The Heart Wants…What the Penis Wants?

June 13, 2013

first-base-making-out-demotivational-posters-1307651468Reader Apple left a comment today that I thought was brilliant re the timing of sex:

Really, it comes down to a woman having the balls to say: “I don’t care what your penis wants if you don’t care what my heart wants.”

The actual line I’ve always used in real life is:

“I don’t do casual sex. Sex for me is something that happens when I love someone and they love me. I understand that’s not how most people operate now, but that’s how I operate. If you don’t like those terms, I won’t waste your time.”

The first thing a woman should do is ask herself what outcome she wants from the connection. If she’s after casual sex, she can have it and fulfill her mission (though she is unlikely to have an orgasm). If she’s telling herself that all she wants is casual sex, goes for it and then catches feelings, she needs to realize she’s been an idiot, and stop pursuing the worst strategy ever.

In How Long Should We Wait Before Having Sex? TV persona and relationship expert Dr. Wendy Walsh has gathered the most current data on how the timing of sex predicts relationship outcomes. (H/T: J)

I. Researcher Dean Busby has found that waiting at least 30 days leads to better relationships. He studied over 2,000 married adults with an average age of 36, asking about when they had sex and relationship satisfaction.

Curiously, almost 40 percent of couples are essentially sexual within the first or second time they go out, but we suspect that if you asked these same couples at this early stage of their relationship – ‘Do you trust this person to watch your pet for a weekend many could not answer this in the affirmative’ – meaning they are more comfortable letting people into their bodies than they are with them watching their cat.

 Walsh summarizes his body of research:

Busby’s research shows that couples who wait to have sex — at least 30 to 90 days — rather than doing it in the early stages of the relationship have better relationship outcomes.

Postponing sex, even for as long as six months, is associated with higher relationship stability, higher relationship satisfaction, better communication and higher quality sexual relationship.

It seems that couples who wait have a better handle on issues that come up in their relationships. Because sex doesn’t complicate the relationship, they have better communication skills.

II. Researcher Anthony Paik found that exclusivity is linked to delayed sex.

In one of my studies, it turned out that the longer couples delayed sex the more exclusive the relationship. And if men engage in sex within the first month of dating they are 4.5 times more likely to be nonexclusive later.

Couples who didn’t wait but were each open to a serious relationship with one another from the start did as well as couples who waited – the problem is, that’s a crap shoot. Even if each party is separately hoping a hookup will turn into a relationship, there’s no acceptable way of sharing that information, since by definition a hookup is “no strings.”

One good indicator of intent is a person’s past sexual experience:

People with higher numbers of past sexual partners were more likely to form hookups, and to report lower relationship quality. Through the acquisition of partners they begin to favor short-term relationships and find the long-term ones less rewarding.

III. Mark Renegerus, author of Premarital Sex in America has also found support for the 30 day rule.

Couples who waited at least 30 days to have sex increased the likelihood that the couple was still dating one year later. Nearly one-quarter of those who waited 30 days were still together a year later.

As for those who were quick to jump in bed together, well, 90 percent of those couples didn’t even make it one year.

IV. David Buss has found that the more women a guy has had sex with, the faster he is to disdain a new sexual partner. 

Renowned evolutionary psychology professor David Buss at the University of Texas at Austin and Martie G. Haselton at the University of California, Los Angeles found that the more previous sexual partners a man has, the more likely he is to quickly perceive diminished attractiveness in a woman after first intercourse. Sex doesn’t lead to love for men. If the guy is a player, sex more often leads to distain for his partner.

Waiting is the most effective way of filtering out players.

Fortunately, the number of women who need to be convinced is shrinking. There is continued support for the claim that college students overwhelmingly prefer relationships to hooking up. In a recent editorial in the LA Times, sociologist and hooking up expert Lisa Wade summed it up:

It’s true that more than 90% of students say that their campus is characterized by a hookup culture.  But in fact, no more than 20% of students hook up very often; one-third of them abstain from hooking up altogether, and the remainder are occasional participators.

If you do the math, this is what you get: The median number of college hookups for a graduating senior is seven. This includes instances in which there was intercourse, but also times when two people just made out with their clothes on. The typical student acquires only two new sexual partners during college. Half of all hookups are with someone the person has hooked up with before. A quarter of students will be virgins when they graduate.

…The majority of students — 70% of women and 73% of men — report that they’d like to have a committed relationship, and 95% of women and 77% of men prefer dating to hooking up. In fact, about three-quarters of students will enter a long-term monogamous relationship while in college.

Wade points out that those relationships will begin via the hookup – the casual encounter is still the path to commitment in college. But it’s good to know that the majority of hookups are not intended to be casual after all. Kids are making out, dry humping, and getting busy with their hands without having sex, pretty much like we did back in the 70s.

  • Charm

    “I don’t do casual sex. Sex for me is something that happens when I love someone and they love me. I understand that’s not how most people operate now, but that’s how I operate. If you don’t like those terms, I won’t waste your time.”

    Perfect quote. I can’t believe so many people seem to have trouble saying what they mean as plainly as this in regards to sex and relationships.

    I guess maybe they fear they’ll be judged, mocked, ridiculed? Seems worth it to maintain your self respect, me thinks.

    • @Charm

      Good to see you! I agree it’s a great quote – I especially like how she expresses a desire not to waste his time, when of course she’s saving herself from that and more. It sounds very reasonable – what guy could possibly object or call her “needy?”

  • tom.s

    This may seem technical, but if you give a woman a “fully body” orgasm from fingering inside, (not the clitoris) would that produce the same “chemicals” that would promote bonding as sex would?

    I’m just wonder if sex is actually necessary, or if a real mind blowing orgasm from fingering would produce the same effect.

    • @tom.s

      Most sex scientists state that all orgasms are clitoral in their origin. Do you have a pectoral orgasm? Or a testicle orgasm? Counting 3,2,1 until Gin Martini shows up to tell us his wife has breastgasms.

  • Abbot

    “I don’t care what your penis wants if you don’t care what my heart wants.”

    Will get a man to wait and feel justified giving his heart for sure. Provided of course he is not made to wait any longer than any man in the past.

  • Mike M.

    Cheap sex is worth what you paid for it. Or even less.

  • Abbot

    “People with higher numbers of past sexual partners were more likely to form hookups, and to report lower relationship quality. Through the acquisition of partners they begin to favor short-term relationships and find the long-term ones less rewarding.”

    Feminists know this. That is why getting women into hookup life early on is so critical: to cement them into this pattern so that man-equalizing careers can take a front seat.

  • Abbot

    “If the guy is a player, sex more often leads to distain for his partner.”

    Players assume its just another women who repeatedly enables players like him to be players.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    Off-topic, but look at this:

    http://www.moreright.net/jezebels-vigilante-squad/

    Bound and determined to ban all non-feminist speech.

  • Escoffier

    S, without getting too, erm, “clinical,” what do you call a female “o” when the clit has not even been touched and the end result is that “blood pressure sleeve” effect on the p?

    • The clitoris is the epicenter of
      the earthquake, and that blood
      pressure thing happens whether you’re in there or not.

      I’ve been told the male and female
      orgasms function the same way physiologically.

      The stimulus might vary, but the male orgasm always ends the same way. Same with us.

  • Sam

    @esco
    Come on, mang, ain’t e’rbidy know by now the clit isn’t just a little spot but extends down into the pelvic region (where it can also be stimulated by other means), as well, jis like ye’ P does.

    @SW & others
    I was pretty sure orgasm was not necessary for the bonding chemicals to be released in women. Although I’m sure it kicks out a stronger dose, I thought any sort of cuddly, intimate touching induced its release.

    On top of that, its probably less about the female orgasm than the male orgasm, anyway, since, as noted in the article, hookups result in orgism for women less frequently than men. It seemed like it was saying that its really the guys who tend to loose interest more than the girls but I’ll have to review it.

    Also, I believe there is a document case of a woman who could orgasm from only stroking her eyebrows. Just sayin’.

    • @Sam

      There are men who orgasm just by sucking on toes. But does their orgasm occur then in their mouth? Or does the penis contract and ejaculate?

      The woman who gets off on eyebrow touches does not experience eyebrow muscle contractions. The arousal still manifests as clit twinges. We get those just from thinking – perhaps the female equivalent of an erection?

      Your point about penetration is also correct – the clitoris is wishbone shaped and also, the push and pull of intercourse tugs on the clitoral hood, which can be very stimulating.

  • Sam

    Meant to use “orgism” all the way through that comment instead of just once, dangit.

  • Hope

    Couples who waited at least 30 days to have sex increased the likelihood that the couple was still dating one year later. Nearly one-quarter of those who waited 30 days were still together a year later.

    This is pretty interesting. My husband and I waited longer than that, and we’re still together 4 years later.

    Sex for me is something that happens when I love someone and they love me.

    This was the case for me, except it was more like “anything physical” including making out, rather than sex. My husband and I waited longer than a month for our first kiss, although that was probably because we lived far apart.

  • Escoffier

    “There are men who orgasm just by sucking on toes.”

    Dick Morris?

    But I thought he had to have his own toes sucked?

    • @escoffier

      I once had a coworker tell me that he got off just looking at spectator pumps. I was wearing some when he said this. Do you think that qualifies as sexual harassment?

  • Escoffier

    Hmmmm, well, I hate to support the HR-PC-police state but that does sound rather bad.

    Any mitigating circumstances? Like, were you in a bar?

    • @Escoffier

      Any mitigating circumstances? Like, were you in a bar?

      No, we were in the office. However, I later learned he was gay so I suppose that mitigates it somewhat.

  • Sam

    Indeed, point taken, I didn’t get your immediate prior post before submitting mine.

    I’m amending my version and vocabulary, though, to “clit twingles.”

    I think that definitely qualifies as sexual harrassment, shame on you, especially if you ever wore them around him again. jk

  • Hope

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_genital_development

    Penis ≈ clitoris
    Shaft of penis ≈ shaft of clitoris
    Foreskin of penis ≈ hood of clitoris
    Scrotum ≈ outer labia / labia majora
    Underside of penile shaft ≈ inner labia / labia minora
    Penile urethra ≈ perineal urethra
    Testes ≈ ovaries
    Prostate glands ≈ Skene’s glands

    Concerning the vagina:

    “The Müllerian ducts, which are paired ducts of the embryo which empty into the cloaca, and which develop into the upper vagina, cervix, uterus and oviducts; in the male they disappear except for the vestigial vagina masculina and the appendix testis.”

    And:

    the majority of the nerve endings in the vagina are located near the opening, and not near the end of the tube. That means that men’s agony about the length of their penis is pretty meaningless, and it also means that when the baby crowns at the opening, can be the most painful.”

    Can confirm! Crowning hurts!

    • @Hope

      Thank you for that genital comparison! I’ve heard bits and pieces of that, but it’s a very handy cheat sheet. 🙂

      Very true about very few nerve endings in the vaginal canal. Also true about penis length – girth is more important. I would also add that a penis longer than the canal rams the cervix and that is very painful. Guys with very long members should target tall women. 🙂 Men should be satisfied with what they have – I once turned a guy down for excessive length. 😛

  • Apple

    Wow, I’m flattered. Thanks for the quoting. 🙂

    I consider myself someone with a high libido, but at the same time it is not NEED. i.e. I like orgasms but I LOVE love. And I can make my own orgasms. So, if I weren’t married, I would be content to make my own orgasms until the right man (who respected me) came along. If he never did… I’d just have friends (not friends with benefits… I mean other human beings for non-sexual companionship), and masturbation. I guess I just consider the risks to my body (STDs and pregnancy) and the risks to my emotions (pump and dump, feeling ‘used’ and crappy, lowered self esteem) are really just not worth the spontaneous hedonism.

    Nobody in this country has any self control it seems. It doesn’t matter if the issue is sex and the almost creepy level of “casualness” we’re expected to treat it with now, or the crap we put into our bodies (i.e. junk food.) People just want instant gratification, but people like that don’t make good life partners. So if there were no other people like that in the entire world, I’d be better off single.

    • @Apple

      You have a good head on your shoulders, you make total sense! Well done, you must have been raised by a mom like me. 🙂

  • J

    Will get a man to wait and feel justified giving his heart for sure. Provided of course he is not made to wait any longer than any man in the past.

    So basically what you are saying is that if a woman has made a mistake, she is honor-bound to keep repeating it–just so guys like you don’t feel cheated.

    • So basically what you are saying is that if a woman has made a mistake, she is honor-bound to keep repeating it–just so guys like you don’t feel cheated.

      Talk about a double bind! Clearly, men want sluts for casual sex, and chaste women for commitment, and never the two shall mix. Unfortunately, they have no real means of enforcing that preference.

  • J

    S, without getting too, erm, “clinical,” what do you call a female “o” when the clit has not even been touched and the end result is that “blood pressure sleeve” effect on the p?

    What you see externally, the glans of the clitoris, is the “tip of the iceberg.” It’s actually a wishbone-shaped organ that surrounds the vaginal sheath. Anything that happens inside the vagina also stimulates the clitoris.

    http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Clitoris_anatomy_labeled-en.jpg

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Hope,

    That means that men’s agony about the length of their penis is pretty meaningless

    It’s not meaningless. Many women express a preference for larger penises (e.g. Sassy), and some will outright reject men who don’t measure up to their expectations. A man who has been rejected based on his lack of endowment might understandably be sensitive about it.

    • @mr. wv

      It’s not meaningless. Many women express a preference for larger penises (e.g. Sassy), and some will outright reject men who don’t measure up to their expectations. A man who has been rejected based on his lack of endowment might understandably be sensitive about it.

      You’re both correct. Penis length really is meaningless physiologically – from a female satisfaction POV. However, it is very relevant culturally. The “bigger is better” cultural meme is very powerful and entrenched. I’ve heard women refer to guys as having huge dicks, and having sex with them is a novelty, something to dish about over brunch. It may lead to increased arousal, obvs, if the woman attaches importance to it.

      But speaking strictly in terms of nerve endings and direct stimulation, Hope is right. Length does not matter.

  • J

    This is pretty interesting. My husband and I waited longer than that, and we’re still together 4 years later.

    I knew my husband for over six months, the last two or so actively dating, before we had sex. The decision to put off sex was mutual. Neither of us was so desperate for sex or insecure about ever getting it that we couldn’t wait. And DH was far more worried about sex clouding his judgement than he was about “price discrimination.” He felt early on that I might be “the one,” and he expressed that he did not want sex to complicate things. We’ve been together over 25 years.

  • A recently published set of articles in the Journal of Sexual Medicine debates whether female orgasms are only clitoral or if there are other regions involved like the g-spot and whether they are distinct or simply an extension of the clitoris.

    http://www.livescience.com/19579-vaginal-orgasm-debate.html

    French gynecologist Odile Buisson argues in her Journal of Sexual Medicine essay, for example, that the front wall of the vagina is inextricably linked with the internal parts of the clitoris; stimulating the vagina without activating the clitoris may be next to impossible. Thus, “vaginal” orgasms could be clitoral orgasms by another name.

    Other research, however, would tend to suggest two distinct types of female orgasm. Barry Komisaruk of Rutgers University has conducted multiple studies in which women masturbate while having their brains scanned with a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machine. The results show which sensory brain areas activate in response to stimulation.

    “If the vagina stimulation is simply working via clitoral stimulations, then vaginal stimulation and clitoral stimulation should activate the exact same place in the sensory cortex,” Komisaruk told LiveScience. “But they don’t.”

    In fact, Komisaruk reports in the journal, the brain areas for clitoral, cervical and vaginal stimulation cluster together but only overlap slightly, like a “cluster of grapes.”

    And then there is other evidence for multiple types of orgasms: Women report that vaginal and clitoral orgasms feel different. Women with spinal cord injury that cuts off all communication between the clitoris and the brain can still have orgasms with vaginal stimulation. Some lucky ladies can even “think” themselves to orgasm with no stimulation at all. (There are also reports of women orgasming from tough abdominal workouts at the gym.)

    “[O]rgasm in women is in the brain, it is felt in many body regions, and it can be stimulated from many body regions as well as from imagery alone,” wrote Rutgers University professor emerita Beverly Whipple, one of the discovers of the also-controversial “G-spot,” an area on the front vaginal wall that may be particularly sensitive to sexual stimulation.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Hope,

    This is pretty interesting. My husband and I waited longer than that, and we’re still together 4 years later.

    My wife and I waited less than a week, and we’re still together 22 years later.

    Personal anecdotes aside, there’s a big problem of self selection in these statistics. People who wait 90 days to have sex are outliers in today’s society and are likely to have personal characteristics far from the norm, such as high future orientation and impulse control. Their subsequent relationship success may have more to do with those personal characteristics than the time they waited for sex.

    • Personal anecdotes aside, there’s a big problem of self selection in these statistics. People who wait 90 days to have sex are outliers in today’s society and are likely to have personal characteristics far from the norm, such as high future orientation and impulse control.

      Only Busby, who’s at BYU, focuses on a 90 day wait. I think the 30 day rule has found significant support, and that doesn’t surprise me. Knowing someone for one month before trading bodily fluids doesn’t sound like too much to ask in terms of impulse control. It’s not like there’s nothing else on the menu. Basically, that means having sex on date four.

  • J

    Wave,

    Sassy’s testimony (ha, ha, I said testes) not withstanding, the average woman does fine with the average guy. I would think that ridiculously small or too big would be a problem.

  • Anacaona
  • J

    People who wait 90 days to have sex are outliers in today’s society and are likely to have personal characteristics far from the norm, such as high future orientation and impulse control. Their subsequent relationship success may have more to do with those personal characteristics than the time they waited for sex.

    True enough, yet high future orientation and impulse control are among the personal characteristics that serious people should screen for. If being able to delay sex is a proxy for that, than asking for monogamy/commitment before sex is more than a shit test.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    The average woman does fine with the average guy, but half the guys by definition are below average to varying degrees. Penis size is something that women select for, just like other physical factors such as height or good hair. With all these factors different women care about some more than others. Some women don’t care very much about penis size, but others care very much indeed.

    • Penis size is something that women select for, just like other physical factors such as height or good hair.

      Not unless she sees it at first meeting. I expect that the majority of women who care about penis size a great deal have very casual attitudes about sex. For one thing, they need a large sample to have a good basis for comparison.

  • Anyway, clits and vages aside, I think this post is great advice to women, to realize what they really want and have the courage to stay true to that.

    As I said before, though I no doubt was not the first to coin the phrase:

    If in doubt, don’t put out.

  • J

    Penis size is something that women select for, just like other physical factors such as height or good hair.

    Yeah, but it’s often a surprise. By the time a woman sees it, she’s fairly committed to having some sexual contact if not actual intercourse. Generally by that time, there’s some emotional commitment or attraction as well, unless we are talking about ONS. It seems to me that where there is a relationship, personal charcteristics override penis size unless it’s something freakish. I don’t know any women who have rejected a man based on penis size–which the exception of one man who was described to me as having a penis smaller than a pinky finger.

    • I don’t know any women who have rejected a man based on penis size–which the exception of one man who was described to me as having a penis smaller than a pinky finger.

      You may recall that one of my focus group members described her bf’s dick as a pinky to Kate Bolick, and it made it into the Atlantic! They’re engaged.

      Another young woman told me recently that her bf boasted to her that his penis is in the 97% percentile – he looked it up online. She didn’t want to hurt his feelings, but she said that it’s a bit much to handle, and in the past has been quite happy with average. She basically has to ask him not to go deep.

  • mr. wavevector

    I don’t know any women who have rejected a man based on penis size

    No, you don’t know any woman who has admitted to you that she rejected a man based on penis size. You have no idea what their mating decisions were really based on. They might not either – this is an area where a lot of rationalization goes on, and women will “self deceive or lie” as one researcher put it to conform to expectations.

    • No, you don’t know any woman who has admitted to you that she rejected a man based on penis size. You have no idea what their mating decisions were really based on. They might not either – this is an area where a lot of rationalization goes on, and women will “self deceive or lie” as one researcher put it to conform to expectations.

      I have heard women ridicule male penises at great length, (no pun) not just based on size, but also color, curve, uncut, etc. They can be ruthless. In all cases, sexual satisfaction was not the driving factor. The woman with the pinky dick boyfriend did say she could literally not feel it going in and out. But obviously, they have found other ways to make it work.

  • Anacaona

    Oh boy this is the fake boobs conversation all over again… Don’t we have this at least once a year? Do we ever agree?

    • Oh boy this is the fake boobs conversation all over again… Don’t we have this at least once a year? Do we ever agree?

      It’s funny, this is a convo where guys are all size queens. Let them believe whatever they like, no one is going to change their minds. It reminds me of the pushback I got when I wrote a post that was positive about beta traits. The beta males were really pissed off. I guess this has something to do with the way males think, I find it baffling.

  • J

    No, you don’t know any woman who has admitted to you that she rejected a man based on penis size.

    Women do tend to confide in friends though. FWIW, while I hear women occasionally joke about penis size, with the one exception I discussed above, no one has said to me she rejected a man for having a small penis, nor have I ever heard it advocated by one woman to another. I have heard women talk negatively about poor performance far more often than about size. If I were a guy, I’d worry more about my technique than size.

  • J

    Some lucky ladies can even “think” themselves to orgasm with no stimulation at all.

    I could do that as a teenager, but I lost that ability as I aged–except when I was pregnant. I think it’s dependent on high estrogen levels.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    If I were a guy, I’d worry more about my technique than size.

    I would too because the former you can change and the latter you can’t. There’s no use worrying about things you can’t change. You just do the best with what you’ve got.

    Nevertheless, since we talk about SMV here all the time, the evidence is that penis size matters as much as height in women’s appraisal of male physical attractiveness. It’s one of the factors that each woman weights according to her own preferences and goals. And it’s one of the factors a man considers when choosing his mating strategy. As you pointed out, a less well endowed man might overcome that disadvantage by improving his relationship skills.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavevector you said: “People who wait 90 days to have sex are outliers in today’s society and are likely to have personal characteristics far from the norm, such as high future orientation and impulse control. Their subsequent relationship success may have more to do with those personal characteristics than the time they waited for sex.”

    I think that’s exactly the point isn’t it? It’s not necessarily specifically because they waited for sex but because of the other qualities they were likely to have. I brought up the reverse issue also that if there was not a man willing to wait for me (if I were single), then I would count that against his character. i.e. how instant gratification is he? How likely is he to be able to weather the ups and downs of a relationship? How likely is he to randomly bail on me or cheat on me? A lot of how much you can respect someone’s wish to wait a little while for sex (or how little you can), has much larger character implications. Some might call this a “shit test”, if so, the response that would keep my interest is a man who respected me and my concerns/needs. Instead of only caring what his penis wanted “right this moment.”

    Men are perfectly free to pursue casual sex, but they would never be free to pursue it with me. It comes down to value matching.

  • Apple

    re: penis size… is this a whinefest about women having preferences in what they find sexually attractive in the opposite sex? I mean… am I correct that many men also like large breasts? And a certain waist-to-hip ratio? Among other physical endowments? Are we trying to say that men are allowed to be attracted to what they are attracted to but women are not?

    If we are not trying to say that… then what is your point?

  • @Apple

    I don’t see anyone whining about some women liking certain sizes. Wavevector simply pointed out that some women like large ones. J pointed out that what you do with what you’ve got is more important in many/most cases.

    No one was saying women don’t or can’t have preferences.

  • Charm

    Hi Susan. I happened to be looking over a older thread and saw I was mentioned so I decided to drop by. 😀

    what guy could possibly object or call her “needy?”

    Depends on the guy. A man who respects another persons right to choose their own path, and their honestly for that matter, would just pass. But there are men who would get upset and make some demeaning remark of judgement to the women to get her to gain his approval. Something like a “neg”, I suppose. “Oh, I like women that are confident in their sexuality and don’t hold on to outdated views” or some shitty slight like that. I’ve never had it happen to me, but I’ve heard about it and seen it happen to other people.

    A lot of people in general fear judgement for what they believe. Especially when its something that conflicts with whats mainstream. It takes a lot of backbone to tell someone to hit the road because you’re not giving in to social pressures to put out before you’re ready.

    • @Charm

      But there are men who would get upset and make some demeaning remark of judgement to the women to get her to gain his approval. Something like a “neg”, I suppose.

      Yeah, I recently wrote a post about a woman who had a guy throw a temper tantrum when she said no on the second date. Player alert.

  • Charm

    So if there were no other people like that in the entire world, I’d be better off single.

    This is pretty much how I’m choosing to live my life. I’ve decided that I’m not compromising on character traits that are important to me regardless of what the current climate is. The fact that young people are taught to “do stupid shit when you’re young and then pull the ‘it helped me grow as a person’ card when you’re older, ashamed, and looking to displace responsibility for your actions” is something that doesn’t sit right with me. Never has.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    re: penis size… is this a whinefest about women having preferences in what they find sexually attractive in the opposite sex?

    Absolutely not. I believe it is a natural part of human mate selection, and I provided a link to a study that concludes just that.

    What I am objecting to is platitudes that “size doesn’t matter”, such as Hope’s comment that “That means that men’s agony about the length of their penis is pretty meaningless”. That’s false. Size does matter – moreso for some women than others perhaps, but overall, it matters. Pretending it doesn’t isn’t really useful for anyone.

  • mr. wavevector

    To continue that thought, what if someone said “women’s agony about their figure is pretty meaningless”? Of course it’s not. Men prefer hourglass figures – some more strongly than others, but overall there is a clear preference. This means that women with apple-shaped figures will experience lower attraction and may experience emotional distress because of it.

    The answer isn’t to pretend that having an apple figure is not a disadvantage. Rather, the best strategy is to recognize that “agony” isn’t the best emotional state to deal with it. It’s better to realize that some men care more about other attributes and to concentrate on maximizing her appeal in the areas she is strong in.

    In the end, most apple shaped women and men with small penises find suitable mates. Those who don’t are often the ones who are emotionally crippled by the “agony” and insecurity they experience as a result of their deficit.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Charm,

    A lot of people in general fear judgement for what they believe. Especially when its something that conflicts with whats mainstream. It takes a lot of backbone to tell someone to hit the road because you’re not giving in to social pressures to put out before you’re ready.

    That is an excellent point. The trouble with today’s sexual marketplace – one needs a log of backbone to protect one’s own interests. Backbone is something few people have.

    It used to be that society provided a lot of structure and guidance in terms of sexual mores and mating customs that inhibited early sexual engagement and prioritized emotional engagement instead. The great advantage of mores and customs is that the majority of people can benefit from them without having to have much backbone. But those have all been discarded as “outdated views” as you said.

    This is the great error of “progressive” thinking – that all restrictions on individual liberty are outdated and contemptible, and all acts to “transgress” those restrictions are advanced and admirable. That is the philosophy that has created the dysfunctional system we find ourselves in.

  • szopen

    Aww, the crisis reached Poland. One of most discussed letters to editor to one of most popular Polish newspaper is from 35 years/old beautiful, having good job woman who is “pissed” that she cannot find herself a man. And she has modest demands: he had to be well-off, her age, handsome, healthy, matching her on intellectual level…

    And I thought that we are behind the west more than a decade 🙂

    • @szopen

      You did well to avoid it for this long! That will be bad news for PUA types, who head for Eastern Europe to get away from nasty American women. 🙂

  • Abbot

    “a less well endowed man might overcome that disadvantage by improving his relationship skills.”

    Or merely go to a place where extremely few women “grow as people” via “expressing their sexuality” by serially mounting and dismounting all manner of penis.

  • Gin Martini

    Don’t be hating on us sexy folks. I’m rather sure that when she’s gasping and shaking in pleasure, your opinion of whether it exists or not is irrelevant. 😉

    Obviously there are things there, that produce intense sensations and pleasure, that tense and release and buzz like an orgasm, that are not present in my elbow or her ankle.

    • I’m rather sure that when she’s gasping and shaking in pleasure, your opinion of whether it exists or not is irrelevant.

      Indeed, I find it curious that people are so invested in the discussion. If your partner gasps and shakes in pleasure, you’re doing it right. No doubt individuals vary a great deal. I think men want to educate themselves so that they can bring a skill set to sex, but it doesn’t work that way.

      The female orgasm is something that sex scientists have not entirely figured out. They can’t even agree on whether women are squirting urine. Yet you can find videos on YouTube of women realeasing quarts of water pumped into their vaginas just before the camera started rolling. I feel sorry for women whose partners come into bed hell bent on reproducing some of this stuff. I’ve heard some wild stories. One woman even told me that her boyfriend asked her what was wrong with her when she didn’t come after he scraped the hell out of her front vaginal wall, insisting that was her g-spot.

      Obviously there are things there, that produce intense sensations and pleasure, that tense and release and buzz like an orgasm, that are not present in my elbow or her ankle.

      Thank you for acknowledging the obvious.

  • purplesneakers

    To continue that thought, what if someone said “women’s agony about their figure is pretty meaningless”? Of course it’s not. Men prefer hourglass figures – some more strongly than others, but overall there is a clear preference. This means that women with apple-shaped figures will experience lower attraction and may experience emotional distress because of it.

    This is kind of a side note, but I find that this preference is overblown in reality. Look at Kate Upton, who is an apple shape (carries weight in boobs and belly, not really a defined waist or hips, thin and long limbs), but apple shapes have boobs and limbs going for them, so long as they don’t gain too much weight, but that’s to be said for any body shape, including pear shapes who might appeal to guys who are into hips/butt/thighs. I guess an hourglass figure with T&A is ideal, but I think as long as women are at a good weight for their body, it doesn’t really matter that much. Most men aren’t going to be that discriminating, except maybe for ones who have very particular things they’re looking for.

  • Sai

    @HanSolo
    “If in doubt, don’t put out.”

    +50

  • Man

    Size does matter… Pretending it doesn’t isn’t really useful for anyone.

    Will you or her be able to change the size of your dick? If not, it doesn’t matter. I think a guy would be better off keeping his Head off his dick and more onto her. Have a look at this interesting discussion going on in another forum.

  • Sam

    On some talk show on MTV or E, I think, I can’t remember, they had on a female sex Doc who, when asked about what a guy should do if he finds himself not stacking up, replied “find a smaller vagina.” That was much to the aghast of the other female guest participating in the discussions who had just asserted that size was important to a degree. Thank goodness someone finally said it, and I’m not surprised at the other’s reaction.

    If only it were as easy to tell as seeing that someone has an apple figure.
    Which also brings to mind the “huge vagina” clip from Arrested Development
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfHqv8YAA9w

    • @Sam

      “These big vagina ladies are getting away with murder. Something should be done about it.”

      Hilarious! Larry David is a genius.

      I recall cracking up when Borat said his wife’s vagina was like a wizard’s sleeve.

  • Emily

    @purplesneakers

    As an “Apple”, I can agree. IMO we’re probably one of the more misunderstood body types. Even most “Dress for Your Body Type” articles will generally show an overweight person as their “Apple”.

    I think a girl with a natural hourglass shape can probably get away with gaining a bit more weight (ie. Christina Hendricks), but a slender apple can still be pretty hot (ie. Angelina Jolie, Catherine Zeta Jones, Kate Upton).

  • Apple

    Hey HanSolo,

    That’s fair. I know that probably came off a little bitchy, and I’d be lying if I said that wasn’t part of the intent. I just saw him mention it SO many times in a row that I wasn’t sure what the point was or what he was going for there. It just seemed like a constant reiteration that women judge and eliminate based on this factor. (Some do, some don’t.)

    I didn’t know if it was a complaint that women actually DO have sexual attractiveness preferences? If not, I really didn’t understand why it kept being brought up over and over like this was some moral failing in a woman (admittedly that was my own reading into it after hearing far too much crap from PUA types and being a bit defensive toward anything that smells remotely like “Whaaa women like this or that about men that not all of us ‘nice guys’ have, but I expect a perfect 10 in a female partner anyway”, when the same standard (of assumed moral failing) is not applied to men’s sexual preferences.

    I mean, I don’t have large breasts, but not every man is really a breast man. Some are leg men. I had that in spades. So win for me. But I understood lots of men prefer large breasted women, and that was just a fact of life. Just like if I were single right now I’d have to accept that even men in my age category might prefer women younger than me (or a lot of them would), but I’m not going to complain about or try to restrict the desire of men in general or any one man in particular, and don’t think that should be done to women either. If a woman is sexually aroused by this or that feature in a man… well… welcome to reality. Men and women both have preferences when it comes to what gets them hot and bothered. And it’s not largely a “choice” what we find arousing. Since a sexual relationship is in part defined by the sexual nature of the relationship, being with someone who doesn’t arouse you for whatever reason is probably not a great idea long term, even if they have a lot of other great qualities. Both sexes are allowed to make this judgment. Importance of varying things are different for different people of either sex.

    If that wasn’t what was going on (what I assumed), okay, fair enough. I just couldn’t understand why it kept being repeated over and over. Like… yeah… so what? Some women do select for that sort of thing, yes. Some women don’t. Not all women like or don’t like anything. You just have to find the right lid for your pot.

    But it’s late, and I apologize if I misread or didn’t read clearly enough to comprehend why this was such a “thing”/issue.

  • Emily

    A friend of mine had a bf with a massive member. She told me that she used to dread having sex with him because it was so uncomfortable. It is totally possible for there to be “too much of a good thing”. 😛

  • Man

    Talk about a double bind! Clearly, men want sluts for casual sex, and chaste women for commitment, and never the two shall mix. Unfortunately, they have no real means of enforcing that preference.

    And unfortunately women have not real means of enforcing the end of the double bind. A chaste guy is rightful in wanting a chaste woman for commitment.

    • And unfortunately women have not real means of enforcing the end of the double bind. A chaste guy is rightful in wanting a chaste woman for commitment.

      Of course. She can deceive him, but why would she? She’s unlikely to want a chaste guy in any case. It’s a mismatch.

      • @Man

        Sorry, I inadvertently lost a comment of yours – the one with the link about penis size.

  • Sam

    Thats funny about guys being size queens because I know quite a few guys, myself included, who have a definite preference for smaller cup sizes. I also know some (admittedly fewer, but no less enthusiastic) who go absolute ape ssshhh over them being virtually flat. So fret not, flaunt what you got, somebody wants to tear them up, promise.

    Also keep in mind that a lot of what are called D cups are really more like G cups or bigger, and a lot C and D cups are really quite modestly sized breasts.
    If anyone wants to read more on it:
    http://broodsbigbrasblog.com/2012/05/03/breaking-the-d-cups-are-huge-myth/
    http://www.epbot.com/2013/04/everything-you-never-knew-you-needed-to.html

    • So fret not, flaunt what you got, somebody wants to tear them up, promise.

      Exactly. As Shakespeare said, “For I must tell you friendly in your ear, Sell when you can: you are not for all markets”

      But most of us are for one market, at least.

  • Man

    She’s unlikely to want a chaste guy in any case. It’s a mismatch.

    Hmm… I don’t know. Some women don’t seem to be aware of the double blind, or they pretend they don’t know. They just go after the guy who is available. She has more experience, so she’s likely to snag the more timid guy who usually is not a jerk. Of course, his choice, his business.

    But there is one case who has always intrigued me. Once I knew a girl with a high number of past sexual partners during a trip and she kept telling me about her high number of sexual partners and how she was seemingly making an effort to stick to her current boyfriend. I asked her if she was nuts about telling every guy she meets that she’s had so much past sexual partners and I explained her how the double blind standard is and how most guys will have far fewer sexual partners than her. I think that as she is pretty unrestricted, she was even willing to cheat her boyfriend and/or trying to play some game with me/friend zone, etc. Eventually I figured it out she was also worried about her boyfriend’s opinion. Ultimately I told her the cold truth. She was really pissed off with me, but I think it was the best I could do for her. I also told her that I was not really interested in playing the “gay friend” for her.

  • J

    Nevertheless, since we talk about SMV here all the time, the evidence is that penis size matters as much as height in women’s appraisal of male physical attractiveness.

    I have seen that study before and have been puzzled as to how it actually relates to real life. For one thing, it talks about flaccid penises. Who cares about a flaccid penis? Some guys are showers; some are growers. What does a woman care what it looks like AFTER sex? And who sees it for the first time when it’s flaccid? It’s been over a quarter of a century since I’ve seen any strange dick, but in searching my failing post-menopausal memory I can’t come up with one single incidence where a man showed me his flaccid penis before engaging in any contact. It’s not as if men drop trou before asking a woman out for coffee and women get to choose at that point. I think size becomes most relevant after a break up, when a woman wants to rationalize how crappy the guy was anyway.

    • For one thing, it talks about flaccid penises. Who cares about a flaccid penis?

      No woman ever judged a man in a flaccid state. Standing at attention is the only thing we register. This is why men comparing themselves to one another in the locker room is just stupid.

      I can’t come up with one single incidence where a man showed me his flaccid penis before engaging in any contact.

      Same here. In fact, I rarely see my husband’s in a flaccid state! The minute I look at it, it springs to attention lol.

  • Man

    They can be ruthless. In all cases, sexual satisfaction was not the driving factor… Let them believe whatever they like, no one is going to change their minds. It reminds me of the pushback I got when I wrote a post that was positive about beta traits. The beta males were really pissed off. I guess this has something to do with the way males think, I find it baffling.

    Yep. That’s why I say and I think there is pretty evidence of this (and I’ve been there myself), that a man’s identity and motivation for life is kind of phallocentric. Smart women can use that to the benefit of their relationship.

  • J

    To continue that thought, what if someone said “women’s agony about their figure is pretty meaningless”? Of course it’s not. Men prefer hourglass figures – some more strongly than others, but overall there is a clear preference.

    A person’s silhouette is immediately obvious, so this is a false comparison. I would say that the male preference for an hourglass figure is like the female preference for the V-shaped torso (broad shoulders, narrow waist and hips) in men. Both are apparent in clothed people, even from a distance. People can select out each other out for unattractive physiques before talking to each other. In most cases, people are exposed to many other factors than gential size before they actually see or touch genitals.

  • Liz

    @Susan & J

    So basically what you are saying is that if a woman has made a mistake, she is honor-bound to keep repeating it–just so guys like you don’t feel cheated.

    Talk about a double bind! Clearly, men want sluts for casual sex, and chaste women for commitment, and never the two shall mix. Unfortunately, they have no real means of enforcing that preference.

    Any real change is bound to make somebody uncomfortable. I would expect that girls making the jump will continue to be pursued by bargain-hunters for a while. And probably dissed by the ones who object to the new terms and/or don’t respond well to feeling “demoted.”

    When adopting the Susan Strategy, steel yourself against the cries of dismay from boys who’ve had their candy taken away. Maybe, go on low-interest dates for a while until you get used to it.

    And if you find someone who appreciates your interest in self-betterment, give him a chance!

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Susan,

    Let me be clear about what points I’m making:
    – Women do, on aggregate, have preferences about penis size.
    – Some women make mating decisions based on this preference.
    – Some women report greater sexual satisfaction with a large penis.
    – There is probably an ingrained preference for a characteristic male body type (tall, broad shouldered, large penis), similar to the male preference for a characteristic female body type (slim, high hip to waist ratio, large breasts).
    – I attribute no moral blame to a female preference for large penis size
    – I am not complaining about women who select based on penis size
    – I am not looking for reassurance for anything associated with penis size.

    Now, for your responses Susan, you are making the mistake of speaking for all women – you should know better. Women’s sexual responses are highly varied and the generalizations you make are not universally true.

    Penis length really is meaningless physiologically – from a female satisfaction POV.

    That is not universally true – a brief perusal of women’s opinions on the subject will show a significant number who achieve greater sexual pleasure from a longer penis.

    I would also add that a penis longer than the canal rams the cervix and that is very painful.

    Also not universally true. Some women find pressure against the cervix to be orgasmically pleasurable, not painful.

    However, it is very relevant culturally. The “bigger is better” cultural meme is very powerful and entrenched.

    The articles on recent research on the subject suggest that it is more than a cultural meme.

    Not unless she sees it at first meeting. I expect that the majority of women who care about penis size a great deal have very casual attitudes about sex.

    I can attest from personal experience some women will reject a man based on penis size, and not on first meeting either. I hold no resentment over that – a woman needs to find a partner who is sexually compatible. If she needs a big dick to turn her on, then a big dick she should seek.

    I don’t know any women who have rejected a man based on penis size

    And I know two who did – to me. One did immediately after I dropped my drawers, the other after several episodes of intercourse. My personal experience anecdotes trump all your second hand gossip anecdotes!

    As a man with a small penis who has had enough sexual experience to sample a range of female reactions, I can tell you that the emphasis women place on penis size is highly varied. Some will reject an under-endowed man as soon as he drops his drawers. Others will marry a guy with a pinky dick with no regrets. But there is a tendency in society to claim that “size doesn’t matter”, when statistically speaking it does. Let’s deal with reality here, not platitudes and delusions.

    • As a man with a small penis who has had enough sexual experience to sample a range of female reactions, I can tell you that the emphasis women place on penis size is highly varied. Some will reject an under-endowed man as soon as he drops his drawers. Others will marry a guy with a pinky dick with no regrets. But there is a tendency in society to claim that “size doesn’t matter”, when statistically speaking it does. Let’s deal with reality here, not platitudes and delusions.

      I never said it did not matter statistically. Nor did I say that women do not have preferences. They clearly do, and I’ve shared some gossipy secondhand anecdotes that demonstrates they can spend an evening ridiculing penii for their own amusement.

      I do not understand how penis length can provide pleasure, when as has been stated, there are few nerve endings in the vaginal canal. The cervix does have nerve endings, though they are not there for pleasure. Hitting the backstop often causes bleeding, and my gyn has shared this is a serious problem for women whose partners have long penii. (I know of what I speak, it was actually a risk during pregnancy.) Of course, there are people who find pain pleasurable. I never meant to suggest no woman could delight in the pain of having her cervix rammed.

      Girth is a different matter, as it stretches the opening at the point of entry, where there are many nerve endings. It also produces a greater tug on the clit, so it’s more likely to produce orgasm. But even here there is a point past which most women simply will not want to go. As always, YMMV. There is no AWALT here, any more than on any other topic.

      And this concludes my participation in the penis size convo at HUS.

  • J

    You may recall that one of my focus group members described her bf’s dick as a pinky to Kate Bolick, and it made it into the Atlantic! They’re engaged.

    Another young woman told me recently that her bf boasted to her that his penis is in the 97% percentile – he looked it up online. She didn’t want to hurt his feelings, but she said that it’s a bit much to handle, and in the past has been quite happy with average. She basically has to ask him not to go deep.

    I find both of those stories a bit troubling. I hope both of those girls will be satified sexually, especially the one who got engaged. While I believe most us will be happy with average, I would worry about freakishly large or small penises.

  • mr. wavevector

    Here’s an interesting quote from that article:

    And how big was too big? One of the most surprising aspects of the study was it could not accommodate an end point at which women found any penis too large. “Our curve wasn’t going down at 13 centimetres so we did not reach the most attractiveness in terms of size. The concept of a penis that was ‘too big’ was outside the range that we tested and we simply didn’t find an absolute maximum size, even though it strikes me that it is going to start to look ridiculous and actually quite painful.”

    Note that the measurements were flacid penis length, not erect length.

    This is interesting compared to studies of male preferences for breast size, which do show a decreased attractiveness for very large breasts.

  • Lokland

    “Some lucky ladies can even “think” themselves to orgasm with no stimulation at all.

    I could do that as a teenager, but I lost that ability as I aged–except when I was pregnant. I think it’s dependent on high estrogen levels.”

    Weird personal anecdote but so to can guys.
    I was a teenager and just wanted to see if it was possible.

    It took literally forever though. (Like upwards of 2-3 hours of focused mental concentration.)

  • mr. wavevector

    @J

    I have seen that study before and have been puzzled as to how it actually relates to real life. For one thing, it talks about flaccid penises. Who cares about a flaccid penis?

    The study showed a very clear female preference for larger flacid penises. Your opinions are not supported by the evidence.

    A person’s silhouette is immediately obvious, so this is a false comparison. I would say that the male preference for an hourglass figure is like the female preference for the V-shaped torso (broad shoulders, narrow waist and hips) in men. Both are apparent in clothed people, even from a distance.

    You are missing the point – the hypothesis is that women have an innate preference for certain male physical characteristics that evolved in a time before people wore a lot of clothes. Obviously any preference women may for penis size it is suppressed by our cultural preference for wearing pants.

  • J

    And unfortunately women have not real means of enforcing the end of the double bind. A chaste guy is rightful in wanting a chaste woman for commitment

    I dunno, is “price discrimination” really that frequent a problem IRL? People tend to cluster around similar attitudes and experiences and attract people of similar SMVs. Any woman who has had an experience or two that she regrets is likely to be dating men who have had some negative experiences themselves. I’m sure that in my husband’s case, the desire to have a real relationship going with me before we got sexual was based in part on some ONS gone wrong. The problem comes in when the involuntarily chaste resent the more experienced or worry that someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

  • mr. wavevector

    I find both of those stories a bit troubling. I hope both of those girls will be satified sexually, especially the one who got engaged.

