounded by single women over 30 who, in the media meme, are desperate to get their hooks into someone, anyone, so …

    I suspect M3 was on the right path – that you don’t exhibit the signs of sexual interest that women who might be attracted to you respond to. The IOIs that a man makes are a reflection of his sexual interest and arousal in a woman, and may be unconscious or unconscious, deliberate or even consciously but unsuccessfully suppressed.

    Women are attuned to these signals of male sexual interest. If they find you attractive they may respond in kind. If they find you unattractive they will consider you creepy. If you don’t get this type of response from women, perhaps you don’t feel the attraction in the moment or are very good at concealing it.

    I think those of us who get this type of female attention are signalling interest first. Upon reflection I’m sure I do. Sometimes it’s been unconscious – I’m attracted but distracted so I am not thinking about my attraction. I’m not deliberately trying to perform “mating displays” but end up doing so anyway on instinct. Sometimes I am very aware of my attraction and am trying my best to conceal it, but I don’t think I’m very good at concealing my emotions so my attraction is probably apparent despite my efforts. If the woman finds me attractive too, my behavior may spur her to escalate emotionally. And that’s how married guys find themselves at the edge of the precipice.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Esc,

    P.S.

    I’m not suggesting you should show signs of sexual interest in other women. It doesn’t lead to anything good. I’m just trying to understand the difference in our experiences – especially given the fact that you are apparently more physically attractive than I am.

  • Escoffier

    “These happily married husbands are very satisfied in life, and have been heard to wonder in amazement how they ever snagged such a terrific woman. My husband regularly tells our kids he has no idea how he got so lucky.”

    I know this is probably not what you meant to imply, but it does illustrate something that I see a lot of. For various reasons I get roped into going to a lot of benefits and such and I hear male speakers all the time go on about how it’s a miracle that a dirtbag like themselves married so far above his station, yada yada yada. I hear this ALL THE TIME from men and NEVER ONCE in my life from a woman talk about how great her husband is and how lucky she is to have him.

    Part of that may be just the cultural meme: it’s expected for men to denigrate themselves, but it’s an offense against feminism for women to do so. And to talk about how great the man in her life is, well that is blasphemy!

    Part, however, it also how some women must genuinely feel. Especially the kind of high achieving woman up on the dias.

    Funny, it’s “anti-hypergamy.” Would take a little thought to sort out all the underlying reasons but the pattern is there.

    FWIW, I know that I am lucky to have my wife but I also know that she is lucky to have me, and I know that she knows it. It’s nice to feel appreciated and one of the reasons we are both happy is that we both appreciate the other and make sure we both feel it. I don’t think either one of us married radically above our station in any sense. If I were ever called upon to make such a speech, I would be very gracious about what she means to me, but I would not portray myself as a worm unworthy of her attention who secured it only through luck and/or providence.

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

      FWIW, I know that I am lucky to have my wife but I also know that she is lucky to have me, and I know that she knows it. It’s nice to feel appreciated and one of the reasons we are both happy is that we both appreciate the other and make sure we both feel it. I don’t think either one of us married radically above our station in any sense. If I were ever called upon to make such a speech, I would be very gracious about what she means to me, but I would not portray myself as a worm unworthy of her attention who secured it only through luck and/or providence.

      I don’t think my husband would make that public speech either. It’s more of a joke in the family. And I do regularly tell the kids similar things about their dad, and I also tease him for being slow to come to his senses. We do a lot of good natured teasing in our house.

      My daughter’s primary filter in evaluating men is considering what her father would think of them, and I encourage that. She also goes straight to him rather than me if she needs advice on any aspect of evaluating male character.

      My kids know I hold their father in the highest regard.

      I am truly disgusted whenever I see either a husband or a wife put down the other in public, I cannot even imagine what their family dynamic must be like.

      When we celebrated our first anniversary, we went to Cape Cod for the weekend – we were living in NY at the time. We booked a table at a very expensive and famous (at that time) restaurant. We were seated next to a couple who seemed quite old – maybe in their late 60s. Anyway, the tables were close to one another and it was difficult to ignore their conversation, which was the wife berating her husband for over an hour. It was like a scene from “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” She kept saying things like, “You are such a loser, you have never done one good thing for this family.” He kept answering, “Yes, dear.” God, it was painful to observe, and I think we were both petrified, having been married only a year. Why they went out to an expensive dinner was not clear. They may have even been celebrating something. Terrible.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, I don’t know that I need a story line. Once I see her in that short skirt, the high boots, the neckline, perhaps holding a tricorder, I think nature will just take care of the rest. Not sure I could focus on anything else in any case.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Esc,

    FWIW, I know that I am lucky to have my wife but I also know that she is lucky to have me, and I know that she knows it. It’s nice to feel appreciated and one of the reasons we are both happy is that we both appreciate the other and make sure we both feel it. I don’t think either one of us married radically above our station in any sense. If I were ever called upon to make such a speech, I would be very gracious about what she means to me, but I would not portray myself as a worm unworthy of her attention who secured it only through luck and/or providence.

    Very well said. I heartily concur.

    I think one of the aspects of a relationship where equality is mandatory is respect; each partner should respect the other as they do themselves. If you disrespect yourself, you are disrespecting your partner by implication.

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

      If you disrespect yourself, you are disrespecting your partner by implication.

      I really like this!

  • Escoffier

    RE: signals, I had to go to another damned benefit Wednesday and somebody snapped a pic of our table, which got emailed to me after. Jesus, I look like such a sourpuss. I think I was even trying to smile!

    So, maybe you all have a point …

    I am definitely not a flirt but I can be chatty enough if a conversation somewhow gets going.

    Ah, well, it’s for the best, I suppose, in that there are no temptations …

  • mr. wavevector

    This idea that restricted men are only restricted because they lack options is an example of black and white thinking. It goes like this: Men are more unrestricted on average than women, therefore all men are unrestricted. Since all men are unrestricted they want to promiscuous. If they are not promiscuous it’s because they lack opportunity, and any explanation to the contrary is a rationalization of their failure.

    Sometimes there’s a normative twist: Men should pursue sexual opportunity. Real Men are promiscuous.

    But this is erroneous thinking. The data clearly shows that not all men are unrestricted and there is in fact a large overlap in the sociosexual orientation of the two sexes. Those men who forgo sexual variety either don’t want it, or want it but want a committed relationship more.

  • Man

    These happily married husbands are very satisfied in life, and have been heard to wonder in amazement how they ever snagged such a terrific woman.

    We’re not on the same geographic region, and you’re also from an older generation. But most men just complain about being in a relationship/marriage. I guess they always focus on the bad aspects. And perhaps they are Bachelors too, complaining. But I know two who are visibly happy in their marriages, and their wives are very smart, feminine and beautiful too. They are clearly the average “dad” type. I try not to leave so much room for chance, such as trying to be in the right places and giving attention to the what seem to be the right women/girls, but for sure luck can help a lot.