    Lesbians manage with no penis at all.

  • Charm

    So basically what you are saying is that if a woman has made a mistake, she is honor-bound to keep repeating it–just so guys like you don’t feel cheated.

    This is like a rock and a hard place, I think.

    If a person messes up a couple times, then changes you can cut them a break. But you dont fuck up 30 times and expect the same break as you’d get if you fucked up 3, do you?

    I’m not saying that a woman (or anyone for that matter) that screws up should have to keep doing it, but they aren’t really in a place where they can as ask for much as a person who hasn’t done the same.

    I think a lot of people want shit to be reset back to zero when they get to a point where they decide they dont want to lay in the bed they made but thats not life. I think that anyone who fucks up (no matter how they do it) should at least be understanding of other peoples position as well. Why would/should anyone invest in you? Because you’ve changed?

    Too many fish in the sea, and most aren’t special.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Lokland,

    It took literally forever though. (Like upwards of 2-3 hours of focused mental concentration.)

    Is that how Jedis jerk off?

  • I think that the 30-day rule imposition would probably successfully screen out quick-hit PUA types who take a very aggressive, buckshot approach to mating, in the same way that presenting a so-called “hard target” to a mugger may lead to the predatory criminal simply avoiding you and waiting for the easier victim that he knows is probably coming along soon.

    We are talking layers of defense here. If you are a high SMV woman, then you still face the risk of a veteran plate-spinner putting you into a kind of R&D phase of his “product development pipeline”, and leaving it on slow-simmer for weeks or months.

    He will have remarkable endurance in this game, because he is not relying on you for sex AT ALL during this time. He will, as previously stated, make sure that the dates take place during the day, usually weekday afternoons or weekend lull periods, and that they will generally involve low resource commitments on his part (“let’s have a picnic”; “let’s meet at that indie coffeshop”; “let’s take a walk in the park”; “let’s visit that museum”). Yes, any sexual tension that builds up during these events will probably be released later that night on or in another woman, but there isn’t a whole lot you can do about this at the early stages.

    This type is still dangerous in terms of being somewhat biased against monogamous LTRs, but at least he probably won’t pump & dump or go psychotic on you if continually denied sex. The dates really will be low-risk by design. If anything, he may seem *too* relaxed and nonchalant about sex. He does find you attractive and/or interesting enough to explore these non-sexual relationship opportunities with you, he does not view you as a P&D target, but he doesn’t have enough information to know what kind of relationship he wants with you yet.

    Obviously the woman can be dating several men during this time, and the player will assume this. He will probably assume that she has an FWB, perhaps a recent ex, for sexual purposes.

    I think the concern that the woman may have is that she may find this kind of extended uncertainty/ambiguity in her personal life to be exhausting. The relationships are all very shallow and she cannot really afford to become emotionally intimate with any of these guys (lest they view her as a neurotic psycho). So she may feel that she has to continually maintain a happy-go-lucky, super-positive, emotionally independent persona (if this is her real personality, then no problem; she will have a great advantage over many of her peers).

    Her counterpart male in the game may really have this type of personality, so he can keep a casual thing going indefinitely unless he does have some kind of urgent, deep emo issue that he really needs to download on a woman and to be able to confide in her.

    There was a line in the Hussey book that I found insightful: “Give a man ten women and he will play; give a woman ten men and she will choose.”

    It goes without saying that any approach needs to be tempered with a realistic sense of the intrasexual competition that you face and the tactics that your rivals will employ, etc.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    I dunno, is “price discrimination” really that frequent a problem IRL? People tend to cluster around similar attitudes and experiences and attract people of similar SMVs. Any woman who has had an experience or two that she regrets is likely to be dating men who have had some negative experiences themselves.

    It never occurred to me to insist on a standard of sexual behavior for my prospective wife that I didn’t meet. I assumed that any woman I would seriously date would have a sexual history similar to my own.

  • Lokland

    @Sam

    “when asked about what a guy should do if he finds himself not stacking up, replied “find a smaller vagina.” That was much to the aghast of the other female guest participating in the discussions who had just asserted that size was important to a degree. Thank goodness someone finally said it, and I’m not surprised at the other’s reaction.”

    +1

    The small dick thing is something meant to intimidate and scare men.
    Call it a social shit test or something.

    Better to just accept that certain people are going to be incompatible regardless of their attraction to one another in other areas.

  • J

    She has more experience, so she’s likely to snag the more timid guy who usually is not a jerk.

    That’s a common problem in the ‘sphere, less so IRL. It’s not hard to see how a more experienced person can take advantage of a less experienced person, so I understand that it hurts when it happens and that people need to be wary. I just don’t think that unrestricted women are generally attracted to male virgins or near virgins.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Length does not matter.”

    Maybe not for pleasure.
    If one considers the hook shape of the penis as being used to scrape out competing sperm a longer penis is useful if she has been banging other guys.

    Says something about guys with long dicks and those women who like them if its true.

    • @Lokland

      If one considers the hook shape of the penis as being used to scrape out competing sperm a longer penis is useful if she has been banging other guys.

      True. So the perfect length for this purpose would be the precise length of the woman’s canal.

      Says something about guys with long dicks and those women who like them if its true.

      Interesting, I hadn’t thought of that. However, in my very limited experience size queens do tend toward the slutty side…those in my focus groups include the woman who took her number from 36 to 6 with creative accounting, and a woman whose number was then 45 but is now probably twice that. In contrast, the woman who is content with a small guy has an N or something like 2-4.

      There is a valid reason for men to be concerned about “not measuring up” to previous partners. The more partners, the more demanding the female, I suspect.

  • Sam

    “Same here. In fact, I rarely see my husband’s in a flaccid state! The minute I look at it, it springs to attention lol.”

    Hahaha, ROFL! Oh for the frankness the internet allows.

    Ata boy, Mr. HUS, and ata girl Susan for inspiring such loyal servitude.

  • Man

    The problem comes in when the involuntarily chaste resent the more experienced or worry that someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

    I think this is the main worry of the sphere. But eventually I think you’re right that…

    Any woman who has had an experience or two that she regrets is likely to be dating men who have had some negative experiences themselves… It’s not hard to see how a more experienced person can take advantage of a less experienced person, so I understand that it hurts when it happens and that people need to be wary. I just don’t think that unrestricted women are generally attracted to male virgins or near virgins.

    … also taking into account the statistics Susan gave in this post. I just would add that it might become a problem when the woman is too self-conscious of her past and engages into trying to justify or explain it. In such cases I say that she has to reconcile with her first.

  • Re: price discrimination as a problem IRL. I would posit that women can expect the following typical male hang-ups (at a minimum):

    1. Restricted Guy: UTTER FEAR OF PRICE DISCRIMINATION

    2. Unrestricted Guy: UTTER FEAR OF DETERIORATION OF RELATIONSHIP SEXUAL QUALITY/FREQUENCY OVER TIME

    3. Hot Guy: FEARS OPPORTUNITY COST OF MONOGAMY, FEARS LOSING HIS HOTNESS

    4. Not-so-Hot Guy: FEARS HOT GUY FUCK PHANTOMS IN THE PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE

    5. Wealthy Guy: FEARS GOLD-DIGGERS, FEARS FAMILY COURT SYSTEM

    6. Not-so-Wealthy Guy: FEARS WEALTHY FUCK PHANTOMS IN PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE

    7. Well-Educated Guy: FEARS BEING INTELLECTUALLY STIFLED/BORED

    8. Not-so-Well-Educated Guy: FEARS BEING PATRONIZED AND DISRESPECTED BY BETTER-EDUCATED WOMAN

    9. Badass Guy: FEARS LOSS OF INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY, MID-LIFE CRISIS ABOUT MISSING RESUME ACCOMPLISHMENTS, AND LOSS OF “BADASS” HE-MAN HOBBIES AND TOYS

    10. Non-Badass-Guy: FEARS HAVING TO ACT “ALPHA” TO SHOW SUFFICIENT DOMINANCE TO HIS GF OR WIFE

    • @BB

      That list of hangups is brilliant. I’ve clipped it for posterity, though god knows I can’t use it as a post. 😛

  • Man

    The more partners, the more demanding the female, I suspect.

    In all aspects, I suspect.

  • Lokland

    @Sue

    This might be a little too much if so delete it.

    “Interesting, I hadn’t thought of that. However, in my very limited experience size queens do tend toward the slutty side”

    Consider the spectrum of races with going from Asian-White-Black (I realize there are others but this is to keep it simple).

    Asian- smallest dicks, least infidelity/divorce, tends to lowest N
    Whites- medium dicks, moderate infidelity/divorce, tends to median N
    Blacks- largest dicks, highest infidelity/divorce, tends to highest N

    Each may simply be the result of different selective pressures where ancestral men/women competed in different ways and thus received different sets of tools to work with.

    Obviously being a size queen and/or large dicked is not confined to one race but the trend is general and all seem to correlate.

    Feel free to delete if this hits the race card too much.

    • @Lokland

      I will let your comment stand because AFAIK it is factually correct. You are definitely right about N. I have seen some articles that say studies show no difference in penis size by race, but frankly, I don’t believe them. If anyone has evidence, I’m happy to amend this.

  • mr. wavevector

    And this concludes my participation in the penis size convo at HUS.

    You wish 😉

    There is a valid reason for men to be concerned about “not measuring up” to previous partners.

    The guy my wife dated immediately before me was a friend of mine. Actually, I set her up with him when I was dating someone else. He was taller, better looking, and much better endowed than me, from what I could see in the gym shower after our workouts. But he was also very delta – lacking in confidence, assertiveness and dominance. I never felt like “less of a man” than him. Quite the opposite.

    The more partners, the more demanding the female, I suspect.

    True in my experience.

    • @mr. wv

      And this concludes my participation in the penis size convo at HUS.

      You wish

      Haha, I’ve already caved. My threats are all empty.

      I really should know better than to go down this rabbit hole.

      FWIW, I am not interested in platitudes, but I also don’t want to be part of promoting size in the culture. Which reminds me, assuming they use guys with big dicks in porn, watching porn must do a number on a lot of guys’ heads. It seems like it would lead to massive Pluralistic Ignorance…

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “So the perfect length for this purpose would be the precise length of the woman’s canal.”

    Only if the woman were to partake in such a strategy. If she never did any many with her would not need a long dick.

    “There is a valid reason for men to be concerned about “not measuring up” to previous partners. The more partners, the more demanding the female, I suspect.”

    You could apply this to nearly all male characteristics including prior sexual experience, wealth…etc.

    “In contrast, the woman who is content with a small guy has an N or something like 2-4.”

    Anecdote.
    Everything about me is short and thick.
    All of my girlfriends have been N below 3 (4? including the liar). Never been rejected after having sex.

  • J

    Is that how Jedis jerk off?

    LMAO; I nearly peed my pants on that one.

    Lesbians manage with no penis at all

    But these are straight girls. As a cisgendered straight woman, pardon my solipsism, I can tell you we do like the penis. That doesn’t mean we’re all size queens, but a guy should have some going on down there–if not average size, then technique or duration.

    And I know two who did – to me. One did immediately after I dropped my drawers, the other after several episodes of intercourse. My personal experience anecdotes trump all your second hand gossip anecdotes!

    If I wanted to be all ‘spherian about this, I’d say that anecdote isn’t data. As it happens, I had a stats professor who convinced me of the value of anecdata, so I’ll not argue with your experience. FWIW, I think the first girl was being mean. If she liked you enought to get naked with you, she should have not reacted that way. As to the second, well, she wasn’t satisfied, but that can happen with average or big guys too. You two weren’t compatible. What can you do?

    The study showed a very clear female preference for larger flacid penises.

    Yes, in dealing with computer generated images, not in dealing with real life situations. If I wanted to prove that men like blondes with big boobs, I could hook up a meter to the genitals of some male colege students and show them Playboy bunnies. I would get the desired result, but it wouldn’t explain leg men or gay men. There may be some superficial preferences, but they don’t matter that much in common practice. Pear shaped brunetttes and fat men with small dicks do find mates. IRL, people do build relationships based on more than first impressions.

    You are missing the point – the hypothesis is that women have an innate preference for certain male physical characteristics that evolved in a time before people wore a lot of clothes. Obviously any preference women may for penis size it is suppressed by our cultural preference for wearing pants.

    But we are constantly evolving, self domesticating as you often point out. While there may be a switch that’s still flipped by seeing certain sexual characters, I would guess that there are other switches that are flipped by other characteristics. I, for example, love both a killer sense of humor and a V-shaped torso in a man, but if I have to choose one, it’s humor.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Lokland,

    What about the Irish Curse? Does that imply “least infidelity/divorce, tends to lowest N” too?

    • Well, I guess this answers my question about race:

      Average penis sizes by country:

      Republic of Congo 7.1
      Ecuador 7
      Ghana 6.8
      Colombia 6.7
      Iceland 6.5
      Italy 6.2
      South Africa 6
      Sweden 5.9
      Greece 5.8
      Germany 5.7
      New Zealand 5.5
      UK 5.5
      Canada 5.5
      Spain 5.5
      France 5.3
      Australia 5.2
      Russia 5.2
      USA 5.1
      Ireland 5
      Romania 5
      China 4.3
      India 4
      Thailand 4
      South Korea 3.8
      North Korea 3.8

      Hmmm, does anyone know if there’s a correlation between length and sexual orientation?

  • Lokland

    @Mr. WV

    “Is that how Jedis jerk off?”

    Well with the proper application of The Force…

    “What about the Irish Curse? Does that imply “least infidelity/divorce, tends to lowest N” too?”

    I know literally nothing about Irish people except that they like potatoes.

  • Hope

    Mr. Wavevector “Hope’s comment that “That means that men’s agony about the length of their penis is pretty meaningless”.”

    It was a quote from a website, so take it up with them:

    http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/human-biology/vagina2.htm

  • BroHamlet

    @Liz, Susan & J

    When adopting the Susan Strategy, steel yourself against the cries of dismay from boys who’ve had their candy taken away. Maybe, go on low-interest dates for a while until you get used to it.

    First of all, going on low-interest dates is an absolutely AWFUL idea if you expect guys to accept waiting en masse. All you will be doing is reinforcing the idea that girls will say one thing and do another, and trust me this idea is gaining ground with guys *daily*, because LOTS of girls who are not on HUS (read: most of them a guy meets in real life) are are doing exactly that. The best way is probably just not to date AT ALL until you have actually worked on yourself and actually improved.

    RE: this whole “double-blind” ya’ll are tripping over. This whole thing is about *congruence*. Personally, I’m not all that interested in a girl’s words- the quote that Susan based this post on sounds nice, but at the end of the day, any guy who’s perceptive is going to compare your words to the little things you have already done up to that point- he’s largely going to have decided whether you’re really and truly “not that type of girl” before you even open your mouth. This is where your actual personal ethos is going to be tested- the little things need to be in line with what you are presenting.

    con·gru·ent
    /kənˈgro͞oənt/
    Adjective
    In agreement or harmony.
    (of figures) Identical in form; coinciding exactly when superimposed.

    I think what you are seeing the guys say here is they want a girl to be congruent to her image, which is absolutely the same as every girl’s subconscious demand that guys be congruent to the image that they project. Neither of these are unfair, they just are. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I *do not* want a girl to keep making mistakes if they were indeed mistakes, and not just guilty pleasures that she doesn’t really regret- that puts me in a difficult position if I like her. If I know that she has dated a few people in the past, a “good girl” speech like Susan has quoted would come off as overcompensating and would make me suspect she’s “turning over a new leaf” at my expense. I’d actually be less likely to trust than if she demonstrates her level of self control through her actions (whatever that level may be), i.e. how she reacts to escalation, and if she escalates emotionally right off the bat. Actions speak a LOT louder than words. In that respect, girl game is the same as guy game. You have to learn the nuance, not just bash everything that looks like a nail because you’re holding a hammer, haha.

    FWIW, I have never heard this speech from a girl, and that’s probably because my actions speak loudly to what I want from any girl I’m hanging with (in both cases, casual, and relationship)- she should never have to get to the point of giving me a speech. And in return, I don’t have to listen to words that might be meaningless, I get to see how she ACTS. That is what I mean by congruence.

  • J

    Me: The problem comes in when the involuntarily chaste resent the more experienced or worry that someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

    Man: I think this is the main worry of the sphere.

    Me: I call it the Deti syndrome. I don’t doubt his story. I’m sure it happened to him. I just think that his ability to gather on the net a cadre of men with similar experiences makes it typical.

    Man: I just would add that it might become a problem when the woman is too self-conscious of her past and engages into trying to justify or explain it.

    Me: I agree. I’m married, but if I were to find myself dating again, I doubt I would want to walk down memory lane with a new man. My response to a man who wanted my history would be to say that the most salient point is that I was a faithful and loving wife for over 25 years and that my husband never felt a need to ask for numbers or details of my love life before I met him. If that wouldn’t be enough, I’m sure that there’s nothing I could say that would make the new man feel right about me and that would end it for me. None of us are able to re-write the past. We certainly shouldn’t lie about it, but I don’t think we are obligated to supply details that will only make people uncomfortable or be used against us later.

  • mr. wavevector

    Lesbians manage with no penis at all

    But these are straight girls. As a cisgendered straight woman, pardon my solipsism, I can tell you we do like the penis. That doesn’t mean we’re all size queens, but a guy should have some going on down there–if not average size, then technique or duration.

    When I asked my wife why she doesn’t like receiving oral sex, she said “I’m not a lesbian”. My P in her V is what she craves.

    She comes every time from it too, very quickly and easily. The technique that does it for her isn’t in and out like a piston, it’s grinding like a mortar and pestle, with me balls deep grinding my pubes into her clit and labia. That actually wouldn’t work well with a really long penis – she isn’t one of those women who like cervix slamming.

  • Lokland

    @Sue

    “I will let your comment stand because AFAIK it is factually correct. You are definitely right about N. I have seen some articles that say studies show no difference in penis size by race, but frankly, I don’t believe them. If anyone has evidence, I’m happy to amend this.”

    Fair enough.
    I went through the ‘OMG my dick isn’t big enough’ stage in my early 20’s and researched the topic intently at the time.

    I remember most of it quite well but its been awhile so specific sources might be harder for me to come by.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    There may be some superficial preferences, but they don’t matter that much in common practice. Pear shaped brunetttes and fat men with small dicks do find mates. IRL, people do build relationships based on more than first impressions.

    Right. I’m not claiming penis size is a dominant attraction trait for women. Actually I think physical attraction traits are over-rated in general. Men do not select as strongly on physical characteristics as all the social memes claim they do either.

    As for “pear shaped brunetttes” – that’s my type of girl.

  • J

    I’d actually be less likely to trust than if she demonstrates her level of self control through her actions (whatever that level may be), i.e. how she reacts to escalation, and if she escalates emotionally right off the bat. Actions speak a LOT louder than words. In that respect, girl game is the same as guy game. You have to learn the nuance, not just bash everything that looks like a nail because you’re holding a hammer, haha.

    I would srongly agree with this and not just in this situation. Anyone can SAY anything; actions always speak louder than words.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Lokland,

    I know literally nothing about Irish people except that they like potatoes.

    That’s the curse. All potatoes and no meat.

  • Laurel

    About that discussion on orgasms and bonding–for me at least, being given an orgasm with fingers during a hook-up has much less “bonding power” than does actual PIV intercourse. And this is true even if the intercourse isn’t all that great.

    I don’t know if this is due to chemicals like oxytocin or is purely psychological…or maybe it’s just me, but in my case, the hot hook-up is much less psychologically risky than the intercourse.

    Not that my Number is high enough for scientific validity, lol.

    • About that discussion on orgasms and bonding–for me at least, being given an orgasm with fingers during a hook-up has much less “bonding power” than does actual PIV intercourse. And this is true even if the intercourse isn’t all that great.

      I agree with this. I’ve read that more women cite penetration than orgasm when asked about the most pleasurable moment during sex. Crossing that line is a very significant step psychologically, IMO. I don’t know how oxytocin flows vary, but that can’t be the whole story, or oxytocin during masturbation would have some sort of effect, haha.

      “Don’t knock masturbation. It’s sex with someone you love.”
      Woody Allen

      Maybe it was the oxytocin!

  • J

    I’m not claiming penis size is a dominant attraction trait for women. Actually I think physical attraction traits are over-rated in general. Men do not select as strongly on physical characteristics as all the social memes claim they do either.

    Oh wave, I don’t know why we debate so much when basically we always agree.

    As for “pear shaped brunetttes” – that’s my type of girl.

    OMG, I love Spinal Tap. DH introduced me to it, and it’s been a family fave ever since. Even the boys love it.

    Let me be your Netflix suggestion algorithm. If you liked Spinal Tap, you’ll love this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_a_Black_Hat

    And now, I’m gonna go clean my house.

  • Fish

    Re: Penis size. . .

    “Which reminds me, assuming they use guys with big dicks in porn, watching porn must do a number on a lot of guys’ heads.”
    For the longest time, I thought I was average to slightly below average because the only exposure I had was porn (to other mens’ erect penii). Also, I didn’t start tacking onto N until midway through college so I didn’t really have any info to go on.

    I think its one of those tricky things because women have no idea what they’re getting. It doesn’t necessarily correlate with anything (as far as I can tell and the only way to know what you’re getting is initiate sexual contact. Not that I look up this information often but:
    http://www.sizesurvey.com/result.html

    So I’m in the 80th percentile (sorry for the TMI) and experiences have been all over the place. my ex fiance loved it (and preferred the same technique as Mrs WV). My first gf in college could only do it missionary with me because other positions were uncomfortable for her. I’ve also been with women who claim they couldn’t be satisfied with less than 8″. Anal, even with women who like it with other guys, is generally not happening.

    In my experience, more women filter for height than penis length. When I was in my 20’s it was particularly frustrating as my ideal target range (5’0 to 5’5) seemed to prefer guys 6ft+ (I am 5’9). I frequently joke and say I wish I could take about an inch and a half off the bottom and tack it on the top (5’11 is almost 6ft lol). In the end, as has been said, you like what you like.

  • Fish

    @WV
    ” Men do not select as strongly on physical characteristics as all the social memes claim they do either.”

    Personally, I think most men have a range of “acceptable”, “hot but attainable” and “out of my league”. The higher up the range a woman is, the more shit he’s willing to put up with in a relationship with him. I.E. “out of my league” chick pulls the “I don’t have sex until I’m in love”, she gets more leeway than “acceptable” chick (who probably would not be contacted again after that statement, at least by me).

    I will give you that attractiveness just gets your foot in the door, although thinking back, I tend to place more long-term worthiness on more attractive women. I can’t think of a single girl I thought was “acceptable” that I looked at as more than a short term thing until something better came along. . .

  • Fish

    @BB

    I actually lol’d at your list.
    “2. Unrestricted Guy: UTTER FEAR OF DETERIORATION OF RELATIONSHIP SEXUAL QUALITY/FREQUENCY OVER TIME”
    thats 100% me, and I’ve been trending toward “wealthy guy”.

  • Hope

    Fish “I.E. “out of my league” chick pulls the “I don’t have sex until I’m in love”, she gets more leeway than “acceptable” chick (who probably would not be contacted again after that statement, at least by me).”

    I’ve definitely said that to guys before. But in the end, I did more than fine. We all have our own idiosyncrasies. I was always drawn to guys who are considered “nerdy” by the mainstream, and maybe that means they were more willing to put up with my “demands” than the guys who are smoother with women/playas/alphas/Bastiat types.

    Also, at least in my case, I didn’t say it during the first meeting/date. I never went on dates until after an intense intellectual and emotional connection has already formed. I would be talking about all sorts of stuff, from philosophy to science to technology, and only after we’ve mutually established that “hey, I think you’re neat/interesting/cool,” do I start mentioning some of my romantic pasts and what I expect before physical things start happening.

  • Man

    Which reminds me, assuming they use guys with big dicks in porn, watching porn must do a number on a lot of guys’ heads. It seems like it would lead to massive Pluralistic Ignorance…

    Right on spot, to my mind. Porn feeds a lot of men’s feelings and expectations towards women nowadays, and towards themselves too. They also use certain camera angles in porn to enhance the size of the stud.

  • mr. wavevector

    10. Non-Badass-Guy: FEARS HAVING TO ACT “ALPHA” TO SHOW SUFFICIENT DOMINANCE TO HIS GF OR WIFE

    10b. Non-Badass-Guy: FEARS HIS WIFE KEEPING HIS BALLS IN HER PURSE

  • Man

    …which is to say: if they are not willing to marry a porn star why does it matter? I guess that even porn stars are not worried about it (actually mostly worried about big size causing damage to them I’ve heard).

  • JP

    ““2. Unrestricted Guy: UTTER FEAR OF DETERIORATION OF RELATIONSHIP SEXUAL QUALITY/FREQUENCY OVER TIME”
    thats 100% me, and I’ve been trending toward “wealthy guy”.”

    Um, doesn’t this apply to all guys?

  • JP

    You know, now that I think about it, #5 would also double as “work experience” and increase my professional marketability.

    “4. Not-so-Hot Guy: FEARS HOT GUY FUCK PHANTOMS IN THE PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE”

    I suppose #4 would resonate more with me if I actually successfully emotionally connected with anyone prior to my wife.

    I mean, if I wanted one of those women, I would still be with them and married to them. There’s a reason that I’m not with them, which has to do with me not wanting to be with them.

    It would probably be different if I was ever the one who got my heart squished by somebody I dated.

  • Abbot

    “The more partners, the more demanding the female, I suspect.”

    It is an absolute fact that this is the core reason feminists want all women to “discover their sexuality” via multipenis as its synonymous with “discover your power” or “break the love/intimacy link” that getting with a bunch of men effectively does. But most of all, it rubs away the bonding/oogling euphoria that is all-consuming and thus serves to repel feminist “ideals” and indoctrination.

    • @Abbot

      I guess any manner of producing demanding females is A-OK with feminists.

  • Charlotte

    This is absolutely true. While there are rare occasions of couples having sex the first time they meet because of total chemistry and connection (my parents had sex the first time they met!! They were set up and my mom said the next day they were talking about marriage….but obviously this is super rare), I always advise my friends to make a guy wait. Not too long so that he loses interest, but I think a good rule of thumb is to wait long enough that you know the guy is hanging out with you not merely to solicit sex and then peace out…in otherwords, have a commitment, to some level, before sex.

    Also, when you don’t have sex with someone, it is far, far easier to let them go when it doesn’t work out. For me personally, having sex is a very intimate act and one that I could only enjoy if I knew the other person respected and cared for me for more than just what I could offer them in the bedroom…which essentially translates to dating and commitment. If you are casually seeing someone and you don’t sleep with them and don’t call you back, yeah it sucks, but it isn’t as if you feel as connected to them.

  • Anacaona

    It’s funny, this is a convo where guys are all size queens. Let them believe whatever they like, no one is going to change their minds. It reminds me of the pushback I got when I wrote a post that was positive about beta traits. The beta males were really pissed off. I guess this has something to do with the way males think, I find it baffling.
    I had a couple of gays top friends that were obsessed about having well endowed males bottoms even if they were not using their penis to penetrate. They just though “smaller than me = inferior = no sexy”.
    I think I read it comes from boys seeing adult penis. The adults have the power so bigger penis = power and they never that go it seems like.
    Another anecdote there was this forum I ended up reading about a guy so big that he only had found two women willing to ‘take it’ and he loved the feeling but other women had only do BJ to him. He was lamenting his size and the other guys were like “are you crazy?!” “You have a big dick I wish I had it that good” Yeah penis size is more important than actually being able to have sex…men.

    But most of us are for one market, at least.
    And one is all you need. 🙂

  • MWV, agree 100% about 10b. That should be a permanent modification to the “SUM OF ALL FEARS” list project.

    Ideally, a clever female strategist could accurately categorize a man along the five domains depicted using admittedly-simplistic (but computationally frugal) A/B testing logic…

    Restricted/Unrestricted

    Hot/Not So Hot

    $$$/Not So $$$

    Educated/Not So Edu

    “Fighter”/”Lover”

    …and then pre-empt his key relationship fears and concerns by providing the kinds of things that would soothe his ruffled feathers, lower his DEFCON or Terror Alert posture, and allow him to relax.

    For instance: Lisa, trained by Strategist Susan, meets “Mick”. Mick is an unrestricted hot guy with income challenges, relatively poor education level, and to top it all off he is an androgynous metrosexual hipster (non-Badass self-concept, interests include many activities typically associated with gay men).

    A bespoke Psychosexual Comfort Package that Lisa customized just for appeasing hipster Mick would, if the SUM OF ALL FEARS list is accurate (and I present the first draft only as a straw man to be critiqued and modified by other HUS members), possibly spit out something like this:

    1. Lisa should, when she feels comfortable doing so, emphasize her high sex drive, sexual adventurousness, and desire to avoid being “one of those long-term couples who hardly fuck anymore.”

    2. Lisa should emphasize how hot Mick is and how she just wants to have sex with him “all the time”.

    3. Lisa should emphasize her lack of materialism and make fun of girls who pursue rich sugar daddies or who covet luxury items.

    4. Lisa should restrain her intellectual capacity around Mick, and perhaps even praise his more vapid comments for their penetrating analytical insights. She should refrain from having debates with Mick.

    5. Lisa should downplay any illicit desires she may have about being sexually dominated by a controlling “alpha” man who “takes her”, she should disparage those “Neanderthal” type males who are into violent sports and the rugged outdoors, and she should praise Mick’s wearing of capri-length pants, beanies, colorful scarves, etc.

    • A bespoke Psychosexual Comfort Package…she should praise Mick’s wearing of capri-length pants, beanies, colorful scarves, etc.

      Funniest thing I’ve read in a while. The Hipster Hate is strong in you.

  • Hope

    BB, or Lisa could just act true to herself so she doesn’t get accused of putting on an act then becoming someone totally different later.

    If you’re looking for marriage, you should be authentic, not pretending to be someone you’re not just to get a commitment. If Lisa is actually as you described in 1-5, good deal. Otherwise it strikes me as very manipulative and a big lie.

    • If you’re looking for marriage, you should be authentic, not pretending to be someone you’re not just to get a commitment. If Lisa is actually as you described in 1-5, good deal.

      Oddly, the Lisa strategy seems very STR. Why would she want to marry a vapid mimbo?

  • Anacaona

    If you’re looking for marriage, you should be authentic, not pretending to be someone you’re not just to get a commitment.
    Even Oscar winning actresses only spent a few months in character. This sounds like hell. Pretending to be someone you are not for the sake of getting the hot rich guy. DO.NOT.WANT!
    The whole of strategic dating is to have the best tools to win a guy that you want for the long term and that wants you back.

  • Hope, Ana: Yes, yes! If Lisa would need to put on this act to maintain a Psychosexual Comfort System that appeases Mick, then she would find the whole charade to be exhausting and dishonest.

    Mick would be a poor fit, and she could anticipate the fatigue that would come with a relationship with Mick by using the SUM OF ALL FEARS framework as a self-defense option.

    If she instead met “Bill”, a restricted, looks-challenged, economically successful, well-educated, manly-outdoors type, then she would need to emphasize other things. She should inventory her own aspects and see if they match up well. If she has had some ONS activity in the past, for example, then a restricted man’s fear of price discrimination would be a potential source of conflict or deception and she should opt for a more unrestricted man who would not care so much about that. Bill might be a poor choice.

    If she has been chaste, however, then Bill’s sociosexuality would be a very good fit as she could easily and truthfully appease his fears on the price discrimination front.

  • Apple

    Hey Mr. Wavevector, thank you for clearing that up! Maybe the person who said “size doesn’t matter” simply meant size doesn’t matter to them. I think a lot of people have a hard time navigating between their particular thoughts and feelings about things as well as their wants and needs and how other people feel. Or how common their feelings/wants/needs are compared to most other people.

    I think size doesn’t matter to some women. I think it matters to a lot of women. I think women who have never been with a man with a larger penis says size doesn’t matter because they don’t know any better. Other women’s lady parts (particularly cervix) are constructed in such a way that a larger penis is painful. Some women don’t really seem to enjoy penetration at all. Women who don’t enjoy penetration would probably select for smaller penis size if they went for men at all because… easy blow jobs, lol. And no pain for them during intercourse.

    Other women really like the feel of a larger penis so… different strokes. It’s not just a visual thing. It does matter to some. And not to others. Having been married twice and experienced both, it’s a HUGE difference and actual intercourse is hugely pleasurable for me with someone larger. I think Mr. Apple has pretty much ruined me for all other men. Though, I think if I loved someone I could overlook it. But I’d really miss it.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector, and agreed. Though “apple shape” is not necessarily how it’s portrayed. (i.e. fat and dumpy in the middle.) It’s really more something about how you gain your weight and where you gain it if/when you gain it. It doesn’t mean you will gain it. Or be fat at all.

    A woman with an “apple shape”, won’t be super hour-glassy when at a good weight, but she will still be attractive in a way that is appealing to a large percentage of men. I think we have to distinguish between various body shapes (as in bone structure and where one gains weight if/when they do) and level of “fatness”. The latter, in my opinion and observation is a far far bigger deterrent to women than the former. Women with an “apple shape” can and do also fit into the “correct” waist-to-hip ratio to attract the male eye. (I know this because I AM an “apple shape” but am not fat. Though that’s not why I picked that name haha.)

    An apple shape looks great at just the right weight for them and also particularly with strength training to emphasize areas that need emphasized. (like working on glutes to add more “hip shape” for example.) When thin and not particularly built, they look willow-y like models or ballerinas, which is not a type that is unappealing to large swaths of men. Though the men who prefer bigger breasts wouldn’t chase such women.

    I do think some men don’t like “apple shapes” at all, even if they are fit and not what anybody pictures as an ‘apple shape’ when they think that phrase, just like some men wouldn’t be attracted to a B cup. But it’s much less difficult for a fit “apple shape’ to find an appealing mate than an overweight woman who, if thin, would be a perfect “hourglass”. IMO and observation.

  • Madelena

    This is a little off topic but I’ve been going through the arhives and using Google to get some quality advice Escoffier once gave another poster regarding the value, or lack of, a graduate education. I’ve looked but cannot find it. Can someone direct me to it, if possible?

    Sorry for interjecting with a random question.

  • Sassy6519

    @ mr. wavevector

    It’s not meaningless. Many women express a preference for larger penises (e.g. Sassy), and some will outright reject men who don’t measure up to their expectations. A man who has been rejected based on his lack of endowment might understandably be sensitive about it.

    *peeks head in*

    Size Queen here, reporting for duty!!

  • Apple

    @Susan, re: moms, yes, I have a great mom. I was raised by a woman who knew exactly what she wanted in life. Extremely strong-willed. I was never really raised to “subdue” myself or who I am. (And given the genetics of my mother’s will and my grandmother’s will… well… good luck to her if she’d really made much of an effort to do that.) So I guess I get pretty confused still when I watch how few women around me seem to have backbone or self esteem. I’ve also watched my mother have a successful and happy marriage for going on 4 decades now. It makes a difference.

  • Fish

    @BB
    Brilliant, 100% awesomeness and probably the best filtering type I have ever seen. Figure out a guy, figure out if you are compatible, emphasize desired qualities, wait for IOI. It seems to me the best strategy I have read on here.

    Using myself as an example, I put off a highly unrestricted vibe (shocking I know), so naturally, more unrestricted girls are drawn to me and vice versa. Figuring out where a guy falls on that scale through conversation would give you both “how do I approach?” and “do we fit?”

  • Apple

    Also re: size mattering… agreed that it is GIRTH you want, guys, not length. Obviously a reasonable length is a good thing from the perspective of many women. (I’m not sure how a REALLY short and thick penis would stack up in the sensation department) but it’s more about girth.

    Also, this is not just a preference of “loose” women. And “looseness” is more a function of childbirth than number of sexual partners. (i.e. large number of sexual partners isn’t ideal for a lot of reasons… but it’s really not what makes a woman’s vagina “loose”.) If you want somebody “tight”, then a woman with only one previous sexual partner who had 3 kids by him is going to be looser physiologically speaking than a woman who has had 10 partners and no babies. Just something to think about.

  • Escoffier

    Madelena,

    The point is, DO NOT go to grad school in an academic program (i.e., I am not talking about professional school) unless you are fully funded, or you have someone to pay your way. Under NO circumstances should you ever take on debt for an academic grad degree.

    Not getting funding means, in effect, you didn’t get in. It means the school wants your money but they really don’t think you have the chops.

    In most instances in careers, when you have to choose prestige v. money, prestige is the right choice and the money pays off later. This is NOT true here. A Harvard or Chicago or Berkeley PhD (these are at the top in most departments) is not enough to get you an academic job–the glut is too large, the slots too few, the competetion too fierce. So taking on debt for that is a mistake.

    If you have to go to GS, and you get into a low rung school but with funding, do that. If your parents, or a rich husband are willing to pay, or you have an inheritance you don’t mind blowing through, then do that but don’t think you’ll ever earn any of it back in wages.

  • Man

    If there is something I find interesting here at HUS is the honesty of some women (Apple & Sassy). 🙂

    Just out interest, Apple, since the phrase in the initial post is attributed to you “I don’t care what your penis wants if you don’t care what my heart wants” how do you reconcile what your heart wants with what your vagina wants with regard to your dating strategy?

    I think Mr. Apple has pretty much ruined me for all other men. Though, I think if I loved someone I could overlook it. But I’d really miss it.

  • Apple

    @Charm I think socially we’ve gone WAY too far in one direction, and part of that can be laid at the feet of feminism, but I also think that there are a lot of issues women seem to have socialized into them that are definitely of “pre-feminist” origin. Like the need to please or be approved of by any random man.

    If women didn’t, in general, have such an irrational need to be approved of and “liked” by random men (or random women), then “negging” simply would not work. It’s a childish game that only works on someone who isn’t remotely self-actualized. (granted, this includes a lot of women, particularly women who frequent the bar scene where PUAs most frequently like to practice their “skills”, but still I think they really overestimate how effective their schtick is.)

    I don’t really get what is so hard about not caring what an asshole thinks of you. Everything he says to you is selfishly motivated manipulation. It’s all a con. Why are women falling for these con artists? Women need to get very clear on what they want and what they don’t want and be as rude as they have to be to get men like this away from them. Not try to be “nice” so he doesn’t call them names. I mean who cares? When a man who has been harassing you and trying to manipulate you into bed screams that you’re a frigid bitch, it’s obviously a case of “boner rage”/”my sad boner”. And again… STDs, pregnancy, feeling like crap the next day, very doubtful you’d even get an orgasm, and you definitely are not getting the relationship you probably crave… none of these things sound like something that makes it “worth it” to keep some random asshole from calling you a dumb name. so whaaa that some guy can’t use you. Oh noes the world is ending. (And by “you” I mean general third person you, not you personally.)

    Also, no matter what a guy calls you, if you successfully stop him from using you in bed as his personal sex toy for the night, didn’t you actually win that round and not him? So he called you a frigid bitch? Lots of men and women petulantly call people names as an impotent manipulation effort with people strong enough to not care what they think at all.

    (Also this comment is because an earlier comment I made didn’t appear. So I’m not sure if it got stuck in moderation or spam or something. I’m still navigating the way comment appearance works here.)

  • Hope

    Apple “If you want somebody “tight”, then a woman with only one previous sexual partner who had 3 kids by him is going to be looser physiologically speaking than a woman who has had 10 partners and no babies. Just something to think about.”

    Have you had kids?

    It’s unfortunate misinformation like this that leads many women to think that elective C-sections are “better,” because they’ll still be “tight” after childbirth. Now, C-sections are medically necessary in some cases, but an elective one is really not a good thing. I don’t want to get too into much graphic detail about this, but suffice it to say that it’s better for both the mom and the baby to have a vaginal birth than a C-section, which is considered major surgery. There are also higher risks for subsequent children, including possible rupture of the uterus during contractions, which is why very few hospitals in the country allow VBACS (Vaginal Birth After C-Sections).

    In any case, I’ve given birth twice vaginally, and it’s still a tight fit. 😛

  • Apple

    @Man,

    Since I’ve been married almost 12 years, I don’t have a dating strategy at this moment haha. And given how the landscape has changed in just the last 12 years I really think I would just get cozy with my vibrator and never date again if something happened to Mr. Apple. Definitely I would not go “looking for love”. If it found me by virtue of me just being my generally awesome self (only half-kidding), then fine. Otherwise I wouldn’t seek/hunt for love.

    But as for my dating strategy when I was dating Mr. Apple goes, I pretty much did what I expected the man I was dating to do… masturbate. And it’s not like we didn’t do anything ever (like making out and such), it was just, until I knew he was emotionally on the hook with me we did not have sex.

    Mr. Apple got it a lot sooner than many men would have, but he was talking marriage very early as well. Now, he could have just been playing me, and I’m not saying I can’t be fooled, but I’ve got a really good bs detector. He was pretty much putting a ring on it very very early. Which made a difference. But the odds this was part of a “strategy” to get me into bed were quite low since I distanced myself a bit from him then because I’d just come off my first marriage (he was basically trying to lock that down as soon as I was legally free) and I just wanted to be unattached for awhile.

    So… bringing up marriage early with me was not a good strategy for getting me into bed at that point. Either way, he still had to wait a little while. (Talk of marriage was also accompanied by taking me on an 8 hour drive to meet his mother and stay in her house for several days. Not usually a ‘player strategy’. I’m not even sure sometimes that players even HAVE mothers.)

    I guess the basic strategy is… a woman being strong enough in who she is that while she might really enjoy a man and a sexual relationship, she understands fundamentally that her vibrator and a community of good friends will meet all her needs much better without leaving her feeling emotionally hollow, than getting sexually intimate with men who don’t want her as a long term feature in their life.

    • I’m not even sure sometimes that players even HAVE mothers.

      I cracked up at this, and then suddenly felt sobered. I think players tend to have bad mothers, and bad relationships with their mothers.

  • JP

    @Madelena:

    “This is a little off topic but I’ve been going through the arhives and using Google to get some quality advice Escoffier once gave another poster regarding the value, or lack of, a graduate education. I’ve looked but cannot find it. Can someone direct me to it, if possible?

    Sorry for interjecting with a random question.”

    Don’t go to law school.

  • Hope

    Escoffier “Not getting funding means, in effect, you didn’t get in. It means the school wants your money but they really don’t think you have the chops.”

    Yep. My husband’s applied math graduate degree was fully paid for, and he also got a small stipend for being a TA. He has no student loans whatsoever.

    Fish “Figure out a guy, figure out if you are compatible, emphasize desired qualities, wait for IOI. It seems to me the best strategy I have read on here.”

    Eh, I disagree with the “wait for IOI” part. The girl is supposed to be giving the IOI, and the guy is supposed to follow-up on it. That is what I did with my husband. I figured him out, figured out we could very well be compatible, and made the first moves indicating my interest in him.

  • bellacoker

    I might have missed a similar comment, but average is the wrong word to use re: acceptable penis size. Penis size, like other measurements of humans, height, intelligence, whatever, is going to fall into a bell curve, and it is only the people who fall into the tails of the curve who are going to have problems functionally. So, men who are “below average” but in the bell of the curve may have anxiety about themselves but really there is no functional and very little aesthetic difference between average and average plus or minus 1.

  • Apple

    Hope, I’m sorry to say that I don’t feel it is “selective misinformation”. I do not have children, but I’ve spoken to many women who have tearfully told me that it has never been the same since kids. What the doctor did and a million kegels could never get them back to their pre-baby vagina. I’ve also spoken to men who have similar feelings about their wives even though they love them and would never say it out loud.

    I do think some women have enough elasticity to “bounce back”. It also depends on other factors like how big that kid’s head is. How many you have… etc. etc. But to say that having a baby vaginally does not and cannot in a good number of circumstances, change the vagina significantly from what it was like before a baby, is to lie to women IMO.

    If you’ve had a baby and everything tightened right back up, I’m very happy for you. But know that there are a significant number of women (and their husbands) out there who are not so lucky.

    I also agree with you re: elective C-section. I think when a woman decides to have a baby and become a mother, her priorities really need to be centered on something besides how sex is going to be afterward.

  • Gin Martini

    Sue: “No woman ever judged a man in aflaccid state. Standing at attention is the only thing we register.”

    Sassy has gone on record for judging flaccid size, so she likely dislikes growers or filters them out.

    It never occurred to me to worry about size, ever. Unless you are abnormally small, there are hundreds of other more important things. And I watch porn.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    A woman with an “apple shape”, won’t be super hour-glassy when at a good weight, but she will still be attractive in a way that is appealing to a large percentage of men.

    There is a lot of research across many societies that show a strong male preference for a low waist to hip ratio. There is very common and possibly universal male preference for a female figure with rounded hips and buttocks, narrow waist, flat stomach and medium to large breasts. Most men choose this as the ideal female figure. Women who vary from the ideal may still be attractive, but the further a figure is from that ideal shape the fewer the number of men who will express a strong attraction for it.