  • mr. wavevector

    The other day I read a story that had a vignette that illustrated a man in a monogamous relationship who was determined to satisfy his desire for sexual variety. In The Real Story of Ah-Q by the Chinese author Lu Xun, the village patriarch is determined to buy a concubine, and his wife is staging a hunger strike in protest.

    Restricted men don’t seek sexual variety because they are unwilling to inflict that sort of emotional distress on their female partners.

  • BroHamlet

    @Sassy

    As much as I like the idea of relationships/monogamy, there are parts of it that deter me from it, or even make me sabotage my relationships while I am in them. I worry about becoming bored with someone. I don’t necessarily like having to answer to somebody. I worry that I may not be completely satisfied with only one person sexually for the rest of my life. These issues are always nagging me in the back of my head whenever I start dating someone new, and it’s part of what makes me “jump ship” early from relationships.

    Sassy, you have more or less described the guy I look at in the mirror every morning. I feel like I *should* want to be monogamous, but that feeling fades when I get into a relationship. Oddly enough, my parents are still married after 25 years, but I question whether I could accomplish that, and I don’t believe in following social convention just because many other people do. I tend to prize my freedom to pursue the things that hold my attention in life over relationships- I’m lone-wolfish like that with spurts of being inclined to take a break and allow myself to settle down. Maybe it’s not healthy- I think I somehow equate settling down to weakness or giving up.

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

      @BroHamlet

      You sound like a Mr. Bachelor. You associate weakness and giving up with commitment – clearly a different emotional response than a Mr. Relationship. There is nothing unhealthy about it if that is what you prefer. It would be unhealthy to put yourself in a relationship that felt restrictive or even stifling.

      People who don’t want marriage or even relationships should not feel pressured into pursuing them, it only winds up making two people unhappy.

  • Fish

    I’ve used this analogy before. As sometimes being single is like eating at golden corral. Yes, there is a lot of variety, none of it particularly appealing & sometimes the only thing you want is just to gov straight to dessert.

    I think if you find the right partner, relationships have the potential for the highest consistent level of enjoyment. If you find your unicorn & you’re in a relationship, you (hopefully) get to keep her. If you aren’t, you have to hope lightning strikes twice. I also think relationships (marriage) has the highest potential downside if you choose wrong. Its high risk, high reward…

  • mr. wavevector

    One characteristic of a Mr. Relationship is declining sex with available unrestricted females. I’ve been thinking about why a man would do that.

    It comes down to the need to “top” the woman. This is something that both parties usually want and expect. A slutty girl still wants to be the girl in the relationship. To the extent that there is any sexual gate keeping going on, she wants to be the one doing it. She still expects the guy to initiate and escalate sexually. If he doesn’t her reaction is usually negative – he’s a prude, a loser, gay. So to top a slutty girl the guy needs to act even sluttier. If he has a need for emotional connection, he has to ignore it and push hard for sex first.

    The guy who isn’t naturally a bigger slut than the slutty girl needs to make a choice: act like one to get laid, or decline a sexual opportunity. If he chooses the former, he is doing violence to his own emotional needs. He is also dancing to the girl’s tune. The restricted guy who doesn’t dance to any tune but his own will choose the latter path and pass.

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

      The guy who isn’t naturally a bigger slut than the slutty girl needs to make a choice: act like one to get laid, or decline a sexual opportunity. If he chooses the former, he is doing violence to his own emotional needs. He is also dancing to the girl’s tune. The restricted guy who doesn’t dance to any tune but his own will choose the latter path and pass.

      Very interesting hypothesis. It occurs to me that the guy dancing to the girl’s tune is the sphere alpha in this case, while the restricted guy who takes a pass is the sphere beta loser.

      This relates to the concept of BMD, or the good alpha.

  • Zuckercorn

    M3@66
    “problems for guys in the legal arena”, “current legal context”

    Could you explain this a bit?

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    @ Zuckercorn

    Does not need to be rehashed.. this is a relationship blog, not an mra or manosphere blog.

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

      @M3

      Does not need to be rehashed.. this is a relationship blog, not an mra or manosphere blog.

      Thank you, I appreciate this very much.

  • Joe

    …the high boots, the neckline, perhaps holding a tricorder…

    Ack! Esc, TMI! TMI!!!!! 😉

  • Escoffier

    “This idea that restricted men are only restricted because they lack options is an example of black and white thinking.”

    Not what I meant to imply. I shall try to add nuance.

    I think that the vast majority of men biologically want vairety. Some of them get it. Some of them try for it, get some, but not as much as they want. Others try and fail. And still others don’t try.

    In the last three categories, we have lots of men who want something they can’t get. Why not? Presumably because they are not attractive enough, lack game, etc.

    Undoubtedly there is also a category who simply declines but, if they went for it, they could get it. Is this a large category? I doubt it. Or, it depends on what you mean by “variety.” Let’s take a hypothetical guy who loses his V at 20 and then bangs one woman per year over the next decade. His N is 10. That’s well above the median. So, statistically we would have to say that he achieved “variety.”

    Yet in the way his life was actually lived, maybe not. If he’s dedicating it to variety, then presumably the majority of those partners were not LTRs, they were more likely to be casual. 10 ONSs in a decade sounds pretty lousy no matter how you look at it. Really, the variety hunter wants the body count but he also wants the actual sex itself. We know that players have less sex on average than the attached. But to get to even, say, 50% (of total times having sex) of a guy in an LTR, they would have to be out there slaying poon with regularity. This is just not possible for most.

    So, I don’t think it’s crazy to assume that an awful lot of men are able to assess their chances in the SMP. “Well, I might be able to get a dozen ONSs and short flings over the next several years, which might result an N of 12 but only maybe 50 total bangs–that sounds terrible! Much better to get a GF.”

    I am emphatically NOT saying that this is the ONLY reason why a guy would forgoe the chase. There are many reasons. But a clear-headed assessment of his actual options, and how they are actually going to be realized, will convince most men that the player style is not going to get them what they want.

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

      @Escoffier

      I’d be interested in your take on a study that asked undergraduate males and females how many sexual partners they would like to have ideally over a variety of time periods. Men did not desire a greater number of partners.

      :As in a study reported in Buss and Schmitt (1993), participants were first asked to estimate how many sexual partners they would ideally like to have over a series of time intervals: during the next month, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, and a lifetime. In addition, participants were also asked to estimate how many sexual partners they thought they could realistically have over the same time intervals, a series of questions Buss and Schmitt (1993) did not ask. Constraint was computed as the difference between partners desired and partners expected for each time period. High positive numbers reflected constraint with ideal scores greater than expected scores.

      Results and Discussion

      The median response for the 30 year period for both men and women was “no difference” between the number of partners ideally desired and realistically expected. Consistent with this finding, the median value was also zero for both men and women for the other 10 time periods as well.