    Likewise for men, the ideal figure seems to be tall, high shoulder to hip ratio, flat stomach and large penis. The further a figure is from that ideal shape the fewer the number of women who will express a strong attraction for it.

    Fortunately for us who aren’t particularly close to the ideal, the variation among individuals is large. You can find men and women who like all sorts of different figures, and others who aren’t very particular one way or the other because they value a lot of other things more than just appearance.

  • Hope

    Apple, I have lots of female friends who have kids as well, and not a single one of them mentioned that they felt “looser” to me after kids. Maybe your personal anecdotes are more reliable, but medically speaking Wikipedia etc. are on my side.

    From Wikipedia’s page on vaginas:

    During childbirth, the vagina provides the channel to deliver the newborn from the uterus to its independent life outside the body of the mother. During birth, the elasticity of the vagina allows it to stretch to many times its normal diameter. The vagina is often referred to as the birth canal in the context of pregnancy and childbirth, though the term is, by definition, the area between the outside of the vagina and the fully dilated uterus.

    From the same page I linked to:
    http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/human-biology/vagina2.htm

    The vagina resembles a deflated tube that’s only 2 to 4 inches (5 to 10 centimeters) long and three-fourths of an inch (1.9 cm) wide [sources: Planned Parenthood; Harrison-Hohner]. However, the vagina is lined with ringed muscular ridges so that it can expand when necessary, such as during intercourse or childbirth. During sexual intercourse, for example, the vagina swells to approximately 4 to 8 inches (10 to 20 centimeters) in length and 2.5 inches in width [sources: Planned Parenthood; Harrison-Hohner].The vagina will only expand as much as it needs to in order to hold what’s inside the vagina, be it a tampon or a baby.

    Now, it’s possible that individual women may experience dysfunction, especially as they get older. But having gone through childbirth, the most problematic thing with resuming sexual activity was not the size of my vagina afterwards, but the potential for infection as well as pain. In fact for the first few times, it was painful because of too big on his part.

    It could be that the “pushing” stage did not last very long for me. The first time I had an epidural, and the second time was natural, and the pushing stage never lasted more than 15 minutes. It could also be that I was physically active before and after, and I do lifts, squats, and other weighted exercises frequently. Regardless, I’m happy to report that sex is still awesome between us.

    • The vagina is extremely elastic, and even sex with 1,000 penises would not alter its size. Claims that a loose vagina is a slut tell are absurd.

      I had c-sections (not elective 🙁 ) so I’m not sure about birthing a child, but don’t docs stitch women back up after an episiotomy just for that reason? The canal does bounce back, it’s just the opening that may get stretched, or more likely, tear to create a wider space. Docs stitch it up and all is well. I’m sure one can have surgery to tighten things up as well – I would not hesitate to do that if I got too loose for my husband’s taste.

  • Sassy6519

    Sassy has gone on record for judging flaccid size, so she likely dislikes growers or filters them out.

    It never occurred to me to worry about size, ever. Unless you are abnormally small, there are hundreds of other more important things. And I watch porn.

    True. I find large penises attractive for a few reasons, including:

    1. I am more turned on, physically and psychologically, when I am working with a large penis. I like the way that they look. I like the fact that they are harder to hold in my hands. I like that they command a great deal of presence. They just exude more masculinity to me.

    2. I like the feeling created by a large penis during sex.

    3. I have an oral fixation, and a large penis offers more for me to play with.

  • Anacaona

    @Hope
    Most of my friends that are mom’s and have given birth naturally, have no complained either. This reminds me of the many virgins don’t bleed debate, yet to know a single woman that has no bleed the first time and that is a sample size of at least 300. Not All Vaginas are like that? NAVALT?

    • @Ana

      I can be your first. I didn’t bleed when I lost my virginity. I was sporty, though, and I also rode horses. I’ve read that both those things can break the hymen.

      I also know female athletes who bled like crazy. Weird.

  • Sam

    “I think Mr. Apple has pretty much ruined me for all other men. Though, I think if I loved someone I could overlook it. But I’d really miss it.”

    This really strikes at the core of a lot (but not all) of the insecurities/concerns men have related to size and N’s, or maybe just me. No one is perfect, and everyone has things to be overlooked, but damn if any man wants that to be one of them.
    Granted everyone is different and has their own preferences, as is being clearly state, but I think it would be terribly disheartening to have someone settle for you in that regard, even if they never ever showed it, perhaps especially if they never showed it.

    I think some of the best advice Susan has ever given for any woman in any relationship, whether she is settling in the size department or not, is “for god’s sake, worship his cock,” and keep it sincere. (we, too, are looking for someone to foster our personal growth, but who also understands that at some point it stops growing and thats all you are ever going to get)

    • I think some of the best advice Susan has ever given for any woman in any relationship, whether she is settling in the size department or not, is “for god’s sake, worship his cock,” and keep it sincere

      I would also add that this is an area where a woman with a strong preference should not compromise. That worship has to be sincere, or she’s going to get tired of pretending. Fast.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavevector,

    Yes, that’s true, but I think there is a misunderstanding in what the range of what “apple shape” means. It means that IF/WHEN you gain weight, you gain it in your stomach mostly and it throws off your proportions. Having had a brief period where I weighed more than I should I can tell you that I definitely gain in the “apple way”. But, at my ideal weight (and particularly with exercise that enhances my glutes), I have plenty of “ass”. I am not large breasted, but I’m a B cup. I have a normal hip to waist ratio (in the range most men find sexy/attractive). I do have a waist that “goes in”.

    What people don’t talk about is… healthy waist-to-hip ratio (and in the range statistically men are attracted to) is possible for “all the shapes”. Some, like apple, are just less forgiving. If a woman is naturally particularly curvy, she can carry more weight on her body without screwing up her ratio/proportions. Not so for Apples. Doesn’t mean an apple shape cannot have proportions in the “healthy/sexy” range.

    If I had never experienced a period of being overweight I’m sure some would say I’m not an “apple”, but since I have had such a period in the past, yeah… I know which body frame I have. (I also know from having a period of time where I was too thin.) But at a normal/healthy weight, I’ve turned quite a few heads. Now, of course there are going to be men who want a MORE extreme differential than what I have to offer. Tinier waist, bigger breasts, bigger hips. Fine, no problem.

    What I’m saying… from my own personal perspective and experience of being desired by the male of the species… I have had no troubles. Except for during the brief span of time where I put on too much weight and the time before that when I didn’t weigh enough. Once I found the “goldilocks place” for my body, no troubles.

    As long as I’m in my healthy BMI, I have enough curve to attract, and the proper waist-to-hip ratio. For Apples, it’s pretty unforgiving. Too much weight isn’t hidden well, too little weight takes out any curve you have. But it’s very possible to be an apple and be in that range that is appealing to a lot of men. But again… any man into “big boobs” or a LOT of ass is not going to be attracted to me. And that’s fine.

    I also agree that you can find people who like all sorts of things. And in the end game… outside of just the “attention factor”, you really only need one good one. And “good” is going to be defined by much much more than looks.

  • JP

    “Eh, I disagree with the “wait for IOI” part. The girl is supposed to be giving the IOI, and the guy is supposed to follow-up on it. That is what I did with my husband. I figured him out, figured out we could very well be compatible, and made the first moves indicating my interest in him.”

    I’ve always been basically IOI-blind.

    I basically once got a girlfriend because I was IOI-blind. (Yes, that sentence is accurate.)

    Apparently, I required one of two things:

    (1) Physical contact – holding my hand or kissing me; or

    (2) Direct declaration of intent.

    I wonder what percentage of men are basically IOI-blind.

    • I wonder what percentage of men are basically IOI-blind.

      From comments here from guys, it seems like a pretty high percentage. That has informed my advice to women of sending out very clear IOIs. Perhaps it’s time for an IOI post.

  • Apple

    @Hope, I have no way to know which one is more likely. I do know that there are actually support groups out there for women who feel lied to by their doctor and ‘all the women who told them it would bounce back’.

    From their perspective this is happening for more women than admit to it. There is really no way to tell. Maybe their experience is the minority but because of self-selection and finding other women like them they think the other women must be lying to save face. I’m really not sure how one would know this for sure and I’m not aware of any controlled studies that would say statistically how many women have had this problem. It’s pretty taboo still to talk about it.

    Either way, pregnancy and childbirth carries many risks of varying degrees of likelihood and danger. This seems to be one of them. I think women should be aware of all the things that COULD happen, whether or not it is super likely to happen.

  • Apple

    @Sam, I agree. It’s really important that both genders treat their partners’ private parts with respect. (That includes not talking bad about your partner’s endowments or lack thereof to other people.)

  • @Sam

    Great line about men and their phallic inflatables:

    “we, too, are looking for someone to foster our personal growth”

    LOL

  • Man

    @Apple: Thanks, Apple, for your comprehensive answer.

    I guess the basic strategy is… a woman being strong enough in who she is that while she might really enjoy a man and a sexual relationship, she understands fundamentally that her vibrator and a community of good friends will meet all her needs much better without leaving her feeling emotionally hollow, than getting sexually intimate with men who don’t want her as a long term feature in their life.

    I read before in the comments how women feel that intercourse is essential for them, seemingly much more for the emotional connection of it rather than the intercourse in itself. Also out of interest do you think that some women might get psychologically conditioned (or addicted) to using a vibrator and masturbating with it to a point that she might not be able to orgasm or find so much pleasure with intercourse in a sexual/intimate relationship?

  • Hope

    Apple, I had a terrible pregnant outcome my first time, a stillborn at 9 months pregnant. There are support groups for stillborns, too, and it happens enough that there are protocols at the hospital for it. It’s not a statistically high chance, but it is awful when it happens. Lots of things could happen with pregnancy. I just don’t want people to get the wrong idea, and you seemed to state what you stated with such authority that I didn’t want to see it go uncorrected:

    If you want somebody “tight”, then a woman with only one previous sexual partner who had 3 kids by him is going to be looser physiologically speaking than a woman who has had 10 partners and no babies.

    Different women are different.

  • Madelena

    @Escoffier,

    That’s what I figured and it makes sense what you say, re PhD programs. I have a young relative looking to do either her MBA or a Masters in Systems Engineering. The former is a prfoessional degree, hence worthwile to take although I do think it’s losing a bit of its luster and the latter is a practical degree that will stand her in good stead, i.e quite STEM-y.

    Thanks for the prompt response. Much appreciated.

    Topic is fascinating btw and I’ll settle into my sofa, with grapes on the side, and read all the interesting comments later this evening.

    • @Madelena

      Personally, I think if a woman is STEM oriented and capable, that’s the way to go. It’s always better to have specialized skills. If I could do it all over again, I would have been less of a generalist.

      In advising my daughter in her own career, I recommend that she acquire very specific skills that will allow her to off and on-ramp if she so chooses. Some resumes hold up better than others. Just my .02.

  • Escoffier

    FWIW, two kids, the natural way (that is, the natural exit, drugs were involved, the first time anyway), I don’t notice any difference. Possibly there is a differnece but who cares, it sure feels good!

  • Man

    @Sassy: Perhaps there’s some genetic preference at play as well? 🙂 Have you ever thought about what might be optimal for your in terms of length and girth?

    Average penis sizes by country:

    Republic of Congo 7.1

  • Fish

    @Apple
    Re:tightness/looseness & kids

    So as a male with a high N, i can tell you childbirth does not necessarily mean looser and actually high N can actually be tighter. In my experience, its a muscle, so more keggel work = tighter. There are differences in women too. Some women get very wet and will likewise be looser as a result. The “tightest” woman i have been with was a woman who had 2 kids vaginally. The “loosest” had no kids and I believe was not all that high in N vs some other women I have been with.

    I think tightness for women is like penis size for men. Its good when it fits right, but you don’t really know what you’re getting until you do the deed.

    Kids are one of those things that seems to be a genetic crapshoot. I know women who have had kids and I can’t even tell. I also know women who had kids & it destroyed their bodies. I really can’t figure out who is gonna end up how. . .

    • I think tightness for women is like penis size for men. Its good when it fits right, but you don’t really know what you’re getting until you do the deed.

      The best argument for premarital sex there is.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Man

    Perhaps there’s some genetic preference at play as well? Have you ever thought about what might be optimal for your in terms of length and girth?

    Average penis sizes by country:

    Republic of Congo 7.1

    I’ve only ever dated/slept with white men. Italy and Iceland would probably be better bets for me. 🙂

    Iceland 6.5
    Italy 6.2

  • Fish

    @Hope

    I think both sides need to express IOI. Some men are not shy about expressing interest at all, but some men are not particularly keen at picking out which women are into them. I tend to end up with sluttier girls because its easier to figure out interest. I would think, as a woman, showing some IOI would help attract a broader range of guys, not just the ones with more alpha pickup skills. Basically, I agree with JP. . .

  • Fish

    @Sassy
    There are non-grower white guys?

    Also, bigger is not necessarily better when receiving oral.

    This has turned into the P & V thread. . .

  • Anacaona

    I wonder what percentage of men are basically IOI-blind.
    Once upon a time I could literally dance naked in front of my husband he would probably asked if I was cold before thinking I wanted sex. I was pretty much the same. Is a miracle we had a baby 😛

  • Sassy6519

    @ Fish

    There are non-grower white guys?

    Yes.

    Also, bigger is not necessarily better when receiving oral.

    I know. That’s why I said that performing oral on a large penis is more fun for me. I like doing it. It’s fun for me.

  • Lokland

    Umm, when guys say they want a tight vagina they are referring to the natural size of a woman.

    Not whether or not she has been stretched out by use/child birth.

  • BroHamlet

    Average penis sizes by country:

    Republic of Congo 7.1

    LOL- Africans are probably king in that department. I know an African who married a white girl. He said it was awkward and took some “warming up” for a while when they were dating.

    @Sassy & Man

    Would a girl really want to move to Congo or some other place so dangerous for women for that extra inch or two? If I was a girl, I’d say HELL NO, haha.

    • Would a girl really want to move to Congo or some other place so dangerous for women for that extra inch or two? If I was a girl, I’d say HELL NO, haha.

      Or Iceland? Yes, I’m freezing my ass off, but I gained an inch over American guys!

      Interesting that Romanian guys are small – perhaps that explains the Romanian female appreciation of American PUAs? Their legs spring open for an extra 1/10 of an inch!

  • purplesneakers

    Personally, I think most men have a range of “acceptable”, “hot but attainable” and “out of my league”. The higher up the range a woman is, the more shit he’s willing to put up with in a relationship with him. I.E. “out of my league” chick pulls the “I don’t have sex until I’m in love”, she gets more leeway than “acceptable” chick (who probably would not be contacted again after that statement, at least by me).

    I will give you that attractiveness just gets your foot in the door, although thinking back, I tend to place more long-term worthiness on more attractive women. I can’t think of a single girl I thought was “acceptable” that I looked at as more than a short term thing until something better came along. . .

    So I feel like women are often encouraged to not ‘reward’ players/bad boys by sleeping with them, even if they hit all the STR attraction triggers but none of the LTR attraction triggers. I realize that high-SMV males will have their pick, but I sometimes wish men in general would stop rewarding the ‘hot but crazy’ chicks! It’s a corollary to the player dilemma–men ‘reward’ girls from a young age for being hot and slutty, and then complain when they have nothing else to offer. I feel like SayWhaat has commented on this previously too, but it often feels like the parallel to ‘nice guys’ complaining about being overlooked.

    Also, I’m sure this is just inadvertent phrasing, but I don’t understand why the delaying-sex-until-love strategy is being termed ‘shit’ that a guy has to put up with to have sex. I guess that just reflects the mindset of a more unrestricted guy, that it’s just a barrier to get to the ultimate goal, sex (not a relationship).

  • purplesneakers

    Basically, that comment sounds like it’s coming from a guy who would tell a girl he’s interested in a relationship just to have sex with her, then break it off immediately or soon after (happened to a friend of mine in college).

  • Anacaona

    Docs stitch it up and all is well. I’m sure one can have surgery to tighten things up as well – I would not hesitate to do that if I got too loose for my husband’s taste.
    Wasn’t there a joke about doctor’s adding an extra stitch for daddy?

    I can be your first. I didn’t bleed when I lost my virginity. I was sporty, though, and I also rode horses. I’ve read that both those things can break the hymen.
    I also know female athletes who bled like crazy. Weird.

    I peed pink the whole morning after and I was a tomboy all my life (baseball, running, not a lot of horse riding though). Funny I though that thing had dissapeared or dried up given how old I was (28), but there it was… son of a bitch 😛

  • Escoffier

    Re: size, here is the relevant passage from The Perfumed Garden, a 15th century Arabic text (trans. Sir Richard Burton):

    “The virile member, to please women, must have at most a length of the breadth of twelve fingers, or three handbreadths, and at least six fingers, or a hand-and-a-half breadth.

    “There are men with members of twelve fingers, or three hand-breadths; others of ten fingers, or two-and-a-half hands. And others measure eight fingers, or two hands. A man whose member is of less dimensions cannot please women.”

  • Fish

    @sneakers
    ” I guess that just reflects the mindset of a more unrestricted guy, that it’s just a barrier to get to the ultimate goal, sex (not a relationship).”

    For me, i am looking for a relationship, but sex is part of my filtering process. As an unrestricted guy, I like sex, I like to have lots of sex. I want a woman who likewise likes sex and likes to have lots of sex. However, liking it and being good at it are at times different things and if there is no chemistry, I would rather know early on than wasting a month+ on someone with no long term potential.

    What if the guy was interested in a relationship but due to bad chemistry and/or poor performance, he changed his mind? Getting sex (if that is the goal) is not usually a problem. I dated a girl for a while, we refer to her as vanilla: boring in bed, prolly the definition of C grade sex. I wouldn’t commit to a relationship with her, eventually ended up breaking up with her. If she would have been awesome would we have dated? probably. But I had no idea how she’d be until we had sex.

    Small disclaimer from me on personal baggage I may have on this issue. I dated a girl for 2 years with whom I was basically best friends but had ZERO sexual chemistry with (My first college gf). I was too big for her, the sex was pretty unsatisfying. I stayed in the relationship WAY longer than I should have due to emotional investment. Ever since, I refuse to make that mistake, so I RARELY get emotionally invested before having sex.

  • Fish

    Re: hot but crazy
    Hot but crazy are like the female version of alphas. Guys are drawn to them because they are usually good in bed. Of my top 5 (just in quality of sex), I can tell you 3 are pretty nuts.

    I’m not saying looks are all that matter. Looks get you in the door and looks get you more leeway. My ex fiance was attractive but not out of my league hot. Its the same thing as women wanting mr tall dark & handsome, mr 6 figure income or mr tattooed bad boy.

    I guess I prefer hot and crazy to average and potentially crazy because at least hot & crazy is hot and usually good in bed, so if it does not end up in an LTR, I probably had some good sex and wouldn’t see the time as completely wasted. I guess it comes back to hotter girls get away with more. And from my time here, I wouldn’t necessarily say I’m rewarding them, we just tend to match up. I don’t think the restricted commitment seekers are really on my radar. . .

  • Man

    I think this post and thread has become one of the funniest at HUS, with Bastiat Blogger’s typical male hang-ups (at a minimum), in comment #101, being very “enlightning”. 😀

    • I think this post and thread has become one of the funniest at HUS

      Perhaps it was my using the word penis in the title?

  • purplesneakers

    I’m not saying looks are all that matter. Looks get you in the door and looks get you more leeway. My ex fiance was attractive but not out of my league hot. Its the same thing as women wanting mr tall dark & handsome, mr 6 figure income or mr tattooed bad boy.

    I guess I prefer hot and crazy to average and potentially crazy because at least hot & crazy is hot and usually good in bed, so if it does not end up in an LTR, I probably had some good sex and wouldn’t see the time as completely wasted. I guess it comes back to hotter girls get away with more. And from my time here, I wouldn’t necessarily say I’m rewarding them, we just tend to match up. I don’t think the restricted commitment seekers are really on my radar. . .

    That’s exactly what I’m saying, ‘hot but crazy’ is the female equivalent of alpha. I guess what I’m pointing out is that men seem to pursue that and then expect to settle down with a stable girl for a relationship, which is the exact corollary of women ‘riding the alpha cock carousel’ and then settling down with some beta schlub. But I suppose both those narratives are hyperbole, and if you personally find that someone more restricted would be unsuited, that would make the market as a whole more efficient, if people are matched with those similar to those.

    Although I’ve gotta say I object to the notion that more restricted people don’t like sex and don’t want lots of it, LOL. I want nothing more, but I just can’t find the right person to have it with.

    • I guess what I’m pointing out is that men seem to pursue that and then expect to settle down with a stable girl for a relationship, which is the exact corollary of women ‘riding the alpha cock carousel’ and then settling down with some beta schlub. But I suppose both those narratives are hyperbole

      +1

      Although I’ve gotta say I object to the notion that more restricted people don’t like sex and don’t want lots of it, LOL. I want nothing more, but I just can’t find the right person to have it with.

      Sociosexuality has nothing to do with how much one enjoys sex. It has more to do with the propensity for addicition, impulse control, dopamine reward, etc., as well as the emotions one associates with physical intimacy. It’s largely about one’s attitude re commitment.

      It’s the difference between Mr. or Ms. Bachelor/ette and Mr. or Ms. Relationship.

  • Apple

    @Hope, I appreciate and respect what you were saying. I was probably too strident and too generalizing about it, making it seem like it was more common than it was. The truth is, I don’t know how common it is in reality and I’m influenced by the people I’ve run across.

    Because of the way I think about things, I tend to give more weight to things like this where it’s not something people speak openly about much out of shame or whatever. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a huge problem.

    It may not be statistically significant enough for most women to worry about. I have no way of knowing. But I shouldn’t have made a generalization based on what I’ve heard about from others. What I know is that people seem to speak candidly to me about things and this was something I heard enough from both men and women to assume it was one of those “unspoken truths”, but that may be inaccurate. Obviously it’s inaccurate for you, so thanks for updating my knowledge base on it.

  • Apple

    @Man, I think statistically most women don’t orgasm from intercourse alone anyway. Unless he’s doing something extra for her clit or she is in a position where she can rub her clit against him, or she has what she claims is the elusive “g-spot” orgasm (i’m not denying this exists, I’m just saying… men who are expecting EVERY woman to be able to have this kind of orgasm from any kind of penetration alone, are not being realistic with themselves), it’s just not happening with “sex by itself” period for most (whether she’s ever used a vibrator by herself or not.) Men need to understand this is not a “failing” on their part. It is not how our bodies work/are built.

    And if a woman says she enjoys intercourse for different reasons than orgasm, you should believe her and let her relax and enjoy the experience the way she wants to. A lot of women can’t orgasm if there is too much pressure for them to. If you just let her “be” and do her thing or not, or don’t “expect” her to prove to you that you are “the man” by making her arrive, then she’s probably more likely to have one. A lot of women just feel too much pressure and it makes orgasms less pleasurable even when they’re had.

    However, the MORE orgasmic a woman is, the more easily she can orgasm. So really, the more she uses a vibrator in her down time, the more likely she is to be able to know how to “get there” with a man as well. A lot of women don’t know their bodies very well. I’ve known women of college age who REALLY did not believe female orgasms existed at ALL. They had never masturbated, and some who had, had never experimented enough to figure out how to orgasm from it. If she can’t figure it out from masturbation, what makes you think you’re going to figure it out?

    I don’t really see a reason for a man to be “jealous of the vibrator” unless he just is making no effort whatsoever to give her anything in the exchange.

    Having said that… not every woman really even “likes” vibrators. Not to be TMI, but I drive manual. It’s just easier, I like the way an orgasm that way more slowly builds and the way it feels over an orgasm created with a vibrator which is usually too intense, too fast for me. Doesn’t mean I never enjoy them, but I think men overestimate how frequently women or how many women masturbate with vibrators. A lot of us don’t require batteries or accessories to get off.

    VERY short version of that very long answer: I would never discourage a woman from having as many orgasms she can have in as many different ways (short of infidelity) that she can have them. It can only work in your favor if your relationship is otherwise good. IMO.

    • @Man, I think statistically most women don’t orgasm from intercourse alone anyway.

      True for 80% of women. The good news is, we don’t really care how we get off. We’re cool if you are.

      However, the MORE orgasmic a woman is, the more easily she can orgasm. So really, the more she uses a vibrator in her down time, the more likely she is to be able to know how to “get there” with a man as well.

      I do think women need to be careful – they can acclimate to the vibrator sensation, which is not replicable by a male body. Also, I’ve read that too much vibrator use can produce numbness, just as too much porn and masturbation can produce a loss of sensation for men.

  • Apple

    @Hope, also I’m sorry about the stillbirth. 🙁

  • Apple

    Hey Fish, thanks for your feedback on the tight/not tight after kids thing. Also… we really just need a vegetable now and we are a meal. 🙂

  • Apple

    @Susan you’re probably right WRT bad relationships with their mothers. I don’t know if anybody really listens to this “old-fashioned” wisdom or not… but… pay attention to how a man treats his sister(s) if he has any, and particularly his mother. It reflects a lot of his general attitude toward women, since mothers are the first major influence on a boy on how he sees women in general, and it also reflects how good of a mother he had and how well values/empathy were instilled in him.

  • Fish

    @sneakers
    “Although I’ve gotta say I object to the notion that more restricted people don’t like sex and don’t want lots of it, LOL.”

    I don’t think restricted people don’t like sex, I just think in general unrestricted people are better at it. Like most skills, the more you do it, the better at it you get. That’s just been my experience although i’ve been with very few “restricted” women. Plus, being restricted, your definition of “good sex” may be different. Restricted types are not going to ever have a large enough sample size to see a bell curve distribution where unrestricted types might (yes, my N is high enough to tell).

    @Apple
    “Not to be TMI, but I drive manual.”
    So you’re saying you prefer stick-shift? LOL
    I had an ex whose bf before me did not want her self-stimulating during sex. WTF?? I know ex fiance had a vibrator, she referred to it as “her friend.” Actually, she had a tendency to wear them out & we still had a decent amount of sex for a live in, engaged couple. She also didn’t care for receiving oral, which always puzzled me.

    • I don’t think restricted people don’t like sex, I just think in general unrestricted people are better at it. Like most skills, the more you do it, the better at it you get.

      In my experience, which was a mix of relationship and casual, the best sex by a factor of at least 10 was frequent sex inside a relationship – the restricted kind, with more restricted men. There is a reason casual sex is rarely great for either party – there’s no incentive to give a shit, and it’s usually just a straight run from point A to point B. For men, it’s the jackhammer, for women, it’s just lying there.

      If there is sexual compatibility, relationship sex has got to be way better, and if restricted people are more likely to be in relationships, then they’re more likely to be having great sex.

  • Apple

    I’m going to second the notion of “I object to the idea that restricted people don’t like sex or want a lot of it.” I also dislike the assumption that we are more likely to be “vanilla”. Maybe this is part of WHY I have to have a VERY secure relationship to “put out”, but I am a hardcore freak and need a dominant (in the bedroom) partner. The types of things I’m into are the types of things I absolutely would not do with someone I didn’t know well and trust with every fiber of my being, period. And vanilla sex generally bores me. So not only would casual sex give me all the usual negatives (STD risk, pregnancy risk, bonding hormone without a man to truly bond to, feeling like crap, probably no orgasm), but it would probably not be kinky enough for me, and if it was, I would be too scared of the guy to enjoy it.

    So seriously… restricted women are not all “vanillas” with low libidos. There are a lot of ways to figure out chemistry, openness to sex, and potential level of kink besides hopping into bed by the third date. This may sound wacky, but a lot of times you can simply have discussions with the person and learn a lot. Sure, it could be bravado, but women with very low libidos or not sense of adventure in the bedroom tend to also be very closed off about discussing the topic of sex or what turns them on in general.

  • Fish

    @apple
    “Also… we really just need a vegetable now and we are a meal. :)”

    You are the dessert lol

    Re: mom/sister relationships
    That one is tricky. I love my mom but she lives 2000 miles away so we have difficulties getting together. My sister is one of those people who only contact people when they want something. Good example, grandpa was in the hospital for something rather serious. My sister was the only grandchild who didn’t visit.

  • Apple

    @fish re: unrestricted women being “better at sex”, I’m not sure why you would assume that. A woman who has a lot of sex with a lot of different men, not seeing most of them more than a few times, doesn’t have to actually learn many different tricks. She can use the same ones each time because she’s using them on different men and they seem exciting and fascinating to that guy. But if that super awesome trick is really the only thing she’s got in her bag, then you’d be disappointed in the long run. Having a lot of sex with 1 or 2 people is just as (and sometimes more) effective at becoming “good in bed” than having a ton of different partners IMO. Experience in the bedroom is not really based on tons of different lovers, but how much actual sex you have and how much you learned about it while you were doing it.

  • Apple

    @Fish re: oral, maybe she had a partner that made her feel self conscious about it? re: vibrators during sex… there are some pretty small bullet vibrators, called a “mini bullet” I think. It is surprisingly strong for its size. It’s a great little vibrator for during intercourse because it doesn’t get in the way of you and your partner. (Though probably that guy’s complaint about self-stimulation during sex was about how she was somehow “emasculating” him by not getting off only by the sheer awesomeness of his penis.)

  • Fish

    @Apple

    I agree with you 100%. It is entirely possible for a restricted type to be a freak in bed. One of my top 5, I pursued for like a month, we did have sex on the third date but mostly due to her hectic schedule. She has two kids, professional job and is amazing in the sack. I actually pursued her for a LTR, but due to my impending relocation, she decided to go in another direction.

    I have also been with unrestricted women who, quite frankly, suck in bed. However, I think you are the exception, not the rule. Usually restricted = less sexually open minded, less talented.

    My point is, with unrestricted women, you know quickly whether they are good or not. Restricted women could be good or bad, but a guy is putting a lot of effort into finding out and what happens when they’re not? If you are a high MMV, good in bed woman, you are probably taken (case in point Ms Apple). Those of us who are single are really looking through the fridge, sifting through leftovers, trying to find something tasty.

  • Apple

    I can’t be the dessert unless we sprinkle cinnamon on me.

    re: mom/sister stuff. Understandable. Mr Apple’s family is an 8 hour drive away. But he took me up there to meet her (before I put out), and I got to watch first hand how they interacted. Let’s just say his caring and respect toward his mother moved the timetable up.

  • Fish

    Hers was a bullet that attached by some wires to a control box? It seemed powerful, she just wore them out lol She seemed totally fine on top with me rubbing her clit while she sort of ground on me. I dunno about oral, I certainly can’t ask her now lol

  • Esau

    purplesneak at 191: ” I sometimes wish men in general would stop rewarding the ‘hot but crazy’ chicks! “

    Interesting, but only due to the flaw. Can you spot it? Squint or tilt your head until it comes into focus….

    The fallacy here, is that “men in general” cannot reward women, on average, and so cannot stop doing it either. Remember your intro-level Hypergamy 101: the 50th percentile SMV young woman will have nothing to do, sexually, with her 50th percentile SMV male counterpart. He can’t reward her by showing his attention or desire, because she doesn’t want his attention or desire. The only “reward” he can give her, really, is not to show any desire for her at all, after which she’ll certainly be grateful (if only unconsciously); but I’m pretty sure that’s not what you had in mind here.

    The puzzling, way-out-of-proportion attractiveness of the “hot but crazy” chick is rooted in the possibility that, since she’s manifestly outside the norm in other ways then maybe she also won’t be so hypergamous — at least, for today. She’s a wild card, a lottery ticket, a spin of the wheel with at least a chance of stopping on the number you want; maybe not a good chance, but better than a sure loss elsewhere. So as long as female hypergamy remains the predictable norm, expect the recognizably unpredictable woman to rise in relative value.

    • The fallacy here, is that “men in general” cannot reward women, on average, and so cannot stop doing it either.

      Sure they can. If a hot, crazy chick is looking for male validation, her target can take a pass. Is there ever a man who says no thanks to sex with a head case? Is it really that crazy a notion?

      The problem is that the men who want hot crazy chicks are hot crazy dudes. They belong in bed together, on a short-term basis, of course.

  • Apple

    @Fish you may be right. And a part of that may be that nowadays a lot of women who are that restricted are very religious, so they’ve been largely sexually suppressed to begin with. This group probably has the most “non-masturbators” (I just said that like it’s a technical term lol).

    Usually I think freak probably also comes with some level of promiscuity, but I’ve known a lot of submissives who are like me in that they are really restricted. They’ll do just about anything once they have a strong commitment with a loving dominant who they feel safe with, but before that time, you wouldn’t guess they were a freak or you might not believe them.

    I still stand by the idea that there are lots of little ways to test this without insisting a woman go to bed with you before she’s ready and the trust and promise of relationship is there. (And also, not all subs want relationships, either. But there are many who do and of those I’ve met, they tend to be a lot like me.)

    And you’re right, we get snapped up quick. The ink was barely dry on my divorce (everybody is allowed one mistake I think), when he was already locking me down. (in the commitment sense not the freak sense.)

    • It is absolutely possible to assess a woman’s sexuality and sensuality without having sex with her. Hell, I can do it – I could probably predict whose got the best BJ technique after 3 minutes of conversation. And I could also tell you who will be the wildcat in a relationship, too.

      My husband once shared that he and a bunch of other guys at school were talking about the women in the class during the early days. One guy said, “I bet Susan Walsh is a real firecracker in bed.” He said they all agreed 100%. 🙂

  • Fish

    I think the only woman who has ever met my mom is my ex fiance. I am in the midwest, my mom lives in san diego, so it is beyond a car ride, it is a plane trip. And then my mom shows them pictures of me in my awkward pre-teen-teen years.

    • And then my mom shows them pictures of me in my awkward pre-teen-teen years.

      OMG, I love those pictures. Those and the toddler years. Precious.

  • Apple

    @Fish, some of the mini-bullets are self-contained (i.e. battery goes inside it and it just looks like a really big pill.), mine sounds like it is like hers was, with the wire and little controller that had different settings. It allowed for a much smaller bullet than most mini-bullets, which is what I like about it.

  • Apple

    @Fish, the pictures are the best part! Mr. Apple was SO cute when he was little. I got to see all the naked bath time pictures hahaha

  • Fish

    LOL I understand. Actually if one of my married “crushes” ends up getting a divorce, I will probably pursue her to marriage and we’ve never had sex. I actually feel bad because I knew her before she started dating current hubby, and I feel like I should have told her “I don’t think hes right for you.” However I didn’t want to give her advice that would be self serving.

    Believe it or not, I’m actually a lifelong romantic. Short term relationships are just easier and less taxing when they don’t work out. . .

  • Fish

    NOOOOOO Fish in glasses & braces is bad. I am someone who was helped a lot by LASIK, braces & the gym. Also, being a child of the 80’s, my mom has a lot of pictures of me in hot pink.. . . and other 80’s attire. Its just bad. . . can’t possibly be an aphrodesiac. . .

  • Apple

    @Fish I think it’s unfortunate that there are so many assholes (of both genders) out there now. I know men who have been burned want to blame the women and women who have been burned want to blame the men, but lack of respect and learning how to be a decent human being seems to be lost on most people, period, now. So then the people who actually are decent have a harder time getting through the shell of those who have been burned but would be otherwise great.

    I think a lot of guys out there are romantics and want a long term relationship, but what they are finding is a lot of women they can’t respect. I don’t think these guys who do the PUA thing frequently are really helping themselves though. When you’re trolling for low quality, low self-esteem women in bars and using manipulation on them to get them into bed, you’re not only reinforcing your negative view of women “as a group”, but you’re becoming the type of low-quality individual who a high quality woman wouldn’t give the time of day to. So the whole PUA thing is self limiting for any man who deep down really does want a good woman long term. (And when I say “you” here, I dont mean you, Fish, I mean third person general audience you.)

  • Apple

    HAHAHA It might not be an aphrodisiac but it’s humanizing and it tends to build trust in women. (Sometimes that’s not a good thing. If some PUA starts pulling out his pre-teen pics to attract women now I’m going to scream.)

    re: glasses… depends on the glasses. Both myself and Mr. Apple wear glasses. I think we both look really good in them. He looks all GQ and I have that “nerd librarian” thing going. The phrase “guys don’t make passes at girls who wear glasses” is patently false. I’ve worn them since I was a little kid and have found a lot of guys really dig them. And I admit, that on the right guy, with the right frames, I really think men in glasses are sexy.

  • Fish

    Trust me when I tell you, mind were bad. I had VERY poor eyesight so the lenses were thick. BAD BAD BAD. Ex fiance wore glasses, they are very cute on her. I really like the chick on Arrow in the glasses (that could also be because she’s attractive and blonde).

    I think glasses are up there with a little grey hair. I am greying slightly (I’ve been dying for about the past year), some women love it, some prefer not. Personally, I think LASIK is the best thing I ever did, but I play a lot of sports and glasses really get in the way. I also happen to be allergic to my pets (I love them dearly, my eyes do not)

  • Apple

    HA! My kid glasses were pretty thick (have no way to know if they were as thick as yours but they were thick enough). The featherweight lens technology was the BEST thing to come along! I tried contacts but didn’t really like the “experience of touching my eyeball every day”. ick. lol

    I’m not sure if I’ve seen the girl you’re talking about (Arrow). But I agree. Glasses can make a bad thing (in the looks department) worse, but rarely hurts a good thing.

    I think I want to go gray naturally. I think, especially for a woman, it’s a sign of strong self-confidence to just allow yourself to “be” like that. I may not be so stoic when the gray gets here, though, so we’ll see, LOL. But if I start graying in a streak (like Rogue from the X-men), I am TOTALLY going natural! Hopefully superpowers will also come with it.

    Mr. Apple is graying, and I love it. I think the gray in his facial hair is awesome.

  • Charm

    I don’t think restricted people don’t like sex, I just think in general unrestricted people are better at it. Like most skills, the more you do it, the better at it you get. That’s just been my experience although i’ve been with very few “restricted” women. Plus, being restricted, your definition of “good sex” may be different. Restricted types are not going to ever have a large enough sample size to see a bell curve distribution where unrestricted types might (yes, my N is high enough to tell).

    Lol, what?

    Im gonna have to object as apple did. There is zero evidence or way to collect evidence to prove any validity in this claim because all people like different things period. Someone might be crazy about a certain sexual act while another person might yawn at it. So saying that there is a way to gauge how good someone is at sex based on being restricted/non resticted is a bit silly to me.

    I think it boils down the reason why the person is question is having sex. From what I’ve noticed, unrestricted people tend to place a high premium on physcial/carnal pleasure (not saying others dont, but for lack of a better way to phrase it) and in order to achieve that level they need certain things, physically. Whereas for me, as an restricted person, the entire act of sex itsself is more enjoyable from the beginning just because I have deep feelings for the person. I could go through the motions and do the exact same things with a person I had no emotional connection with, and feel nothing. Nothing. The same kissing, touching, positions would elicit no pleasure at all.

    Maybe that notion is strange to someone who can have sex and enjoy it just because the person is “hot” in their opinion. This is kind of why I tend to stay away from unrestricted men. There is a huge mismatch in motivation for sex, which I think can lead to displeasure on both sides.

    But as apple said, restricted people aren’t exactly more “vanilla”.

  • Apple

    @Charm, also “good at sex” really comes down to ‘desire/willingness to learn’. If the chemistry is there (something you can tell way before actual intercourse), and the desire is there (something you should ideally be able to tell from just being around the person and some frank conversations), then the rest is “teaching”.

    I could be wrong about this, but I think a lot of guys get off on being the “sexual teacher” to an enthusiastic pupil.

    And I totally get what you’re saying about needing that emotional connection for pleasure with someone else. If I don’t feel loved and emotionally safe, I’m not having an orgasm. (not unless I’m masturbating privately). I really need that safe space to enjoy it. I like a lot of things and orgasms are on my top 10 list of things I like in the world, but love and trust and safety and feeling protected are just SO much more vital to make that stuff happen for me.

  • Fish

    Hot girl from arrow 9most of her IMDB pic are not in glasses, I prefer her with)
    http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1401597440/nm4703025

    I have to disagree with you on enjoying teaching. i have said repeatedly, I don’t have time to be anyone’s training wheels. I expect by this age, people have experimented and know what they like and our interests align. Again, I may be an outlier in this.

    @Charm
    i see that side of it, personally, I’ve never experienced better sex from emotional attachment. I can say I loved my ex, we had a very strong bond, she was never in my top 5. I have been in relationships with people who were, but they were in my top 5 because the sex was amazing, not because of any emotional connection.

    I think as far as quality of sex goes, people tend to (once they’ve experimented and figured out likes & dislikes) like certain things and behave certain ways and rarely deviate from that. Ex fiance was a solid B, but was not capable of A grade sex (with me at least). I think it is more likely for unrestricted types to figure this out sooner in life. By the time a woman is in her mid to late 20’s (my dating range), she SHOULD know her likes & dislikes. A woman might prefer missionary with a lot of eye contact and being held where to me, that is less enjoyable than masturbation.

    i will admit I have less experience with restricted types because my brain usually rules them out as “not worth it”. For a restricted type to be “worth it” to me, she would probably have to be MMV/SMV above what I can get in an unrestricted girl. It really comes down to the market. I don’t necessarily believe being restricted makes a woman any better in a dating sense in and of itself (see sexually repressed religious types), its just a part of her overall makeup.

    • @Fish

      I have to disagree with you on enjoying teaching. i have said repeatedly, I don’t have time to be anyone’s training wheels. I expect by this age, people have experimented and know what they like and our interests align.

      This is a highly agentic statement. It’s clear that you divorce sex from emotional intimacy and any notion of “giving.” You are clearly a textbook example of a STR-oriented male.

  • Charm

    I could be wrong about this, but I think a lot of guys get off on being the “sexual teacher” to an enthusiastic pupil.

    I think so too. I used to work with a cad (well maybe not “cad” because he never, lied or misled anyone and took pride in that) who would get off on talking about sex all the time. Would talk about needing a partner who either A.) knew as much as him or B.) was enthusiastically willing to learn from him, and considering the circle he hung out in, he always conveniently ended up with the latter every time, though Im sure he encountered the former quite often. Though he always claimed there was no ego involved on his part. I didnt believe that one.

    @Fish

    You keep reinforcing why I’d never date an unrestricted person. Ever. I don’t have it in me, and would find it disrespectful to the person I claim to love, to rank them or compare them to anyone else like that. I’ve only had two boyfriends, and never compared them sexually, only character wise even though I’ve broke up from both of them just the same.

  • Apple

    @Fish agree about the Arrow girl. (I didn’t know Arrow was a show. Holy crap, maybe I need to watch more TV. Though I feel weird even saying something like that.)

    re: teaching, I think I said I suspect many do, which by no means would mean “all”. 🙂 Though I haven’t even taken a poll or anything. I’ve just, in passing, seen/heard things that lead me to believe that for some guys (how many or how few I have no idea), it’s almost a fetish to “teach” women how to please them. I suspect this may be especially true in certain segments of the kink community. (Given that many doms are so exacting on their preferences that they pretty much have to “train” any girl they’re with. But that’s part of the fun/kink/pleasure/appeal for them.) But everybody’s mileage varies.

  • Apple

    @Charm I’m with you on not personally finding the unrestricted appealing. I can respect a guy who knows what he wants and goes for it. Whether it’s the same thing I value/want is irrelevant since he’s not my mate. But, like you, I wouldn’t date a guy that was unrestricted. Though I have to qualify that. Mr. Apple was unrestricted in college. But after that he switched to LTR’s exclusively. I guess you could say he sowed his oats. After that he found it pretty empty and sought LTR’s exclusively. So he was restricted by the time we met and had had that mentality for a long time.

    I wouldn’t have gotten near him when he was in college though. (Even if I hadn’t been a minor when he was in college. If we had been the same age and at the same college, we never would have ended up together because at that point we would have been 100% incompatible for dating or mating.)

  • Apple

    @Aunt Sue, you think? My personal exposure has been to people who have been so shamed about sex that they don’t masturbate a lot if ever at all. But maybe we’re talking about guys vs. girls. Maybe uber religious males masturbate more. I don’t know a lot of uber religious females who masturbate at all. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen or even that it’s not the majority, I don’t know. What i know is the window of the world I’ve been allowed to look through.

    Generally speaking, the women who don’t masturbate much at all and don’t know their own bodies are the ones that were most heavily shamed about doing it. And that group is mostly fundamentalist religious. Do you have any proof I’m wrong or is it a case of your anecdote and social circle versus mine?

    re: teachers, some are bad at it, some… not so much. haha.

    That’s true re: braggers.

  • Sam

    “My point is, with unrestricted women, you know quickly whether they are good or not.”
    Is an improvement from:
    “I don’t think restricted people don’t like sex, I just think in general unrestricted people are better at it.”

    but I still disagree. What you know is that unrestricted women are better at unrestricted sex than restricted women. Unless you put in the time and commitment to cultivate the relationship with a restricted woman, you can never really know or say how vanilla she is or isn’t in bed. Very understandably “Not worth it” depending on your goals.

    If its about practice makes perfect, whose having more sex, anyway? My bets on the relationships. Higher partner counts have yet to demonstrate their benefit to me in quality of sex. I’d take a low N anyday, but I do really enjoy teaching and helping people, too, though, not just sexually but it is a natural extension of that. So there you go.

    Very interesting that you haven’t experienced any difference in sex with or without emotional connection. Definitely different than my experience.

  • Charm

    @ Apple

    I think where we differ (greatly, mind you) is that I’d never be interested in a dom/sub relationship at all. So I can understand your meaning, being who you are, but I can’t really get with it, being who I am.

    @Apple 229

    Im weird about the unrestricted to restricted man as well. A friend of mine is dating a guy who, when dealing with a couple years of depression, slept around (though not much at all, he never jumped off the deep end) and did drugs for a couple years, and then dealt with his depression and emerged a very principled person. Very principled, and is a very good person. But I’d be lying if I said (due to being overly idealistic), I wouldn’t be a disappointed in finding out a person had an unrestricted phase. A part of me (no matter how illogical) is still holding on to believing the perfect unicorn of a restricted man exists. 😀

  • Sam

    “However they can only teach one way – how to please THEM.”

    Disagree, strongly. Still haven’t met many women who know more about how their body works than I do, by their admissions.

  • Apple

    @Charm re: dom/sub and that’s the beauty of life and all our differences. 🙂 If everybody did and thought all the same things we’d have a horrible world. IMO.

    hehe @ the perfect unicorn. It helps that Mr. Apple isn’t particularly “proud” of his unrestricted phase and also that it happened so long before he met me, followed by totally different behavior for an extended enough period of time to make me confident this was a way he could and would be happy to live. (i.e. it was well behind him and he had no interest in re-visiting it.) If he hadn’t had those factors playing in his favor, I would have given him a pass.

  • Apple

    @Aunt Sue, that’s a really good point re: their shame prevents them from admitting it. But I do know there are at least a good number of women out there who don’t masturbate because I’ve met some who didn’t understand there were female orgasms. So either that means they didn’t masturbate or didn’t try it long enough to learn how, or they, for whatever reason can’t achieve orgasm even through masturbation, so obviously they wouldn’t continue a fruitless activity.

    But… I have no evidence that these women, though they exist, are largely representative of very religious women. And your view that it could be shame making them deny it is just as likely.

    LOL agreed at piss poor interpretation of sex hahahahahaha.

    hahaha re: the fundies well, you might be right. I was raised that way (definitely don’t believe any of that crap now, and didn’t believe it even when I met Mr. Apple, in case someone thinks my “religious indoctrination” is why I’m a restricted type), but I was always under the impression that my high-level of masturbation was a definite outlier behavior because all my female friends seemed to know shit about their own lady parts and how they worked.

    I’m intrigued by this research. Did you write a book or something? (Not being a smartass, really curious about what led to your research and if it is published anywhere. I like knowledge, lol)

    true: re: teaching how to please them and not the opposite. But that’s probably why a woman needs to know her own body well so she can teach him the lessons she has to impart.

    “Bodhisattva in the bedroom” <—– LOVE this! ha!

    re: can only teach one way, that's obviously true, but the implication is that they are not open to learning about their partner's body. While that may be true of some, it's not true of all. Some men are just as eager to learn from their partner about her body as they are to teach what pleases them.

  • Apple

    @Sam, and that kind of thing (if true), is exactly why I think many women are not masturbating nearly enough to learn anything useful. LOL. Though… Aunt Sue may also be right about bragger alert.

  • Apple

    That sucks. If you do, let us know!

  • Fish

    @Sam
    I’d agree that unrestricted men have more sex in relationships. Unrestricted women can literally have sex whenever they want with whomever they want.

    Believe it or not, my sole source of info isn’t women I’ve personally slept with. I do have restricted female friends. Our definitions of quality sex don’t match up. I do believe restricted types are CAPABLE of being good in bed. I just think a larger percentage than unrestricted types aren’t. Furthermore, the good in bed ones likely aren’t on the market (why break up with a woman who wants a lot of sex, is good at it & is committed to you?).

    Re: ranking
    Nobody I date and very few of my friends know about my grading and ranking. I’m very statistically oriented and a little ocd. when N = 2, yes, you don’t really have much basis for comparison. When N = 50, well you can get a handle on a bell curve distribution and percentile ranking.

    Susan has said in the past, like types usually find each other. I would be the unrestricted relationship seeker. I have a decent track record of finding the same. I do wish you luck finding your restricted male unicorn. Believe it or not, I’m looking for a unicorn as well (or at least waiting for her to get a divorce lol).

  • Sam

    Bragger alert, indeed! Very unbodhisattva like of you.

  • Apple

    @Fish Question: would you consider an LTR, potentially marriage with an unrestricted woman? I know you seem to think on average they are “better at sex”, but I guess my question is… do you have a Madonna/whore complex where you want a woman with a low partner count for marriage but you’ll just cheat on her with sluts, or will you actually settle down with someone unrestricted?

    And related to that question… what if she was unrestricted AND had a higher partner count than you?

  • Charm

    Nobody I date and very few of my friends know about my grading and ranking. I’m very statistically oriented and a little ocd. when N = 2, yes, you don’t really have much basis for comparison. When N = 50, well you can get a handle on a bell curve distribution and percentile ranking.

    People are not numbers, and they shouldn’t be ranked like livestock. To do so seems quite cold, and detached to a degree that I find to be off putting on a human level. The cad I used to work with would talk about his top 5 and how he ranked based on X, Y, Z I would look at him. I don’t understand how someone can treat another live, breathing human being like a dairy cow at the state fair especially if you claim to have feelings for them.

    And in regards to numbers, I will say that I’m quite glad I don’t have much to compare with. Not having slept with 50 people doesn’t bother me at all. I feel like I have less problems and complications in my life (in regards to relationships) because of it. I’ve had (my definition of) bad sex, but I’m not going to sit down write that persons name on a “bad sex” spreedsheet because they deserve more respect than that and I’d hope that I would get the same courtesy in return.

    @Apple

    I understand where your you’re coming from in regards people changing. I know they do change. But I feel that it is a sign of respect for my future partner, to not have a record of a bunch of unsavory shit that I’m not proud of. And bunch of unsavory events that they will have to accept. Life already gives us enough unexpected problems to complicate things, and I guess the way I see it, I dont want to compound it. Its not like there is a shelf life for making bad decisions. I dont see what the rush is.

  • Apple

    LMFAO @ “I’m not going to write that person’s name down on a bad sex spreadsheet” hahahahahahahahahhaahahaha!

    re: your comments to me, yeah I agree. In the end the heart wanted what the heart wanted with me. I didn’t hold him to the same standard I held for myself because I knew I could trust him (although he had a high partner count in college he was never a cad. He was always honest and upfront with these people. And from the moment I met him he displayed a level of integrity that continues to impress me. I honestly don’t know if another man exists that I would feel I could so implicitly trust with my heart and my life.) I wasn’t going to hold him to an arbitrary standard when I knew he was the right man for me. A little over a decade later, I feel very fortunate to have someone I connect to so well in my life. He gets me on a level not many people do, and I’m privileged to be the one he can say the same thing about.

    I’m sure there are other worthy guys out there, but Mr. Apple is a keeper, and I don’t think another man could ever live up to him for me.

  • Apple

    And I know I can’t “know” how he was with those people back in college, but I do know that his behavior and consistency with how he treats other people is such that there is no real reason for me to doubt him.

  • Fish

    I don’t think necessarily PUA traits make someone a low quality individual, its just a matter of using those powers for good or for evil. I like going to bars, joking around, being flirty and making conversation. I like the attention, but my intention is not to take them home & have sex with them. I’m also not of the SMV to really do that anyways. I think my traits increase my MMV but usually the type of women who would do a ONS with me are not types that I would want.

    I will say, I’ve never had a negative view of the women I’ve slept with. Ex fiance slept with me on date 2, I’ve dated plenty of women who I slept with early on. Reading this blog has shown me I’m probably an exception in a lot of ways.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Sure they can. If a hot, crazy chick is looking for male validation, her target can take a pass. Is there ever a man who says no thanks to sex with a head case? Is it really that crazy a notion?”

    That was actually purples complaint.
    The hot crazy dude is not paying attention to Ms. Relationship but Hot and girl.

    What she was not complaining about was Mr. Same SMV as Relationship girl paying attention to hot and crazy because
    a) he wasn’t
    b) she didn’t notice

    ————-
    Also, no its not so crazy.
    After one bad experience with crazy (the ugliest of all the woman I have slept with–yes not all crazy woman are hot) I avoided it like a cat does water.

    • @Lokland

      I think that equating good looking with unrestricted is invalid, and calling restricted people “looks challenged” is equally invalid. I think the genetic half of sociosexuality is mostly unrelated to looks, but is highly correlated certain rather unpleasant personality traits. The cultural half is more directly related to looks, in the sense that good looking people get much more attention from the opposite sex, and so have more offers and temptations in general.

      However, there are many unrestricted, ugly men. They just can’t get what they want. And there are restricted beautiful women as well, also frustrated in their goals. Obviously, those two groups will not mate with one another.

  • Liz

    @Apple

    It helps that Mr. Apple isn’t particularly “proud” of his unrestricted phase and also that it happened so long before he met me, followed by totally different behavior for an extended enough period of time to make me confident it was well behind him and he had no interest in re-visiting it.

    Yep, that’s me – and good for you.

    I’ve heard enough people recoil at the notion that life’s trial and error helps you grow as a person or “made me who I am today” that I wonder what buttons are being pushed here. I try not to use those cliches, but I’m a bit puzzled by how much they HATE that idea and I honestly want to know why. Are they inferring a sort of backward justification? (no doubt it happens)

    You know, some of us came from a place where it was almost guaranteed that we’d lose our way for a while. (Lack of proper role models, moral instruction, etc.)

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Yes, not my point.

    Purple was complaining about men going for hot and crazy.
    She actually meant hot men going for hot and crazy women. There is nothing wrong with that I just agree with what Esau said.

    The complaint of an SMV 5 woman is not that SMV 5 men are going after hot and crazy but the SMV 7-8 men are.

    Thats hypergamy, not unrestricted vs. restricted.

    • The complaint of an SMV 5 woman is not that SMV 5 men are going after hot and crazy but the SMV 7-8 men are.

      Thats hypergamy, not unrestricted vs. restricted.

      People generally mate with a partner of the same physical attractiveness – hypergamy is not just about looks. In fact, it’s not really very much about looks. It’s about status, and looks are one thing, but far from the only thing, that help men get status.

      A lot of times, hot just means slutty and DTF – if a woman is average looking she can tart up her face, dress like a hooker and get called hot.

  • Gin Martini

    Apple… You are arguing against one application of Game (maximizing N is just one fraction of it) and then admitting you married someone who did exactly that. The way out is through.

  • Liz

    [bitch alert]

    Am I the only one noticing that than when a man “turns over a new leaf” in his 30s, the world applauds? And when a woman does that, people snicker and use the exact same phrase in a sarcastic manner, and mutter “good luck” under their breath?
    [end bitch]

    For those of us above the young/single line (people who’ve been married once or twice already), the “history” issue has, or should have, a different color. But some people will react as if it happened yesterday. I ask how far back do we have a right to judge people? For example: I was younger, it was a different era, I acted unwisely (although with generally good intentions). I then stayed faithful to a fault for 17 years.

    Maybe this is an issue for an old farts’ forum. 😉 Sorry HUS-ers.

  • Lokland

    @GM

    “You are arguing against one application of Game (maximizing N is just one fraction of it) and then admitting you married someone who did exactly that.”

    The space between words and actions.

    Number of women who want a non-player vs. number of woman actually marrying a guy who didn’t have a crazy N racking up phase.

  • Gin Martini

    Liz: “I’ve heard enough people recoil at the notion that life’s trial and error helps you grow as a person or “made me who I am today” that I wonder what buttons are being pushed here.”

    Easy. The people who actually had the guts to do it “right” in the first place feel like chumps. Doubly so, when we find out that people actually like the people who screwed up and recovered better than the ones who didn’t.

    I’ve had this told to me point-blank several times. A person who is struggling with something, or did, doesn’t trust someone who appears not to struggle with the same thing.

  • Gin Martini

    Liz: “Am I the only one noticing that than when a man “turns over a new leaf” in his 30s, the world applauds? And when a woman does that, people snicker and use the exact same phrase in a sarcastic manner, and mutter “good luck” under their breath?”

    Which men? Ah, the reformed players. I forgot. Only those count, right?

    The people who had their leaves the right way the whole time… boring!

  • JP

    “I’ve heard enough people recoil at the notion that life’s trial and error helps you grow as a person or “made me who I am today” that I wonder what buttons are being pushed here. I try not to use those cliches, but I’m a bit puzzled by how much they HATE that idea and I honestly want to know why.”

    In my case, it’s most likely underlying perfectionism.

    You have only one shot to get it right, in any area of life.

    If you step off of the narrow stairway, for whatever reason, your fate is the abyss, and justifiably so.

    You have been weighed in the scales and found wanting.

    Error has no rights.

  • JP

    “Which men? Ah, the reformed players. I forgot. Only those count, right?

    The people who had their leaves the right way the whole time… boring!”

    Uh, that’s because we didn’t dare entertain the option of error.

    I’m still effectively unable to swear.

    We’re so anomalous that we don’t even figure into this conversation.

  • Man

    That’s exactly what I’m saying, ‘hot but crazy’ is the female equivalent of alpha. I guess what I’m pointing out is that men seem to pursue that and then expect to settle down with a stable girl for a relationship, which is the exact corollary of women ‘riding the alpha cock carousel’ and then settling down with some beta schlub. But I suppose both those narratives are hyperbole, and if you personally find that someone more restricted would be unsuited, that would make the market as a whole more efficient, if people are matched with those similar to those.

    I guess that you are referring to players or “hot and crazy” guys who had and took their chance with the “hot and crazy” girls in their youth and then afterwards want to settle down with a stable girl for a relationship, right?

  • Fish

    “Easy. The people who actually had the guts to do it “right” in the first place feel like chumps. Doubly so, when we find out that people actually like the people who screwed up and recovered better than the ones who didn’t.”

    My dad says there are two types of people in the world. People who can listen to others and learn from there mistakes and people who have to screw up themselves. I am the latter.

    There is a reason I refuse to reveal N to people I date. I don’t consider myself a player, I’ve just had sex a lot. Its never intentional and I’m honest about it. I don’t look at high N as this mark that I am a bad person. I’m not, I’m probably just bad at filtering. Yes, i am probably a STR person, because the qualities I’m looking for in an LTR are rare nd I enjoy sex and companionship.

    I think the notion that anyone can’t change is ridiculous. My bachelors degree is in criminal justice (about as useful as underwater basket weaving). I had to work hard to overcome that to break into the business world. People get second chances, well a lot do.

    There are people for whom I’m a bad match, that’s the nature of dating. However, as much as some may judge my quantifying sexual quality (I am a finance guy now, I seriously can’t help it & most guys do some form of it) negatively, how is that different than judging people with high N? We spend our whole lives being graded and tested. I’ve NEVER had a job without a performance evaluation. It doesn’t make me feel like a cow.

  • Fish

    Re: restricted/unrestricted in relationships

    There is a middle ground here between LTR and ONS: the STR. I think the STR has the highest level of sexual satisfaction (for me at least, granted my LTR’s are a small sample size). Yes, unrestricted types can be bad in ONS situations, i have experience with that.

    If you’re talking about judging who would be good in bed without sex, my experience says SINGLE unrestricted > SINGLE restricted. Nobody would argue that there are not good in bed restricted types, I just think there are less of them on the market because when they are taken off the market, they’re kept off or not on the market for long.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Fish

    I don’t think restricted people don’t like sex, I just think in general unrestricted people are better at it. Like most skills, the more you do it, the better at it you get. That’s just been my experience although i’ve been with very few “restricted” women. Plus, being restricted, your definition of “good sex” may be different. Restricted types are not going to ever have a large enough sample size to see a bell curve distribution where unrestricted types might (yes, my N is high enough to tell).

    Hmmmm. I actually agree with you, to a certain extent. I think that people tend to focus more on the number of sexual partners a person has had than other aspects of the Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI). Partner count is just one aspect of it. Below is a link to the inventory.

    http://www.larspenke.eu/pdfs/SOI-R%20Manual.pdf

    Here are the items that are used to determine sociosexual orientation.

    1. With how many different partners have you had sex within the past 12 months?

    2. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse on one and only one occasion?

    3. With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse without having an interest in a long-term committed relationship with this person?

    4. Sex without love is OK.

    5. I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying “casual” sex with different partners.

    6. I do not want to have sex with a person until I am sure that we will have a long-term, serious relationship.

    7. How often do you have fantasies about having sex with someone you are not in a committed romantic relationship with?

    9. In everyday life, how often do you have spontaneous fantasies about having sex with someone you have just met?

    A person can have a high score on the SOI even if his/her N is small. I took the test, and I got a pretty high/high SOI score, even though my N count is small. This isn’t surprising to me. I have many unrestricted views about sex, and I like more “risque” sexual acts, but I don’t engage in such acts with many people. Would I say that “unrestricted” people are generally better at sex than “restricted” people? I’d say yes.

    At the same time, it’s very relative. I’d say that “unrestricted” people are better at sexual acts that demand a more open mind, kinkier proclivities, etc. Perhaps “restricted” people are better at “vanilla” sex than “unrestricted” people. Maybe they are better at acts that align with a more “traditional” sensibility.

    Maybe “restricted” people are better at tackling “bunny slope” type sexual acts, while “unrestricted” people are better at tackling “extreme alpine skiing slopes”. One type is better for beginners and casual skiers, while the other type is better for more experienced, advanced, or thrill seeking skiers. Maybe it’s related to dopamine receptors and “risk taking” propensity.

    • I’d say that “unrestricted” people are better at sexual acts that demand a more open mind, kinkier proclivities, etc. Perhaps “restricted” people are better at “vanilla” sex than “unrestricted” people. Maybe they are better at acts that align with a more “traditional” sensibility. Maybe “restricted” people are better at tackling “bunny slope” type sexual acts, while “unrestricted” people are better at tackling “extreme alpine skiing slopes”. One type is better for beginners and casual skiers, while the other type is better for more experienced, advanced, or thrill seeking skiers

      Did I miss something? Where does the SOI ask about preferences wrt kinky vs. vanilla sex?

      I think this is self-congratulatory bias from an unrestricted type. There’s been quite a bit of that around here lately.

  • JP

    “Easy. The people who actually had the guts to do it “right” in the first place feel like chumps.”

    Can’t you look at the bright side here?

    I mean there was zero risk of STD’s and pregnancy right?

  • Re: “Arrow”. I think the show has really been picking up steam since Deathstroke showed up. He was always one of my very favorite comic book characters when I was a boy, perhaps even a template of sorts.

    I think that relatively unrestricted men will probably feel that relatively unrestricted women are better at sex because said women would be more likely to be into the kinds of things that these men would find very hot.

    Restricted females may tend to respond to this by saying that these things are not hot and that men who like them are perverted or have porn addiction-inspired ideas of sexual behavior. Restricted men would agree.

    Although sociosexuality does not normally attempt to predict clothing choices, mannerisms, etc., I would guess that a relatively unrestricted girl is more likely to wear sexy clothing than is her relatively restricted friend, to enjoy being objectified as a sex object more, to dance more provocatively at a night club or to wear a more revealing bikini at the beach, to be more open to porn-type sexual activities and to enjoy porn herself, and so on. A restricted would be more likely to pass negative judgment on all of these things.

    I’m sure there are exceptions—the conservatively-dressed librarian type who is secretly a freak, the pornstar/bombshell looking girl with the huge rack and tattoo who is a virgin.

    I suppose that more extreme Restricteds are going to be the neighbors hiding behind the drapes and observing what you are up to in your hot tub, calling the cops, etc. Extreme Unrestricteds would be watching you and getting themselves off.

  • Man

    @Apple:

    I think statistically most women don’t orgasm from intercourse alone anyway.,,I’m just saying… men who are expecting EVERY woman to be able to have this kind of orgasm from any kind of penetration alone, are not being realistic with themselves), it’s just not happening with “sex by itself” period for most (whether she’s ever used a vibrator by herself or not.) Men need to understand this is not a “failing” on their part. It is not how our bodies work/are built… However, the MORE orgasmic a woman is, the more easily she can orgasm.

    Thanks, Apple. I had a girlfriend who was quite inorgasmic. I really felt sympathy for her and she was just an amazing girlfriend (she even refused receiving oral sex). However she was really concerned with that, doing psycho-therapy on a regular basis, and she was using a vibrator to try to reach orgasm, possibly stimulated by her therapist.

    I would agree with Susan in this regard (below). In such cases, I think it’s necessary some caution and put more focus on the emotional connection and happiness of the relationship, which actually is essential for both. I suspect that if there is more bonding and trust, then women who experience difficulties in that area can orgasm more easily. More or less it’s also what this post is about what the heart wants I think.

    I do think women need to be careful – they can acclimate to the vibrator sensation, which is not replicable by a male body. Also, I’ve read that too much vibrator use can produce numbness, just as too much porn and masturbation can produce a loss of sensation for men.

  • Sassy, I think you are on to something. The Restricted is probably more likely to find sex satisfying when it is combined with high levels of emotional intimacy and privacy, while the Unrestricted is likely to find sex particularly satisfying when it is adventurous and impulsive in some way—public place, home movie, porn-type language and activities, etc.

    • The Restricted is probably more likely to find sex satisfying when it is combined with high levels of emotional intimacy and privacy, while the Unrestricted is likely to find sex particularly satisfying when it is adventurous and impulsive in some way—public place, home movie, porn-type language and activities, etc.

      Again. Are you just making this up? Why can’t adventurous or impulsive sex be emotionally intimate? In my experience, it’s far better when it is. One feels more comfortable taking risks and trying kinky stuff when there is intimacy and trust.

      I’m calling BS. And I’m doing so as a fairly unrestricted type myself. The unrestricted types know they don’t want relationships and/or are not good at them. Restricted types clearly do that better. So they want to level the playing field by claiming the “good sex” advantage, and relegate the restricted types to vanilla, routine, unvarying sex.

      Sociosexuality is strictly about the number of partners one wants, not what they do with their partner.

  • JP

    “I suppose that more extreme Restricteds are going to be the neighbors hiding behind the drapes and observing what you are up to in your hot tub, calling the cops, etc.”

    My father would get on the roof to spy on the neighbor’s affair.

    I don’t think that has anything to do with restrictiveness.

    I think it has more to do with the desire to be in charge of sting operations, and implement a police state, I think.

    He always wanted to be an FBI agent, but up becoming a high school principal, and ultimately a superintendent.

    One of the parts of his job he really enjoyed was to get the kids to rat on each other using threats of punishment during the 1970’s.

  • purplesneakers

    That was actually purples complaint.
    The hot crazy dude is not paying attention to Ms. Relationship but Hot and girl.

    What she was not complaining about was Mr. Same SMV as Relationship girl paying attention to hot and crazy because
    a) he wasn’t
    b) she didn’t notice

    Hmm, no, what I meant was that “hot but crazy” chicks* will screw around with high-SMV males, but they will still get lots of attention from lower-SMV males, and it is this attention from men ‘in general’ that feeds their ego and enables this craziness, because chances are that it’s the self-described high-SMV males who are less likely to put up with her ‘shit’ (and even from them they get more of a pass, e.g. Fish’s comment that sparked this whole discussion).

    Although I guess I should be grateful that there are such crazy bitches out there, because that helps me stand out by not being one, and (trying to be) LTR-worthy, to the relationship-oriented guy that comes along who meets my standards. I know you’re going to look at this “who meets my standards” and think I mean the ‘hot unrestricted guy,’ but I really just mean someone who is smart, sane, stable, and who I feel chemistry with. There are lots of guys who meet the first three who fail at creating chemistry, i.e. who have lots of trouble building sexual chemistry with girls, i.e. your typical guy who gets friend-zoned a lot who could learn a lot from game. I think it’s a bad idea all-around to pursue someone I don’t feel chemistry with. The last guy I dated had all four of these qualities, and he wasn’t a casual sex person either.

    *which might include naturally beautiful girls, OR, more likely, slightly-above-average girls who spend a lot of time, money, and effort presenting themselves as highly sexual, e.g. breast implants, heavy make-up, fake nails, revealing clothing, etc.. Men on the internet often claim to be into “natural beauty,” but the reality I see is that these girls get hit on ALL the time, not just by alpha males using game, but even ‘white knighted’ by average guys buying them drinks as a way of introduction, cold approaching them at the gym, telling them ‘you’re so beautiful,’ etc.

  • purplesneakers

    I guess that you are referring to players or “hot and crazy” guys who had and took their chance with the “hot and crazy” girls in their youth and then afterwards want to settle down with a stable girl for a relationship, right?

    Yup. Some women (the unaware ones not clued into HUS) might like the challenge of being The One to make him settle down, irrespective of all the data and studies showing less satisfaction in marriage and much less sexual satisfaction and greater infidelity rates for former player-types. I’m too insecure and risk-averse to find anything thrilling about that kind of ‘challenge,’ so Do Not Want. I guess I should be glad that I’m probably not hot enough to get the attention of a former player anyway.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Bastiat Blogger

    Sassy, I think you are on to something. The Restricted is probably more likely to find sex satisfying when it is combined with high levels of emotional intimacy and privacy, while the Unrestricted is likely to find sex particularly satisfying when it is adventurous and impulsive in some way—public place, home movie, porn-type language and activities, etc.

    Yeah, I think that’s the key. Adventurous, impulsive, and novel sexual acts tend to be highly valued by unrestricted people, at least that’s what I believe. Speaking only for myself, I enjoy adventurous and novel sexual activities more than the more “traditional” ones. The risky/risque nature excites me. Fellow unrestricted individuals probably have similar feelings about the matter, while more restricted individuals view sex in a completely different way. Risk and impulsivity are probably not things that positively add to their sexual experiences.

  • purplesneakers

    Hmm, all those listed things are things that I’ve fantasized about and have been interested in trying. The thing is that I would never make a ‘home movie’ with anyone except my husband though. While I’m sure there is some small difference in general between restricted and unrestricted types, I thought even your average beta guy wants a hot sex life and for his wife to be a sex goddess. I feel like the difference is overblown.

  • Emily

    Re: Crazy girls

    I’ve known some crazy girls who seem to consistently punch above their weight in SMV and other crazy girls who are consistently forced to date down. I haven’t been able to crack the exact formula, but there seems to be a particular “type” of craziness that men love. (NAMALT of course.)

  • Purplesneakers, I think that an unrestricted person can want to do all of those things within a relationship, but her reasoning may be more about safety concerns, the guy being hot enough to make it worthwhile, and so on. Her desire for adventurous sex within an LTR would probably not be because she equates sex with “emotional intimacy with her partner.” If anything, she might want to be manhandled, dominated, called names, etc. during sex, but she needs a safe, controlled environment for this or it could easily get out of control.

    I believe unrestricted people separate sex from emotional intimacy, but still like having their emotional needs met. They may actually feel that restricteds are too “emotionally promiscuous” and ready to give their feelings out. So it seems to be more complex than meets the eye: high sociosexuality can be very conservative and stoic when it comes to emotional expression or vulnerability and want those to be with someone *very special*; low sociosexuality can be conservative about sex but very aggressive in terms of emotional escalation.

    Just my *non-scientific* $.02!

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Liz 254, 257:

    I’ve heard enough people recoil at the notion that life’s trial and error helps you grow as a person or “made me who I am today” that I wonder what buttons are being pushed here. I try not to use those cliches, but I’m a bit puzzled by how much they HATE that idea and I honestly want to know why. Are they inferring a sort of backward justification? (no doubt it happens)

    Am I the only one noticing that than when a man “turns over a new leaf” in his 30s, the world applauds? And when a woman does that, people snicker and use the exact same phrase in a sarcastic manner, and mutter “good luck” under their breath?

    I think you are right about people not being very receptive to the idea of personal change in the context of sexual / romantic behavior, especially in women. The high level of concern and the double standard reflect the male perception of mating risk. Women have a large set of anxieties and fears in mating too, but I will just address the male concerns here.

    Men have a fundamental reproductive insecurity – not knowing for sure if they are the father the children they are supporting. That is the source of a lot of male mate guarding behavior. It is also the reason for the high degree of emphasis on female character as judged by women’s past behavior and sexual history.

    In these comment threads, this male insecurity is constantly manifested in the following refrains:

    – a preference for low N / virgin women
    – a disdain for women who “rode the carousel”
    – worries about “price discrimination”
    – concern that a woman is an “alpha widow”
    – anxieties about measuring up in attractiveness / size / sexual experience or technique

    I also think that these concerns are greatly heightened in today’s society by the lack of security in marriage and divorce courts that are seen as hostile to male interests. This creates a set of culture specific anxieties that reinforce the biological ones. To be blunt, men don’t want to be cuckolded by the bad boy biker then get taken for all they’re worth in divorce court and forced to support the cheating ex and the bastard child in perpetuity. Women with a colorful past are deemed to present a higher risk for such an outcome.

    Not all men show such high sensitivity to these potential threats. There are several factors that influence how much a man is threatened by a woman’s past – how trusting they are, and how confident they are, and how dominant they are. If you observe the men who write obsessively on the topics of women’s “N” or “price discrimination” or “alpha widowhood”, I think you will see that they are lacking in one or more of these characteristics. Men who are trusting won’t fear betrayal of a woman they’ve screened and chosen; men who are confident won’t worry about losing to phantom lovers; and men who are (benevolently) dominant won’t suffer anxiety about maintaining a woman’s attraction and loyalty.

  • purplesneakers

    Purplesneakers, I think that an unrestricted person can want to do all of those things within a relationship, but her reasoning may be more about safety concerns, the guy being hot enough to make it worthwhile, and so on. Her desire for adventurous sex within an LTR would probably not be because she equates sex with “emotional intimacy with her partner.” If anything, she might want to be manhandled, dominated, called names, etc. during sex, but she needs a safe, controlled environment for this or it could easily get out of control.

    Hmm, that basically describes me to a T. I’d need more experience to really figure out whether it’s the emotional intimacy or safety that makes the difference though.

  • JP

    @Emily:

    “I haven’t been able to crack the exact formula, but there seems to be a particular “type” of craziness that men love. (NAMALT of course.)”

    It’s one of the aspects of what’s currently known as borderline personality disorder.

    Specifically, it has something to do with psychological boundaries.

    I have never experienced this, however, I believe that I am accurate here.

    I am not saying that these women have BPD.

    What I am saying is that the nature of their boundaries most likely simulate very intense intimacy; it’s actually dysfunction masquerading as intense intimacy.

    It’s a psychic trap and ultimately a real problem for the men and women involved.

  • mr. wavevector

    One clarification on #278 – when I say “male insecurity” I mean an actual lack of security in the man’s status. I am not using “insecurity” as a pejorative term, where it is implied that the insecurity reflects a character defect in a man.

  • Hope

    Charm

    From what I’ve noticed, unrestricted people tend to place a high premium on physcial/carnal pleasure (not saying others dont, but for lack of a better way to phrase it) and in order to achieve that level they need certain things, physically. Whereas for me, as an restricted person, the entire act of sex itsself is more enjoyable from the beginning just because I have deep feelings for the person. I could go through the motions and do the exact same things with a person I had no emotional connection with, and feel nothing. Nothing. The same kissing, touching, positions would elicit no pleasure at all.

    This exactly! You said it very well.

    Bastiat Blogger

    So it seems to be more complex than meets the eye: high sociosexuality can be very conservative and stoic when it comes to emotional expression or vulnerability and want those to be with someone *very special*; low sociosexuality can be conservative about sex but very aggressive in terms of emotional escalation.

    Actually, no. I was very aggressive in terms of *intellectual* escalation, but emotionally speaking my husband hadn’t opened up to many girls before me, despite being “restricted.” I’m just unusual in that I *can* get men to open up to me emotionally quite quickly, if I intend on it.

  • JP

    “In these comment threads, this male insecurity is constantly manifested in the following refrains:

    – a preference for low N / virgin women
    – a disdain for women who “rode the carousel”
    – worries about “price discrimination”
    – concern that a woman is an “alpha widow”
    – anxieties about measuring up in attractiveness / size / sexual experience or technique”

    I’ll take this from the standpoint of moral absolutism, since my calculus basically began and ended with moral rules.

    With respect to:

    “- a preference for low N / virgin women
    – a disdain for women who “rode the carousel””

    Back when I was in college/law school, I always took this as indicative of the inherent moral quality or value of the person.

    For instance, low N/virgin (male or female) indicated that they were fundamentally a quality person and had inherent worth as a human being, so to speak.

    Whereas, with a high N (male or female), this would indicate that they were profoundly morally disordered and basically needed to be exiled from the human community as you would want to exile any other morally disordered person, such as a believing member of the Nazi SS or a child molester.

    With respect to:

    “- worries about “price discrimination”
    – concern that a woman is an “alpha widow”
    – anxieties about measuring up in attractiveness / size / sexual experience or technique”

    These simply had no emotional resonance with me because they were irrelevant to the calculation.

    It’s stupid, I know. It’s also not a good way to go through college.

    However, this is at least one strand of thinking about this subject, from a black/white moral absolutist standpoint.

  • purplesneakers

    Actually, no. I was very aggressive in terms of *intellectual* escalation, but emotionally speaking my husband hadn’t opened up to many girls before me, despite being “restricted.” I’m just unusual in that I *can* get men to open up to me emotionally quite quickly, if I intend on it.

    I know you wrote at the girl game blog, but your posts about emotional escalation and relating to men are so enlightening and useful, Hope! I wish you could teach me the ways of the jedi ;p

  • Fish

    “I believe unrestricted people separate sex from emotional intimacy, but still like having their emotional needs met. They may actually feel that restricteds are too “emotionally promiscuous” and ready to give their feelings out. So it seems to be more complex than meets the eye: high sociosexuality can be very conservative and stoic when it comes to emotional expression or vulnerability and want those to be with someone *very special*; low sociosexuality can be conservative about sex but very aggressive in terms of emotional escalation. ”

    This. While my N is pretty high (I was related this thread to a female friend at the pool earlier & she said “duh Fish, you’re kinda a man whore.”), I can count on one hand the number I was truly emotionally open with. For me, emotional attachment USUALLY comes after sexual chemistry. I won’t let myself get emotionally invested until the sex is there.

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with filtering for type. If a woman wants a restricted beta type guy, there are plenty out there. I am not trying to say that one is better than the other. A restricted woman could be completely happy with what, to me, would be boring sex. The “vanilla” girl that I dated actually wanted sex 2-3x a day. However, because it was “boring” to me, I was usually good with once or twice.

    I have no evidence to support this but I think there is a difference between married/LTR restricted women and single ones. My guess would be the ones who are taken may either be more sexual or are taking the restricted guys off the market who would be interested in someone a little more vanilla. I couldn’t speculate on the cause of breakup for restricted women. I can confidently say that an unrestricted person, male or female will end a relationship due to unsatisfactory sex. I don’t know if that is true of restricted types (I’m not saying that’s the ONLY reason).
    @Sassy
    I LOL’ed at “bunny slope”.

  • Fish

    @sneakers

    I would guess Hope is very good at filtering. Finding a “type” of guy who is open to that type of relationship.

    I really think its about filtering. Once you get good at finding your “type” and have the game to get them (SMV/RMV appropriate) its about whittling down available options.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Fish

    I can confidently say that an unrestricted person, male or female will end a relationship due to unsatisfactory sex.

    Yup. I’ve done it twice. The issue was more about compatibility issues with regards to optimal frequency of sex, however.

  • Lokland

    @purple

    “I mean the ‘hot unrestricted guy,’ but I really just mean someone who is smart, sane, stable, and who I feel chemistry with. ”

    I only question the last part.
    I’ve never met anyone, male or female, who
    a) wanted a relationship
    b) was willing to have one with someone at their level
    whom did not have one.

    Ever. Not once in my life have I encountered someone with both a and b without a relationship (or was long without one).

    I have known many people who claim to want a or b but for various reasons their actions shown through any number of words they managed to speak.

    For b, one of those reasons is always a lack of spark/attraction (to people in their ownSMV level).

    Note: I would argue most single people fall into category a type problems which manifests in many formats.

    “by average guys buying them drinks as a way of introduction, , telling them ‘you’re so beautiful,’ etc.”

    I’m average and have never done either of these things to any woman attractive, average or ugly.

    Note: Excluding girlfriends/dates/spouse.

  • Fish

    @Sassy
    My biggest (to this point) relationship regret was ending a relationship because the sex was bad. She was just no good, but everything else was great. Allegedly she got better and is now in a LTR but I always wonder if it would have gotten better.

    I dumped her for the aforementioned “hot but crazy” chick who was very good in bed but didn’t last for other reasons. Oh well.

  • JP

    @Lokland:

    “I only question the last part.
    I’ve never met anyone, male or female, who
    a) wanted a relationship
    b) was willing to have one with someone at their level
    whom did not have one.

    Ever. Not once in my life have I encountered someone with both a and b without a relationship (or was long without one).”

    I have no idea what you are trying to say here, and I can usually translate you.

  • Lokland

    @JP

    Redo.

    I have never met a person not in a relationship (despite their claims otherwise) who did not
    a) actually want a relationship
    or if not the first b) want a relationship with someone at their SMV level.

    The largest group of single people (I know) that claim to want a relationship but are unable to find one are those who actually don’t want a relationship (as shown by their actions).

    A smaller minority (by my estimation) want a relationship but not with those available to them.

  • Fish

    @JP
    “I have no idea what you are trying to say here, and I can usually translate you.”

    I think what he’s saying is that if you are finding people of appropriate SMV & arent in a relationship, you don’t really want one. If you really want one but are not finding suitable candidates, you may be looking outside your SMV.

  • Lokland

    @Fish

    Lets go with that.

  • purplesneakers

    Lokland:

    I’m average and have never done either of these things to any woman attractive, average or ugly.

    I’m sure you haven’t, but my personal observation is that lots of guys do. I mean, I’m no raving beauty and it happens even to me. I keep the red pill and the difference between SMV and MMV in mind and remind myself they’re probably drunk, lol. :p

    I only question the last part.
    I’ve never met anyone, male or female, who
    a) wanted a relationship
    b) was willing to have one with someone at their level
    whom did not have one.

    I’m trying to have a realistic sense of my ‘level,’ I really am (a couple of years ago I got a ‘rating’ from a male online friend there was no chance of meeting in person, and recently from a male workout buddy), while working to improve on it. The last guy I dated was not the most objectively attractive person, but our sense of humor just clicked and I was really attracted to him (and vice versa). I think my problem is that I just do not meet that many new people, and I’m a shy introvert so it’s difficult for me when I do. There’s online dating, but I’m uncomfortable with it for various reasons. I’m also in NYC, don’t know how much of a difference that makes.

    Although your point is taken, and I sometimes find myself questioning whether I really want a relationship or just lots of male validation (or both).

  • Fish

    @Sneakers
    “Although your point is taken, and I sometimes find myself questioning whether I really want a relationship or just lots of male validation (or both).”

    Thats completely ok. There is nothing wrong with enjoying peoples’ company outside of a dating context (I’m not talking about casual sex, just hanging out). I don’t quite get your aversion to online dating though, for you it seems perfect. An alternative to online dating is finding a hobby where there will be guys. You will have a chance to meet new ones and perhaps spark a relationship from that.

  • Gin Martini

    Abbot, I love these articles. By Freidman’s definition, well, Mrs. Athol Kay is a slut, because she surely has had more sex than Friedman ever will. Note how they try to conflate “lots of sex” with “lots of partners”, as if they are even remotely related. It’s the same old thing – “my choices are unjudgeable”, with nary a word of whether all men have the same privilege.

  • Hope

    purplesneakers “I wish you could teach me the ways of the jedi ;p”

    Well what do you want to know? I think you may want to start with some activity that has male-heavy and that you would be interested in as well.

    Fish “I really think its about filtering. Once you get good at finding your “type” and have the game to get them (SMV/RMV appropriate) its about whittling down available options.”

    Yeah, that’s part of it. The other part is that I have tended to participate in mostly male activities like video games, and I’m versed in a lot of the topics that guys tend to be into (STEM topics for example).

  • Anacaona

    Is there ever a man who says no thanks to sex with a head case? Is it really that crazy a notion?
    My husband had a crazy girlfriend once and he said that after that “Don’t stick it on the crazy” so I’m not sure how good the sex was but was not worth the crazy.

    My husband once shared that he and a bunch of other guys at school were talking about the women in the class during the early days. One guy said, “I bet Susan Walsh is a real firecracker in bed.” He said they all agreed 100%
    I had some guys pitying my future husband, like I was going to be demanding in bed. I also had a gay friend that told me that I was a lucky girl upon laying eyes on my husband and this guy had at least 500 of sample size when I met him. I do think some people just know those things. Of course I also think that people preoccupied with this are probably hard to please and easy to get dissapointed so I guess it works for them to have sex early and it works for us to say “thanks but no thanks” feature no bug.

    Am I the only one noticing that than when a man “turns over a new leaf” in his 30s, the world applauds? And when a woman does that, people snicker and use the exact same phrase in a sarcastic manner, and mutter “good luck” under their breath?
    Not me. I would had sew my vagina first than give it up to a ‘reformed’ I spent a lot of time denying myself to end up with someone that didn’t. Not compatible with me now or ever.

    Easy. The people who actually had the guts to do it “right” in the first place feel like chumps. Doubly so, when we find out that people actually like the people who screwed up and recovered better than the ones who didn’t.
    I don’t feel like a chump. At this point I’m used to the virtuous first born curse. A good life is its own reward, IMO.

    We’re so anomalous that we don’t even figure into this conversation.
    Everyone remembers Lancelot and are “Galahad who?!” Good kid curse FTW!

    I think that relatively unrestricted men will probably feel that relatively unrestricted women are better at sex because said women would be more likely to be into the kinds of things that these men would find very hot.
    I will add that since those women don’t need emotional connection before engaging in the act is easier and faster. Unrestricted guys don’t like waiting so when a woman makes them wait they are probably starting to see her in a less flattering light. Again feature no bug if he pressuring for sex before you are ready. FIDO. If she is not giving it up as soon as you like FIDO too. This is the only way we can start matching with our kind and having less drama IMO.

    I suppose that more extreme Restricteds are going to be the neighbors hiding behind the drapes and observing what you are up to in your hot tub, calling the cops, etc.
    ??! I don’t even watch reality show. I don’t care what people do behind closed doors as long as they don’t overshare the morning after over breakfast with me.

    I’m too insecure and risk-averse to find anything thrilling about that kind of ‘challenge,’ so Do Not Want.
    I have too many novels to write to spent all my time being ‘enticing’ so the unrestricted type doesn’t get bored.

    Actually, no. I was very aggressive in terms of *intellectual* escalation, but emotionally speaking my husband hadn’t opened up to many girls before me, despite being “restricted.” I’m just unusual in that I *can* get men to open up to me emotionally quite quickly, if I intend on it.
    Yeah. My husband did a lot of intellectual and trust escalation. That is the key I can be attracted to a man but if I don’t trust him he is not getting any. The fact that my husband led such a nice straight life, by USA standards, sold me in opening sexually to him. He also didn’t had a good track record of opening and being vulnerable to other girls. So we are a good match for each other. Life is good. 🙂

  • Abbot

    “Note how they try to conflate “lots of sex” with “lots of partners”

    That is done all the time. In their minds, once a woman is not virgin, what difference will a couple dozen supplementary penises make. They either 1) do it on purpose in an attempt to get men to place no importance on a woman’s N or 2) they truly believe its all the same and thus always express it that way and can’t really understand why men have such “weird” standards.

  • Fish

    @Abbott
    “That is done all the time. In their minds, once a woman is not virgin, what difference will a couple dozen supplementary penises make. They either 1) do it on purpose in an attempt to get men to place no importance on a woman’s N or 2) they truly believe its all the same and thus always express it that way and can’t really understand why men have such “weird” standards.”

    I can’t understand that either. Really, no kids, no diseases, unrestricted, I don’t see what the difference is between N = 5 & N = 50. There may be other differentiators, but lets say personality wise, they are the same. What is the real difference? I’d say there is none, therefore tracking by N is a useless measure.

  • Abbot

    “N = 5 & N = 50. There may be other differentiators, but lets say personality wise, they are the same. What is the real difference?”

    There is only a difference if a man determines that there is one. Some men just know they want to marry a natural brunette. Its how he feels. Despite his discriminating against a naturally occurring trait, no feminist would fault him for his manner of thinking. Yet, if that same men dares to express his desire to discriminate against what is entirely controllable by a woman – her N – he is harshly judged and there is a whole bag of feminist-contrived nasty words and phrases ready to be cast at him.

    Now, why is that? Why the difference? What is going in those feminist “minds”?

    .