      Consistent with our hypothesis and the expectations of Attachment Fertility Theory, these findings suggest that both men and women, typically, are not constrained in achieving the number of partners they desire. These findings, however, do not support Sexual Strategies Theory. Specifically, if men are not “constrained in their reproductive success primarily by the number of fertile women they can inseminate” (Buss and Schmitt 1993, p. 206), can there be evolutionary-based gender differences in the problems that follow from this non- constraint? Obviously not.

      Buss and Schmitt (1993) found statistically significant differences between the means for men and the means for women at all 11 time intervals from a month to a lifetime. As strong as these findings may appear, Buss and Schmitt’s (1993) inferences rely heavily on t-test comparisons of means. We have argued that this matters both conceptually and statistically (Pedersen et al. 2002). First, these data are heavily skewed. For example, even in Buss and Schmitt’s (1993) original data which they provided to us, for the “next 30 years” time frame, the skew for men was highly significant (Z = 8.94, p < .000001). Given that these data violate the assumptions of parametric tests, medians rather than means are a more appropriate measure of central tendency (Wilcox 1997). As we have reported elsewhere (Pedersen et al. 2002), although we readily replicate Buss and Schmitt’s findings for mean differences between men and women in number of partners desired per time frame, the story is different when we look at medians.

      We (Pedersen et al. 2002) find at the 30-year time frame, for example, that over 50% of both men and women desire no more than 1 sexual partner.

      More recent cross-cultural work by proponents of SST (see Schmitt 2003) indicates that medians for men and women (except for men in Oceania — i.e., Australia, Fiji & Pacific Islands, and New Zealand) were also 1.

      The logic of Sexual Strategies Theory, so tied to non- overlapping biological propensities (e.g., sperm production; bearing offspring), seems consistent with the expectation that at the very least, most men would differ from most women in their sexual strategies. Medians therefore, could provide a particularly useful measure of central tendency with which to examine a hypothesis about evolved, biologically-based, differences between men and women.

      First, virtually all men (98.9%) and virtually all women (99.2%) desire to eventually settle down in a long-term mutually exclusive sexual relationship. Second, of those who have not yet found such a partner, the median desired time frame for ideally dating before finding this person is 5 years into the future. Third, when asked how many short-term and long-term partners men and women ideally desired, we replicated both a mean difference, and no median difference between men and women. Fourth, both men and women desired a median number of 0 short-term partners.

      Study: Are Men and Women Really That Different? Examining Some of Sexual Strategies Theory (SST)’s Key Assumptions about Sex-Distinct Mating Mechanisms

      William C. Pedersen & Anila Putcha-Bhagavatula & Lynn Carol Miller

      What say you?

  • Jonny

    A single guy advising single women on how to find a husband could either be doing a good job (if successful) or could be doing lasting damage. Having married twice, you really don’t know what the marriage institution is until you’re past the point, and even then, it is not the same for everyone. Luckily, I am a man, who can start over. Many women, if made a bad first choice, can have a difficult time in getting a second round. Of course, getting the first round is hard for many women.

    As women are the cause for breakup of the majority of marriges (and I am proof that my first marriage failed due to my wife wanting out), it is vitally important that women figure out what they want out of marriage and not marry for the wrong reason. It is not wrong to have low expectations of marriage. It is the high expectations that can ruin a marriage.

    Low expectations: You will not be alone. You will spend much time with your husband (unless you avoid him) and probably be sick of him. You will not have much sex (but more than being single). You will do most household chores. No gender equality (feminists should not marry).

    High expectations: You will find your soul mate (untrue). You will get richer (depends if you avoid debt). Your man will accept you unconditionally (as you much as you accept your husband unconditionally).

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Escoffier,

    Or, it depends on what you mean by “variety.”

    For married men like us, “variety” would mean cheating on our wives. An affair, a mistress, a ONS, a piece on the side. You seem unsure of your possibilities, but I’m quite confident that if I went looking for trouble I would find it. I choose not to because I value my relationship with my wife more than variety. Even if I were 100% confident of not getting caught, I would still damage my marriage by cheating.

  • Anacaona

    I think she (mine, that is) would look really hot in a female Lt. uniform circa 1966. I have been promised that this will happen Halloween 2013.
    Heh it seems that Uhura is a popular male fetitsh among the geeky crowd. Hubby and I have one of those ‘exceptions’ discussions and he told me that “I will always be faithful to you but if a temporary anomaly happens and Uhura (Nichelle Nichols) circa the 60’s falls into my lap I can’t make promises”

    An extrovert lives to find excitement, so boredom is a welcome feeling for him/her because it means it’s time to find another adventure. The bachelors life suits a high option Ent just fine, it’s in their DNA.
    I’m an extrovert but I don’t experience it that way, Is more like I find excitement on everything. Learning a new recipe, selecting a new house gadget, reading a new scientific advance. The only think I find dull is cleaning up mostly because I have a bad association with it and is repetitive.

    Sometimes there’s a normative twist: Men should pursue sexual opportunity. Real Men are promiscuous.
    If not they turn gay 😛

    Maybe it’s not healthy- I think I somehow equate settling down to weakness or giving up.
    I do wonder if this is the way you think your father is? I mean do you feel he gave up a lot of things to be married? Does he ever shows regret or tells you how many things he would had done if it was not for your mother and maybe you? Just curious.

  • Sassy6519

    @ M3

    Perhaps this also applies more heavily on Introverts than Extroverts? Granted, us Int’s can occupy our time with whatever we fancy and can rarely be bored.. but in the context of coming home to an empty home without someone waiting for you with a smile on their face, and simply feeling the emptiness and having to think of something to do to allay boredom. An extrovert lives to find excitement, so boredom is a welcome feeling for him/her because it means it’s time to find another adventure. The bachelors life suits a high option Ent just fine, it’s in their DNA.

    I feel a lot of what he’s describing are the dispositions of Int’s and Ent’s wrt to how they view their options.

    This very well may be the case. My Myer-Briggs type is ENTP, and I admit to having averse reactions to the ideas of commitment and “settling down”. For me, being out and tackling the world is very exciting to me. I value my freedom a lot, and I have a hard time relinquishing some of it whenever I enter a relationship. I like being able to come and go as I please, never having to answer to anyone. I like doing spur of the moment nightlife activities with my friends without having to check in with someone. I don’t necessarily enjoy being “tied down”, and a lot of arguments between my exes and I stemmed from their desires to dictate parts of my schedule/how I spent my time. That is the worst thing someone could do to me, honestly. The moment that I start feeling caged in, the quicker I am to start making my exit out of the relationship.

    @ BroHamlet

    Sassy, you have more or less described the guy I look at in the mirror every morning. I feel like I *should* want to be monogamous, but that feeling fades when I get into a relationship. Oddly enough, my parents are still married after 25 years, but I question whether I could accomplish that, and I don’t believe in following social convention just because many other people do. I tend to prize my freedom to pursue the things that hold my attention in life over relationships- I’m lone-wolfish like that with spurts of being inclined to take a break and allow myself to settle down. Maybe it’s not healthy- I think I somehow equate settling down to weakness or giving up.

    I hear you. Your description fits me too.

  • Sassy6519

    @ JP

    You are three standard deviations from the norm.

    This means that we can say, with significant certainty, that you are not “the norm”.

    This is actually helpful because we can add it to our list of “things that are not the norm”.

    See how the exception that proves the rule works?

    I’m confused. What does any of this have to do with my comment? Would you mind offering some clarification?

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    @ Anacaona
    “The only think I find dull is cleaning up mostly because I have a bad association with it… ”

    Killer dust bunnies? lol.

  • Anacaona

    Killer dust bunnies? lol.
    Heh I wish. Mostly mom never being happy about it, making me do it all over again and not letting me play, watch cartoons or read books until she was happy with the result or too tired to keep arguing. Also sociopath brother being allowed to roam free while I had to do all the housework, because of a difference that was not bigger than 1% of my body. AKA genitalia. Bad memories all over.

  • Escoffier

    wave, that’s way off topic, as should be obvious. We’re not talking about what variety means after the vows, but about the potential to actualize it before the vows.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    You sound like a Mr. Bachelor. You associate weakness and giving up with commitment – clearly a different emotional response than a Mr. Relationship. There is nothing unhealthy about it if that is what you prefer. It would be unhealthy to put yourself in a relationship that felt restrictive or even stifling.

    Fair enough- I think logically I know this, but it’s resulted in some personal strife. One one hand, I have a great example of a solid marriage, and was raised conservatively. On the other, when I think of what I want to leave behind when I’m gone, a family never seems to fall in the top two or three. I come from a family of relatively high achieving, conservative people, and started out never questioning that what they had was what I should want. The fact that my personal ethos drags me in the opposite direction makes me feel selfish, but I can’t really help what I am.

    If I was a girl about to get engaged, I wouldn’t just want a guy to ask me to marry him for the Disneyesque warm fuzzies of crossing the marriage finish line and ticking that box that makes her “ok” by society’s standards. I would be asking him to be honest about what he sees every time he thinks about what he wants his life to be about. Does a partner factor in? Seems to me, a fair number of people do things because they think they’re supposed to.

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

      If I was a girl about to get engaged, I wouldn’t just want a guy to ask me to marry him for the Disneyesque warm fuzzies of crossing the marriage finish line and ticking that box that makes her “ok” by society’s standards. I would be asking him to be honest about what he sees every time he thinks about what he wants his life to be about.

      Marrying without a clear sense of this would be absolute insanity. Divorce in 5.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3

    @ Sassy

    Interesting. Even as i worked to increase my options through game, weight training, etc.. i did it to increase my ability to choose a high quality partner for LTR in mind, not to actually exercise every option afforded to me within my reachable and available SMV spectrum of choices. As an INT, that would be overly taxing and exhausting to me and not feeding into the comfortable and consistent reality i crave.

    If i actually enjoyed long engaging conversations with strangers, meeting new strange random people, looking for new adventurous thing to constantly do.. where being a comfortable and consistent homebody wasn’t a requirement, perhaps that temperament would have made me more amiable to utilizing my newfound skills to take the high risk road of being more unrestricted?

  • Sassy6519

    @ BroHamlet

    If I was a girl about to get engaged, I wouldn’t just want a guy to ask me to marry him for the Disneyesque warm fuzzies of crossing the marriage finish line and ticking that box that makes her “ok” by society’s standards. I would be asking him to be honest about what he sees every time he thinks about what he wants his life to be about. Does a partner factor in? Seems to me, a fair number of people do things because they think they’re supposed to.

    Oh man, if I could, I would give you a big kiss on the cheek for this comment.

    You have summarized a lot of my feelings in this one paragraph. I get a lot of pressure from my family to get married and have kids, but it just makes me want to run. I have absolutely no desire to get married just for the sake of saying that I am married. I would rather cut off my own arm, to be honest, than to do that. That’s how strongly I feel about it. If I ever get married, it will be because I have found a man that makes marriage seem like a pleasant option for a lifetime. I don’t want to “half-ass” it, and I have yet to meet a man that even remotely inspires me in such ways. I don’t want to get married just because it is something that is expected of me, as a woman in this society. If I have to choose between that and spending the rest of my days with cats, I’m going with the cats.

  • Hope

    Escoffier “I hear this ALL THE TIME from men and NEVER ONCE in my life from a woman talk about how great her husband is and how lucky she is to have him.”

    I say that my husband is awesome and I’m lucky to have him all the time, but you are right that not a lot of women say this.

    And for what it’s worth, I find your online persona to be one of the more attractive that I’ve seen. If you don’t notice the women flirting with you, maybe you just don’t realize that they think you’re attractive. Women are mostly not overt about it, unless the man initiates. I’m one of the weird ones that do initiate, and my husband was surprised that I expressed interest in him first.

    Also, consider that your IQ is probably several standard deviations above the norm. The average girl isn’t going to appreciate your type, and your type (like your wife) isn’t going to express her interest in the salacious and obvious way that you would take notice as “flirting.” So you’re dealing with an “elite” and “selective” female audience, and well, they wouldn’t be openly flirting with a married man. At least, they shouldn’t.

  • Escoffier

    Hope, you are very kind.

    I admit, I didn’t think of you (or anyone here) when I made that comment about women talking about their husbands. I was thinking only of experience at awards dinners (I have been to a lot), where I hear the men say that all the time and the women, never.

    In the last two months alone I heard two different billionaires talk about how amazing it is that their amazing wives stooped to marry them and how it explains all their success. I suppose these dudes have alpha cred to burn so why not but it just seems kinds stupid.

  • Sassy6519

    @ M3

    Interesting. Even as i worked to increase my options through game, weight training, etc.. i did it to increase my ability to choose a high quality partner for LTR in mind, not to actually exercise every option afforded to me within my reachable and available SMV spectrum of choices. As an INT, that would be overly taxing and exhausting to me and not feeding into the comfortable and consistent reality i crave.

    I think that is the major difference between INT and ENT. To me, exploring choices/options is very exciting. I don’t find it taxing at all.

    If i actually enjoyed long engaging conversations with strangers, meeting new strange random people, looking for new adventurous thing to constantly do.. where being a comfortable and consistent homebody wasn’t a requirement, perhaps that temperament would have made me more amiable to utilizing my newfound skills to take the high risk road of being more unrestricted?

    Perhaps.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Esc,

    wave, that’s way off topic, as should be obvious. We’re not talking about what variety means after the vows, but about the potential to actualize it before the vows.