  • Man

    Actually, no. I was very aggressive in terms of *intellectual* escalation, but emotionally speaking my husband hadn’t opened up to many girls before me, despite being “restricted.” I’m just unusual in that I *can* get men to open up to me emotionally quite quickly, if I intend on it.

    I can attest to that. Hope was the only HUS reader/woman who successfully managed to get me to open up emotionally. 🙂 As previously here at HUS I also self-professed me as a Darth Vader to feminists, I can also attest she is a Jedi. 😀

  • Fish

    Yes, N is under a woman’s control. However, per your example, the guy who prefers natural brunettes is getting utility (although I’d argue the natural part, with grooming standards as they are, I wonder how you’d ever know), there is no utility gained by lower N. She won’t be tighter, you’d have no way of knowing. If N = 50 acted exactly the same as N = 5, there would be no way to tell them apart. I guess you could say “I will only be with women who tell me their N < 10." However, from a utility standpoint, you're not gaining anything…

    I just don't understand that way of thinking. Is it better that a woman had sex 100x with 1 guy before you or 80x spread across 10? I don't understand why higher N decreases utility…

  • Man

    @Emily:

    I haven’t been able to crack the exact formula, but there seems to be a particular “type” of craziness that men love. (NAMALT of course.)

    Perhaps it’s the point at which a woman realizes that a man is a penis and a penis is a man, in the essence of their oneness, and expresses deep respect and admiration for them?

  • Abbot

    “I don’t understand why higher N decreases utility…”

    Its about romance. Its fluid, not mechanical. Romance is wrapped in emotions and feelings. Anything and everything goes and everyone accepts that diversity in themselves and every other person. That includes N…unless you’re talking to feminists. When it comes to this sole, single, one, only matter, WHY do women and the feminists get so in a lather over it?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Did I miss something? Where does the SOI ask about preferences wrt kinky vs. vanilla sex?

    I never said that the SOI explored preferred sexual inclinations/acts. I merely formed my own speculative hypothesis about the matter, separate from the SOI.

    I think this is self-congratulatory bias from an unrestricted type. There’s been quite a bit of that around here lately.

    Perhaps.

    • I never said that the SOI explored preferred sexual inclinations/acts. I merely formed my own speculative hypothesis about the matter, separate from the SOI.

      Speculative indeed. May I ask the basis for this hypothesis? Do you have significant experience having sex with both restricted and unrestricted men?

      Because the SOI is about the desire/need for emotional connection with a special person during sex, it stands to reason that some kinds of “kink,” like threesomes, swinging, orgies, etc., will appeal only to unrestricted types. I do not believe you can assume what restricted people are doing in their relationships, or that they are content with missionary or routine blah sex, lol. Based on the stories I’ve heard in the focus groups, it’s the girls with serious bf’s who do some out there stuff, yikes. No, they don’t fuck in the hallway at the bar, but they know how to play when they get home.

      I’ve had good and bad sex in relationships. I’ve only had bad to mediocre sex in casual hookups, and far less imaginative. As I said earlier, someone who isn’t emotionally invested is far more likely to be selfish. It’s really two bodies masturbating in one another’s presence.

  • Lokland

    @Fish

    “I wonder how you’d ever know), there is no utility gained by lower N. ”

    Lower infidelity, lower divorce.

  • purplesneakers

    An alternative to online dating is finding a hobby where there will be guys. You will have a chance to meet new ones and perhaps spark a relationship from that.

    Well what do you want to know? I think you may want to start with some activity that has male-heavy and that you would be interested in as well.

    Yeah, that’s what I’ve been doing for the past year, and it’s worked somewhat. But I’m bad at turning our friendship into actual dates. I just have no idea of what kind of vibe to try to send off! Although I genuinely enjoy the activity, I’m kind of wary of sending off a slutty or desperate-to-meet-someone vibe. I don’t think the problem is just with dating; it exists in other aspects of my life too–I’m not sure of myself, and don’t want to set myself up for embarrassment or criticism in other people’s heads, and it leads to me not pursuing a lot of different things. I feel like I shouldn’t try to date someone seriously until I have better self-esteem and sense of self, but at the same time, I feel like I’m missing out on lots of potential guys who I haven’t met.

  • Lokland

    “Unrestricted is likely to find sex particularly satisfying when it is adventurous and impulsive in some way—public place, home movie, porn-type language and activities, etc.”

    My wife got a 2 on the SOI.

    Home movie–only after marriage
    Public places–yes
    Porn Language- no
    Activities- hair pulling-no, everything else-yes

  • Man

    Why can’t adventurous or impulsive sex be emotionally intimate? In my experience, it’s far better when it is. One feels more comfortable taking risks and trying kinky stuff when there is intimacy and trust.

    +1 In renowned sexual therapist Barbara Keesling’s Sexual Healing, having she worked as surrogate partner herself with many men, it’s quite clear that without bonding and trust it’s just difficult to try kinky stuff. She proposes specific exercises to build that too, which I think might come more naturally (without exercises or therapy) in the context of a relationship where there is already a foundation of intimacy/love.

  • Lokland

    @purple

    “Although your point is taken, and I sometimes find myself questioning whether I really want a relationship or just lots of male validation (or both).”

    Its likely to come out as an either or scenario.
    Dressing slutty to get male validation will probably not go over well with a boyfriend.

    Ans as you said, you are no raving beauty which I would assume means validation isn’t exactly forthcoming as is.

  • JP

    “Sociosexuality is strictly about the number of partners one wants, not what they do with their partner.”

    I’m still trying to figure out how you would even know how many partners you wanted.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “A lot of times, hot just means slutty and DTF – if a woman is average looking she can tart up her face, dress like a hooker and get called hot.”

    +1
    Being called hot is not a compliment if one wants a relationship.

    Cute and beautiful are much better.

    Note: Unless the person has to vocal of a toddler.

    ———–

    “People generally mate with a partner of the same physical attractiveness – hypergamy is not just about looks. In fact, it’s not really very much about looks. It’s about status, and looks are one thing, but far from the only thing, that help men get status.”

    Words are here——————Reality is here.
    Women went for the hottest guys in college regardless (or sometimes even in spite of) their own SMVs.

    At least, most of the single ones did.

  • Lokland

    to vocal = the vocabulary

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “” like threesomes, swinging, orgies, etc., like threesomes, swinging, orgies, etc.,”

    As an FYI.

    Its possible to be present at one of these, having sex and not touching anyone else or having any interest in doing so.

  • Lokland

    And it would not be unrestricted, or at least so I would assume.

  • Anacaona

    A lot of times, hot just means slutty and DTF – if a woman is average looking she can tart up her face, dress like a hooker and get called hot.
    Jenna Marbles time! 😀
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYpwAtnywTk

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    May I ask the basis for this hypothesis? Do you have significant experience having sex with both restricted and unrestricted men?

    If an N of 6 is significant, then perhaps I can offer some tidbits.

    Of these men, I would say that only 1 was more towards the restricted end of the scale. He was my worst sexual partner by far. It was the least satisfying sex I have ever had. Not only did he not like adventurous sex, I also wasn’t satisfied with his “equipment”.

    My best sexual experiences have been with men who were fairly unrestricted. Not all of them racked up huge body counts, but all of them had very open, adventurous, and sometimes taboo beliefs about sex.

    Because the SOI is about the desire/need for emotional connection with a special person during sex, it stands to reason that some kinds of “kink,” like threesomes, swinging, orgies, etc., will appeal only to unrestricted types. I do not believe you can assume what restricted people are doing in their relationships, or that they are content with missionary or routine blah sex, lol. Based on the stories I’ve heard in the focus groups, it’s the girls with serious bf’s who do some out there stuff, yikes. No, they don’t fuck in the hallway at the bar, but they know how to play when they get home.

    Oh, no doubt. I may have more unrestricted views about sex, but I only have sex with men that I’m in relationships with. I just unleash my kink on them. I will say, however, that my proclivities tend to be more risque than some of the proclivities of others. I’ve mentioned some of them on this blog, and was met with a lot of comments along the lines of “How is that enjoyable?”, “I would never do that with someone during sex”, or “That’s a little outside my comfort zone, sexually”. Most/all of those comments came from the more restricted commenters here.

    As an aside, I am the woman going at it with someone both in the hallway and at home. I like to keep it spicy. 😉

    I’ve had good and bad sex in relationships. I’ve only had bad to mediocre sex in casual hookups, and far less imaginative. As I said earlier, someone who isn’t emotionally invested is far more likely to be selfish. It’s really two bodies masturbating in one another’s presence.

    I agree. This is why I don’t have casual sex. I let my unrestricted “freak flag” fly, but I do it within the confines of a relationship. For me, the matter surrounds around whether or not I actually feel inclined to be in a relationship with someone at any given time.

    • only 1 was more towards the restricted end of the scale. He was my worst sexual partner by far. It was the least satisfying sex I have ever had. Not only did he not like adventurous sex, I also wasn’t satisfied with his “equipment”.

      So do you hypothesize that unrestricted men have bigger dicks as a result of this one experience?

      I’ve mentioned some of them on this blog, and was met with a lot of comments along the lines of “How is that enjoyable?”, “I would never do that with someone during sex”, or “That’s a little outside my comfort zone, sexually”. Most/all of those comments came from the more restricted commenters here.

      Hmmm, IIRC you are referring to people’s responses to your liking to be choked? I’m not a fan myself, but again, I’d have to assume that most people who enjoy it would want to be choked by someone they know intimately. I mean, would you give that license to a stranger? Remember, SOI is about one’s preference for multiple partners, no strings. Choking play seems especially risky with strangers.

      I let my unrestricted “freak flag” fly, but I do it within the confines of a relationship. For me, the matter surrounds around whether or not I actually feel inclined to be in a relationship with someone at any given time.

      Since unrestricted types are far less likely to be in relationships at all, it doesn’t surprise me that you have had difficulty in finding a partner who, like you, wants to push the unrestricted peg into the restricted hole. 🙂

      If you are in the habit of trying to make relationships work with unrestricted men, it’s no wonder you’re not having success.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Your comments in post # 307 and #308 brought up some great questions, in my opinion.

    I was curious, so I decided to do a wee bit of digging. This is something that I found.

    http://faculty.newpaltz.edu/glenngeher/files/Peterson_Geher_Kaufman_2011.pdf

    The following are some excerpts from the paper:

    Sociosexuality was positively correlated to the preference for self- masturbation (r(399) = .35, p < .01), masturbation with a partner (r(396) = .12, p < .05), performing oral sex (r(394) = .15, p < .01), receiving oral sex (r(392) = .24, p < .01), vaginal sex (r(395) = .21, p < .01), anal sex (r(393) = .21, p < .01), and the preference for a variety of sex acts (r(400) =.32, p < .01). These correlations indicate that being sociosexually unrestricted corresponds to preferences for all of the sex acts examined. Extraversion was positively correlated with the preference for receiving oral sex (r(469) = .10, p < .05), neuroticism was negatively related to the preference for receiving oral sex (r(469) = -.10, p < .05), and conscientiousness was negatively related to the preference for anal sex (r(471) = -.10, p < .05). Agreeableness was negatively correlated to the preference for self-masturbation (r(473) = -.10, p < .05) and anal sex Predicting sex act preferences Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 9(3). 2011. -378-(r(466) = -.12, p < .05) and openness was positively correlated to the preference for selfmasturbation (r(480) = .10, p < .05), performing oral sex (r(475) = .16, p < .01), and the preference for a variety of sex acts (r(481) = .12, p < .01).

    and this…

    Sociosexuality was positively correlated with the preference for self-masturbation (r(86) = .43, p < .01), anal sex (r(83) = .35, p < .01), and the preference for a variety of sex acts (r(86) = .35, p < .01); indicating that sociosexually unrestricted men preferred to engage self-masturbation, anal sex, and a variety of sex acts more than sociosexually restricted men. Extraversion was positively correlated with the preference for
    masturbation with a partner (r(109) = .23, p < .05) and neuroticism was positively correlated with the preference for performing oral sex (r(108) = .23, p < .05).

    as well as this…

    Among females, sociosexuality was positively related to the preference for selfmasturbation (r(313) = .29, p < .01), performing oral sex (r(311) = .13, p < .05), receiving oral sex (r(309) = .22, p < .01), vaginal sex (r(311) = .25, p <.01), and the preference for a variety of sex acts (r(314) = .25, p < .01); thus, indicating that sociosexually unrestricted females had greater preferences for self-masturbation, performing oral sex, receiving oral sex, vaginal sex, and a variety of sex acts than restricted females.

    I find this all rather fascinating, to be honest.

    • @Sassy

      Thank you for looking up that study! Here are some things I find interesting:

      Simpson and Gangestad’s (1990) sociosexuality construct corresponds to variability in proclivity toward uncommitted sexual encounters – essentially a proxy for a tendency toward the employment of short-term mating tactics.

      No surprise here – unrestricteds generally prefer STRs.

      Kruger and Fisher (2008) found that unrestricted sociosexuality corresponds to several attributes of a fast life history strategy, including the number of sex partners an individual has had in past 12 months, the number of one-time sex partners an individual has had, and the number of times an individual has cheated.

      A slow life history strategy corresponded to a restricted pattern of sociosexuality. These findings suggest that extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional stability (i.e., low neuroticism) are selected together to form a coordinated slow life history; thus, maximizing the reproductive success of the individual..

      …Based on the work of Helen Fisher (2004), it seems that some sex acts, such as face-to-face intercourse and kissing, may be more likely to facilitate parts of the brain that promote long-term pairbonding. Perhaps other acts, such as anal sex, therefore, are part of a more short-term
      mating strategy.

      IOW, restricted people are the ones who pair bond, marry, and have children. Their relationships are stable. Again, not surprising.

      Also, life history strategy was not particularly predictive of the preferences for different sexual acts – except that slow life history strategists tended to be repulsed by anal sex. This relationship is likely due to slow life history strategists’ greater regard for social
      norms and consideration of risk than fast life history strategists since anal sex is still considered to be somewhat taboo and, in the case of the transmission of sexually transmitted infections, more risky than other sex acts.

      I found it interesting that the authors classified all sex acts not procreative as short-term mating tactics, including oral. This comment appears to confirm your assessment that unrestricted people are risk seekers, getting off on the dopamine rush. That makes sense in another way – while restricted people might be alarmed at the idea of being choked by a stranger, someone highly unrestricted may like, or even need, a sensation of asphyxiation, made even more exciting when performed by a stranger.

      Congruent with previous research (Schmitt, 2003, 2005), males oriented toward a more short-term mating strategy than females and females were oriented toward a long-term mating strategy; with males endorsing lower K life history strategies and more unrestricted sociosexual orientations
      than females.

      This appears to support the idea that unrestricted women may be high T or for whatever reason like to “have sex like a man.”

  • JP

    “Hmmm, IIRC you are referring to people’s responses to your liking to be choked? I’m not a fan myself, but again, I’d have to assume that most people who enjoy it would want to be choked by someone they know intimately.”

    I remember discussing this on here, which was where I learned that because my college roommate nearly killed his girlfriend this way, he was doing it wrong.

    So, it’s also important to do it properly, apparently.

    I presume the EMS was involved in that one, but I don’t know.

  • purplesneakers

    Its likely to come out as an either or scenario.
    Dressing slutty to get male validation will probably not go over well with a boyfriend.

    Yeah, I know. I don’t mean dressing slutty, necessarily, I mean dressing sexy and feminine. This is one of those other pieces of advice I find confusing–be sexy enough to get his attention, but not so sexy that you get the attention of other men?? If I’m in a relationship I don’t want to turn down the sexual chemistry just because I’m already in a relationship–I want to keep it going, including through presenting myself in the way that got his attention in the first place (all the while showing loyalty, etc., because I know how important that is).

  • Gin Martini

    Poly doesn’t mean maximally unrestricted sluttery. You all act like a single extra partner is like an instant n=50 or something.

    Heck, cheating is just one-sided poly, yet we don’t assume they’re all incapable of good sex and love. So how does being open about it change it?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    So do you hypothesize that unrestricted men have bigger dicks as a result of this one experience?

    I’m not sure that a claim that unrestricted men have larger penises is even accurate. I’m going to go do some digging on this though.

    Hmmm, IIRC you are referring to people’s responses to your liking to be choked? I’m not a fan myself, but again, I’d have to assume that most people who enjoy it would want to be choked by someone they know intimately. I mean, would you give that license to a stranger? Remember, SOI is about one’s preference for multiple partners, no strings. Choking play seems especially risky with strangers.

    It does seem very risky to engage in choking with a stranger. I’ve only ever done it with boyfriends. There has to be a certain level of trust established before I will do it. Having said that, not all monogamous couples engage in choking either, so there has to be something/some trait separating these two groups.

    Since unrestricted types are far less likely to be in relationships at all, it doesn’t surprise me that you have had difficulty in finding a partner who, like you, wants to push the unrestricted peg into the restricted hole.

    If you are in the habit of trying to make relationships work with unrestricted men, it’s no wonder you’re not having success.

    True. I either need to find the right balance, or give up on relationships entirely. I either find a like-minded guy who I would be happy to commit to for the long haul, or I remain alone.

  • Hope

    purplesneakers, I hear you about having lower self-esteem. I was like that throughout my teens and early twenties. Don’t worry. A girl doesn’t need tons of self-confidence to get a guy. Self-respect is more important.

    So you have male friends, but are they really attracted to you? A guy has to experience a kind of psychological and sexual draw to you that makes them want to be with you, I.e. get a crush on you. Now reading between the lines from guys who have had crushes, as well as in my own experience, you need not be super hot, but you should at least be “cute.” You don’t need to be over the top flirty, but you need to give off some sexual innuendo and banter. You don’t need to make very obvious physical moves, but you need to make clear that you’re “on the market” and be giving off the “I’m looking” vibe. My husband called it”she’s spreading her scent around” when he saw it. All guys, even the ones who are not good at reading IOIs, understand on at least a subconscious level when a girl is “looking.”

    You need to put yourself in isolation mode with a guy if you’re interested. Guys tend not to want to make a move in public because rejection is embarrassing. So if you’re alone with a guy, or talking privately, even under the guise of friendship, there are more opportunities for showing interest on both sides. With my husband, I got his private email and chat name, and talked with him outside of the normal context. He knew immediately “something is up.” Since he was also interested, he spent the time to talk to me. If a guy won’t do this, he’s not interested. After that, it’s just a matter of getting to know each other, “better than acquaintances.”

  • Sassy6519

    Hmmm, it looks like the only studies that have been done that examine the relationship between sociosexuality and penis length have been conducted with participants who are gay males. I can’t seem to find any studies with heterosexual males.

  • Fish

    @sassy
    I could never get into the choking. A little biting & hair pulling but I have very established boundaries about violence to women. I’ve done it, its not hard to do (a little carotid pressure is what you’re going for, I think), I’ve been choked frequently (jujitsu, not in the bedroom), my brain has a hard time translating it to sex.

    Its good to read your comments, I think there are women out there who are unrestricted but relationship seeking, you seem to back up that assessment.

    My own experience has been similar with restricted/unrestricted women. My sample size is MUCH higher. I can only say unrestricted, in my experience, correlates with quality. I do have restricted female friends and they just seem way more uptight. I don’t think this is a discussion of the tails of the curve but more the inside 2 std deviation area.

    Re: emotional connection
    I think there is something to unrestricted types separating sex & emotion. I either love my partner or not, I don’t love her more after sex. I’d agree with the mutual masturbation comparison, it is similar, just way better. I agree that there has to be a trust element, but that’s different than opening up emotionally. I personally, find it much easier to be open sexually than emotionally. Maybe restricted & unrestricted are just inverses of each other. I think its also a scale, not black or white. I’m pretty unrestricted but don’t have any desire to do BDSM, group sex, swinging, etc.

  • Fish

    I really cant speak for penii aside from my own however:
    Unrestricted, above average for the Congo (Caucasian though)

  • Anacaona

    I either find a like-minded guy who I would be happy to commit to for the long haul, or I remain alone.
    You are young, hot and unrestricted. I doubt you will be alone for long. What you need is to stop seeking monogamous relationships. At least for the moment and try an open arrangement with two or three men. Your natural counterpart is very unlikely to be exclusive with one woman in their 20’s anyway. Just thinking out loud.

  • Fish

    @hope/sneakers

    I like that strategy. If you seem to connect, suggest a time you’re not busy, see if they ask you out or ask them out directly. I will say, depending on the guy you may need to be more blunt & less subtle with the flirting. I will agree self esteem has nothing to do with it. Just out yourself out there, you’ll get results.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    I disagree. I don’t think its unreasonable at all to find a relationship seeking unrestricted male. I’ve been one and I’m not that far past my 20’s. I do think its a challenge to filter out guys not looking for relationships. However, sometimes a LTR is a STR with stamina. Once the unrestricted guy is committed if the sex is good & personalities mesh you can see if the relationship has stamina. I don’t think sassy wants open relationships with multiple guys & she seems to have the SMV to be picky…

  • purplesneakers

    @ Hope,

    It’s so funny that you mention self-respect, because I was just thinking about how the way the guy I last dated basically communicated with me (meaning lack of it) in a way that didn’t show much respect for me or my time, and if I happened to run into him again and he wanted a second chance (wishful female logic), would I give him one? I desperately want to because I liked him so much, but I know that just shows a lack of self-respect and that I don’t value myself, so I most definitely shouldn’t.

    I often get told that I’m pretty or cute, ‘hot’ not so much (last guy said that, I had no idea how to react, maybe that’s part of why the experience stuck with me so much), but I have no idea how to do “sexual innuendo and banter,” and I have trouble opening up and letting my ‘real’ self shine through too. I guess I feel like no one would ever want to be with me, so I don’t see any point in trying and only opening myself up to lots of rejection.

  • Fish

    @sneakers
    ” I guess I feel like no one would ever want to be with me, so I don’t see any point in trying and only opening myself up to lots of rejection.”

    Thats a horrible way to look at it. Everyone has something to bring to the table. I have no idea if you are SMV 3 or SMV 6 or whatever, but everyone has something to bring to the table. If you have a willingness to share in a guy’s hobbies, thats HUGE.

    My advice, first of all, do what you can to maximize your fitness. Wear things that flatter your shape. Engage with guys in talking to things they are passionate about. It is clear you may be a little less comfortable discussing sex. Try talking about it with female friends or a close male friend to get more comfortable. Practice innuendo with them, joke around before you have to do it “for real”.

    I think so much about flirting is just about being comfortable. I’m loud, opinionated funny guy. Some of my friends call me the lovable asshole. Figure out your best traits and play them up. I really think thats the essence of game in general.

    Rejection sucks, but what is it really? One person had a different value system. It doesn’t make you any less of a person. I’m not advocating the shotgun approach but “I’m not interested” is not the worst thing on the planet. It only takes one “yes” under the right circumstances. . .

  • @purplesneakers

    Not trying to make you feel dumb or rag on you. Just curious.

    What did you like so much about this guy that didn’t contact you much?

    I don’t know that you didn’t value yourself at all but you obviously valued him much more so in the end it was the same effect.

    What was it about him (or about you) that made the hope and desire for his affection so alluring and consuming to you?

  • Fish

    Focusing on what you’re not sets yourself up for failure. I’m not 6 feet tall. Focus on what you are and the right people will see value in that.

  • @purple

    I think Fish’s advice is good.

    Also, I’m not sure what kind of guys you like but most girls usually have more guys interested in them than they are aware, and either they are oblivious to that interest or the guys don’t spark anything in them so they might as well not exist.

    I would encourage you to try to act more friendly and smile and say hi and so on to way more guys. You’ll probably be surprised that you get more attention. Now, I’m not saying you’ll get much more attention from totally awesome guys, necessarily, or guys that are out of your league.

    But my point is to give some other guys a chance and interact with them and get used to interacting with guys and going out with guys that actually like you. Now, even if they are a point or two below you in sexual or marriage value and you would never LTR/marry them go out a few times and learn to appreciate the good things they have. Make them feel good about themselves and learn to bask in the positive attention they give you.

    By going out a bit here and there with under-your-league guys you will see that there really are guys that like you and will treat you well and hopefully you can recalibrate your attraction triggers a bit to actually be turned on a bit by guys that will treat you better.

    Over time as you get more comfortable with yourself and men you’ll be able to flirt better and hopefully improve your looks/style a bit too and then move up to a guy who is both in your league and treats you well.

    Yes, you need to learn to filter out the guys who don’t treat you well.

  • Gin Martini

    Fish, not sure you know Sassy’s background since you’re fairly new.

    She doesn’t just want unrestricted men, she wants the alpha type to be restricted with her, yet paradoxically gets nervous in monogamous LTRs. And, keeps running into paper alphas who crumple around her.

    Ana and I think she has no real use for monogamy, so she should go for a timeshare with two or three real-deal alphas, and maybe a Dom on the side. She has the mental toughness to pull it off.

  • Anacaona

    Ana and I think she has no real use for monogamy, so she should go for a timeshare with two or three real-deal alphas, and maybe a Dom on the side. She has the mental toughness to pull it off.
    Heh I wouldn’t had added the dom but I do think Sassy needs an experimenting stage in her life so she can choose what lifestyle she really wants for the long run. I do think she is unlikely to come out worse of from it either. Also having 3 hot Alphas is not being unpicky. She is hot enough to pull it off and she will never settle for anything but hot and Alpha.
    That being said I don’t want to hear details if she gets this arrangement. Probably VP can mentor her in this idea in her own blog The advice is impartial and the problem solver in me, no any desire to live vicariously through her I already have any unrestricted tales to last three lifetimes. Just again thinking that this is the route she hasn’t being able to point out for herself.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Sassy

    Hmmm, it looks like the only studies that have been done that examine the relationship between sociosexuality and penis length have been conducted with participants who are gay males.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if there were a correlation. There are studies that show that being attractive people correlates with being less restricted. There are studies that show that large penis size is attractive. Therefore, it would seem logical that large penis size correlates with being less restricted.

    I’d say that “unrestricted” people are better at sexual acts that demand a more open mind, kinkier proclivities, etc.

    I also guess that might be true statistically speaking, although there would be exceptions. Restricted people prioritize intimacy over kink.

    • I have read that gay men have larger penises, and also that they are ruthless about selecting for it. I think it’s very difficult to be gay with a small penis. But maybe whatever it is that scrambles sexual orientation in utero also makes a big penis.

  • Gin Martini

    Being part of a rotation doesn’t require extreme hotness, just mental toughness. Any woman can do it! The hotness probably determines how large your timeslice is.

  • JP

    “She doesn’t just want unrestricted men, she wants the alpha type to be restricted with her, yet paradoxically gets nervous in monogamous LTRs.”

    That’s not a paradox.

    It’s indicative of some sort of underlying issue.

    I’m not a psychologist or therapist, so I’m not even going to try to guess as to the nature of this issue. Seriously. I do not have a clue.

    However, I’m combining my legal issue spotting experience and my experience reading psychological reports for several years (and wow, have I read some bizarro ones) to simply note that this is some sort of issue.

  • purplesneakers

    @HanSolo, I’m not sure why exactly this guy stuck with me so much, but two moments come to mind: 1) him reassuring me when I was nervous about an upcoming interview, and 2) we were sitting at a bar and the conversation had momentarily hit a lull, and he just looked right at me with this look in his eyes and this smile on his face, and I wasn’t afraid to look right back. Same thing when I would get up to go the bathroom, I wasn’t afraid to look at him when I was walking back and he was obviously looking me up and down. My stomach still feels topsy turvy when I think about those moments.

    That makes sense about going out with guys even if I don’t necessarily feel a lot of chemistry (I’ve often advised my female friends to do the same thing), although I’d be worried about playing with their feelings. But that’s probably better than operating from this mindset where I think nobody will ever want me or love me so I let myself be treated poorly because I think nothing better will ever come along.

    Fish, I’m actually not that uncomfortable talking about sex–I just prefer talking to my female friends about it, and I feel uncomfortable talking about it in public. I dunno, even though I think I have strong sexual desires, I’m just really wary of coming off as ‘too easy,’ possibly due to my upbringing, possibly due to one really bad experience in college. It would be great if there were instructional videos about this, LOL.

  • Fish

    “Ana and I think she has no real use for monogamy, so she should go for a timeshare with two or three real-deal alphas, and maybe a Dom on the side. She has the mental toughness to pull it off.”

    Well, I won’t claim to know her, but I do happen to be a well endowed, unrestricted semi alpha caucasian male. She has said she wants the security of a relationship, so 2-3 alphas won’t work. It’s not what she wants. Unrestricted does not necessarily mean multiple women at once. Unrestricted men want kink & variety, that variety can come from one person. My most recent ex was amazing in bed, neither my mind, nor my naughty bits wandered.

    Yes, LTR’s are a problem, thats why I said STR with stamina. Thats how it was with my ex fiance. We were dating, we moved in, all of the sudden, we’d been together for 2 years. I’m not saying Sassy and me are the same, but I think we’re close enough that I can say what she is looking for is not impossible.

    It sounds like Sassy is in a similar boat to myself: she is looking for a unicorn and is not prepared to settle. I also don’t generally do long term relationships (not on purpose, I just decide they’re not keepers after 3-6 months). Is she looking for a rare, elusive creature? Sure. But she seems comfortable with that plan and would rather be celibate than settle (another trait we don’t share, I do need some booty occasionally)

  • MM

    @LL

    Lower infidelity, lower divorce.

    Not sure about the divorce issue, but check these out. Just ran them over at the GSS:

    Question: “Have you ever had sex with someone other than your wife while you were married?”
    Sample: 4,381 currently married men ages 18+ (by reported N since age 18)

    Question: “Have you ever had sex with someone other than your husband while you were married?”
    Sample: 5,690 currently married women ages 18+ (by reported N since age 18)

    Not exactly a dramatic or suprising correlation. Both report higher rates of infidelity at higher N, but men seem slightly more prone to it at most levels.

  • MM

    Dang, couldn’t post the charts.

    Men

    Women

  • MM

    Crap, I give up! Anybody know how to link a simple pic around here via ImageShack.us?

  • @purplesneakers

    He reassured you before and interview and he gazed at you confidently with wanton desire as you returned from the bathroom, consuming you with his look and making you feel desired. I can see that those would be positive things, since you wanted him. But I could imagine some other guy that you didn’t like as much doing that and it either doing nothing for you or making you feel uncomfortable. So, what was it about him that really made you long for him so much?

    I still don’t feel like I understand why you wanted him so much. Was he charismatic? Good looking? Funny? Confident? What really turned you on so much?

    As to worrying about toying with their feelings, don’t. Men are not women so don’t think that they’ll think the same way you do.

    Most men don’t get lots of dates with women that are out of their league so many of them will just be happy to be with you. Now, of course, they will hope to have sex or date you but a date with a woman points better than a man is better than a makeout with a girl in his league which is better than sex with a woman 2 points lower.

    Just go out with them. Don’t have sex with them. Just enjoy each other’s company. At worst, I think you’ll become comfortable around men and yourself and who knows, maybe you’ll see some inner value/beauty in one of these men that seem below your league and you’ll fall in love.

  • Sassy6519

    She doesn’t just want unrestricted men, she wants the alpha type to be restricted with her, yet paradoxically gets nervous in monogamous LTRs. And, keeps running into paper alphas who crumple around her.

    This is all very true.

    Ana and I think she has no real use for monogamy, so she should go for a timeshare with two or three real-deal alphas, and maybe a Dom on the side. She has the mental toughness to pull it off.

    I know that I could pull it off. I would be lying if I said that the aforementioned suggestion is not appealing to me. It definitely is. There is a part of me that thinks such an arrangement might work for me, and there is another part of me that thinks that I shouldn’t dip my toe into those waters.

    It’s not societal pressure that is stopping me. I worry more that I would go overboard with such activities. I would be like a kid in a candy store, but I’m not sure whether or not that is the best thing for me.

  • Sassy6519

    @ JP

    That’s not a paradox.

    It’s indicative of some sort of underlying issue.

    I’m not a psychologist or therapist, so I’m not even going to try to guess as to the nature of this issue. Seriously. I do not have a clue.

    It’s a unique manifestation of “daddy issues”. I’ve been aware of them for awhile now.

    I like the idea of relationships, but I run from them/sabotage them whenever I’m in one.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Fish

    It sounds like Sassy is in a similar boat to myself: she is looking for a unicorn and is not prepared to settle. I also don’t generally do long term relationships (not on purpose, I just decide they’re not keepers after 3-6 months). Is she looking for a rare, elusive creature? Sure. But she seems comfortable with that plan and would rather be celibate than settle (another trait we don’t share, I do need some booty occasionally)

    Haha! We do sound similar.

    I just don’t see the point in hurting some unsuspecting guy. I’d rather enter a relationship when I’m sure and satisfied than be ambivalent about someone. The last thing I want to do is get married and then divorced. What would be the point? I’d rather wait to be with a man who inspires me to be in a long-term relationship with him. “Meh” just won’t do for me.

    Am I picky? Definitely yes. Might I end up alone due to my choices? Yes. Am I willing to take that risk? Yes.

  • http://www.xojane.com/sex/do-women-like-facials

    How do self-professed Restricted and Unrestricted types at HUS feel about this article…?

  • @Bastiat

    I’ve seen all types. Some that like it in the face, others on their tits, others inside, one who freaked when I was about to cum on her tits and so I kind of had to pull back and it still went on her stomach and she just freaked out lol. I personally like to cum inside a woman because a pussy is my dick’s favorite part of a woman’s body, much better than a mouth, hand or other.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Bastiat Blogger

    I just read the article that you posted, and I agree with the author.

    Even if other people may not share similar proclivities, I believe that a woman shouldn’t feel bad about liking whatever legal sexual acts that she is into.

    I like facials, so I can understand what she means when she says that other women find her sexual proclivities degrading. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

    It’s also true that getting splooge in your eye burns like you wouldn’t believe. I would suggest that men who like giving facials should try to aim away from the eyes, unless the woman in question wants it in the eye. If the latter is true, then carry on.

  • @Bastiat

    Also, she says, “The goal of feminism is to make life better for women, whatever choices we make.”

    That’s a nice thought but in reality feminism is much more controlling and dictatorial about what is appropriate or not for women (and men).

    See the Atlantic article where so many high-achieving women feel guilty for getting in relationships and betraying the sisterhood of the travelling work pants.

    And speaking of working women, I just talked to a friend who had to quit her high-stress job because her period had gone away for 6 months and now that she quit and got away from the stress it has come back.

    • the sisterhood of the travelling work pants.

      Haha, I love it!

    • And speaking of working women, I just talked to a friend who had to quit her high-stress job because her period had gone away for 6 months and now that she quit and got away from the stress it has come back.

      Good for her for listening to her body! That’s so worrisome. No wonder high-powered women in their 30s have trouble conceiving.

  • But I can relate to women who don’t like facials. 😉 I definitely wouldn’t want some big dick flapping in my face getting ready to hose me down! 😀

  • Personally, I think giving facials is one of life’s greatest joys.

    Han, I think that is a very good point. I had a discussion with a gender studies academic awhile back on how women of different feminist cohorts (2nd Wave vs. 3rd Wave/Sex Positives) calculated attractiveness in other women.

    Apparently 2nd Wavers are reluctant to ever give attractiveness points to women who have optimized their looks to delight the typical male aesthetic (i.e., exaggeratedly sexy “hyperfertility”). So the 2nd Waver will look at the subject woman, decide if men would find her sexy, and then deliberately score down a woman who Team Patriarchy would particularly enjoy.

    As the article notes, a woman who states that she genuinely enjoys looking like this will be accused of having been brainwashed by patriarchal oppressors and in need of an immediate intervention and stay in a re-education camp of some kind.

    My colleague believes that this kind of continuous zero-sum-game contrarian position is a hallmark of 2nd Wave Fems.

    My colleague believes that Restricted women who do not necessarily identify with 2nd Wave Fems may impose a very similar filter when asked to judge the attractiveness of another female, but they would be doing it out of concerns regarding mate-poaching activity by hot sluts. Politics may make strange bedfellows of certain groups. It would appear possible that if Restricted men are deeply concerned about price discrimination, Restricted women may be deeply concerned about mate-poaching.

    Thoughts?

    • Personally, I think giving facials is one of life’s greatest joys.

      This fascinates me. The facial was not even invented when I was still single – it is strictly a product of porn. I had never heard of it, nor heard of a man requesting it, until it became prevalent in porn.

      What do you like about it? What need does it fulfill? Is it a question of variety? To what degree do you believe you have been conditioned by watching porn?

      It would appear possible that if Restricted men are deeply concerned about price discrimination, Restricted women may be deeply concerned about mate-poaching.

      I think part of being restricted is being attracted to men who are “one woman men.” I’ve mentioned before that a young woman I know is seriously dating a fitness model. She is not worried about mate poaching. Why? Because he is so goofy in love that he can’t even see straight, so happy to be off the market, so turned off by the slutty women he does shoots with. A restricted guy in unrestricted clothing, literally.

  • @Bastiat

    I agree that 2nd wavers will score down the beautiful woman or say something derogatory, perhaps that she’s not so smart, in an effort to maintain the herd narrative that beauty doesn’t matter and career achievements do.

    Also, the restricted mindset will try to police the herd by shaming ones that are acting out and feeling their sexual oats, and putting them on display. In ages past that narrative was much more dominant whereas today it’s receded to religious environments and perhaps some of the truly restricted who feel no fear in going against the greater slut-pride narrative.

    It also speaks as to why I rarely believe a woman’s rating of other women’s looks. Been burnt too many times before and I keep a believe it when I see it mentality. Far too often the women will overrate the looks of the women that are their friends and disparage their rivals or enemies.

    As a young teen my mom tricked me out of 2 hours of sleep by telling me to get up because 3 cute girls were there. I struggled between my love of sleep and love of cute girls and my reproductive instincts won out over my recuperative ones…only to sleepily wander into the kitchen to behold a frumpy four, a friendly five and a smiling six. Obviously my idea of cute and my mom’s were way different.

    Also, one girl that had a crush on me would vehemently argue about the looks of this other girl I said was pretty. “She is not!!!! I don’t know what you see in her!”

  • Apple

    @Susan re: too much vibrator and numbness, from what I’ve read, this is more a problem with super high powered vibrators like the Hitachi (sp?) And from my understanding (which could be wrong, but from what I’ve read), it’s not a long term issue. i.e. “too much masturbation, even with a vibrator probably won’t hurt you.” But how much is “too much masturbation”. How many women are really just CONSTANT masturbators anyway? Once or twice a day maybe, but that’s not that extreme. Also, some women, for whatever reason are not orgasmic at all without vibrators, so the advice that they shouldn’t overuse vibrators because a man can’t replicate that physically would be a non-starter anyway. Either way, my personal opinion is that the biggest problem is that most women don’t seem to masturbate “enough” by ANY method because many don’t seem to know their own bodies and what brings them pleasure or if they do, it’s still shrouded in too much shame. I’d think that would be a far bigger problem than potential side effects from too much vibrator use. Again, all my opinions only.

  • Tongue in cheek:

    The hitachi will detach ye from his dick! lol

  • Apple

    @Susan and Lokland: re: the unrestricted=gorgeous and restricted=uggos.

    Another point on this is… like Susan says a lot of unrestricted guys “can’t” get laid. And one of the things women are looking for in one night stands are guys they find “hot” by whatever definition they use. I always find it weird when PUAs think that women want one night stands with “alpha guys” which are usually at least partly defined by their level of wealth. What good is his money going to do her if they are just screwing one night while drunk? Seriously? But meh, anyway.

    Similarly, people say over and over that one of the reasons it’s not an “accomplishment” for a woman to be a slut is that nearly any woman can supposedly get sex any time she wants it. I do think it’s true that guys who want one night stands are often not picky, particularly if they can’t get really hot women. So they’ll sleep with anyone who spreads for them provided they aren’t totally repulsive. (But most people are pretty normal looking in the grand scheme of things). Plus, how many have heard guys charmingly say: “You can just put a bag over her head”? Clearly those who just pump and dump are using women as a masturbatory aid and aren’t nearly as picky as they pretend when they are bragging about their conquests to random strangers online. Plus, if you’re both drunk, how do you really know who is and isn’t good looking?

    There are actual studies that suggest the more attractive a woman is the fewer sexual partners she’s had. Why? Because she’s good looking enough that she can get what she wants from a guy without having to give it up too soon. Or she’s good looking enough that she can be picky and only sleep with what she considers the best of the best, which is also a smaller pool of people.

    A good looking woman who has ANY other good qualities besides just her looks can insist on nothing but relationships from men. And get it. The only really beautiful women who are screwing everything in sight are the very slim minority of women who swear they LOVE casual sex, and the ones with low self esteem or daddy issues. Yeah, have at it with that group.

    Sluttier does not equal prettier/hotter. But again, if you’re drunk, how the hell would you know? It fascinates and amuses me that people who have one night stands think they can “rate” the other person when it’s highly doubtful they were sober. So how accurate is their rating system?

  • Apple

    No, Gin… honey… try to follow me here… Game is this stupid thing created on the internet to help betas with issues of “my sad boner” and “boner rage” trick and manipulate women through some rather nasty methods including negging and other bullshit to get them into bed.

    Mr. Apple was just in college during the 80s and partied a lot. He’s not a dickhead manipulating women. Game is practically sociopathic. If you are pretending that the passive parts of Game that are just decent social skills and being somewhat attractive to women is “Game” then there is a real problem here.

    A man having a lot of sexual partners at one time isn’t equivalent with “Game”. You also seemed to miss the part that in the grand scheme I consider that a mark AGAINST him. It’s only because he stopped being a man whore for about a decade before I even met him that he got anything from me at all.

    Had he currently been sleeping around, I would not have gone out with him. That doesn’t match my value system.

  • @Apple

    I agree that restricted doesn’t mean ugly.

    There are actual studies that suggest the more attractive a woman is the fewer sexual partners she’s had. Why? Because she’s good looking enough that she can get what she wants from a guy without having to give it up too soon. Or she’s good looking enough that she can be picky and only sleep with what she considers the best of the best, which is also a smaller pool of people.

    There was a thread on this topic a couple posts back that I participated in. 🙂 The study quoted showed that very attractive women had about 5.15 partners, attractive 5.6 and average 5.7, so not that much difference really. About 0.5 partners less for the very attractive, that were 10% of the sample. Also the same portion of relationships were sexual only across these three groups.

  • Apple

    @Fish you make a good point about good person vs. bad and partner count. It’s a silly litmus test. However, a high N for EITHER sex IMO indicates some potential issues. In women, to me at least, it can indicate daddy issues, poor self esteem, psychological issues. (I know some may find that very harsh, but of all the women I’ve known with a high number, none of them seemed to have ANY aspect of their life together and they were all insecure as hell. LTR’s are hard enough as it is, particularly in the current world that doesn’t really support them socially, someone with excess baggage should be handled with extreme caution.)

    For men, it’s a bad sign because it indicates a potential lack of respect for women, a potential pump and dump mentality, potential for lots of STDs, someone who can’t be faithful in a relationship (and I’m sorry but there are men who can be faithful in a relationship. And claiming it’s “evolution” is a piss poor excuse for lack of self control.)

    But… a man who played around in his college days, who still seemed to have some ETHIC about it (i.e. not following “Mystery” or “Style” or any of these stupid PUA’s like Tucker Max. Gross.) and who also had a decade of social proof that they could ALSO be monogamous, respectful of women, were really decent guys, that is different.

    The judgments those of us in LTR’s make about potential partners do not happen in a vacuum. In general high N for EITHER sex makes me very wary about the person in general. But one negative thing judged in light of everything else makes more sense than saying: “Oh, you had a lot of partners so you are out.”

    Mr. Apple had to have a LOT of good qualities as a human being, and a long period of fidelity and monogamy, and treating his mom well, and a long list of other things, to overcome his N. So… those of you like Gin who think people like me are playing into all your goofy beliefs about this stuff… um yeah. This might be why you think PUA is a great idea. Because you are looking at things totally out of context of the real world in which they happen.

  • @Apple

    I don’t think you’re fairly representing game. Yeah, there are some “dark” practitioners that want to trick women into bed but most guys who study game just want to remove some of their pedastalizing and awkward attitudes and behaviors so they can get a gf. Men are often taught the absolute opposite of what it takes to create attraction in women and so they need someone to step in and tell them a few things to do differently.

    I am an example of one such guy. I was very nice to women, pedastalized them and thought that I could get the girl by being the nicest guy ever. Well, I dated a lot but things rarely went anywhere.

    After a heartbreaking break up with a Mormon girl I wanted to marry I found David DeAngelo’s Double Your Dating. I read the promotional material and a lot of the advice seemed to agree with how I had acted when women actually were attracted to me (before screwing it up) and so I bought it. Now I don’t agree with 100% of what he wrote but roughly 90-95% was pretty helpful and started a long process of helping develop a bit more inner and outer game (I’m still a work in progress).

    So, I think game is much different than how you described it and it can help a lot of good-hearted guys. I think A Definite Beta Guy and Lokland on here have also benefitted from reading some game stuff (but correct me if I’m wrong).