    Speak for yourself – I was talking about variety in all its manifestations. It doesn’t make sense to talk about a “sacrifice” a married man makes in sexual variety unless you consider his sexual opportunities after he marries, because it is exactly those opportunities that he vows to forgo.

    When a married man is faced with a beautiful young woman looking up at him with wide-eyed admiration, her face flushed with excitement and desire, and has to fight like hell against his own raging desire and infatuation to stay faithful to his wife, he truly understands what he’s sacrificing. And if he surmounts that challenge, he can accept the title of Mr. Relationship knowing that it is a sign of his character and strength of will, not a sign of his paucity of opportunity.

  • mr. wavevector

    I suppose these dudes have alpha cred to burn so why not but it just seems kinds stupid.

    Maybe they’re overcompensating for treating their wives like shit the rest of the time.

  • Man

    I hear this ALL THE TIME from men and NEVER ONCE in my life from a woman talk about how great her husband is and how lucky she is to have him.

    Part of that may be just the cultural meme: it’s expected for men to denigrate themselves, but it’s an offense against feminism for women to do so. And to talk about how great the man in her life is, well that is blasphemy!

    Part, however, it also how some women must genuinely feel. Especially the kind of high achieving woman up on the dias.

    +1 On Facebook, for instance, it is very common that men will publish in their profile their pictures with her mate and children. And some women publish only their own. There might be a variety of reasons, but indeed it’s hard for us to men to realize that we are never loved and desired as much as we love and desire them. They are always sure of our love and feelings. We are never sure of theirs. We desire and love them (their bodies, company, affection) so ardently, it’s as if they were our existential aim. Yet, we are never desired and loved with the same intensity and we can never know their true feelings. No wonder men are so romantic and love is so idealized and romanticized by male writers, poets and musicians. It’s as if the whole of the universe revolves around them. Yet, we do not exist. We are invisible. Only our external or subjective attributes exist. And every often we do not even have a name, feelings or a personality… Welcome to men’s reality world (of desiring, while not being so much desired). :) Man’s existential aim: woman. Woman’s existential aim: children.

  • Escoffier

    “Speak for yourself”

    No need to snark. This is, or was, not personal.

    The question is whether some/most R men go that way because they lack the option to rack up a body count, not what they do after they are married. Of course that would not account for all instances, but it’s a mistake of Hussey’s to assume that all R men are that way because they have zero inclination to variety, just as the flipside mistake is to assume that nearly everyone has a shot at variety but the most virtuous choose to forego it.

  • JP

    I always thought of being married and having children as basic requirements for adulthood.

    Plus, being married is the only way to avoid chronic guilt and regret for engaging in extra-marital sex.

    I couldn’t tell you if I am “restricted” or not, since my motivation was moral perfectionism in aligning myself as much as possible with what I perceived to be the objective permanent moral order.

    This is also my primary motivation in avoiding porn as well.

  • JP

    I have had sex with precisely one woman in my life because my *goal* was to have sex with precisely one woman.

  • mr. wavevector

    No need to snark. This is, or was, not personal.

    It’s not snark. You made a statement about what “we” are talking about. I’m pointing out that is not what I am talking about. You and I are talking about different things, as I’ll explain.

    The question is whether some/most R men go that way because they lack the option to rack up a body count, not what they do after they are married.

    That may be your question, but this exchange started with my comment at #17 (to which you responded in #18), in which I was addressing a different question. My response was a reply to this question from Susan:

    The data clearly shows that single men have sex less frequently than married men. Does Mr. Bachelor forfeit frequency for novelty while Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for frequency?

    Susan is presenting a contrast where married men have more sex than single men. I addressed the tradeoffs married men make in my response in #17, and specifically how that affects me in my marriage. All my comments since then have all been in the same context: the tradeoffs men make in marriage. If we’ve been having different conversations, it’s because you have continued to talk about a different point, which is the decisions men make before marriage.

    but it’s a mistake of Hussey’s to assume that all R men are that way because they have zero inclination to variety, just as the flipside mistake is to assume that nearly everyone has a shot at variety but the most virtuous choose to forego it.

    That I agree with.

  • JP

    “Susan is presenting a contrast where married men have more sex than single men. I addressed the tradeoffs married men make in my response in #17, and specifically how that affects me in my marriage. All my comments since then have all been in the same context: the tradeoffs men make in marriage.”

    I didn’t view marriage as a tradeoff, as much as I viewed it as obligatory.

  • mr. wavevector

    I didn’t view marriage as a tradeoff, as much as I viewed it as obligatory.

    That simplifies the problem a bit/

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

    I have tended to think in terms of an efficient frontier with SMV Quality positioned on one axis and Commitment Required on the other. A dotted line across the horizontal might represent a man’s minimum SMV threshold.

    So perhaps normally this creates a curve that slopes up and to the right—for gain in the SMV of a female sexual partner, a man would be expected to have to commit more. Maybe we should describe Commitment Required in units that run from 1-10, like SMV. Commitment below “5” units depicts casual sex; above 5 depicts increasing degrees of exclusivity.

    If a man needs a mate with a minimum SMV of 7 to be happy, he could hypothetically consult his SMV vs. Commitment tool and find that he needs to expend a minimum of 7 Commitment units to have a sexual relationship with her (i.e., an LTR). Another man may find that he needs a similar SMV 7 mate, but perhaps in his case he only has to expend 3 Commitment units to make this a reality (i.e., an STR). Yet a third man may find himself in the unfortunate position of wanting an SMV 7 woman, but being required to supply an extravagant 13 Commitment units—he only has 10, so he basically cannot have sex with an SMV 7 unless he acquires vast resources or something.

    I think that most guys realize that there is normally a tradeoff out there between Mate SMV and Casual Sex. Perhaps most successful player types either have a lower SMV threshold (they are willing to have sex with lower SMV women than their more restricted male peers would be willing to have sex with), or they can reliably obtain casual sex with higher SMV women (women that other men would only be able to seduce by using high levels of commitment).

  • Hope

    Susan, I’ve participated in some of those undergraduate psychology surveys. Honestly I think they’re not as good as general population surveys. They tend to do those things to first-year, psych 101 students, who are kind of wide eyed and innocent. So if you ask those guys, they’re going to give different answers than those same guys might give in a few years.

    Not saying that the results are invalid, but I don’t like undergrad surveys in general.

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

      @Hope

      They tend to do those things to first-year, psych 101 students, who are kind of wide eyed and innocent. So if you ask those guys, they’re going to give different answers than those same guys might give in a few years.

      That may be, but I figured guys at their absolute height of horniness would be more likely than anyone to express the desire for more partners. Isn’t this what they think of 24/7? In any case, the comparison to other research using the same subject population should be valid.

      Not saying that the results are invalid, but I don’t like undergrad surveys in general.

      Unfortunately, almost all academics use undergrads!