    A guy who used to post here, Ted, who is as restricted and noble in a relationship as they come, has benefited by learning game. I’m sure there are many other examples of men on this blog that have benefitted from it and as they become better men their partners have too.

  • Gin Martini

    I don’t disagree JP, but I’m here to help, not psychoanalyze. She wants what she wants.

    Fish – no, unrestricted mostly means variety from different people, whether realized or not. Read the SOI. The craziest freak can be completely unrestricted if it only involves one person.

  • @Susan
    the sisterhood of the travelling work pants.

    “Haha, I love it!”

    LOL, glad you enjoyed it. As a former consultant I thought you might appreciate the three words joined together.

  • Fish

    @Sassy
    “It’s also true that getting splooge in your eye burns like you wouldn’t believe.”
    Diced jalapenos, forgot to wash hands, took out contacts. . . Never had jizz in my eye, but I think I feel your pain. . .

    @Apple
    I agree with almost the entirety of your post #364. However, I think (and data from the other post seems to show) there are restricted and unrestricted women from all levels of attractiveness. i would never claim restricted types are less attractive, that has not been my experience. One of the most gorgeous quality women I know was saving herself for marriage (as of age 23 she was a virgin, we sort of lost touch aside from being FB friends). She is one of the few 10’s I know in person. I don’t actually know any unrestricted women that hot, which may support your point.

    Re:facials
    Not my thing, I prefer to keep it below the waist. . .

  • Man

    @Sassy: I think that Susan is right that there are conflicting desires in you. From what you have been stating here, you want a big dick, dominant, unrestricted mate. (By the way, from what you have been posting here about your sexual preferences I wonder how you managed to get to this self-reported N of 6 🙂 ). Back to topic, previously you also shared that you like to dance and you had been going to dancing balls to find a mate.

    I think you need a whole different strategy. You seem to be looking for the wrong men in the wrong places.

    You need to define first what you really want: a big dick, wealthy, dominant and unrestricted guy? I will try to outline a strategy I think might be useful for you:

    I think you’d better dress your best slutty and sexy and go to places where there is, say, a “demand” for ladies like you, such as clubs, bars, etc. Then filter out the restricted, timid, nice, gentle, smiling, small package types, while striving to filter in the ones who appear to be really bad, dominant and over-confident, with a big package (probably your best bet, unless their dick size is written on their heads). By dressing very slutty and sexy you’re already likely to be approached by the latter anyway. Once you’ve screened an interesting stud, play easy to get to him until you hook him. Then you have to “defeat” him in which he thinks he’s best and strong, i.e., in the bed and in his own “game”. If you manage to defeat him in the bed, while keeping some emotional distance (mirroring his own game) he might become your, say, “slave”. Then eventually you might give him the “privilege” of a relationship with you, if you think he’s your type and he deserves you. In other words, if you’re unrestricted and want an equally unrestricted type, you’d better act like one.

  • Fish

    @hansolo
    ” I personally like to cum inside a woman because a pussy is my dick’s favorite part of a woman’s body, much better than a mouth, hand or other.”

    Lower back. Thats why god invented tramp stamps. . .

  • @Fish

    I’ll take your jalapeños in the eye and up the ante (or at least add to it). 🙂

    I cut up some jalapeños and then later masturbated. Talk about a painful dick on fire! lol

    • I cut up some jalapeños and then later masturbated. Talk about a painful dick on fire! lol

      A writer named Jon Ray, who was a commenter here in the early days, wrote about an incident like this. He was on a date with a woman in Austin, TX at a great Mexican restaurant. He loves pickled jalapenos and was scooping them up with his hands like popcorn. Later, back at his place, he got her panties off and began to finger her. Suddenly she started screaming. Desperate to find a way to stop the burning he dumped a container of yogurt on her vagina. It’s one of the funniest things I have ever read. They didn’t go out again.

  • Apple

    LOL Hansolo!

  • Fish

    @Susan
    “To what degree do you believe you have been conditioned by watching porn?”

    I can’t speak for facials because i’ve never given one, but it did warp my sense of reasonableness with anal. In porn, its completely reasonable my size or bigger and they don’t seem to prepare at all. It didn’t help that my first experience was basically “porn-like”. Porn is a really hard standard for “normal” girls to live up to.

  • SayWhaat

    All guys, even the ones who are not good at reading IOIs, understand on at least a subconscious level when a girl is “looking.”

    I never even made my relationship public on Facebook, but I experienced a flurry of activity after the breakup. Seriously, you dudes, this is some ESP-level shit! 😛

    @ purplesneakers

    I don’t mean dressing slutty, necessarily, I mean dressing sexy and feminine. This is one of those other pieces of advice I find confusing–be sexy enough to get his attention, but not so sexy that you get the attention of other men??

    You got some good advice in this thread, so I’ll only add that you should identify and dress to flatter your body type, and also check out the Girl Game challenges (there were 8 total).

    Also, as someone who has also dealt with low self-esteem (I mean, who hasn’t?), I have found that the best way to get over it is by 1) faking it until you make it, and 2) be gracious about the compliments you receive.

    In other words, act how you think a high-quality woman would act. Eventually, you will be able to internalize those behaviors.

  • @Fish

    LOL Target practice, I guess.

    I once had one woman (my 3rd parnter ever) who said she loved it on the tits and so I went to do it but I was so pent up that it shot over her head and onto the nightstand-bedframe behind and above her bed.

    And with another one I was trying for her tits but totally overshot into her curtains!!!! 😀

  • @Apple

    Also wanted to add I’m not mad at you because of my different opinion about game.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo When talking about these averages of how many partners pretty, not pretty, average, ugly, whatever has, you’re not dealing with a lot of real numbers because it doesn’t take a lot of outliers to screw the average. Like… people who have 2.4 children. NOBODY can actually have 2.4 children. There is a huge range. And most “slutty women” have way more than 5 partners. And there are plenty of women who have never had that many.

    I had 3. Two of them I married. One of them I seriously regretted. I would prefer it if my number were 2 if we were going to be baldly honest about it. Not because I have some issue with the number itself, but because one of those guys… I was emotionally vulnerable and thought he cared about me, but he was just VERY good at manipulation. The experience with him is why I won’t have sex ever outside of a committed relationship headed toward marriage. If something happened to Mr. Apple and it meant I ended up single for the rest of my life because of this standard, that would be okay with me. I would rather be single than used by an asshole. I still have rather violent thoughts about that man and hope there is a special place in hell and a window where I can watch.

    • @Apple

      When talking about these averages of how many partners pretty, not pretty, average, ugly, whatever has, you’re not dealing with a lot of real numbers because it doesn’t take a lot of outliers to screw the average. Like… people who have 2.4 children. NOBODY can actually have 2.4 children. There is a huge range. And most “slutty women” have way more than 5 partners. And there are plenty of women who have never had that many.

      At the risk of beating a dead horse – I have said this several times in the last couple of weeks alone – using a mean is not very informative when it comes to sex. The distribution is critical, as the highly unrestricted people in the sample are likely to have numbers way out in the long tail of the distribution.

      For example (purely hypothetical), when asking 1000 men and women how many lifetime sexual partners they want, almost everyone says 1. 5% of men say 10,000. 5% of women say 1,000 (smaller due to sex differences). Then we ooh and aah about the difference. The mean male preference is 501 partners, while the mean female preference is only 51. Men want sexual variety and only forego it because they lack opportunity! Alert the manosphere! Meanwhile, 95% of people are happy to boo up in monogamous relationships.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo, My problems with Game is that there is misogyny embedded in almost all of it. Even the “nice guys” saying “you don’t understand Game or Red Pill or MGTOW or blah blah blah” STILL tend to say crap like “women this” and “women that” (with the “all”) implied.

    I had a “nice Red Pill Guy” who believed in game telling me constantly that I was a feminist simply because I didn’t agree with all of his generalized assertions about women and “how we are”. It was incredibly insulting to be spoken to like that, like I wasn’t even a person but some software program that you just had to type the right command into.

    I can appreciate that some guys are seriously just socially clueless about how to attract women. And yes, there are SOME aspects of Game that address that. Generally the more passive aspects like becoming less socially awkward and more confident and such like that. But a BIG part of Game includes nasty manipulation tactics including things like “negging”. Much of “Game” only works on insecure drunk women.

    I think a lot of basically good guys could use some aspects of Game for their benefit without harming women. However, there is so much misogyny and nastiness that comes along with Game, that IMO it takes a guy with strong integrity to overcome such a toxic environment and constant rationalization doesn’t change that. (And these men say women have the rationalization hamster. Wow.)

  • @Apple

    Yes, means can be quite different than the median but not in the case of this study.

    They also provide the third quartile which is between the median and the highest value (or basically, the 75th percentile, meaning 75% below, 25% above).

    They found these 3rd quartile numbers:

    Very attractive women 6
    Attractive women 7
    Average women 7

    So, only 1 partner less than the 7 that average and attractive women had. So, yes, very attractive women (top 10% as seen in this study) can be more picky and have sex in relationships more easily than other women but the difference in N doesn’t seem to be that big (6 vs 7) for the third quartile of women.

    Also, the first quartile showed all three groups were the same, with N=2.

    See Table 2 of the study mentioned here.

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19485565.2011.615172

  • Apple

    @Fish

    Oh I agree. I’m not saying unrestricted women are “all ugly” or restricted women are “all hot goddesses” (I mean it would be a bit self-serving wouldn’t it? Considering I’m restricted… if by restricted we just mean partner count and willingness to have sex only inside a committed relationship.)

    I’m simply saying that “in general”, very attractive women often more easily have the OPTION to hold out longer.

    I think for the most part a woman has to get a man emotionally on the hook before she sleeps with him. (If she just wants relationships.) It doesn’t help that there are so many manipulators out there, so you have to wade through so much crap to figure out true intent.

    I got taken once. Never the hell again.

    LOL @ not knowing any unrestricted women that hot which may support my point hahahahahahahaha. 😛

    I will say, I don’t think I’m a 10, but I do know I’m very pretty and I’m aging like a vampire. HA! (Great genetics from mom and G-mom.)

    Now… Fish… you don’t like facials? tsk tsk… and I thought you were a wild one! 😛

  • purplesneakers

    I still don’t feel like I understand why you wanted him so much. Was he charismatic? Good looking? Funny? Confident? What really turned you on so much?

    He had a lot of these good qualities, but there were also things that I didn’t like. I think it was mostly the feeling of rejection and mindset of scarcity that has caused me to think ‘what if’ and about everything I potentially missed out on with this one guy.

    @Bastiat,

    I could get into facials, but only with a man that I really love and trust and want to feel ‘owned’ by (that author makes it sound like she’s into it with just any guy she picks up at the bar), and who I know loves me and respects me even as we’re doing degrading nasty shit in bed, because that’s the appeal of it. I hate, hate, HAAAAAATE when feminists write about sex and try to make stuff where the whole point is that you’re doing something submissive, and instead try to turn it into something ’empowering’ (ugh). I feel like we would all be so much better off if feminists never talked about people’s private sex lives, especially not their own, and rationalizations for trying to show ‘no wait, it’s feminist! it really is!’ Just do whatever turns you on and STFU!!

    I feel like I fit your example of the 2nd wave feminist/restricted woman worried about mate-poaching. My disdain for a culture that emphasizes women’s overt sexuality at the expense of other things comes from a variety of sources, actually: traditional upbringing, dabbling in more 2nd wave feminist sources in high school (I think it started when I read Ariel Levy’s “Female Chauvinist Pigs”), and possibly jealousy, I’ll admit, although the more I learn about men the less I feel jealous, actually.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo, I didn’t think you were mad at me. 🙂 Different opinions happen.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Man

    I think that Susan is right that there are conflicting desires in you. From what you have been stating here, you want a big dick, dominant, unrestricted mate. (By the way, from what you have been posting here about your sexual preferences I wonder how you managed to get to this self-reported N of 6 ).

    I had boyfriends that liked to explore as much as I do. Excluding some activities, I’ll try most things at least once.

    You need to define first what you really want: a big dick, wealthy, dominant and unrestricted guy? I will try to outline a strategy I think might be useful for you:

    Surprisingly, as much as I like it when a man has a lot of money, status/wealth is the area that I am the most lenient on. A guy does not need to make a ton of money to catch my eye. Having said that, my leniency in this area is probably made up for by my harsh standards of male physical attractiveness.

    I think you’d better dress your best slutty and sexy and go to places where there is, say, a “demand” for ladies like you, such as clubs, bars, etc. Then filter out the restricted, timid, nice, gentle, smiling, small package types, while striving to filter in the ones who appear to be really bad, dominant and over-confident, with a big package (probably your best bet, unless their dick size is written on their heads). By dressing very slutty and sexy you’re already likely to be approached by the latter anyway. Once you’ve screened an interesting stud, play easy to get to him until you hook him. Then you have to “defeat” him in which he thinks he’s best and strong, i.e., in the bed and in his own “game”. If you manage to defeat him in the bed, while keeping some emotional distance (mirroring his own game) he might become your, say, “slave”. Then eventually you might give him the “privilege” of a relationship with you, if you think he’s your type and he deserves you. In other words, if you’re unrestricted and want an equally unrestricted type, you’d better act like one.

    Umm, I don’t think this would work for me. It doesn’t really jibe with who I am as a person. I’ll amend that scenario into the following adaptation:

    Go to the bar in my normal style/fashion (Which I categorize as classic styles mixed with vampy/seductive touches). Spot attractive artsy guy across the room. Give him “come hither” eye contact. He approaches and we chat/flirt. He gets my number and we go on a date in the future. I’m thoroughly intrigued by not only his looks, but by his personality as well. I feel inspired to continue seeing him, because the chemistry is so strong, and the feeling is mutual. We wait to have sex a bit, but we engage in foreplay like nobody’s business. When we are finally ready, and we are officially together, he bangs me so well that I forget my own name. We continue to bang like rabbits in the relationship, while also exploring each other mentally. As time passes, I don’t get bored with him/we don’t have any major incompatibilities/my fears about commitment don’t make me sabotage the relationship/etc. We stay together, our love for each other grows, and the thought of being with him for the rest of my life doesn’t fill me with dread/nausea/boredom. We either stay together, or even eventually get married.

    That’s how I would want things to be.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    “I think a lot of basically good guys could use some aspects of Game for their benefit without harming women.”

    I think there is game and there is Game. I am naturally loud, funny, easygoing, a lot of women are drawn to that. I look at that as game. Negging, strategy, all that BS, “Game”, while I’m sure its effective, I have too much self respect to be someone I’m not to get into some girl’s panties. My N is high enough, she can want to bang me for me or not at all (and I’ll fwap to porn, no loss)

    While I might prioritize sex in a relationship, I do not prioritize it at the cost of all else. I think the good thing is that most guys who do are fairly transparent. I think the best defense a woman can have to Game, is to learn about it so she sees it coming and can defend herself accordingly.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo the clarifications you pointed out on that study would seem to suggest that maybe… women who can have relationships easier aren’t necessarily the hottest/most beautiful but they have the self confidence/self-worth/backbone to stand up for what they want.

    A really pretty girl is likely to have been very well-reinforced in her lifetime about how high she can aim and what she can have. A more average girl probably not so much. But, judging from the numbers you show… nearly any girl with sufficient self worth, patience, and strength of will can hold out for what she really wants.

  • Sassy6519

    @ HanSolo

    LOL Target practice, I guess.

    I once had one woman (my 3rd parnter ever) who said she loved it on the tits and so I went to do it but I was so pent up that it shot over her head and onto the nightstand-bedframe behind and above her bed.

    And with another one I was trying for her tits but totally overshot into her curtains!!!!

    Woah!

    Talk about having some strong bursts. Good lord.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    “Now… Fish… you don’t like facials? tsk tsk… and I thought you were a wild one! ”

    i’ve done a lot, pretty much crossed off my whole sexual bucket list. The only stuff that i do regularly is really certain positions, oral & ass play. I actually consider myself a 4/10 kinkiness speaking. I am probably close to moderate unrestricted rather than “true” unrestricted.. .

  • @Apple

    I don’t like misogyny and I’m not an ALL men or women are this way or that kind of guy. That guy sounds like a tool and no one who thinks all women are this way or that has truly taken the red pill. The true red pill sees women on a spectrum.

    But for all the misogyny that exists in certain people there is much more culturally-institutionalized misandry (all while proclaiming that there’s a war on women) that harms men. Look at the education system where men are doing worse than women and yet few feminists that supposedly support equality are stepping forward to improve things. No, they crow about how maybe women were superior all along. Suicide is the leading cause of death of men 15-49 in the developed world (about 5x more men commit suicide than women) but where is the attention to this? I think that there are many other issues that men face but feminists keep harping on men being the privileged ones.

    Also, in most of the game material I’ve ever read the men claim to like women and aren’t into tricking them. Now, what the reader does with that is a very different thing.

    Don’t mistake heartiste for all of game.

  • Apple

    @Fish I would tend to agree with you re: game vs. Game. I definitely think Mr. Apple had game instead of using GAME when he was in college. Everything about his character suggests as much. I don’t know how old you are, but maybe you are him on an earlier timeline, LOL

    I also think knowing about GAME can help a lot of women to avoid being manipulated. The guy who manipulated me convinced me he really had feelings for me… love feelings. (Looking back I think he may have believed his own bullshit so that may have been why it was so damn convincing. I don’t think he’s necessarily a true sociopath, but… at that time in my life I was more vulnerable than normal. I don’t think he would have gotten “through the gate” otherwise. He should realize how lucky he was, but he probably never will. And by lucky I don’t mean because I’m “so awesome” or something lame like that, but how unlikely what he got was given how I feel about sex without real love.)

    I would hope that my experience with that guy, my awareness of the factors that can make me want to believe something that isn’t true, and awareness of GAME would help me if I were ever single again (i.e. if Mr. Apple died before me.) But frankly, I really don’t think I ever want anybody else even if that should happen. And ideally we’ll both die in a plane crash or something. (so neither of us loses the other.)

  • Apple

    hehehe Fish, now the truth comes out! (I’m just taking the piss out of you. 😛 )

  • Hope

    Man “Hope was the only HUS reader/woman who successfully managed to get me to open up emotionally.”

    Well, thanks. All it takes is some active listening. 🙂

    purplesneakers “I have no idea how to do “sexual innuendo and banter,” and I have trouble opening up and letting my ‘real’ self shine through too. I guess I feel like no one would ever want to be with me, so I don’t see any point in trying and only opening myself up to lots of rejection.”

    Sure you do. We all do. Talking about anything sex-related is sexual banter. You’re doing sexual banter with me right now! 😛 And you’re letting your “real self” shine through right now, by being honest about how you feel. That’s it. You don’t have to pretend to do anything else. Just say what’s on your mind, politely.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo

    I haven’t mistaken Heartiste for all of game. I mean THE GAME… (book by Neil Strauss) and that moron “Mystery” (Seriously, what self-respecting women sleeps with a goofball in a fuzzy hat??? OMFG WHAT?)

    Anyway… I do agree there is institutionalized misandry, but I also believe there is still institutionalized misogyny. I think whatever gender you are is likely to make it easier for you to see the inequalities and issues for your own gender and not really see the issues for the other.

    Plus there are other things besides misandry OR misogyny that can result in the same results. i.e. Oligarchy, insane religious fundamentalism, etc.

    I think the solution is for us to stop seeing people as “generalities” and deal with people as individuals. If that could happen, we wouldn’t HAVE these issues. Unfortunately, categories and labels are shorthand. I even say stuff like “PUA type” and think most guys who use “game” are douches. But… I recognize that you are probably not one of those guys and neither is Fish. Everything in life and especially with human beings does not exist on a binary. Most of our social insistence that it does is where the real harm comes from IMO.

  • Man

    @Apple:

    I agree about your views on good looking women. I don’t know if this actually a kind of self-selecting visual bias, but the most beautiful women I have known are all the restricted types. I think that there is an emotional component in the way men assess a woman’s beauty.

    About your views on “game” I generally agree. But I cannot really condemn most of guys who resort to “game” tactics or to get information in the “sphere”. The heavy toll of all feminist injustices and misandry falls on the shoulders of “nice, straight guys”, not on the shoulders of players or cads, who are actually benefited by the system. No wonder so many of them end up in misogyny. Even though from an ethical or even spiritual standpoint it’s not justifiable they have the right of self-defence from the psychological and emotional aggression they are often subjected to. For instance, being classified as inferior and “beta” for all the right reasons (being nice, gentle, educated, kind, etc.) and expecting them to accept such a condition is utterly degrading and dehumanizing.

  • Apple

    @Man I kind of hate this “alpha/beta” binary because it’s not even real. I mean Mr. Apple has a lot of traits (his N alone by most people’s standards, especially since “Game” and PUA crap wasn’t really around back then… would label him as an “alpha”) he also doesn’t take shit from anyone, he’s not easy to manipulate, and he’s incredibly self-possessed. But he’s also incredibly kind, has a lot of integrity, really respects me as a person and my views about things, doesn’t assume he is right all the time about everything, is faithful, has high values.

    So is he alpha or beta? *I* think he’s alpha, but judging by the binary people often use… I’m not sure how they would class him since he definitely has good traits that are supposedly “beta”. I find it obnoxious to suggest a dominant and self assured guy cannot be a GOOD guy with the “good beta qualities”. Or that a beta guy can’t have any backbone at all.

    Maybe this is another binary we need to get away from altogether.

  • @Apple

    The thing you need to realize about game and Game is that women by and large set the standards and the price for which men get sex (especially if talking about casual or short-term sex and excluding the uber-alphas that can get it quite easily). So Mystery responded to what the niche-market he was seeking to “buy” was demanding. It was really the club women that implicitly developed Game and he just learned by observation and experimentation that they were demanding Game as the price to enter their vaginal confines. Now some of the Game stuff he learned tends to apply more to the excitement seeking unrestricteds but a lot of it applies in general.

    That is one of the biggest red pills that most women don’t want to take: the fact that in a relatively free sexual market, they collectively are who sets the price and conditions for sex. Women used to shame the sluts to keep them in line. Now they either praise them, say to each their own, or remain silent. Plus, with so many women choosing to date, sex or marry assholes, they send out market signals that that is what is in demand. Slowly men are responding.

    That’s another big insight. Most men are reactive and will change to get pussy (either casual or committed).

    In today’s age of feminist proclaimed victimization of women, women need to realize that they’ve gained all the environmental power they need and start just looking at the role they’re playing in things.

    Stop blaming cads. Stop choosing cads. Choose the dads if that’s what is really wanted. However, I think a lot of women actually want the cads…however, they just can’t get them to commit.

    • Women used to shame the sluts to keep them in line. Now they either praise them, say to each their own, or remain silent.

      I don’t think this is true. Non-sluts have never praised sluts. And the study I wrote about last week demonstrated that non-sluts reject sluts for friendship, which is slut shaming, pure and simple. As it is, only a small minority of females is slutty – I’m not sure that wasn’t the case back when we had full blow slut shaming. There will always be women who give up all female validation in the pursuit of male validation.

      Plus, with so many women choosing to date, sex or marry assholes, they send out market signals that that is what is in demand.

      Pluralistic Ignorance again. The data just doesn’t support this claim. For starters, assholes don’t do relationships very well, much less marriage.

      However, I think a lot of women actually want the cads…however, they just can’t get them to commit.

      More PI here. Remember the study that looked at the most promiscuous men on campus? From the post:

      What do players actually do?

      50% have more than one sex partner per year, compared to 20% of non-players.
      3-5% have 4 or more partners per year over a four-year span.
      Having multiple sex partners concurrently becomes more common among men who have 5 or more partners per year.
      In any given year, aspiring Casanovas may be up to 15% of the male population, but only about 5% of men sustain this behavior for three years.

      Only 15% of men even aspire to be players. Perhaps in the U.S. population that is “many,” but not as a percentage of the whole.

      http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/11/19/hookinguprealities/men-want-sex-with-girlfriends-not-randoms/

  • @Apple

    I think whatever gender you are is likely to make it easier for you to see the inequalities and issues for your own gender and not really see the issues for the other.

    I disagree with this. I used to totally see women as the victims in most things and men as the terrible, sinful agressors. It got so drilled into me that men were just potential rapists and responsible for most of the ills in the world that I often felt vicarious guilt for being a man. I know many other men that were raised this way.

    Of course I believe many men do bad things and that there are real female victims.

    However, it has been liberating to realize that my sex hasn’t been the arch-villain that feminists, pop-culture, academia and PC media have often claimed (though not minimizing the bad that many men have done).

  • Apple

    Oh, I “get” all of this, HanSolo. Again, please don’t assume what I do and do not get about all this (unless you aren’t assuming and are just speaking generally, in which case, ok). And I shame the hell out of sluts because I think it’s gross and trashy. I also think it’s pretty gross when men do it too much. It doesn’t mean I have no heart or can’t get to know someone and like other qualities about them but I’m never going to pretend I approve of sluts because I don’t. They make it harder for all the “good girls” to get what they want out of life.

    And the stupidest part? The vast majority of the sluts want the SAME THINGS the “good girls” want. They just have some deep psychological issues or insecurity or daddy issues for the most part that makes them behave in ways that aren’t good for them and their long term goals. But they aren’t hurting just themselves. They’re hurting women in general. So yeah… no… I don’t “support sluts”. It’s also part of the reason why I would very likely remain single if I ever became single again. I surely would not go “looking for love”. The entire sexual marketplace has been screwed up by the sexual revolution and sluts.

    I think you should consider that women don’t “want assholes”. Many women have just had such an F’d up history that they don’t understand they deserve better. Women are still socialized to “be nice” and “get along” or else they are “bitches”. So, again, despite all the misandry out there, there is still a lot out there that is harmful to women and how women “turn out”. The biggest problems I see are the pre-feminism issues meeting post feminist realities.

    Women are STILL taught socially to be and behave in certain ways that can make them marks for predators. They still don’t stand up for themselves enough. So you mistake that for “women want assholes”. Also, you mention that “Game” is mostly about the bar scene. You do understand that “the bar scene” is not where ALL women go, right?

    I don’t even like bars and don’t go to them. I’ve never been drunk in my life. (Note: I do not think drinking is a “moral failing” I just personally don’t see the appeal outside of like a glass of wine with dinner occasionally.)

    “men will change to get pussy” is a fairly misogynistic way of seeing things to begin with. Because it’s saying that the highest priority is getting into a vagina, and not caring about a person for who she is or getting to know her. It’s all about “how to get the sex”. Gee, I can’t imagine why that attitude would make a woman feel like shit.

    I also understand, though, that men have extremely high sex drives in general, particularly in their twenties. Most women might do better to not even start looking for a man under 30. Before that point it seems like there is too much testosterone in the way of basic humanity.

    • And the stupidest part? The vast majority of the sluts want the SAME THINGS the “good girls” want. They just have some deep psychological issues or insecurity or daddy issues for the most part that makes them behave in ways that aren’t good for them and their long term goals.

      +1

      “men will change to get pussy” is a fairly misogynistic way of seeing things to begin with. Because it’s saying that the highest priority is getting into a vagina, and not caring about a person for who she is or getting to know her. It’s all about “how to get the sex”.

      Men who study Game will often profess to be only interested in “what works.” We have had many ethical debates here over deception, emotional manipulation, including deliberately creating false jealousy and anxiety in one’s partner to keep them keen. There have also been male commenters here who have rationalized being an asshole for a while on the road to being a better man. These arguments are not morally defensible, yet some men do take cover under “Game” or “red pill knowledge.”

  • Apple

    @Hansolo, so you just reversed your stance and decided women were the villains instead? Make no mistake, there is a lot of misogyny in the world. I did not say and do not think that women are all “victims”. In fact, one of the things I hate about feminism is the victim narrative. It’s not empowering to tell women they’ve been oppressed forever and are still oppressed by “the patriarchy”. I don’t think the patriarchy was originally intended to “harm women” in the first place, but to protect them. Then the world changed and some things had to change with it.

    Fine.

    But yeah, it’s gone way too far in the other direction. The problem with feminism is that it set up a battle of the sexes of the MEN vs. the WOMEN and that is not how men and women are supposed to interact together. It’s poisoned the well. There is probably now even more misogyny because anytime you set up a binary of a GOOD gender and a BAD gender all you’re doing is creating more hostility, hatred, and mistrust.

    But just because men are treated like shit in our world does NOT mean women “have everything”. From a legal perspective, you’re right, but when it comes to how men think of and treat women “in general”, well, look around you… shit like “The Game” could not happen in a vacuum of truly GOOD guys.

    If being a “nice guy” is simply a strategy to get laid, then you are not a nice guy. Sex is not a reward you get for being nice to women. Being nice should be the basic bare minimum of human behavior toward other human beings. Guys who say “I couldn’t get with women being a nice guy… but I was a NICE GUY”… to me going on about how nice a guy you are is equivalent to saying: “This is the best pen on the market! It has INK in it!” Or “Wow, look at this car! It has TIRES!”

    This is my problem with humanity in general. Most people male or female are not that nice. Not really. Respect for each other is in such short supply that yeah… I could easily be single forever if necessary.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “What do you like about it? What need does it fulfill? Is it a question of variety? To what degree do you believe you have been conditioned by watching porn?”

    Inflation of dominant-submissive roles within the relationship.
    A BJ is inherently submissive, think about the body position–knelt down, head down.

    A facial just takes it one step further.

    Not variety.

    Probably never would have occurred to me without porn.

    ———-

    I prefer finishing inside the V over a facial which is preferred to all other potential landing zones.

    ——-

    More into the dom-sub roles. I don’t like giving oral if I am not also receiving it at the same time.

    Most of the time it devolves into her biting my leg with me working but that is not the point.

    I dislike the loss of dominance when becoming the submissive one.

    She has never asked nor hinted at wanting oral for just her and the few times we have attempted it were less than stellar for both of us.

    • I prefer finishing inside the V over a facial which is preferred to all other potential landing zones.

      This is why I’m surprised. I would have imagined it feels better to come inside a woman’s body than to use your own hand for the final bit.

      The young women I know do not object to being ejaculated on – no big deal. But they do often feel uncomfortable at the idea of acting out porn, of having the guy’s desires coming straight from porn, which, after all, does not concern itself with female pleasure at all.

  • It’s not mysogynistic, it’s just biological reality. If a man can’t get any pussy he weeds himself out of the gene pool and so it doesn’t matter whether he likes women for other things or not.

    Men aren’t just about sex but sex is a big thing to most men. Most men also would like a good relationship and for that they care about many things that a woman brings to the table. However, for casual, not as much.

    So, men won’t just change to get pussy–they’ll do that if they just want casual–they’ll change to get women if they want to get married and removing a lot of anti-game is needed for some/many men. Basically, they have to add more short-term attractive things than they had to 50+ years ago because women don’t need the provider/protector as much at a personal level and are free to seek other forms of attraction generation in men.

    What I’m talking about probably refers more to men and women in their 20’s where women have much more sexual power than men (and many of the women putting off relationships for career means they are more seeking just short-term things or nothing, the net effect being that the men she might have considered are left out in the cold for relationships and have to either try for casual with her or go to other women, but there’s less of these relationship-seeking women by the very fact that a good number are putting off relationships).

    Now, as women age and hit their mid-30’s and beyond then the power shifts more to men and amongst the divorced or singles that are mid-30’s are higher then men will collectively have more power and so it’s women who have to adapt more to what the men want then.

  • Lokland

    @Apple, 364

    I have no clue what you are trying to tell me.

  • Lokland

    @Purple

    “I don’t mean dressing slutty, necessarily, I mean dressing sexy and feminine. This is one of those other pieces of advice I find confusing–be sexy enough to get his attention, but not so sexy that you get the attention of other men??”

    Single: Be sexy enough to get attention of men in general. Only pay attention to man whom you are interested in. Ignore others (in his presence).

    Relationship: Be sexy enough to keep boyfriend happy. This may or may not be enough to attract other men. If not, no problems. If yes, ignore advances of other men with clear cut rejections being given out (when in boyfriends presence).

    Essentially, if your interested or dating a guy attention should not be paid to other men.

  • @Apple

    I don’t think women are now the villains. But I do think that things have drastically changed in an asymmetric way. Also, feminism has only really touched the developed world to a significant degree, though it is making inroads into many middle economy countries like Brazil. So, yes in many places there is a lot of misogyny still, like Afghanistan and Pakistan and many others.

    The rich/safe environment we live in in developed countries, though, has reduced the value that the male role of provider-protector holds. This was the core competency that most men brought to the table. Now it’s been reduced. Most men don’t have a whole lot of sexy sizzle to bring to the table but that is more of what is needed in today’s age (in rich countries) to attract women, especially women in their most fertile and beautiful years.

    So, basically, many men are facing an existential crisis of what their role is. A lot of them can’t even put a finger on it or know how to articulate it but it’s out their percolating through their subconscious.

  • Lokland

    Clarification:

    In relationship: Dressing like a hoe is bad because it signals sexual availability. Advertising sexual availability is a bad idea because your boyfriend should know that your available. The only purpose of dressing in a manner that says DTF while in a relationship is an assumed intent to attract other men.

  • Man

    @Sassy: (#391). I still think that my proposed plan is more consistent with your goals (big dick, dominant, confident, etc.) because you would take a more active, congruent role. If you are lenient about the “wealthy” part, even better. Anyway, good luck.

  • Abbot

    That Cornell study really twisted the panties. This topic is so front and central among feminists.

    “letting go of stigmas against women who engage in premarital sex is imperative.”

    Thats a first! The anger and frustration is so intense that they are now just letting it all pour out.

    This feminist reached for some old literature as a last ditched attempt to “justify” the serial mounting of multipenis:

    “In her work, Mead suggested that the Samoan practice of allowing adolescent girls to freely explore their sexuality with many partners before settling into married domestic life contributes to their relative ease and happiness in transitioning from girlhood to adulthood. ”

    Yeah, somehow grandma never felt at ease with grandpa. If she only knew about the multipenis approach she would have been sooo much happier. Oh well.

    Of course this article has the usual upsells “explore their sexuality” and “embrace her sexuality” whatever the fuck that means.

    http://www.neontommy.com/news/2013/06/phasing-out-slut#comment-184238

    .

  • Abbot
  • Man

    @HanSolo: I see that you and your friends just launched a blog. 🙂 Good luck with your new project.

    • @Han Solo

      Good luck with the new blog! Who is Morpheus? Sounds like a HUS regular under a new name.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo

    I think you make a lot of really reasonable points here and I see what you’re saying. I think the problem is that there are a lot of misogynistic assholes applying these types of principles toward more sinister ends so it creates a knee-jerk reaction in people like me who have been exposed to enough genuine “woman hatred” that was undeserved by me, that I hear something that sounds “sort of like” and immediately that screams misogyny to me. (Though I’m also pretty sensitive to misandry, which is why feminism annoys the crap out of me. Though I DO see SOME of their points. Just like I see SOME of the MRA’s points.)

    I think one of the big issues with the MRA is that they often start conflating genuine legal/social inequalities that SHOULD be addressed and are harmful to men, with “my sad boner”/”boner rage”. It’s like… there is this good discussion going on about how the legal system went too far in one direction on this or that issue but then it becomes about getting their penis serviced and the “hypergamous bitches” who won’t do it. If they could stick to the true social movement aspect of that, it would get them much farther.

    But… I also understand men want to have sex. Sex is a normal HUMAN desire, not just a male desire. But I guess the biggest problem I have with “Game” is that it’s conflating a lot of issues.

    Like “women want assholes”, well no, not really. Not unless they really have serious self-esteem or other issues. Sometimes women find one thing sexually appealing but not appealing for a relationship but because of oxytocin/bonding, it’s harder for them to break away from abusive situations/assholes. Which gives the impression that “women like assholes”.

    Then some women like men who are “assholes to other people but not to them” (Unfortunately that almost never plays out right because if it’s in a man’s character to indiscriminately treat people like shit, then sooner or later he’s going to turn on his sexual partner.)

    Then there is, what I consider the biggest issue… what many women find sexually arousing in the bedroom is going to ruin most relationships outside the bedroom. Since Game observes and deals mostly with the bar scene and casual hook-ups, it’s not really “meant” to be fully and truly applied to a long term relationship.

    The way Mr. Apple treats me IN THE BEDROOM would probably be ‘appalling’ to most. And it would reinforce many people’s view that “women like assholes”. It’s a running joke at our house that every time we do something sexual, I set back the women’s movement. 😛

    But… that does not translate to OUTSIDE the bedroom. Outside the bedroom, Mr. Apple treats me with respect as his equal. He consults me before making decisions that could affect me. He doesn’t control me or treat me in any condescending or demeaning way. He respects my autonomy, my intellect, and my feelings. So inside the bedroom he’s the “alpha asshole”, outside it… he’s very egalitarian. (Definitely a Jekyll/Hyde thing going haha)

    I think, (and I could be wrong, of course, but I think this is probably pretty close to the mark), that many women… when you strip away bad home lifes, insecurity/self esteem issues, get to the root of what they really want, etc… are turned on by very dominant alpha types in the bedroom, and maybe even being treated a certain way in the bedroom that outside it would be extremely demeaning and degrading.

    But outside the bedroom they probably want to be treated like human beings. And not disrespected or manipulated constantly.

    I think I’m probably more extreme in my tastes than many women, but not as extreme as others. Like some would like living that way all the time, not just treated that way in the bedroom, but I think that’s a minority of women. (And definitely a minority once you strip away confounding factors like home life, past abuse, self esteem issues, etc.)

    But, unfortunately, I think a lot of women in their early 20’s haven’t had a chance to sort all this out, which is why it’s so much easier for a PUA to pick up a girl that young, then it is for their techniques to work on a woman in her mid-thirties. (I also suspect their “Oh girls are so ICKY and OLD and GROSS and have “hit the wall” after 25 has more to do with how hard it is to manipulate most women the older they get. So finding every woman over a certain age “gross” is a way to save face.)

    I also think that it’s hurtful to women in general to be treated in certain ways in the bedroom by a man who doesn’t really love them and is just using them. It’s one thing for a man like Tucker Max to introduce a woman to his dog as “the new slut” (a man who obviously has deep disdain for women and really believes women are nasty sluts). It’s a totally OTHER thing if Mr. Apple said something similar to me. Because with us it’s in the context of kinks/sexual desires and not how he REALLY feels about “women” in general or me in particular.

    I also think you’re wrong about women’s “sexual power” as they hit their mid-thirties and beyond. I know too many women who got married VERY late (I’m talking 52 or remarried in their 60’s. Or first marriage at 40) who didn’t have to “settle” for anything. They were able to find a man in their age and attractiveness range and in general they still held the sexual power.

    I know it’s enticing for men to believe that they will somehow gain the upper hand here, but… it’s just not how reality has played out from my observation (again: considering women with high self esteem who don’t let men shit on them). Men have a very skewed view often of “how young” they can date. Men who don’t have a lot of money and really good looks usually can’t keep sleeping with 22 year olds when they are in their 40’s. That’s just the reality. I know men want to believe otherwise, though.

  • Apple

    @Lokland: re-read in context with the conversation before, if you still don’t get it, it probably wasn’t important enough to get, because I have no idea how to re-type it/re-state it that won’t just be repeating myself.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    I know you mean well. I’m 33. The way you describe Mr Apple, we do seem similar.

    Re: nice guys
    Actually, I used to get regularly friend zoned, and it ticked me off and did make me “up my game.” However, I realized that you have to be who you are and I am (although blunt) a nice guy. I agree with you, nice to try to get into womens’ pants A) is counter productive, B) isn’t true niceness. Its like how a person treats wait staff in restaurants or random people. When you have nothing to gain is what shows a person’s true character. I’m not saying I’m a saint or anything, I just believe in being nice to people, no violence towards women and everyone getting a fair shot.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo re: role of provider/protector… That’s unfortunate, but women shouldn’t have to sit and home and raise babies just to enhance male ego. I am not trying to be cold here, but changes have happened. Some of them good. Some of them bad. Men can search for more traditional women if that’s what they want (not really sure how screwing a bunch of sluts is going to help them in what they say they supposedly want… how much providing and protecting is the average PUA doing?)

    Alternately a man can go seek women in another country. Or he can try to figure out another way to interact with a woman. There are a lot of men who consider themselves “feminists” who seem to be happily married in egalitarian relationships where they both make money and both act as PARTNERS instead of one acting in an almost parental role. (provider/protector thing).

    I have no issue with men doing whatever they need to do within ethical boundaries to get their needs met. But I get a bit irritated about all this “Western women are blah blah blah” “Women are blargle blargle”. It just clues me in that they don’t know how to deal with people as individuals.

    I also think they probably spend like all their time either on the Internet or in bars. Because honestly… outside of the internet and bars… people aren’t “that” bad. Sure, most of them I wouldn’t get into a long term relationship with but… I’m pretty sure that would have been true in any era or social situation.

    The difference is… a hundred years ago, I wouldn’t have had much of a choice.

    Before feminism, men only had to be able to provide for a woman. Then they could do what they wanted. THey could mistreat her if they wanted. They could cheat on her if they wanted. It didn’t matter. As recently as the sixties, most women had to prove adultery to get a divorce and have any hope of getting her kids or any financial support… this was in a time when most were expected to stay home and be totally dependent financially on a men.

    I neither enjoy nor want to be “dependent” on anybody. Power corrupts. Any human being, male or female, who holds the economic power… basically the power of life and death over another person, is in a position to harm them. They have no choices and no power. So I’m sorry that the power dynamic shifted. To some degree it’s shifted way too far to the point that it actively harms men. I don’t disagree with that.

    At the same time, I would not want to go back to a time where I couldn’t make my own living and have the option of leaving a man who hurt me. I don’t want to NEED a man for survival because it’s largely a crapshoot if that man will truly protect you or allow his power to corrupt him.

  • Apple

    And when I say “I don’t disagree with that” I mean I don’t disagree with your points that men have been harmed and continue to be harmed. I DO disagree with it morally. I don’t think men should be shit on just because women used to be.

  • Apple

    @Fish the entire “friend zone” thing makes me convinced that men and women in real life can’t really be just friends for the most part. If the guy has any sexual attraction for her at all, he’s going to consider her “harming him in some way” by just being his friend.

    This is why I don’t have male friends outside the internet. It’s just too much drama. I don’t really think most men are interested in being just friends with any woman they are sexually attracted to at all. So being pretty makes it impossible for women to have genuine male friends.

    And very true re: how you treat people when you have nothing to gain shows your character. That’s why “but whaaa I’m a nice guy but I couldn’t get laid” annoys the crap out of me. Because nobody OWES anybody sex. Period. Women don’t owe you sex for simply not calling them names or beating them. Men don’t owe women sex either.

    Nobody owes anybody anything. Transactional relationships rarely work or involve much mutual respect.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    I know it’s enticing for men to believe that they will somehow gain the upper hand here, but… it’s just not how reality has played out from my observation (again: considering women with high self esteem who don’t let men shit on them). Men have a very skewed view often of “how young” they can date. Men who don’t have a lot of money and really good looks usually can’t keep sleeping with 22 year olds when they are in their 40′s. That’s just the reality. I know men want to believe otherwise, though.

    That’s a bit of wishful thinking on your part. There have been a lot of statistics discussed here that show that men definitely have the upper hand in the sexual marketplace after the age of 30, your empowered older women notwithstanding.

    Want a depressing stat? 72.3% of single women age 30-39 didn’t have sex in the last year, compared to only 39.6% of men in the same age. Who do you think the 60.4% of those single men who are getting laid are fucking? Not 47 year old divorcees.

    You are right that 40-something men can’t usually get with 22 year old women. But it’s not that unusual to see them with 30 year old women. A lot of men here in that age range and older can tell you so from personal experience.

  • Fish

    I think a lot of men see other men get screwed in divorces and are terrified of that happening (just like I was terrified of getting a girl pregnant in high school). They see men as bearing the majority of financial damage in divorces. I can sympathize with them. My dad was firm middle class before my parents divorced, it took him over a decade to recover.

    However, I see this more as fear of the unknown. Its hard to really know people these days. I’ve known my “crush” for 6 years. I’d marry her tomorrow no prenup because I know her that well. Its really hard to get to know someone that well especially if you are preoccupied with sex (yes I understand this is contrary to my desire for early sex, that’s why I’ve avoided marriage so far).

    BTW I LOLed at “boner rage”

  • mr. wavevector

    I don’t really think most men are interested in being just friends with any woman they are sexually attracted to at all. So being pretty makes it impossible for women to have genuine male friends.

    That’s what the last thread was about. I’ve been very interested in being “just friends” with women and tried hard to make it work, but my reptilian brain had other plans. Unfortunately it’s not possible to shut that lizard up. And when my lizard started getting a response from her lizard, the whole thing got complicated. Lizards in heat don’t listen to reason.

    So yeah. Sexual attraction makes being “just friends” close to impossible.

  • Fish

    Re: male/female friends

    I don’t think its impossible. I have a lot of female friends. Most of them are attractive. I think being friends with the opposite sex just takes valuing more than sex. My friend actually tried to set me and my neighbor upto have sex, it ended not working out but we are friends now. I just had dinner with her and her current bf. I’m not like “waaaaah, denied”. She’s a fun chick, we get indian food every now and then.

    I try to keep it positive, not make it weird and enjoy things. I also have a tendency to be the “friends with exs” guy. one of my best friends is a girl I dated for about 6 months. We are way better friends. I don’t think all people can have those kind of relationships, but they are possible.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavevector I’m just saying what I have personally seen “in real life”. The way most women behave now, I do not doubt those “statistics” are accurate, but they are not measuring the right things IMO. When you only need ONE man out of 7 billion humans on the planet, really… women marrying “over a certain age” is not as rare as you probably think it is. If it was, I wouldn’t know at least 10 women personally who defy your statistics.

    The reality is that most men UNLESS they have money or VERY good looks cannot get “any woman they want” once they get into their 40’s. Most women in their 20’s think men over 40 without a LOT to offer either money or looks-wise are pretty creepy.

    I also think you underestimate the number of women in their 30’s who have decided they just don’t want any of what is on offer. A few desperate women crying about “where all the good men have gone” not withstanding. What I have observed is… MGTOWs still usually want to fuck women. Women who decide to “go their own way” pretty much just stay away from men. And if they have really major sexual needs, those who have any bi-tendencies at all just switch to women.

    Asking a woman if she’s had sex in the last year is not equivalent to: “Did you really really want to be with a man but couldn’t find one?” Sometimes studies aren’t constructed well. Big shocker.

    Why would it be “wishful thinking on my part”? I’m married to a man whose first wife was 6 years older than I am right now on the day he married her. For long term relationships he usually went for women older than him, not younger. Just his very existence proves that if necessary I COULD find ONE good man to be with if I were on the market.

    I don’t really care what “most women” can accomplish.

    Being younger than Mr. Apple, I was an anomaly that shocked his whole family. I am not concerned about aging with Mr. Apple. If Mr. Apple should die before me, I have no interest in another relationship. I’ve made that clear here. However, if I did, I have no doubt (again, because of the women I PERSONALLY KNOW who have gotten married to good men in their age range and attractiveness range) that I could easily do the same thing.

    However, the overall way men and women are toward each other makes me not even want to bother. I don’t see the appeal in even trying to relate to most human beings on that level anymore. I’m just glad/lucky/happy that I have Mr. Apple. I will enjoy it as long as it lasts, and just hope we are lucky enough to die together somehow.

  • Apple

    @Fish I think it’s dangerous for everybody now to put their hopes and dreams on anything “working out”. Our society no longer truly supports monogamous marriage and commitment. And I definitely understand the fears of divorce/money. I make good money, so I’d be likely to make the man sign a pre-nup. Not as likely but usually it’s the one who makes the most money who is at risk of losing out in a divorce.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector, at least you are honest enough to admit that. I don’t get all the “platonic friendships” out there right now. I just don’t think opposite sex friendships make much sense for heterosexual people.

  • Apple

    @Fish to me male/female relationships are just such a minefield I don’t want to go there.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavevector… one other factor with the power balance with women in their 30’s and men at or over that age… a LOT of women want babies. And so once the biological clock starts ticking, yes, she has less power because she wants something so bad.

    I’ve never had the misfortune of wanting children. The women I knew who married older either didn’t want/didn’t have children or… they already had grown children. Either way, normally their biological clock was done ticking and they were free to make decisions based on appropriate relationships as opposed to desperation to reproduce/biologically replicate themselves.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    I’d agree with you on prenups with 99.999% of people. She’s a severe outlier. I’m not one to take idle risks, I think she’s worth it.

    Have you ever seen the x files? Mulder had a poster that said “I want to believe”. That’s how I feel about relationships.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    You’re all over the place with that response, but you didn’t do anything to support your claim that women maintain their sexual power past the age of 30. If 3/4 of the over-30 single female cohort is getting no sex at all, they aren’t winning the sexual power game because they aren’t even playing it. Whether deliberately or not, they’re on the sidelines watching while their male contemporaries score with younger women.

    Can women past their peak sexual power marry well? Yes. But they can’t rely on the sexual power they had in their 20’s. Those that marry well have a lot of other things to offer.

  • Apple

    @Fish, I understand that. Knowing what I know about Mr. Apple, if I were making that kind of money when I met him, I wouldn’t have asked for a pre-nup because I think he has enough integrity not to try to take my money. He’s got too much pride to do something like that anyway.

    It’s sad that decent people are severe outliers, LOL. But unfortunately I would tend to agree with you.

    Who hasn’t seen the X-files? 😛 But it’s been a LONG time. I hear you on “I want to believe”. My parents have a great relationship, my brother and his wife have a great relationship. My aunts and uncles have great relationships (most of them). My grandparents have a great relationship. (There really must be something in the water around here.) Yes, I was raised very religious, which I think did influence some things early on, but in other ways I feel it protected me from falling into stupid crap that would have made me miserable, so in the current climate, it served a purpose.

    But… I always assumed that all the people who went to church with me had family’s like mine. I was pretty disillusioned later to find out how fucked up so many families even from my church really were. I think I got a “unicorn family”. I know how very lucky I was. And I know it very much influences how I see the world and what I will and will not tolerate. But… just know… I don’t think it’s just my family lol. Good people exist and good relationships exist… but sometimes it’s like a needle in a haystack trying to find it. Probably the best you can do is just live your life and be content in yourself. It’s usually when you aren’t looking that you find someone good.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Mr. Wavevector, at least you are honest enough to admit that.

    Well, it took a near disastrous close call of black hole proportions to smack me out of my blue pill platonic delusions. A close call with a 29 year old 17 years my junior btw.

    Most women in their 20′s think men over 40 without a LOT to offer either money or looks-wise are pretty creepy.

    I used to think that. And that thought was a dangerous part of my blue pill delusion – even if I was suppressing a sexual attraction, no way would it ever be reciprocated. I was wrong about that too.

  • Apple

    Mr Wavevector: On the sidelines watching implies they are looking with their faces pressed up against the candy store window desperately wanting it. This is where I think men and women are really different. Even if we really like sex, most of us can live without it if necessary and get our emotional needs met in other ways, and masturbate for physical needs. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than being with an asshole. Men seem to be willing to put up with a lot more stupidity past a certain age just to have sex. And I really don’t think most women past a certain age are. So, I think women, for the most part, continue to be choosy and if they can’t find what they want they just opt out altogether or they “switch to women”.

    But again… lots of women I know… getting married way “past their prime” to men who they seem to hold a lot of sexual power with. Just from my personal observation.

    Also, with regards to losing sexual power… what does that even mean? Since people really only need ONE good person, what difference does it make if EVERYBODY wants to bang you? I look forward to turning forty because hopefully by that time, men will stop hanging out their cars whooping at me and strange men will stop making me uncomfortable in public places simply because they think I dress for their pleasure. (And I do not dress slutty. Just nice… as in… not wearing sweatpants everywhere.) While I guess it can be flattering to be desired, after awhile it just gets old. Particularly when it’s guys who I find creepy or threatening in some way. If I become “invisible” to these assholes after 40 (because in my mid-thirties it still hasn’t happened), then YAY! Sign me up. I can’t wait.

    And I agree that those who marry well have a lot more to offer. But… the point of all that that I was saying was mainly more about how online men in the manosphere seem to REALLY exaggerate their own sexual power at ANY age. And also… the implication seems to be that “women past their sell by date” (whatever that means) can never be loved/find love. And that’s just not true. Again, men are trying to measure women by what THEY want. i.e. they assume if THEY want a ton of sex all the time that women MUST be the same way. So if women “aren’t getting it” oh boo hoo. But I think most women want relationships at all ages. And since you only need one good one… I’m really not sure what the point is about “oooh women’s sexual power fades”. It sounds like “Revenge of the Nerds” or something.

    Since most women seem to want real relationships and love as opposed to just casual sex… I’m really not sure what the issue here is.

  • mr. wavevector

    But… the point of all that that I was saying was mainly more about how online men in the manosphere seem to REALLY exaggerate their own sexual power at ANY age. And also… the implication seems to be that “women past their sell by date” (whatever that means) can never be loved/find love. And that’s just not true.

    I agree with all that. Most of the manosphere claims have a kernel of truth but it’s surrounded by bullshit.

    I’m really not sure what the point is about “oooh women’s sexual power fades”. It sounds like “Revenge of the Nerds” or something.

    It’s totally the revenge of the nerds 😉

  • Anacaona

    How do self-professed Restricted and Unrestricted types at HUS feel about this article…?
    I prefer to swallow it myself. Kind of a waste otherwise but in the back, the belly and the classic pearl necklace are good too. I do facials once in a while but I worry about getting it in the eye and ending in my hair and me ending in a Something about Mary situation.
    His dick is gorgeous too he could be a penis model if there was that career choice. 😉
    And is the most I will ever share about our sex life at HUS. Restricted don’t enjoy sharing sexual exploits but we do have them a lot.

    I agree about your views on good looking women. I don’t know if this actually a kind of self-selecting visual bias, but the most beautiful women I have known are all the restricted types. I think that there is an emotional component in the way men assess a woman’s beauty.
    My theory is that being restricted adds 1 point of beauty if the man is looking for a wife and subtract 2 points if the man is looking for sex only.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavevector: Yes Re: kernel of truth surrounded by bullshit. Seems to be the same issue with feminism.

    LMAO @ “it’s totally revenge of the nerds” HA! I like you. So much honesty from one guy is hard to handle. hahaha

  • Fish

    I think as men & women age, the market favors men past age 30ish. Its not a matter of absolutes & outliers, more the areas within 2 std deviations. High value women can, in general, write their own ticket well past 30.

    I can’t give anecdotal evidence of this as my female friends are mostly attractive and have no issues securing men.

    The problem in a lot of these surveys is that its hard to filter the data. Are the women 30-39 mothers? Are they dating? Was there sampling error?

  • Apple

    “My theory is that being restricted adds 1 point of beauty if the man is looking for a wife and subtract 2 points if the man is looking for sex only.”

    That sounds about right!

  • mr. wavevector

    But again… lots of women I know… getting married way “past their prime” to men who they seem to hold a lot of sexual power with. Just from my personal observation.

    I would assume that any woman way past her prime who has a lot of sexual power over a man she marries is marrying pretty far down in SMV, and that the guy is either unattractive or has a weak personality. There is no reason for a successful, confident, and attractive middle aged man to be under the sexual power of a woman his own age. He may be madly in love with her, but that’s a different thing.

  • Abbot

    “..you underestimate the number of women in their 30′s who have decided they just don’t want any of what is on offer.”

    Amusingly, the number is quite high and men are not motivated whatsoever to accommodate.

    “..most women seem to want real relationships and love as opposed to just casual sex”

    By avoiding the latter altogether, it would have been much easier to accomplish the former as they would not feel as though they were settling for “what is on offer” (the men who were invisible to them in their 20’s).

    .

  • Hope

    Anacaona “Restricted don’t enjoy sharing sexual exploits but we do have them a lot.”

    Yep! 🙂

    On a side note Aidan is sick and oh boy, babies with colds are fussy little things! >.<

  • Fish

    @Ana
    “My theory is that being restricted adds 1 point of beauty if the man is looking for a wife and subtract 2 points if the man is looking for sex only.”

    Not true for me. My friend the restricted 10, is pretty much a 10 by anyone’s estimation, 5’4, beautiful face, ran cross country, 32D. Toned, slime & busty.

    I don’t actually know any unrestricted 10’s.

    I think your theory is closer to SMV vs MMV which I would agree that a man will sleep with less attractive women than he will marry (in general). I don’t think this affects his perception of her actual attractiveness.

  • Apple

    @Fish “High value women can, in general, write their own ticket well past 30.”

    This is what I’ve observed. Though it is probably NOT the case in the “bar scene” women past thirty in the pick-up bar scene…. eek… yeah. It’s just a different thing.

    I do agree also that men over 30 are often far more successful than they were in their early twenties. I think a lot of that has to do with increased maturity and confidence, as well as having more to offer financially (though that’s becoming less of an issue to a lot of women since many of us can make money just fine.)

    I also think men can date younger than themselves in general “to a point”, but that point is NOTHING like what a lot of guys online seem to think. (I find it baffling how a guy who can’t get laid at 22 who is doing nothing to improve himself besides learning to be a PUA, thinks he’s going to suddenly have a free flow of young pussy when he hits 42. One hopes he gains enough maturity and perspective by that point in his life to change course before he embarrasses himself.)

    It’s no doubt that a 22 year old beautiful woman is much more sexually potent to a man than a 40 year old woman, no matter how pretty. But it’s also true that a 40 year old woman in fantastic shape is a lot more attractive than a 22 year old woman who just didn’t start out that attractive or is significantly overweight. Either way… a lot of ‘sexual power’ seems to come down to… how many different people want to bang you? But for women, that’s irrelevant since most want to weed through the players to find a ‘good man’. A good man. Singular. Just not that hard ever for a woman looking in the right places who is a high quality person with higher marriage market value. IMO.

    Maybe some “revenge of the nerds” effect happens to some effect. If so, good for them. But they probably shouldn’t delude themselves about how many “women past a certain age” are crying about it.

    It’ll be nice to hit 40 and be treated like a human instead of a sexual “thing” for a change.

    And definitely I agree with you about single mothers. A lot of women in their 30’s fit that category and a lot of men don’t want to raise other men’s children. So having a bunch of kids kind of slows down your sex life. No kidding!

    And yeah… if someone is not playing the game, one can hardly call them “losers”.

  • Apple

    “I would assume that any woman way past her prime who has a lot of sexual power over a man she marries is marrying pretty far down in SMV, and that the guy is either unattractive or has a weak personality.”

    You would assume wrong, Mr. Wavevector. Every single one of these women I know, married someone that was about their age range or a little older, but definitely not more than a few years older, around their sexual attractiveness level, and are GOOD men. I know these people personally. They are far from unattractive or “weak personalities”.

    ” There is no reason for a successful, confident, and attractive middle aged man to be under the sexual power of a woman his own age. He may be madly in love with her, but that’s a different thing.”

    Ummmm wow. yeah. I’m just not even touching that one. If that’s how you really feel, for your own good, I hope you never age out of being able to sleep with 22 year olds.

  • mr. wavevector

    But it’s also true that a 40 year old woman in fantastic shape is a lot more attractive than a 22 year old woman who just didn’t start out that attractive or is significantly overweight.

    To a certain extent that’s true. But a lot of sexual attractiveness comes down to a male instinctive evaluation of a woman’s fertility. And that’s why women over 40 lose the intense sex appeal of a younger woman. Instinctively you know they aren’t very fertile, even if they still look good. That lizard logic has a powerful influence, even if reproducing is the last thing you want to do.

    I think that’s also why women consistently overestimate how attractive older women are. Women don’t have a lizard brain telling them to knock up those other women. They see the looks but not the subtle indicators of fertility, or the lack thereof.

  • Fish

    Re: older guys/younger women

    My best friend is 41. He used to give me a lot of grief for dating younger women. Recently he was sleeping with a 23yo chick. Just by ages, he seems to be “winning”, but I’d put her looks around 4ish. One of my “crushes” is around a 7 but is 33. So is he coming out ahead by sleeping with a younger woman? His last bday I hooked up with a 36yo woman, I’d say she was also 7-8.

    I guess my point is there comes a time when age is just a number. As I’ve said, most of my female friends who are my age are 33, still 6+ & look just as good as they did at 23.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector, the thing is… if a woman is 40 and in great shape she may not LOOK her age. I think you are really overestimating how much a man can “intuit fertility”. Not only that but, you’re forgetting another factor. I think you seem to have in your head this idea (and I could be totally wrong, but from some of what you’ve said it seems like I’m not) that most men in their forties are these great catches.

    But that’s not true. Most middle aged men are overweight, balding, and don’t have great jobs. Many have been burned by relationships in the past. If they are divorced or still single… there may be a reason. So they are not “catches”.

    I don’t really care how much they intuit fertility… the average middle aged male STILL cannot bed a very in-shape 40 year old woman. Because she is still out of his league. The impotent boner rage in the assumption that every 40 year old woman is a dried up old hag that no man can get hard for is kind of sad, really.

    Mr. Apple married a 40 year old the first time. He also dated someone else about 12-15 years older than him. He slept with them a lot. He preferred them and wanted them. In general he is sexually attracted to “older women”. So… seriously, not every man’s “lizard brain’ works like yours. And even if it does… wanting something doesn’t mean getting it.

    Perhaps the reason older women still have sexual power over their partners is because no matter how much he may watch porn or look at young fertile women, he’s not GETTING that.

    Sure, some really confident, successful, good looking middle aged man “could” have a younger woman if he wanted one. But you seem to heavily overestimate the number of men who fall into this category.

    I think a part of this insistence about women’s “sell by date” and “hitting some wall” has to do with the current national economy. It’s shit. Many men have lost their jobs or are not nearly as upwardly mobile as they would like to be. Additionally, as HanSolo mentioned earlier, many men feel an erosion of their “protector/provider” role. So I can understand why there is such a deep need to act as if women can’t be sexually wanted by a man “past a certain age”, but it’s just ridiculous nonsense.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector… basically if you can’t bring yourself to want or fuck a woman “past a certain age”, you’re in for a very sad future. Because sexual prospects for most men dry up more as they age, not less. Myths of endless male sexual appeal notwithstanding.

    Unless you’re in the top 10% of men who are very alpha, very good looking, very financially successful, very confident. Then you can write your own ticket forever. Given the things you’ve posted, I sincerely hope you are part of that group so you don’t end up lonely or with a sad boner. (and no, I’m not being snide.)

  • mr. wavevector

    If that’s how you really feel, for your own good, I hope you never age out of being able to sleep with 22 year olds.

    I have no intention of ever sleeping with a 22 year old. That’s a ridiculous statement. But I will tell you this honestly – middle aged women have no more than a fraction of the pure sexual power that younger women have.

    I am married to a middle aged woman. I love her very much. We have great sex together and we have it often. I am still powerfully attracted to her. But the power in that attraction comes more from a deep emotional connection than from her sex.

    No middle aged woman has ever made my head spin and my heart pound with an overwhelming, disorienting desire the way younger women still do on occasion. That’s a tough reality that you women don’t want to hear. Deal with it how you like.

    Does that mean that I would chase 22 year olds if I were suddenly to become single? No, I wouldn’t. But the lizard would want me to.

  • Apple

    @Fish I tend to agree with your thoughts here. Mr. Apple always used to pick older for long term relationships. His first wife was 40 when on their wedding day (he was 25). Maybe he’s a unicorn, but all men are not “OMG she has to be in the FERTILE PERIOD for me to find her fuckable.”

    I feel sorry for people who feel that way because everybody ages. And most people in this economy are not going to end up rich enough to keep dating girls barely out of college.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector, wow. Um… I don’t believe I ever failed to acknowledge that a hot 22 year old is going to turn more heads in a visceral way than I will in my mid-thirties. Now you’re just being ridiculous.

    But what you seemed to imply was… that men can’t get hard at all from older women and that an older woman can never hold ANY sexual power over her mate. And that’s just patently absurd. What you WANT and what you can HAVE are two different things.

    Men are visual. I get that. They can look at whatever they want, but if they can’t bring themselves to fuck a woman over 40 because she doesn’t have as much “sexual power” they are in for a sad life.

    So basically you’re proving my point. You’re sleeping with and attracted to a woman closer to your own age, but you may lust over 22 year old hot chicks.

    Well, big deal. I lust over Joe Manganiello. Doesn’t mean I’m going to be sleeping with him.

    The implication in much of what you’ve said to me up until this point implied women just lost all ability to have a man be attracted to her at 40 (or whatever your magical cut-off age is). But you wouldn’t kick Catherine Zeta Jones out of bed.

    Changing your story after the fact to imply that I somehow think I’m as awesome and hot as a random hot 22 year old is a little disingenous. Maybe you, like I, thought we were having a different conversation than we were actually having, but I can only go on the words you actually type.

  • Apple

    Oh… and… since I’m in the neighborhood anyway… this is highly amusing in light of all the “nice guys” who whine that women won’t sleep with them because they aren’t “hot enough”. Apparently women are supposed to never age and be HOT and be grateful men don’t beat them or call them bitches. And men can look like whatever or be any age and still get whatever. Must be nice for the men living in that fantasy world.

  • mr. wavevector

    I think you seem to have in your head this idea (and I could be totally wrong, but from some of what you’ve said it seems like I’m not) that most men in their forties are these great catches.

    Absolutely not. I agree with you that the number of men who could attract a younger women are few, and these men have unusual characteristics – unusual looks, or wealth, or intellect, or accomplishments, or charisma.

    @Mr. Wavevector… basically if you can’t bring yourself to want or fuck a woman “past a certain age”, you’re in for a very sad future. Because sexual prospects for most men dry up more as they age, not less. Myths of endless male sexual appeal notwithstanding.

    We are cross posting here, so I’ll repeat. I am happily married to a woman I love immensely and have an excellent emotional and sexual relationship with. I plan to keep it that way.

    It’s true the sexual prospects for men dry up as they age. Not as fast as for women, but they do. I’m lucky to be in the 16% of men my age who get laid multiple times a week. 67% of the single men my age aren’t getting any at all.

    if a woman is 40 and in great shape she may not LOOK her age.

    It’s not just looks. There are behavioral clues and olfactory ones as well. Pheromones and such. There’s a lot going on in our limbic system that we aren’t consciously aware of.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    But what you seemed to imply was… that men can’t get hard at all from older women and that an older woman can never hold ANY sexual power over her mate. And that’s just patently absurd. What you WANT and what you can HAVE are two different things.

    That’s not what I said nor intended. An older woman can still be sexually attractive. Attractive enough to want to have sex with, yes. Attractive enough so that it gives her the position of superior power in a relationship? I think that’s improbable (but not impossible).

  • mr. wavevector

    But you wouldn’t kick Catherine Zeta Jones out of bed.

    Yes I would. She’s not my type. Who let her in here anyway?

  • Fish

    I wonder what it would look like if we filtered for certain traits. I have a friend from college, 33 great shape just oozes sex appeal. She’s currently dating a 26yo. We can acknowledge if not a wall, something happens to the majority of women between 30-40. How are the ones who don’t hit the wall different?

    There is about a 50/50 split of my above 30, attractive female friend between restricted & unrestricted. One is definitely more attractive now than before 30 but seems disinterested in dating. All but the one above have had sex this year (so maybe there is sampling error here).

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Fish,

    I guess my point is there comes a time when age is just a number. As I’ve said, most of my female friends who are my age are 33, still 6+ & look just as good as they did at 23.

    I can’t say I know anyone, male or female, who looked as good at 33 as they did at 23. The signs of aging are there. And there’s a big difference when you go to 43.

    Maybe the priorities of the man influence his perception of female attractiveness. Men interested in sport-fucking seem to be less responsive to fertility markers. For example, preferring slim hipped women over big bottomed ones.

    I think men lose their looks at the same rate as women. It’s just that women like some things that a few men can acquire as they get older, like status or wealth.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavelength, we mostly agree then. I think we were just talking past each other and maybe each using a little bit of “communication shorthand” (i.e. I was assuming you had attitudes you didn’t have because some things you said made it seem that way and you seemed to think i was saying things I wasn’t as well.)

    Also, though, I do find it interesting how few men seem to want to acknowledge how visually stimulated WOMEN are. I mean I LOVE Mr. Apple. I enjoy sex with him. I am physically attracted to him. He’s awesome and I wouldn’t leave him for anything or anyone… BUT… when I see Joe Manganiello on a movie or Ian Somerhalder… or when I go running and a hot 25 year old guy with perfect musculature runs past me… my womb just… clenches. DAMN. Women ARE visually and viscerally stimulated by hot, young men. And maybe that’s something men need to acknowledge as well.

    I guess I fundamentally don’t “grasp” why men sometimes like to talk like women age like milk and it’ll be “their loss” because men still want hot chicks as if women are not visually stimulated at all. (or as if any man can have any woman he wants no matter how old, ugly, poor, or slovenly he is). Or maybe more correctly as if female sexual desire simply “doesn’t matter”. I assure you, it matters. It’s how you get any. 😛

    Looks aren’t the only thing important to a woman, but all things being equal, a woman would choose a hotter guy who had everything else she wanted in a mate over a less hot guy who had everything she wanted in a mate. (provided she was in a position to make such a choice.) And for sexual desire all by itself… yes… we pant over HOT, young guys. This is human, not just a male thing.

    And I think people overestimate how “sexy” women find “men with money”. There is something sexually alluring about a man with power, yes, but if he’s 69 (Micheal Douglas is gross to me now), or ugly… she may BE with him, but if he thinks he’s turning her on and that she isn’t closing her eyes and fantasizing about somebody hot, he’s insane.

    I kind of feel sorry for Catherine Zeta Jones with their age difference. She is SO beautiful and Michael Douglas is just… ugh now. I’m sure he’d be appealing to a woman in her late 60’s, but.. not for CZJ.

    Before women had any ability to really make it in the world financially on their own, we HAD to “marry well” (financially) if we could. Even after women were able to pick their own mates and weren’t having arranged marriages they had no say in, women tended to go for money because women are imminently practical and have to think of the children they will likely raise and not living under a bridge or in poverty.

    Men mistook this for women “not being visually stimulated”. Like hell we aren’t visually stimulated. As women gain more socio-economic power and can provide for themselves, I think it’s going to become increasingly clear how much looks do matter to women. They are not “everything”, but neither are they “everything” to most men who are past their twenties.

    Oh and also… really rich women have plenty of “pool boys” as well. Sure, he may not “want her”, but she’s his sugar momma. But if you think women in their twenties aren’t using old guys with money and that they actually “want them”, that’s a little goofy.

  • Apple

    And sorry for that WALL. OF. TEXT. Brevity is not my strong suit.

  • Apple

    Mr. Wavelength, maybe we should define what we mean by “superior power in a relationship”. I mean I don’t think that a 50 year old woman with a 55 year old man, even if she’s extraordinarily hot for her age is going to be able to get away with as much behavioral bullshit as a 22 year old woman. But… I don’t think women should be pulling “behavioral bullshit” with their mate in the first place.

    What I mean is… these women have their husband’s love, attention, and those men are not looking elsewhere. They are not “leaving them for younger women” or “cheating on them”. They seem “eager to be with the woman they are with”. I mean I have no idea what happens behind closed doors but during the newlywed phase, the men have looked at them like lost little puppies. So yeah to me, that’s some version of sexual power. She certainly wasn’t invisible to him.

  • Apple

    hahahaha, okay, fair enough… but *I* would not kick Catherine Zeta Jones out of bed. 😛

  • Apple

    @Fish re: the wall, I think women can get away with more in terms of “not taking care of themselves” when they are younger. But a lot of these bar bunnies are smoking and drinking and that just… ages you. I don’t drink (except the very rare glass of wine with dinner which I almost never finish anyway). I don’t smoke. I get plenty of sleep (lots of bar bunnies do not). I get a healthy amount of sunlight but I do NOT tan on purpose. (like I don’t go to tanning beds or roast for hours in the sun.)

    A lot of women who seem hot and fit in their twenties are doing all or most of the above which will catch up with them. It all ages you and makes you look haggard. I think a lot of women like that also get very angry/bitter about their experiences with men, and anger doesn’t age well. It puts lines on your face in the wrong places.

    Being happy and secure, and taking good care of yourself… getting sleep, managing stress, working out, some sort of spiritual practice or other for inner peace or whatever, eating healthy, having a good attitude and other interests in life besides “getting some guy to want you”. All of that is appealing IMO. It’s especially appealing in an age where most women leave their house in sweatpants without makeup, curse like sailors in public, drink heavily, are overweight, etc.

    These are just my personal opinions. There might be more factors I’m overlooking, or some of this stuff might not matter as much as I think it does.

    Oh, and the way she treats a man and herself. If she has obvious self respect and also treats men with basic courtesy/decency, I think that makes an impact as well. It’s going to give her the pick of just about any available man in her age range who himself is not SO impressive that he can easily date much younger. (though technically if SHE has a lot of other factors, like a bunch of money, for example, she could date a younger guy who wants a “sugar momma” probably won’t be a love match, but same goes in too big age differences the other way.)

  • Apple

    Sorry for so many posts in a row. Had another thought about the sexual power dynamic of couples who are a bit older. Sexual power in a relationship is actually defined as “the partner that needs sex the least”. No woman has to literally compete with every woman hotter than her on the planet in order to have “sexual power”. If that were so, no woman would have much sexual power EVER.

    In the context of a monogamous relationship, I think at any age, by that definition, any woman has sexual power in the context of that relationship. Sure he may LOOK at other women, but unless she’s a horrible shrew and never puts out, he’s probably not going to run out and cheat on her with a “younger woman” (assuming he could achieve that even if he wanted to.)

    I don’t think sexual power is or should be defined by “how much stupid shit you can get away with”.

  • purplesneakers

    LOL Abbot

    Apple = Plain Jane?

  • purplesneakers

    I wish these types of conversations would die (they’re basically re-hashing the same thing over and over), so that female readers don’t have to be subject to unpleasant truths and possibilities, stated over and over again.

    • I wish these types of conversations would die (they’re basically re-hashing the same thing over and over), so that female readers don’t have to be subject to unpleasant truths and possibilities, stated over and over again.

      I am hopeful that the new Four Guys blog will take on most of this. 🙂

      The problem is, they really want to tell it to women, not one another.

  • Apple

    @Abbot you sound extremely cynical. I assure you, Mr. Apple is NOT my “captive”.

  • Apple

    @purplesneakers… um… sorry. This is my first time down this conversational trail here. Also, I don’t really see any “unpleasant truths”. I see a lot of men who like to think their aging situation is somehow much different than womens, when right now, it’s really just not. There are a lot of older woman/younger man dating scenarios happening frequently now. My guess is that it has to do with greater socio-economic power of the women. Money changes everybody’s power. Not just men’s. But… whatever.

  • Liz

    Happy Father’s Day everyone!

  • Gin Martini

    Wow, apple, you went on a rampage.. I love it when women who marry high-N then flip out when people discover how to have those options. Endlessly entertaining.

    First, men don’t need your approval for game, so, your problems with it are irrelevant. It’s true there are men who steep in ineffective whining about women. They do that because they fail to understand Game, or merely vent on the internet. But it’s mostly whining; disagreeing with or disliking women isn’t misogyny. That word is so overused, I just tune it out now.

    Anyway, if a guy complains about women in front of you, he’s just identified himself as a gamma, so you should be grateful for the easy mark of the plague. Watch out more for the guys who harbor that attitude, don’t let you know, and then use it against you. That’s the real dark gamer.

    Second, my personal view of game is more of the David Deida inner-game ideas. Avoiding anti-game, positive attitude, and most of all – not being Christian. The stuff you talk about (club game, silly/dark tactics) are one tiny application of it, which is totally useless to me. Though, if you live in a city and are surrounded by narcissistic women, then, dark tactics are perfectly fine.

    The 22-year old thing again is an exaggeration. I’m average looking, 41 and women 28-33 are definitely interested. But I am not fat, have all my hair, and a good career. As fish(?) said, age is just a number at this point.

    I kind of see what you are saying, but the way you phrase stuff is typical blue pill. It just serves to keep those yucky deltas and gammas in their place. I don’t blame you, though.

    • Anyway, if a guy complains about women in front of you, he’s just identified himself as a gamma, so you should be grateful for the easy mark of the plague

      So Roissy and Vox are gammas?

  • Lokland

    @Apple, 451

    Of course the sex appeal of the well put together 40 yo woman is higher than that of the average balding 40yo guy.

    Thats not in question.

    The question is whether or not the average 40yo woman or man has more power similarly the hot 40 yo’s are up for question but amongst themselves.

    In most SMV groups men are having more sex than woman while single and 40. Men are also controlling who enters relationships in that age range.

    To conclude otherwise because a hot 40 yo woman has more power than the average 40 yo man is simply wrong.

  • Liz

    @Apple

    You’re giving me a lot to think about this morning!

    … not really sure how screwing a bunch of sluts is going to help them in what they say they supposedly want… how much providing and protecting is the average PUA doing?

    The pick-up artists are defending their behavior with some evo-psych crap about the “need to protect” being taken away by feminism? That’s a stretch. Is the manosphere really such a confused place? Or are the PUAs and protector-wannabes just strange bedfellows there?

    Power corrupts. Any human being, male or female, who holds the economic power… basically the power of life and death over another person, is in a position to harm them… I don’t want to NEED a man for survival because it’s largely a crapshoot if that man will truly protect you or allow his power to corrupt him.

    Sadly, people are all-too-easily affected by power, especially after they no longer have to be on their “best behavior” (aka courtship phase). That’s why these assumptions need to be sorted out prior to marriage and kids. My ex breezily said initially that he’d be happy to support me & a kid or two. Then gradually, he started trying to pull rank when there were disagreements… then started retaliating financially any time he was upset. “I pay the bills, so therefore…” It was incredibly destructive. (He did things like stop paying the phone bill and get his own private cellphone – talk about economic manipulation. Of course some people are just sociopaths no matter what the economic arrangement or legal structure. Then when none of that worked he tried to kill me, but that’s another story.)

    I wonder if this is some of the appeal of the “asshole” – an S.O.B. who can beat back threats. Ringo Starr’s rival in Caveman comes to mind here. 😉

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    I think we basically agree after all. Much of the confusion came from our different interpretations of “power”. You seemed to be using it as “attraction”, while I interpreted it as “dominant”.

    Had another thought about the sexual power dynamic of couples who are a bit older. Sexual power in a relationship is actually defined as “the partner that needs sex the least”.

    In the context of a monogamous relationship, I think at any age, by that definition, any woman has sexual power in the context of that relationship.

    That’s not exactly what I’ve experienced. A 50 y.o. man has a lower sex drive than a 25 y.o. man, and a 50 y.o. woman is less hot than a 25 y.o. woman. So between lower libido and lower hotness, the amount of sexual attractive power the 50 y.o. woman has over her mate is much reduced compared to the 25 year olds. But meanwhile, many women maintain their libido and even find it increases as they age, especially in the context of an emotionally close and trusting relationship. A woman can’t use sex as leverage if he doesn’t want it that much but she does.

    I used to want sex a lot more than mrs. wavevector. It’s pretty even now. She’s often the one initiating, and she also tells me she wants me and tells me how attractive I am much more than she ever did before. So I think the balance of power in terms of sexual desire becomes much more balanced as people get older.

    That doesn’t mean that a 50 y.o. woman can’t command the attention and desire of a man her age. Like I said, a man can still be totally in love with her. It’s just that she has to use a lot of other means of attraction other than the purely physical. A lot of younger women simply rely on physical sex appeal – the older woman has to use psychological and emotional appeal to make her mate feel good. But if she’s been paying attention at all for the last 50 years, she should know how to do that.

  • Man

    @Apple:

    Then there is, what I consider the biggest issue… what many women find sexually arousing in the bedroom is going to ruin most relationships outside the bedroom.

    So ultimately they are making choices, aren’t they? The biggest issue I see for women is the following: 1) They are always delegating their happiness to the collective manhood; 2) They want manhood to be able to do mind reading, change and adapt to their whims and wishes, on the fly; 3) If men don’t do mind reading, or cannot or simply don’t want to adapt (even if for inherent biological/instinctive reasons) then they are bad, controlling, misogynist, etc.

    I am quite sure that a woman who is self-confident of her sexuality, beauty and femininity can greatly improve her mate’s performance in bed. He’s very likely to enjoy it as well (again: provided she’s being spontaneous and self-confident of what she wants). I am quite sure that Susan can explain this better to HUSsies. 🙂

  • mr. wavevector

    And I think people overestimate how “sexy” women find “men with money”.

    I don’t think it’s the money per se, and money alone isn’t enough.

    What I’ve observed is many women have a deep seated psychological need to feel “taken care of” by a man. This need doesn’t seem to go away even if they are earning plenty of money on their own. All their earning power seems to do is to raise their expectations for what being “taken care of” means.

    Having money isn’t enough for a man to satisfy that need. He has to have a host of other attributes. He needs status, confidence, and power to do things in the world. He also needs to show kindness and caring and be emotionally responsive to the woman. I call this set of attributes “benevolent masculine dominance” – the power to take care of a woman and make her feel safe, and the emotional disposition to want to do it.

    I agree with you that men lose their looks as they age as do women, and also that women are attracted to youth and beauty in men, as men are in women. So when an older man wins the affection of a younger woman, it’s not because of his looks or even his money. It’s because he can meet her psychological needs to be taken care of, to be safe, to be desired, and to have a man who can fully invest emotionally in her. An older man may have an advantage over younger men not only in resources, status, and accomplishment, but also in having more practice in these emotional skills.

  • mr. wavevector

    I see a lot of men who like to think their aging situation is somehow much different than womens, when right now, it’s really just not. There are a lot of older woman/younger man dating scenarios happening frequently now. My guess is that it has to do with greater socio-economic power of the women.

    That’s actually not true. The relative age preference for mating does not seem to have changed very much in a long time. The average age at marriage for men has been about 2 years older than women for many decades. There have always been couples where the woman was older.

    What you find when you look at the statistics is that the number of couples where the woman is older is significantly less than would be expected by chance, just as the number of couples where the woman earns more is less than chance, and the number of couples where the woman is taller is less than would occur by chance. There appears to be a strong bias among women for men who are a bit older, taller and wealthier than themselves.

  • purplesneakers

    The problem is, they really want to tell it to women, not one another.

    Hmm, I feel like most women are pretty aware of this though (“this” being declining female physical attractiveness with age, and decreased options). But I think maybe even if that is accepted as a generality, they don’t want to think about it in the context of their own lives, especially if they’re looking but haven’t found anyone yet. I think it’s a harder sell to convince them of declining fertility, actually. Also, anything related to keeping it in your panties and delaying sex is probably way way way harder to sell. I almost got jumped on by a friend of a friend’s girlfriend when the topic of college dating (lack of it) at our different campuses came up, and I said that it’s partly because girls are too willing to hook up without demanding that guys actually get to know them. DAMN did that piss her off, LOL! She insisted that girls just feel more free to have sex like men now, and what I was advocating was like prostitution. Ugh.

    I’ve had really good conversations with some male friends and relatives about gender dynamics, and they’re often impressed that I really ‘get’ it. Once at a social event I was talking about how I made a conscious switch to dressing more feminine (prompted by a girl asking about my dress, then that conversation ballooning) and one guy who I don’t know that well was like ‘good for you.’ I feel like I have a competitive informational advantage in this market.

    • @Purplesneakers

      I’ve had really good conversations with some male friends and relatives about gender dynamics, and they’re often impressed that I really ‘get’ it. Once at a social event I was talking about how I made a conscious switch to dressing more feminine (prompted by a girl asking about my dress, then that conversation ballooning) and one guy who I don’t know that well was like ‘good for you.’ I feel like I have a competitive informational advantage in this market.

      That’s awesome – information is power – you can’t have an effective strategy without fully understanding the market.

  • mr. wavevector

    This is why I’m surprised. I would have imagined it feels better to come inside a woman’s body than to use your own hand for the final bit.

    Porn is like some cultural virus that derails the male reproductive instinct. First you have men who can’t even get it up with a real live woman. And if they do, they want to put it in her ass and ejaculate on her face. That’s no way to make babies.

    It’s amazing that the reproductive instinct – one of the most fundamental to survival – can be derailed in this way.

  • Gin Martini

    No. Roissy and Vox are not in front of you, further, their position is more like pussy-drenched disdain, rather than complaining/whining. But if you want to argue they are, go right ahead.

    And, to get very crass, finishing on a woman’s tits is extremely powerful… no hand necessary. I’ve nailed myself in the eye and hit the wall above a few times, too. I have new found respect for women and carefully aim away from the eye now.

    • their position is more like pussy-drenched disdain, rather than complaining/whining.

      You’ve moved the goal posts by adding whining. The pussy-drenched disdain is often expressed in the form of complaint.

      And, to get very crass, finishing on a woman’s tits is extremely powerful… no hand necessary.

      Huh. It appears very necessary in porn, maybe because they’re just acting.

  • Fish

    @WV
    ” And if they do, they want to put it in her ass and ejaculate on her face. That’s no way to make babies.”

    Thats kind of the point. What first drew me to anal, besides porn, was the fact that it is “baby proof”. When I was younger, I had this horrible fear that unprotected sex was 80% likely to get a girl pregnant. I had no idea.

    I think sex has evolved to become 95% pleasure, 5% procreation. I know more couples now who are intentionally avoiding children than couples who are “trying” to conceive. However, I think my particular group of friends may be an outlier in a lot of ways.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, re: peppers, I remember from a Jean-George book this recipe that called for Scotch Bonnets. They are scary hot. I managed to find them in Manhattan after something of a search. You have to clean them to get the seeds out (these are the hottest part of any pepper) and also shave off the interior white ribs. The book said to wear rubber gloves while doing that but I thought, oh, hell, I will be careful. Well, it went OK, but something much have touched a hand somewhere and I casually rubbed my eye and about 30 seconds later I thought I was going blind.

    • @Esco

      Well, it went OK, but something much have touched a hand somewhere and I casually rubbed my eye and about 30 seconds later I thought I was going blind.

      I cannot even imagine that searing pain! My eyes often burn when I cook with chiles – just the dispersion of the oil into the air from cutting is enough to cause discomfort.

  • Fish

    @Sneakers
    “one guy who I don’t know that well was like ‘good for you.’ I feel like I have a competitive informational advantage in this market.”

    I feel like, in reading what you’ve written, that you have most, if not all, of the component parts to snag a guy. “good for you” could have turned into more, or maybe not, I don’t know.

    I have confidence that you will be successful, it just takes some stepping outside your comfort zone.

  • purplesneakers

    Aww, thanks, Fish. I know I need to present myself better physically and just keep myself from getting into these spirals of depression. I went to a couple different parties last night ant didn’t drink and didn’t have problems with conversation/socializing like I thought I would. I think it’s easier when everyone else is drunk, LOL.

  • purplesneakers

    Its a combination of expressing angry venting/wishful-thinking due to women not getting their (newly contrived) way with men since about 1970 and using propaganda to break the will of younger women who naturally prefer to be deferential to men. There is lurking amongst us an unrealized brooding Feminist Triumph of the Will.

    I legitimately have no idea what this is saying, lol.

  • Fish

    @Sneakers
    I used to have issues with depression. What changed it with me was the belief that it was never too late, I can do anything I put my mind to with work.

    You seem like a smart chick. I am not a member of the “it will come when you stop looking for it” club. However, it sounds like you’re putting yourself into social situations. I have said before that I am more witty and charming when they (the women) are intoxicated LOL

    I don’t know how old you are, or what your life goals are, but if you want a relationship and are reasonable with your filtering, you can be successful. The more you talk to guys, the easier it gets. And if you get rejected, just think of it as their loss and there are plenty more where he came from.

  • @Susan

    Poor woman with the jalapeños! And the yogurt part was just hilarious. lol

  • Han, congrats on the new blog, man. Really looking forward to reading your stuff!

  • @Susan

    Women used to shame the sluts to keep them in line. Now they either praise them, say to each their own, or remain silent.

    I don’t think this is true. Non-sluts have never praised sluts. And the study I wrote about last week demonstrated that non-sluts reject sluts for friendship, which is slut shaming, pure and simple.

    I should have added a ‘most’ in front of ‘women.’ But I think that was implied since in the previous sentence I was talking about women collectively.

    the fact that in a relatively free sexual market, [women] collectively are who sets the price and conditions for sex. Women used to shame the sluts to keep them in line. Now they either praise them, say to each their own, or remain silent.

    I also should have added that some still do shame sluts. I was actually thinking of trying to make a clever quip about Anacaona doing so but thought better of it and then never said anything.

    Anyway, my main point is that things have changed a lot, from lots of shaming to less shaming, not that none exists anymore.

  • Anacaona

    I also should have added that some still do shame sluts. I was actually thinking of trying to make a clever quip about Anacaona doing so but thought better of it and then never said anything.
    As long as you clarified that I shame both men and women slut I wouldn’t had minded. Equal opportunity shamer here 😀

  • @Apple and others

    When I said men will change to get pussy, I wasn’t intending to mean that all they care about is pussy (though, I guess if they’re just looking for ONSs then there is more truth to that).

    I was simply trying to say that getting sex is a big drive for most men (and I’ll confess I was thinking more of the 20-40 y/o demographic) though I recognize that libido diminishes as men age.

    The longer the type of relationship the man is looking for, the more he will care about a woman’s personality, character, goals, etc.

    I will try to be a clearer communicator in the future and not leave my assumptions and caveats unstated.

  • mr. wavevector

    Desperate to find a way to stop the burning he dumped a container of yogurt on her vagina.

    What an idiot. Everyone knows sour cream is the way to sooth jalapeño vagina 😉

    • Everyone knows sour cream is the way to sooth jalapeño vagina

      Of course, haha! Just don’t use the reduced fat version – it’s the fat that works.