  • Hope

    Susan “As in a study reported in Buss and Schmitt (1993)”

    Plus, you know, 1993 was a long time ago. A lot has changed in 20 years to make those undergraduate guys’ views a bit outdated, for good or for ill.

    Mr. Wavevector “The guy who isn’t naturally a bigger slut than the slutty girl needs to make a choice: act like one to get laid, or decline a sexual opportunity. If he chooses the former, he is doing violence to his own emotional needs. He is also dancing to the girl’s tune. The restricted guy who doesn’t dance to any tune but his own will choose the latter path and pass.”

    This is very well-stated. My husband was like this and sat out dating for a long time because of it.

    Man “Man’s existential aim: woman. Woman’s existential aim: children.”

    Reminds me of a saying: “Men love women. Women love kids. Kids love Elmo.”

  • Paul Rivers

    Wow, what an interesting article. Personally, I think all the points I’ve seen here reflect my own views on the dynamic between the different kinds of guys and how their emotions work – from the perspective of another guy, at least.

    “1. Do all men have the same “needs?” We tend to describe men as universally horny and preoccupied with sex most of the time. Does Mr. Bachelor actually want or need sex more than Mr. Relationship does? Does Mr. Relationship want or need connection more?”

    I think that for Mr. Relationship, emotional connection is a prerequisite for sex, whereas it is not for Mr. Bachelor (or at least not as much, or maybe it’s not personal and exclusive emotional connection for him).

    I don’t think there’s a difference in drive, more of a difference in what defines “quality”.

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

      @Paul Rivers

      I don’t think there’s a difference in drive, more of a difference in what defines “quality”.

      That makes sense, and I think that’s a good corollary to Hussey’s focusing on the emotions a man feels around commitment. There is also the reasoning or judgment involved in deciding what his individual highest quality experience will be.

      I wrote a comment on #2, but the comment system ate it saying “You are posting comments too quickly. Slow down.”.

      I’ve never heard of that happening! How annoying, I apologize. I checked but I don’t have it. I hate it when thoughtful comments disappear, ugh.

  • Paul Rivers

    I wrote a comment on #2, but the comment system ate it saying “You are posting comments too quickly. Slow down.”.

    It also lost and threw out the comment, the page didn’t have it, and hitting back didn’t have it either. Don’t feel like rewriting it – guess it’s gone.

  • Escoffier

    Ack, bold error!

  • Paul Rivers

    “3. Can these needs be met in different ways? Hussey suggests variety can occur both within and outside relationships.”

    Imagine your princess ideology, where she believes that one day a man is going to come along and save her from her tame and boring life. He will “rescue” her, and suddenly she’ll have it all – live in a castle, suddenly have a bunch of friends, go on wild and exciting adventures, have great sex, be respected by everyone…etc etc etc.

    Obviously a lot of these “needs” are not inherently sexual.

    One of the biggest things I see in women that aren’t particularly relationship trustworthy is that they difficulty making people interested in joining in adventures, talking to them, getting to know each other – without being flirty or dating.

    Unfortunately, it’s not really easy, especially as you get older. There’s an entire mentality that’s like “you’re making new friends? doing new things? you’re married / have children – you’re not supposed to be doing that”.

  • Paul Rivers

    “4. How do emotions play a role? Do these divergent outlooks correspond with pessimism and optimism? Or cynicism and hope?”

    I don’t think it’s either of those, I think it’s a matter of what you enjoy.

    Let me tell you about two completely fictitious men. The first guy is a hunter. He spends thousands of dollars to fly over to Africa. He hires a guide, he rents a vehicle, etc. He gets a tent, and ventures out into the wilderness in pursuit of the most dangerous..uh, second most dangerous game – lions. (Let’s assume he’s not hunting people, lol). After a week of camping hunting, he finally tracks down a lion. The lion springs at him, his gun jams – but at the last second he frees it up and shoots the lion. The lion – already mid-air – is immediately killed, but it’s body still in motion hits him and knocks him over. Wow, he says – what an adventure!

    At the end of his trip, he goes back to his dull job as a doctor, endlessly seeing patients mostly consisting of people with colds, and the elderly who continually have one minor ailment after another.

    The second guy is also a hunter back home – deer, stuff like that. He sees a movie on the exciting safari of Africa and how amazing it’s supposed to be. The first guy relates his **amazing** story of the hunt and personal satisfaction to the second guy.

    So the second guy spends thousands of dollars to fly over to Africa. He hires a guide, rents a vehicle, etc. He gets a tent, and ventures out into the wilderness in pursuit of the…second most dangerous game. :-)

    His guide only barely speaks english. He tries to make friends with his guide and the other guys in the group, but they both know at the end of the week he’s flying home and he’ll never see them again. It’s not the same as hunting with his friends back home. The flies are – everywhere. Even with bug spray, you’re nearly eaten alive the moment you step out of your tent. The heat is incredibly oppressive, you can’t even hardly sleep at night. He’s kind of having a miserable time, but hey – he’s already there, and he’s payed a lot of money.

    After a week of camping and hunting, and continually thinking “why am I doing this shit?”, he finally tracks down a lion. The lion springs at him, but his gun jams. But he’s no idiot – at the last second he frees it up and shoots the lion. The lion – already mid-air – is immediately killed, but it’s body still in motion hits him and knocks him over. His brain – not sure if the lion is actually dead and is going dig it’s teeth into his neck and kill him and it rips his head from his body – flashes his entire life before his eyes. He’s thinking to himself – WHAT THE FUCK WAS I THINKING??? He almost died, surrounded by people he didn’t know, in the middle of some shithole African savanna, after a miserable week of sunburn, flies, and borderline heatstroke. His guide and the other people in the group clap him on the back and congratulate him, but he knows this was an absolutely stupid idea that he would NEVER do again.

    He flies back home, to his life of enjoying hunting on the weekend with his friends and enjoying the comradrie of a bunch of guys he’s known for year, and his satisfying and rewarding job as a doctor where he enjoys working with people every day, saving lives, and even enjoys chatting with his regular elderly patients. He derives real satisfaction from the fact that he makes peoples lives better, he gets respect as a doctor, and hey – the fact that he makes a crapload of money and really enjoys puzzling out what sickness the person has is awesome to. :-)

    Now what’s the difference between these two men? The exact same experience for both of them results in totally different emotional reactions based on what they enjoy. The first guy loves hunting, conquering, etc – he doesn’t care about the drawbacks – the bugs, the heat. He doesn’t even care that he’s putting his life in danger just to shoot something, in fact for him – that’s part of the thrill. That’s what making it exciting. He doesn’t enjoy the group satisfaction of doing something like the second guy does. The fact that the people he’s surrounded with he’ll never see again just isn’t something that makes any difference to him.

    For the second guy, the bugs and the heat are something he can put up with but doesn’t enjoy. And the fact that he’s putting his life in danger completely drains ALL of the fun out of it. Rather than making things “more exciting”, the fact the he’s in real genuine danger is a HUGE turnoff for him, something that he’s only willing to put up with if he was doing something really important – he’d run into a burning house to save the life of his child, but risking his life to shoot a stupid lion? He’s doesn’t feel “excited” by that – he feels like a guy who put all his money into a stock, then the stock immediately crashed. Stupid. Idiotic. And – when we’re talking about something recreational – not having anyone he knows along just isn’t as fun, though with the life threatening thing it’s really a minor point.

    It’s not about optimism, cynisiscm, pessimism or hope – it’s about what causes you to feel good, and what causes you to feel bad.

  • Paul Rivers

    “5. Is Mr. Bachelor a good bet for marriage when he reaches his 40s? Or can no woman hope to hold his attention and suppress his “wanderlust?””

    That’s hard to say. As someone else said, most people do not actually fall into this way of black and white thinking. He’s probably not a good candidate by his 40’s is he’s still into the thrill of the chase and only the chase. But it’s hard to say for sure – sometimes after he’s shot 35 different Lions, it’s just not as thrilling any more. Likewise, after nailing so many women he it’s just not exciting for him to nail some airhead 20-year old, and the older he gets the more it’s the case that the “hot” women he can get are just dumber and dumber. Sometimes – not always, but sometimes – the same thing that makes sleeping with the same girl boring is the same thing that makes nailing a bunch of different women boring. He’s like “I know I can hit that, but I’ve hit some random ass so many times I just don’t care any more. I want to do something new and different.”

    I’d say there’s a better chance of finding this in a guy who’s in hit his 30’s than a guy who’s hit his 40’s though.

    “6. Should women who want to marry ever date Mr. Bachelor? If so, why? If not, why not?”

    Yes. Woman who are just like Mr. Bachelor definitely should be dating him.

    There’s a lot of women out there who simply aren’t Mrs. Relationship themselves. They’re also like guy #1 – the things that Guy #2 likes just don’t excite them.

    It’s more complicated than that – but my post is already way to long, lol…

    “7. Is there an analogous divergence of women? Ms. Bachelorette vs. Ms. Relationship? Or Ms. Career vs. Ms. Family? If so, how do these different types of women recall their single days?”

    Yes. For sure. Without doubt. Etc. Same dynamic – what *causes* her to feel happy/excited/satisfied/etc? A woman wants a relationship but isn’t actually made happy / excited /etc by the actual relationship is just as bad for a relationship as the man who’s the same way.

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

      “6. Should women who want to marry ever date Mr. Bachelor? If so, why? If not, why not?”

      Yes. Woman who are just like Mr. Bachelor definitely should be dating him.

      There’s a lot of women out there who simply aren’t Mrs. Relationship themselves. They’re also like guy #1 – the things that Guy #2 likes just don’t excite them.

      Very good point.

  • mr. wavevector

    They tend to do those things to first-year, psych 101 students, who are kind of wide eyed and innocent.

    In addition to being 18 year old undergrads, the subjects of psych studies have been criticized as being WEIRD: Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. Not exactly representative of humankind in general.

  • Escoffier

    Here’s the initial claim:

    “Mr. Relationship forfeits novelty for a high quality relationship.”

    OK. Certainly some do. But, as worded, it implies that most or all do. That variety is by default a sacrifice for “Mr. Relationship.”

    I don’t believe that. I don’t think the numbers show it. I don’t think common sense or logic will sustain it.

    The real disagreement here is about prevalence. Leave aside which category you or I may or may not be in. I will stipulate that you made a voluntary sacrifice just as I will stipulate that I did not, or not to the same degree. The question is, who outnumbers whom? Guys like you or guys like me?

  • Escoffier

    So, we’re having a party tomorrow and I prepped a bunch of stuff tonight to work ahead. On Fridays, BBC America shows ST-TNG, so I had that on as I worked. My wife came in and I reminded her, because I had Star Trek to remind me, “Remember your promise for Halloween.”

    “I know.”

    “What rank will you be?”

    “Lieutenant. You have to outrank me!”

    Hypergamy!

    Then I said something snarky, which I can’t remember, and she said “If you piss me off, I’ll be an admiral!”

    I confess a certain line from the film A Few Good Men popped into my head but I didn’t mention it.

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

      “Lieutenant. You have to outrank me!”

      Hypergamy!

      I’m loving these domestic field reports from the Escoffier household.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Even at Psy 10, we have some selection or self-selection going on. Among other things, these folks are more likely to be self-evaluating. Even if they’re trying to be Holden Caulfield, or anti-Caulfield. Or whomever.
    In addition, if they’re further into psych than intro, they’ve had some training in testing; construction, analysis, type.
    And they’re probably paranoid about any promised anonymity.

  • Hope

    Paul Rivers #152, that was a brilliant story, and I think it quite accurately describes the mentality between people who like that sort of “lifestyle” vs. people who do not.

    Susan, the other thing about those undergrad psych surveys, people tend to not tell the whole truth on them, even if you don’t put your name on them. I know when I was an undergrad and doing those surveys, I had to get some kind of “completion” on them in order to pass the class, and so even if they assured my anonymity, it didn’t feel completely anonymous.

  • Anacaona

    @Paul Rivers
    Great analysis. I think there is the internal excitement vs the external excitement to take in account as well. I remember some people enjoy other’s peoples company even if they are not doing anything particularly exciting (playing chess, watching a movie, having a quiet talk). While for others the company most be in an exciting setting (dancing, clubbing, kayaking) for it to be enjoyable. We also have those ” I need to get out of the house” type vs “I want to spent a quiet evening at home” type. Of course all this is an spectrum I rarely ever need to go out but I do once in a blue moon while I have a friend that spending a weekend in the house is akin to Chinese torture. Entirely different positions.

  • JP

    “Of course all this is an spectrum I rarely ever need to go out but I do once in a blue moon while I have a friend that spending a weekend in the house is akin to Chinese torture.”

    Isn’t adult life itself boring and repetitive for most people, though?

    I know that I spend most of my time bored out of my mind.

  • Anacaona

    I know that I spend most of my time bored out of my mind.
    I only get bored to tears by certain commenter here that keeps spitting the same crap, again, again and again. You know who I’m talking about. Aside from that I never get bored.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I can’t stand boredom. It makes me want to burn things. Or learn.

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

    When I really think about it, the most psychologically golden moments for an unrestricted male/”Mr. Bachelor” may come well *after* sex, when he is performing his post-coital victory lap and reflecting on the latest adventure. I figure that a visual aid may be the best way to articulate this time of private triumph, so check out this brief clip:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1e5h9YSe_k

    I think that JT’s personal Times Square “slutwalk” captures the essence of the emotional exaltation involved. Look at how he just swags out, unrestrained by normal rules, his drained testicles no doubt swinging freely despite his homoerotically-tight jeans.. Look at this man’s face at about :32—that’s the look of deep life satisfaction, perhaps the same smug, gigolo look that would be found on a champion stallion now happily working the breeding grounds of a thoroughbred stud farm.

  • doomwolf

    PR #152

    That story is, in a nutshell, how I feel sometimes. Three weeks ago my regiment had our end of year BBQ/drinkfest. I’m a clerk, and one of the guys who I’d been dealing with gave me a piece of his mind about how I had been a bit of an ass to him on the phone, so I apologized, and then somehow the subject of sex came up – maybe he figured I’d been frustrated ant not getting any, IDK – and started trying to egg me on to go pick up some girl at the bar and screw her. I really didn’t know how to tell him that I had zero interest in doing that, it just does not sound that appealing to me.

  • Anacaona

    I figure that a visual aid may be the best way to articulate this time of private triumph, so check out this brief clip:
    Heh I always expected him getting hit by a truck when he crossed the street. I prefer him as Danny in Grease he was a bit of an asshole but he showed goodness and it looks like he was a closet romantic that couldn’t show it due to ‘pride’. I also think that if his friend was willing to do the responsible thing with Rizzo the whole group couldn’t be that bad. Anyhow, my favorite male private moment of triumph belongs to Will Smith. Starts at 2:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXkm9JvhLFk

  • chris

    Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream – and Why It Matters by Dr Helen from PJMedia.

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00APDFXKO/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=U

    I bought a kindle version and my suggestion to those who want to
    understand what men really think about dating and mating and marriage in this modern culture to get a copy as well.
    The kindle version is only $9, and if this book was sent to the top of the charts on Amazon or on various best selling booklists it would send a massive wake-up call to the culture about men and their opinions and feelings in the dating game rather than Kay Hymowitz’s bullshit “Manning Up” or Hanna Rosin’s even worse “The End of Men.”

  • Aiva Laz

    “I always thought of being married and having children as basic requirements for adulthood.”

    I feel I profoundly disagree with this in my life. I do not want children and am still adult. I do not want marriage and am still adult. My mate and I are professional. I am an advocate and he an hydrogen engineer.

    I disagree with thought that he loves me more than I love him based on sex. I can lose minutes looking at his pictures on my computer.

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

      @Alva Laz

      I disagree with thought that he loves me more than I love him based on sex.

      Welcome. I agree with you. The idea that women can’t love men fully is nonsense.

  • Aiva Laz

    „Sex” being gender. Not physical act. Sorry.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Escoffier,

    The question is, who outnumbers whom? Guys like you or guys like me?

    No idea. Maybe MegaMan will jump to the rescue, firing facts and figures.

    If we consider the post-marriage set, one clue is the number of men who actually commit adultery, since obviously they had the opportunity and took it. The lifetime rate of adultery for men is 28%, according to this article. So that’s a significant minority in the “opportunity” camp.

    Some people, even sex researchers, believe that all men are so unrestricted in their pursuit of sexual novelty that the rate of adultery equals the opportunity for adultery. I don’t believe that. I think many men when faced with an opportunity to cheat will say “I love my wife” or “I love my kids” or “I love my money and don’t want to lose it in a divorce” and decline. But how many can but don’t? I’ve never seen a study of that.

    In the realm of personal anecdote, I have friends who have cheated, friends who had the opportunity to cheat but didn’t, and friends for whom cheating just hasn’t been an issue. Not enough data to conjecture the answer to your question.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Esc,

    Of course, considering the post-marriage set introduces a bias, because these are men who were attractive enough to get the girl at least once in their life. It excludes the incels and others who lose in the SMP.

    Another part of the male population I observe are the washed-up guys. These are men who once could get a girl but are now too unattractive to do so. These are usually older men with no money, no prospects, no looks, and no game. Often they have let them selves go physically, are not in good physical or mental health, have no job nor interesting hobbies, but do have an addiction.

    No idea of the size of these groups either, but they go in the “no opportunity” group.

  • JP

    “I feel I profoundly disagree with this in my life. I do not want children and am still adult. I do not want marriage and am still adult. My mate and I are professional. I am an advocate and he an hydrogen engineer.”

    I don’t want to pay taxes.

    In fact, my life is stuffed with things that I don’t want to do.

    This issue relates to the metaphysical issue of how best to achieve the White Destiny (for lack of a better phrase) as opposed to the Dark Fate of the war of all against all.

    What is the duty of man and how do we best achieve our corporate metaphysical objective?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    What JP said….we all have social obligations to keep us on track towards White Destiny as opposed to Dark Fate.

    If you don’t mind “dark fate,” well, I assume Ana’s home country fits the bill.

  • Anacaona

    If you don’t mind “dark fate,” well, I assume Ana’s home country fits the bill.
    Oh yeah so very much.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Oh no worries, Ana. We are being spied on all the time now and the President of the US says he kills any citizen he wants without trial, warrant, oversight, or even reporting.

    Even if you think Obama is a swell guy, well, Herman Cain and Donald Trump were both “winning” for a while.

  • Gin Martini

    Avila: “I feel I profoundly disagree with this in my life.”

    JP’s pithy quote also sums up my attitude, because we were both raised conservative Lutheran. Marriage was the only correct way.

    I’m guessing you were not.

  • Man

    @chris:

    Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream – and Why It Matters by Dr Helen from PJMedia.

    It looks like a great development and eye-opener even though realistically our society is still way too deaf to men’s cries. So she acknowledges that as a woman she is likely to get the message more effectively through. She also acknowledges that men are reacting either consciously or unconsciously (rising misogyny to my mind). I think this is a very good development and that more women should step up (to safeguard their best interests as well).

  • JP

    “Avila: “I feel I profoundly disagree with this in my life.”

    JP’s pithy quote also sums up my attitude, because we were both raised conservative Lutheran. Marriage was the only correct way.

    I’m guessing you were not.”

    Interestingly enough, I also considered swearing at any time for any reason absolutely forbidden, since it was also a crime against humanity.

    I think I’ve actually used swear words on two or three separate occasions. It’s extremely difficult to remove that particular block.

    However I did not perceive any restrictions on alcohol or coffee. All other drug use was also considered a crime against humanity.

    In hindsight, it’s somewhat clear why I didn’t have a particularly pleasant time in college.

  • Man

    I disagree with thought that he loves me more than I love him based on sex.

    Passion (lust) is not love, in the same way that a woman’s attraction to male traits of dominance, social status, power, etc. is not love. But if men have ceded power to women in the last 50 years or so in the West is precisely because their essential biological need was used for socio-political ends against them. What happened on a societal level is more or less the risk that a man runs in every relationship with a woman.

    Women have a natural capability of dissimulation of feelings, victimization and ability to manipulate emotions (OK, I know that NAWALT), combined with