  • @Anacaona

    Shame away at us manwhores! 😀 I can take it. lol

  • Fish

    @Hansolo
    “I was simply trying to say that getting sex is a big drive for most men (and I’ll confess I was thinking more of the 20-40 y/o demographic) though I recognize that libido diminishes as men age.

    The longer the type of relationship the man is looking for, the more he will care about a woman’s personality, character, goals, etc.”

    This. Although any woman I would settle down with long term would also have to have at least similar sex drive and desires. However hot & good in bed does become less important than other factors.

  • @Susan

    Plus, with so many women choosing to date, sex or marry assholes, they send out market signals that that is what is in demand.

    Pluralistic Ignorance again. The data just doesn’t support this claim. For starters, assholes don’t do relationships very well, much less marriage.

    However, I think a lot of women actually want the cads…however, they just can’t get them to commit.

    More PI here. Remember the study that looked at the most promiscuous men on campus? From the post:

    What do players actually do?

    50% have more than one sex partner per year, compared to 20% of non-players.

    I don’t know how many assholes are being chosen, since there are no studies that identify men as such and correlate that trait with their marriage, sex and dating rates.

    So my assertion was based more on a few unstated ideas:

    1) A culture where in the past some assholes had to pretend to be good to get married whereas now you have some good guys feeling like they have to pretend to be assholes.

    2) Numerous articles about how a woman’s bf or husband was an asshole (e.g. your post on Jacob the internet slacker who several women would hook up with or date but couldn’t get him to get really serious or marry–he was called all kinds of derogatory names). Why do the women choose them in the first place?

    3) Anecdotal tales from friends and even many women at HUS and elsewhere sharing their stories about having sex with some man who then won’t call them back after. I remember the story of the guy who had the two women, one back home and one at college. Also, recent woman complaining about bike shop owner. Most of these women have other men interested so why are the choosing the asshole or the jerk or the whatever? Some will respond that they were lied to (yes, but that’s totally the definition of an asshole) but these women should have been more patient and discerning before putting out. Also, when bike guy doesn’t contact her for two weeks was it after sex? Well, that’s an asshole but she went back to him. She continued to choose him. Meanwhile the guy who would actually be a good partner is shit out of luck.

    4) feminists attacking nice guys as not really nice–well, what’s the opposite?

    As to the player things you talk about, not all players are cads because they’re not dishonest and not all bf’s are not necessarily not cads, as seen by your post on the guy that had the two gf’s at once.

    So, I don’t have any hard numbers but it definitely seems like the asshole man is in more demand today than 50 or 100 years ago. Yes, most women may not say they want an asshole and most probably won’t end up with one (since I don’t think most men are assholes) but in the sexual and mating markets, actions send powerful signals and the excessive extent to which some women are choosing assholes, either for a fling or for an LTR, does create more of a demand for that and less of a demand for good guys.

    • @Han Solo

      1) A culture where in the past some assholes had to pretend to be good to get married whereas now you have some good guys feeling like they have to pretend to be assholes.

      True, but this too is a natural progression of pluralistic ignorance. Guys go through college believing that assholes get all the girls, and eventually try acting like assholes. My guess is that if they roll out this new and improved persona with highly unrestricted women, they’ll have some success.

      The problem is that the attraction to “Dark Triad” men is highly correlated to mental instability and undesirable personality traits, as well as dysfunctional family dynamics. The Pretend Asshole may get the girl, but she’s wired for STRs and drama. Meanwhile, he can’t ever reveal his true nature, he’s got to actually become the jerk she is attracted to.

      It doesn’t strike me as a good strategy for beta guys. IMO, losing the anti-game should be sufficient, as long as they’re not trying to swim in the PUA pond.

      Numerous articles about how a woman’s bf or husband was an asshole

      Stories about assholes like Jacob are always more interesting than stories about Mr. HUS, lol.

      Of course there are women who respond to booty calls. We know that something like 10% of all young women flock to good-looking assholes. (Ugly assholes don’t get any play.) That can keep a guy like Jacob in good supply, even though 90% of women wouldn’t tolerate his BS.

      Anecdotal tales from friends and even many women at HUS and elsewhere sharing their stories about having sex with some man who then won’t call them back after. I remember the story of the guy who had the two women, one back home and one at college.

      A lot of those guys are betas. The guy with two women is known to me personally, and he is a beta guy. That’s one of the reasons neither woman suspected. As soon as the woman I know learned the truth, she broke contact and never spoke to him again.

      So, I don’t have any hard numbers but it definitely seems like the asshole man is in more demand today than 50 or 100 years ago

      I think the self-confident, self-respecting, non-supplicating man is very hard to find today compared to 50 or 100 years ago. That’s what women really want.

  • @Susan

    @Han Solo

    Good luck with the new blog!

    Thanks.

    We hope it to be a non-angry red pill blog where people can discuss red-pill ideas in a civil way.

    It will treat humanity as a spectrum, realizing that not all men or women are “like that” and hopefully looking at the full range.

    Our intention with Just Four Guys is to offer a blog that deals mostly with men’s issues but some women’s issues too, and in a civil way.

    I think most of the other posters will focus more on men’s stuff but I personally want to do the occasional advice column to women.

    We don’t want the outright racist or misogynistic comments that appear in some sphere blogs but do want to take a clear look at things pertaining to each sex.

    I think there will be a variety of perspectives. Ted will offer a more restricted perspective. Although I am personally more unrestricted, I think I can put myself in the shoes of the restricted, moderate and unrestricted male, at least behaviourly since I was a religious virgin for so long. Obsidian will be more blunt while I tend to be more civil. And Morpheus is just that mysterious man 😀 that wants to help people choose between the red and the blue pill.

    I am hopeful that the new Four Guys blog will take on most of this.

    We certainly don’t want any angry trolls passed on to us 🙂 but if well-intentioned people come to HUS wanting to discuss red pill things that aren’t quite a fit here then feel free to send them to Just Four Guys since we do want to talk a lot about male and red-pill issues in a way that offers positive solutions as opposed to just “burn down society.”

    • And Morpheus is just that mysterious man that wants to help people choose between the red and the blue pill.

      Ha, I’ve already got it narrowed down to a handful of people. Should be a breeze to figure out. Funny that someone is going two layers deep on the anonymity, lol.

  • Anacaona

    Shame away at us manwhores! 😀 I can take it. lol
    LOL! I really don’t do much real life shaming because a) I don’t have the status/looks to pull it off. I tried to help my manwhore friends to see the error of their ways. They couldn’t hear me over the sound of all the pussy they were having and my female friends were not impressed by an average looking women telling them to stop putting out, chasing cads, or just being stupid about who they slept with and for what reasons. The ones that did listened were more of reaffirming their choices than actually changing their ways. The truth is more people are trying to confirm their bias and natural inclinations regardless if it works or not. Very few are capable of seeing the matter objectively and change their ways unless something really big happens, YMMV.

  • @Bastiat

    Han, congrats on the new blog, man. Really looking forward to reading your stuff!

    Thanks! You’re certainly welcome there any time.

    A bit of background: Ted wanted a place where he could talk about society, red pill issues, game, marriage and life but he didn’t want to be the sole proprietor or contributor. He wanted some help with posts and so on, and so in talking we decided that there was a need for a more-civil red pill blog (yet it will still have a blunt tone) and that we have ideas we want to share in order to help people better understand the dating/mating world we live in and know how to make positive changes in their lives.

  • @Fish

    I agree that a woman having sufficiently “similar sex drive and desires” to me is a must. Although I have a high N, I do want to get married and have kids and I am faithful when in a relationship and certainly will be so in marriage. So since I will be giving up sex (or the hope of it) with other women then I do expect the sex life to be good with my future gf/wife.

  • @Susan

    In 507, I meant to say that not all players are cads because cad implies deception whereas not all players are deceptive, though some are. Those who are deceptive would be cads but those who are open about their intentions or at least don’t lie when asked would not count as cads.

    Also, I often focus on how many women need to choose better and stop choosing assholes. I certainly don’t mean to say that all women are always choosing aholes. I also think that men need to stop choosing shallow or bad women for partners. I also recognize that men choosing slutty women for casual or pumping and dumping sends out a market signal as well. I suppose I focus more on women needing to choose better because they are the sex gatekeepers by and large and that is the first thing that most men notice about a woman, whether she sexually attracts him. Most men have dual mating drives to some extent (promiscuity and faithful LTR/marriage) and if casual sex is available then it will often be indulged in, especially when they’re single. Yes, you have guys like Ted or maybe JP that can’t even fathom doing casual but they are at the restricted end of the spectrum. So, for the, say, 60% of the men are that are in the middle, they can go either way and will take some casual when offered or also look for an LTR and want a deeper connection. If the casual stops being offered then they will focus relatively more on their LTR mating drive and find an LTR.

    I’m also very aware that probably a good half of society still functions in a very assortative way and a good portion of the other half eventually wakes up to reality or tires of promiscuity and finds a partner. But, in comparing with the past, things have shifted to rewarding short-term attraction cues more in both sexes.

    • In 507, I meant to say that not all players are cads because cad implies deception whereas not all players are deceptive, though some are. Those who are deceptive would be cads but those who are open about their intentions or at least don’t lie when asked would not count as cads.

      So when you say many women want cads, you’re saying that many women want to be lied to?

      I suppose I focus more on women needing to choose better because they are the sex gatekeepers by and large and that is the first thing that most men notice about a woman, whether she sexually attracts him.

      Well we know that half of college students are in LTRs at any point in time, and 75% will graduate having had a serious relationship. That tells me that the vast majority of women are choosing fairly well now.

      If only 10-20% of women are having casual sex, then you can hardly claim that women in general need to be better gatekeepers, can you?

      In general, I think you are correct about certain trends and SMP dynamics, but you tend to focus on the outliers as the norm. It’s fine to talk about that top quintile, but it’s also important to say that. When you say “women need to do x,y,z” it sounds as if you’re addressing women in general, rather than the minority that isn’t already doing x,y,z.

      I see that at Four Guys you intend to be clear about how the population for these behaviors is distributed. I think that’s very important. The extremists get a lot of the media attention, which is how people get erroneous impressions and Pluralistic Ignorance takes root. My goal is to be as precise as possible in sharing information, so that 10% of women acting out doesn’t become viewed as a “trend” or “a consequence of feminism.”

      I started this blog with a lot of assumptions and beliefs about the way behaviors are distributed in the population. I’ve had to change my position on many things as good data has become available. It is difficult but essential to fight confirmation bias. I hope you 4 guys will do the same.

  • @Man

    Thanks.

    I’m working on a post for tomorrow that explores the evolutionary incentives for men and women in safe/rich and dangerous/poor environments and how that explains to some extent some behavior we see today. Feel free to check it out.

  • Bully

    “@purplesneakers… um… sorry. This is my first time down this conversational trail here. Also, I don’t really see any “unpleasant truths”. I see a lot of men who like to think their aging situation is somehow much different than womens, when right now, it’s really just not. There are a lot of older woman/younger man dating scenarios happening frequently now. My guess is that it has to do with greater socio-economic power of the women. Money changes everybody’s power. Not just men’s. But… whatever.”

    You’re projecting your own desires. You’re assuming that men find power attractive in women the same as vice versa. To use an extreme example, Silvio Berlusconi had underaged women pretty much lined up. I don’t know a single man that wanted to bang Angela Merkel.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Women’s sexual power absolutely fades. That doesn’t mean women in their 30s and 40s can’t find husbands.

    It means that young men will literally start wars for 18-25 year old women just because they are hot and young men are horny.

  • Bully

    I would say there really is no upper limit as far as older men to younger women goes, but it’s also not linear. The older you get, it seems the more power you have to accumulate as the standards for what women will be attracted to will be set higher and higher – e.g. an 80k salary at 30 is far above average and should be well enough to work with, but an 80k salary at 65 is hardly going to do it (but something ostentatious like 300k at 65 would do the trick.)

    At some point, age overpowers the average man’s power to shoot outside his bracket, but say what you want about red pillers; they are never content to be an ‘average’ man and will do what is necessary to keep up.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Also, sometimes an older woman is more attractive because she is more receptive and can actually hold a conversation. Like Susan herself said, she was able to “punch out of her weight range” by having a certain “joy of life” quality.

    Dealing with the average young woman, or young man for that matter, is like dealing with a robot. Particularly if they have a smart phone. I would rather sleep with with my mid 30s coworker with a slightly scarred face than I would my cute as a button friend’s sister, because talking to her is like talking to a wall.

    It doesn’t show the awesomeness of older women, it shows that the options available do not have much Girl Game, or enjoyable personalities. Which doesn’t surprise me in the least.

  • Fish

    Re: money = hot

    I don’t think its the money itself that attracts women. Winning the lottery doesn’t make you more attractive. However, Susan wrote a blog about women finding expertise attractive. Being really good in a field usually equates to compensation. I think the talent part is what women find attractive.

    I agree with the “women want to feel protected & taken care of but not subservient.” Well a majority of mature women. I think that’s the problem with the asshole guys, women mis-associate being an asshole for being protective.

    Re:whining about women
    Yeah, that’s why I stopped reading Game. Apparently I’m already a PUA (4 partners per year over 3 years, yikes. Is that new partners or does “recycling” count?), I guess I have no need for it. I like to believe that for guys, it should be the same as advice I’ve given to women on here: work on you, be yourself, be confident, find someone who appreciates you for you.

    Re: Hard truths
    A lot of the statistics brought up in this conversation & others are uncomfortable. Especially for me (I was never proud of high N, I basically have 2 guy friends who know. My female friends have never really seen it because, big surprise, its hard to hit on other women surrounded by attractive single women, not that I prolly would anyways). It doesn’t make me less apt to read. I’ve always been statistically minded, its why I went into the field that I did.

  • MM

    @SW

    The problem is, they really want to tell it to women, not one another.

    You can always institute some variation of the “Logan’s Run” policy. That should nip it in the bud. 😉

  • Hope

    Good luck with your new Four Guys blog!

    Blogging is tough work and rather time-consuming. I wouldn’t have personally done the four guys name because you never know if you’ll have more join or someone drop out. Regardless, have fun with it!

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    A lot of those guys are betas. The guy with two women is known to me personally, and he is a beta guy. That’s one of the reasons neither woman suspected. As soon as the woman I know learned the truth, she broke contact and never spoke to him again.

    Indeed, “Beta” does not mean ” nice”

  • Man

    It is difficult but essential to fight confirmation bias.

    I think this is one the best features of HUS. It’s also an effective way to send another message out there for guys, especially for guys who are looking for a relationship and are not interested or cannot pretend to be assholes.

    Emphasizing women’s “whole package” attraction triggers, including the benevolent traits might help as well. I think the sphere is too much focused on the “alpha asshat” qualities, probably because this is the very powerful signal being sent by young hotties losing their virginity with “alpha asshats”and other women chasing mostly sexual gratification (it seems that for these women men have more of a recreational function, rather than the function of “commitment provider”). Women who are genuinely interested in a relationship are in oblivion and their signals or message is not being delivered because there are too many women behaving like sluts, or pretending to be one (with the complicity and major influence of the consumerist/feminist media?).

    And all in all we need more Hope 🙂 (women genuinely interested and capable of actively listening to men and, well, noticing that they exist and have feelings, an identity and a personality too).

  • Man

    I’m working on a post for tomorrow that explores the evolutionary incentives for men and women in safe/rich and dangerous/poor environments and how that explains to some extent some behavior we see today. Feel free to check it out.

    Thanks, I will have a look. Actually it took me quite a long time to understand how the female superiority complex works and how it operates in a feminist/consumerist environment such as in developed countries where there is technological comfort and safety. I think it also explains a great deal why feminism only thrives in developed countries. Feminism = deadly poison for developed nations. We have either to find a way to fix that (perhaps sending feminists to fight Taliban :)) or learn something with the Muslims, lest they end up taking over the whole world anyway by the power of the womb. 🙂

  • And Morpheus is just that mysterious man that wants to help people choose between the red and the blue pill.

    Ha, I’ve already got it narrowed down to a handful of people. Should be a breeze to figure out.

    Ha. You are correct. It should be fairly trivial as I intend to draw on personal experience in the discussion of broader principles….kind of a “HBS case study” approach to the dating/mating marketplace.

    Funny that someone is going two layers deep on the anonymity, lol.

    Glad I could amuse! 🙂

  • Thanks, I will have a look.

    Man, I’ve been reading your comments here and I’ve been impressed. You are quite skilled at threading the needle. Hope you join the discussion!

  • So when you say many women want cads, you’re saying that many women want to be lied to?

    I don’t think that is what Han is saying. “Cads” tend to have the sorts of characteristics that push attraction buttons quickly…they quickly generate “chemistry” whereas the steady Eddie guy evokes more of a “he seems like a good guy, but meh” feeling. He can’t generate any sort of initial chemistry so his only route is to hopefully “grow on her”. So to say women want “cads” is not to explicitly say they want to be deceived, but that they want the sorts of men who can generate that immediate “chemistry” effect.

    Well we know that half of college students are in LTRs at any point in time, and 75% will graduate having had a serious relationship. That tells me that the vast majority of women are choosing fairly well now.

    That’s good news right…everything is A-OK? Of course, the bad news is if the vast majority of women are already choosing well, the target market for advising women on how to choose is pretty small?

    • @Mike C

      Changed your IP address I see. I will allow your commentary on a trial basis. I confess I was momentarily thrown off by the apparent open-mindedness of Morpheus. 🙂

      That’s good news right…everything is A-OK? Of course, the bad news is if the vast majority of women are already choosing well, the target market for advising women on how to choose is pretty small?

      Wow, it didn’t take long for the old snide snarkiness to surface, did it?

      I will answer your question. The vast majority of women are choosing fairly well. That’s one of the ways in which it has been necessary to change HUS. I no longer feel the need to admonish women not to go after players and other assorted assholes. A look in the archives will show this.

      However, several challenges remain, and this is where I put most of my energy:

      1. Pluralistic Ignorance is the single most difficult hurdle facing men and women who want relationships in college. Today, young couples do the hookup thing, even when they would rather not, as a means of attaining a relationship. By disseminating accurate information about what 80% of college students are doing, and not doing, I hope to give young people the information and support they need to carve a different path.

      2. Women still need support and strategic advice re the timing of sex. The pressure to put out early is intense, and the 3 date rule appears sacrosanct. Women need help knowing when it’s OK to have sex, and how to navigate male resistance to delay.

      3. Men lie to get sex. A lot. As we’ve seen, at least one survey shows that between 1/3 and 1/2 of men have told a girl they love her to get sex. Women need advice on how to filter for character and cad “tells.” IOW, women know how to choose good men, but cads, wanting to get in there with women who are not sluts, are quite skilled at pretending to be good men.

      4. Women are hungry for Girl Game advice – how to attract men, keep them interested, etc. They also need and can benefit from advice on how to give IOIs and escalate emotionally.

  • I think the self-confident, self-respecting, non-supplicating man is very hard to find today compared to 50 or 100 years ago. That’s what women really want.

    @Susan,

    It can’t be that hard though, right? You mentioned the “vast majority of women” are already “choosing fairly well now” so I presume they have chosen self-confident, respecting men or are the vast majority choosing insecure, supplicating men. Obviously, I’m sure you would agree that if something is very hard to find today, you cannot simultaneously have the vast majority of women finding it.

    • @Mike C

      You mentioned the “vast majority of women” are already “choosing fairly well now” so I presume they have chosen self-confident, respecting men or are the vast majority choosing insecure, supplicating men. Obviously, I’m sure you would agree that if something is very hard to find today, you cannot simultaneously have the vast majority of women finding it.

      This is going to get tedious fast. You can’t outsmart me, you know. Don’t waste your time trying.

      The ability to choose well and the odds of finding it are not the same thing. Many women sit out their college years, unable to find the good men they are searching for. (There are many good men with no game.) In fact, the vast majority of women want self-confident men of good character – the benevolent alphas of yesteryear. Those are in very short supply. So short that today a synonym for “very confident male” is “douchebag.” If half of all college students are in a relationship, that leaves half of women who aren’t. If we throw out the 20% who are sluts, that leaves 30% of women who want a boyfriend and don’t have one.

      Don’t forget the #1 search term at HUS: “why don’t i have a boyfriend”

      HUS readers likely come from the 50% not in a relationship.

  • A lot of those guys are betas. The guy with two women is known to me personally, and he is a beta guy. That’s one of the reasons neither woman suspected. As soon as the woman I know learned the truth, she broke contact and never spoke to him again.

    @Susan,

    I know the alpha/beta distinction is somewhat binary, and one can argue until endlessly on “what is alpha”, but given this statement you obviously believe there is some list of attributes X, Y, Z that makes a “beta”. I’m genuinely curious…if I asked you to name the top 3 personality characteristics and/or behaviors that distinguish an alpha from a beta, what would they be?

  • I am hopeful that the new Four Guys blog will take on most of this. 🙂

    The problem is, they really want to tell it to women, not one another.

    Actually, not so much. The choice in name/play on words was not accidental. The blog is primarily for guys and to offer up perspective, ideas, and advice for guys. That said, I’m pretty sure I speak for all of us when I say we have no desire for a “man only treehouse” and welcome participation from women if they choose to read and comment. All that said, considering certain ideas must be a choice and cannot be force-fed:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ1_IbFFbzA

    • @Mike C

      The blog is primarily for guys and to offer up perspective, ideas, and advice for guys.

      Since I expressly discourage red pill digestion at HUS, I am indeed hopeful that you can siphon off male commenters who are working through those issues but reject manosphere blogs for whatever reason.

  • Marc

    I never believe if a woman sleeps with me within a few dates, that she is a slut. I think men with low self esteem think this. I think that she thinks I am irresistable.
    .
    I also like to get to the sex part in a reasonable amount of time because many times bad sex kills attraction. ***TMI Warning*** I am dating a girl now, with whom I waited about one month, or about 9 dates to sleep with. I have slept with her twice now, and her vagina is so loose (shes 21) that it makes the entire experience a non-event. I can barely finish. I like her a lot, but the thought of a lifetime of sex like this is a deal breaker. I dont look forward to being intimate with her. I realize we can have vaginal tightening surgery. What if shes not willing to do this? Can I bring this up now? I am going to stop seeing her for this reason. What if we waited 6 months for this? Not good.

    • I have slept with her twice now, and her vagina is so loose (shes 21) that it makes the entire experience a non-event.

      Wow, really? I confess I have never heard of this. It can’t be very common – women with this problem wouldn’t be able to hold a tampon. Speaking for myself, and I presume most women, the vagina is closed tight in its default state. Inserting a single finger is a tight fit. I cannot imagine a vagina where a normal sized penis slides in without friction.

      Congratulations, she’s one in a million.

  • Man

    @Morpheus:

    I’ve been reading your comments here and I’ve been impressed. You are quite skilled at threading the needle. Hope you join the discussion!

    Thanks. Actually I owe a lot I know to two geniuses. The knowledge I got from them was so deep that it took me around 5-6 years to digest the whole thing. Then I ended up interweaving it with my own experience and knowledge.

    I will keep an eye in your blog. If you happen to develop interesting discussions I might try and draw them both to join the discussion there, and perhaps I might even join the discussion where I feel it’s necessary, because I think you are in a position to project and spread that knowledge to a wider audience.

  • Anacaona

    Congrats in the new blog. That is the spirit! 😀

  • If you happen to develop interesting discussions I might try and draw them both to join the discussion there

    Well, that is certainly our objective. I’d say fostering interesting/stimulating discussions is at the very top of our list of priorities, but that comes largely from commenters. Of course, we have great minds and writers like Han Solo to jumpstart that process.

    because I think you are in a position to project and spread that knowledge to a wider audience.

    That is the hope. We shall see. An interesting question might be how does one “change things”? I think the answer to that question is the first thing is you must change minds and the beliefs people hold. Of course, there are different ways to do that depending on the audience.

    But all evolutions/revolutions start as an idea. Thomas Paine precedes George Washington. The man of thought and ideas precedes the man of action.

  • This is going to get tedious fast. You can’t outsmart me, you know. Don’t waste your time trying.

    The ability to choose well and the odds of finding it are not the same thing. Many women sit out their college years, unable to find the good men they are searching for. (There are many good men with no game.)

    I’m perplexed by your last couple of responses. I was just asking some innocent questions looking for clarifications on what appeared to be contradictions. Sorry if that irked you…that was not my intent. Thanks for the clarification! 🙂

    • @Mike C

      I was just asking some innocent questions looking for clarifications on what appeared to be contradictions.

      They were not innocent. You think a name change erases your history of playing gotcha? I don’t think so.

      In fact, they were not contradictions. It was simply that you lacked understanding.

      Please take the convo to your own blog. All the best with it, seriously. There’s no benefit to any reader in rehashing the same old stuff here. I’m sure you will get many enthusiastic takers there when you share stories of your cubicle mate banging hundreds of chicks or that time you got offered a threesome when you were a bouncer. We’ve BTDT.

  • Richard Aubrey

    “HUS readers likely come from the 50% not in a relationship.”

    Susan. Not me. Married more than forty years. Find the whole thing interesting, if sometimes depressing.
    Confident man of good character….
    Okay, we’ve discussed confidence, demonstrated comfidence, obvious confidence, overconfidence, fake confidence.
    How do we demonstrate good character, or find it in another person? Remember the three-dates-and-he’s-in thing.
    Here are four things that happened to me back in the day:
    Met women I knew but was not dating on my going to and fro here and there.
    One would say to another:
    1. give you the shirt off his back.
    2. taught us how to [something important]
    3. always felt better when he was around
    4. can always count on him.

    Unfortunately, none of this happened when in the company of a woman I was dating, or thinking of dating. If it weren’t for bad luck….

    Question: Would something like this speak to character? I know it would, in a rational world, but as the blue pill-red pill issue shows us, that’s some other planet.
    Or would it make me out to be a large, helpful pet?

    Asked another way, how does character manifest itself in the first, say, six hours of face time? Twenty hours?

    • @Richard

      I know and love my middle aged readers. 😉

      Truth be told, we represent just a small fraction of the 10K that come here each day. I do think we are well represented among commenters though.

      I think the challenge for men today is to demonstrate character without being a pushover. It seems like a lot of guys fall into the trap of:

      1. Gave you the shirt off his back, and hung around being your emotional tampon even though you have a boyfriend.

      2. Hard for men to teach women much today, when women make up 60% of college students and are outearning men in the first ten years of getting a post-graduate job.

      3. Feeling better when a man is around is still a powerful thing – but women no longer really look for men to be protectors. They may enjoy a man’s company, but they don’t feel safer or cared for, especially, when a man is around.

      4. Unfortunately, the number of men one can always count on has declined very dramatically in recent decades. The “end of men” articles bemoan the lack of marriageable men, and point to the extension of male adolescence to age 26.

      Obviously, feminism is the root cause of all of these changes.

  • Mike C

    In fact, they were not contradictions. It was simply that you lacked understanding.

    I guess I must have misunderstood. My bad.

  • MM

    Since I expressly discourage red pill digestion at HUS…

    Whenever these terms are thrown around, I experience Total Recall:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWfh0OuTKKE

    Beware Dr. Edgemar, who was handing out pills 10 years before the Matrix ripped off the idea. Only the red pill was the path to paranoia and brainwashing.

    Either way, quite an ideologically simplistic way to view complex interactions between the sexes.

  • Anacaona

    @Mike C
    Nice to see you around again at least briefly. Back from your honeymoon or it is still too early to congratulate you?

  • Fish

    @Susan
    “but women no longer really look for men to be protectors.”

    I don’t think women want to actually BE protected, they want to FEEL protected. Although short (5’9) I’m pretty muscular (200lbs). more than one woman has commented that they feel safe in my presence. Sometimes these people don’t know about my martial arts training. I could be completely wrong here, but I think women do still want the “I will protect you no matter what” type of guy. They may never be in a position to test that, but I have seen no small number desire it.

  • 4. Women are hungry for Girl Game advice – how to attract men, keep them interested, etc. They also need and can benefit from advice on how to give IOIs and escalate emotionally.

    I wish you well with helping women up their girl game and find good men for dating and marriage.

  • Fish

    Re: loose vag

    I have experienced that. It is indeed very rare. In my case it was made worse by the fact that the girl got very wet on top of it. I was wearing a condom at the time and I literally decided I was done.

    Unfortunately, your only other options may be oral, anal or breakup. See if she would he open to anal, that would definitely solve your first problem if she can do it. . .

    • See if she would he open to anal, that would definitely solve your first problem if she can do it. . .

      “Listen, you suffer from a huge vagina. However, if you’re willing to tolerate the pain and sphincter damage from a steady diet of anal sex, we could try switching to that exclusively. No, I’m sorry, there will be no more kissing, no more eye contact, and yes, you’ll be looking at the pillow from now on. But I’m willing to get my rocks off that way, and I don’t care about you anyway. Sound good?”

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    They were not innocent. You think a name change erases your history of playing gotcha? I don’t think so.

    Not entirely innocent, but the question can be an innocent one.

    If things really aren’t so bad, well, then, what’s the point of all these blogs?

    I go back to my good friend the Beta-esque guy who couldn’t spark a girl’s attention for the life of him, but accidentally stumbled into a relationship because he just happened to display a bunch of attraction triggers at the same time, and she happened to be receptive, and she happens to be below his league.

    I figure a lot of girls might be in the same situation.

    Everyone just stumbling along and eventually something works and none of us really understand it.

    But it’s like working with broken sights on a rifle. Don’t aim too much and you’ll occasionally hit something. If you actually rely on those sights…the harder you aim, the more you miss.

    Which means for the standard, non-pill aware person, the best advice is to “don’t think too much about it, just let your instincts guide you.”

    For most people, perhaps, that old parable of half-fool and half-wise applies here.

  • If things really aren’t so bad, well, then, what’s the point of all these blogs?

    If the overwhelmingly majority of people were getting close to what they wanted, they wouldn’t be online doing Google searches.

    I go back to my good friend the Beta-esque guy who couldn’t spark a girl’s attention for the life of him, but accidentally stumbled into a relationship because he just happened to display a bunch of attraction triggers at the same time, and she happened to be receptive, and she happens to be below his league.

    And therein lies the rub. Most guys are relying on nothing more than dumb luck. There is a reason that the expression “getting lucky” ONLY applies to men. Problem is ….relying on serendipity as your core mating strategy has to be the most God awful one you could utilize. And as your example demonstrates, it is likely to result in a “mediocre” outcome rather than maximizing the value you have to offer.

    I figure a lot of girls might be in the same situation.

    Probably. My best guess on the biggest stumbling block women many women have is on making themselves approachable. Most women are not going to initiate so if a meeting is going to take place, the guy has to approach, but to do that he has to muster up the wherewithal to know he isn’t going to be blown out and humiliated. I’d be more inclined to approach a woman who smiles at me, than one that looks at me like who the f are you.

    But it’s like working with broken sights on a rifle. Don’t aim too much and you’ll occasionally hit something. If you actually rely on those sights…the harder you aim, the more you miss.

    Or you actually learn how to shoot properly.

    • If the overwhelmingly majority of people were getting close to what they wanted, they wouldn’t be online doing Google searches.

      People do Google searches for two reasons: to get information, i.e. learn, and to find solutions to specific problems. People comment on blogs to be part of a community.

      It’s no secret that both men and women are struggling to find good relationships in this SMP. We’ve already discussed the factors at work there. 50% is a lousy success rate if 80% want relationships.

      It’s incorrect to assume that women can’t get what they want because they keep going after the wrong men. Some do, of course. But in 5 years of writing this blog, I can think of only a handful of women who presented with that problem, including Sassy and Alexis of the Bike Dude story. It’s far more common for women to make the error of focusing way too much on their jobs and not working hard to meet new people. And of course, we no longer teach young people how to naturally inhabit their gender roles. Women lack femininity, men lack masculinity. They don’t know how to approach one another, or escalate in any way other than physical.

      It’s like there’s a No Man’s Land that one sex or the other has to cross to meet up, and lots of people have difficulty doing that, either due to fear/lack of confidence, confusion about gender roles, or even ignorance about what’s on the other side.

  • jack

    Is unrestricted a synonym for promiscuous? And is restricted another way of saying only has sex in the context of monogamy?

  • Anne

    @Susan
    “However, in my very limited experience size queens do tend toward the slutty side…”

    I’ve just had an argument about this with a friend so felt the need to comment. There is definitely a connection and in my experience it is related to how feminist the woman is. One good friend of mine is very promiscuous (30+ partners, 22 yo) and is very much a size queen. She is also a feminist. Like many young feminist women, she hates the pressure women experience for their looks, she also feels like men has the upper hand in most scenarios. To ‘even things out’, she puts this size pressure on men.
    Some girls have given themselves lower value if their number has gone up too high, and have to compensate by attempting to lower the man’s value. The often also have other ‘requirements’ which aren’t true. I.e. they say that abs and arms are important to them, but their choices say differently.
    The biggest size queen is always the most promiscuous girl because she has the strongest need to objectify men because she feels objectified.

    Of course, by ‘size queen’ I mean someone who is overemphasizing importance of penis size.

    • @Anne

      Some girls have given themselves lower value if their number has gone up too high, and have to compensate by attempting to lower the man’s value. The biggest size queen is always the most promiscuous girl because she has the strongest need to objectify men because she feels objectified.

      That’s a very interesting theory, it certainly makes sense.

      It’s funny, I know one such woman who has gone on and on about how jacked a guy needs to be to turn her on – always describing huge biceps, etc. She’s now in a relationship after being single and promiscuous for 6 years head over heels for the guy. He’s a really nice guy, very skinny. 🙂

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Susan, one more

    Obviously, feminism is the root cause of all of these changes.

    Gotta admit that I sometimes LOL when manosphere blames feminism for the majority of this social catastrophe. If male earnings had held, for instance, this would not have happened. If our society had not decided to economically obliterate itself, irrelevant. If our society had not decided to worship college degrees en masse, irrelevant.

    There’s obviously a lot of crap going on besides feminism. Too much identification of an issue in isolation.

    Though, tbh? Some of the game writers have noted this. Roosh actually says it isn’t THAT broken in Sweden because women in Sweden are still “game-on” for betas, whereas this culture in general is still extremely hyper-gamous alpha chasing, I guess. And maybe all women aren’t that way, but if you are setting up the culture where drunkard Tony Stark is King Bad-ass of the Americans…

    However, I do feel that there is some nostalgia going on here. Were the guys in the past really all that much more awesome? If guys have really decided en masse to be immature and delay marriage, well, women aren’t really looking for early marriage either, right? Seems to be a joint decision on that front.

    Even if there were a greater number of “marriageable” men in the past, was it a majority? Was the average woman ever really in competition for these men?

    • If male earnings had held, for instance, this would not have happened. If our society had not decided to economically obliterate itself, irrelevant. If our society had not decided to worship college degrees en masse, irrelevant.

      I’m not so sure, I think feminism played a role in all of those. You are right though, that the U.S.’s move away from a manufacturing economy, and the weakening of the unions, drove male wages down. However, increasing reliance on technology in the economy favors men, so perhaps that pendumlum will swing back.

      If guys have really decided en masse to be immature and delay marriage, well, women aren’t really looking for early marriage either, right? Seems to be a joint decision on that front.

      Yes, this is why any notion of a marriage strike is incorrect. Women are just as likely to delay marriage as men are – in fact, since women are outperforming men career-wise in their 20s, they may be even more likely to delay.

      Even in lower SES groups, where the marriage rate is extremely low, cohabitation and single parenthood is an accepted norm, not something women are unhappy about.

      Even if there were a greater number of “marriageable” men in the past, was it a majority? Was the average woman ever really in competition for these men?

      The post WWII boom made most men marriageable, and people married and had families early and with enthusiasm. Assortative mating was the norm. Because women had limited opportunities, hypergamy was not as big an issue. Even college educated women stayed home full time once they married.

      There was no apex fallacy then either.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Morpheus,

    The pure beauty of it is that if society is working properly, then no one really has to think about things too much. We are designed to reproduce. Literally. It is what we are meant to do. If we are failing to do this, if we are failing to produce good matches between men and women, it means the society we have created is failing.

    If we rely on people custom-building their own rifles, well, some people are going to fall through the cracks, or only get lucky.

    Which sucks.

    And the question is how long can you rely on people getting lucky? Obviously marriage is functioning relatively okay among college graduates. Not so confident about the rest of the population. Given how rapidly things change, well, I don’t know where my kids, or grand-kids, might end up…

    As for women, well, I don’t know. I do suspect a good number of women are simply making themselves unapproachable by default.

    But I don’t advise women unless they ask 😛

    Like many young feminist women, she hates the pressure women experience for their looks, she also feels like men has the upper hand in most scenarios. To ‘even things out’, she puts this size pressure on men.

    Pressure is what turns coals into diamonds.

  • Man

    @Morpheus:

    Well, that is certainly our objective. I’d say fostering interesting/stimulating discussions is at the very top of our list of priorities, but that comes largely from commenters… The man of thought and ideas precedes the man of action.

    Of course. It’s just that those two guys are into really deep psychic and philosophical knowledge. None of us condone jerkdom either. They won’t be interested in superficial debates which might already have been covered in the sphere. We’re continually striving to produce new knowledge/ideas. That’s why I also only make punctual interventions in discussions, where I feel necessary. But I also have many other things to do and sometimes I cannot track all discussions. 🙂 So I try to focus only on what is more important. Don’t worry. I will keep an eye on your blog once in a while. I think you have a good starting point. You just to take it slow and strive to produce quality and relevant discussions.

  • Man

    @Susan: I would be really interested in an article of yours exposing your views whether women really a need a man, nowadays. I think that a man’s role has been reduced mostly to recreational function to a lot of post-feminist women. Hence the focus on game, sexual performance, other attributes which might make him “attractive”, etc. In other words, the average/common man has just little or no value to them. You often seem to write about women as if being ready and mature for a LTR. This is a typical feminist assumption. But if one takes into account the male standards of a “marriageable woman” (including attraction for him), then the prospects are not that great for men either, especially when they are most willing to marry, to find a woman they can count on. I guess that you yourself have stated this elsewhere.

    • @Man

      . I think that a man’s role has been reduced mostly to recreational function to a lot of post-feminist women.

      I would not say recreational. Many women want and need healthy relationships with men. They want to be in love, and they want children. Pair bonding is still the best way to do that.

      You often seem to write about women as if being ready and mature for a LTR. This is a typical feminist assumption.

      I don’t believe I’ve ever written that. I say that women want LTRs, which is a very different claim. They are certainly not mature in their teens – this is why I believe it’s imperative that young men and women do have relationships – serially, most likely – before they marry. They need to mature and learn relationship skills, including compromise, unconditional love, loyalty, etc. It’s no accident that the divorce rate is much lower when people delay marriage until age 25.

  • Fish

    In a perfect market, arbitrage doesn’t exist. If the SMP was a perfect market, there would be no SMV/MMV, there would just be RMV. For the SMP to be a perfect market there would have to be little or no casual sex. I don’t know how viable that is…

  • @ADBG

    The pure beauty of it is that if society is working properly, then no one really has to think about things too much. We are designed to reproduce. Literally. It is what we are meant to do. If we are failing to do this, if we are failing to produce good matches between men and women, it means the society we have created is failing.

    I agree with you, but right now I think we have a society that is NOT working properly with respect to gender dynamics, gender roles, expectations and responsibilities. You’ve actually given me an idea for a JFG post at a later date, as this is not the appropriate forum to get into deeper detail on this.

    In the meantime, individuals at the individual level don’t have the time to wait for society to right itself and therefore must craft individual solutions. I’ve been reading some of your stuff, and I suspect you know way better than I do the frustration and/or lack of success the “average, good, decent, beta” guy is having at simply landing a relationship with an assortative mating equal. Why? Because they are colossal f-ups? Or because they get filtered out on superficial stuff that shouldn’t matter to the quality woman serious about a LTR? Maybe some of both?

    If we rely on people custom-building their own rifles, well, some people are going to fall through the cracks, or only get lucky.

    True dat. But that doesn’t mean you don’t offer the toolbox or skillset to people who are interested in utilizing them.

    I probably won’t be around here too long, but I hope you will stop by add to the discussion.

  • Fish

    @man
    I think “marriageable woman” varies by guy. I read an article online that men should look for a never divorced 20yo virgin who will cook, clean, do housework & spit out babies. That couldn’t be farther from what I’m looking for.

    Granted, I have my own set of criteria, but a virgin!?!? Seriously? I also don’t care if a woman cooks, I genuinely enjoy it & do it well. I don’t want a pet with a vagina, I want an equal.

    My point with this is that while I agree, women don’t require a husband, they want one. Being in a (good) relationship does convey bonuses beyond sex. I think that’s what women are looking for and why trust & communication are so important.

  • I think that a man’s role has been reduced mostly to recreational function to a lot of post-feminist women. Hence the focus on game, sexual performance, other attributes which might make him “attractive”, etc.

    Man, let’s say you are 23-24 year old single guy recently graduated at your first corporate job.

    The scarcest commodity we all actually have is time, and how we use our time. Time spent for activity X cannot be spent for activity Y.

    I believe on this thread, and I know on this blog, numerous times it has been mentioned women do NOT need an economic provider (of course that ignores the fact that rules out SAHM optionality), and also the LOOKS matter (which I agree with). I believe it was Apple who mentioned her womb tightening or clenching or something like that when a fit guy is around.

    So if you are this hypothetical guy, do you spend a couple extra hours at the office each night Mon-Fri taking on extra projects and trying to more quickly climb the ladder and boost your job status, and earning potential or do you hit the gym 5 days a week and try to build a muscular, fit body (with the caveat different women prefer different levels of muscularity).
    It is a no-brainer.

    • I believe on this thread, and I know on this blog, numerous times it has been mentioned women do NOT need an economic provider (of course that ignores the fact that rules out SAHM optionality)

      They don’t NEED a provider, but that doesn’t change the fact that Economic Capacity is still the most powerful female attraction cue. It’s the primary component of status.

      A woman pulling down 500K on Wall St. is not likely to be interested in a man making half that, despite the fact that she could afford to date someone penniless. A woman will seek a man of higher status, i.e. economic capacity, than herself, which is why very successful women find the dating pool very small.

      In addition to Economic Capacity, there are several other female attraction cues, including looks, as you mentioned. A woman is unlikely to choose a man for his earning power alone, if she is not otherwise attracted to him. Obviously, very low SMV women may make this compromise, as they are less likely to have alternatives.

      do you spend a couple extra hours at the office each night Mon-Fri taking on extra projects and trying to more quickly climb the ladder and boost your job status, and earning potential or do you hit the gym 5 days a week and try to build a muscular, fit body (with the caveat different women prefer different levels of muscularity).
      It is a no-brainer.

      The most successful men seem to have no trouble achieving both. They aren’t going for the musclebound look, so perhaps they spend less time lifting, or do cardio activities like running instead.

      I know at my gym, there’s a huge exodus of beautifully dressed women at about 7:30 a.m. They’ve worked out, showered, and made up for the day. My daughter hits her gym at 5:30 a.m.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan

    1. Gave you the shirt off his back, and hung around being your emotional tampon even though you have a boyfriend.

    2. Hard for men to teach women much today, when women make up 60% of college students and are outearning men in the first ten years of getting a post-graduate job.

    WRT the “shirt” thing, I guess the question is whether a caring guy in a situation where there is no romance going on–you rolled your canoe and I’m down to my cutoffs and everybody else is wearing my other stuff and it’s starting to sleet but I have what I found out decades later, “brown fat”, ex–would look like a pushover before the pushovering situation arose to find out.

    The showed us thing was, among others, a quick and dirty self-defense class for the women in a field project–civil rights in MS in ’67. Nothing to do with numbers of matriculees. Other things: change a headlight, open a locked door–depends on a couple of items. Nothing to do with classroom seat time.

    Neither case today would be different except I’d be counting the ten minutes before the brown fat kicked up my metabolism. Used to just hope.

    But if details were not forthcoming, I suppose it would look bad rather than good, wouldn’t it?
    So how does a woman discern character in six hours or twenty hours of face time?

  • Fish

    @RA

    huh? I don’t think I understood your post at all…

  • Richard Aubrey

    Fish.
    Replying to Susan’s reply to mine of 543.
    She thought that “shirt off the back” might be misinterpreted to mean pushover. But the actual situation was the canoe trip. Really shirt, plus sweatshirt and jeans and stuff. But it wasn’t as much a problem for me because of a rare but now known condition, “brown fat”. Which I didn’t know at the time. But if somebody said “shirt off his back” to a woman I was dating, how would it be taken without the detail?
    As to “showing us [something important], Susan presumed it was a classroom situation. Wasn’t. So the situation today wouldn’t be any different just because of the different proportions of men and women in and graduating from college. Didn’t have anything to do with earning, either.
    Hence my correction regarding self-defense.
    So, if I grok this correctly, those general statements from women I knew but wasn’t dating to a hypothetical woman I was dating would be a Bad Thing rather than a Good Thing.
    From which I figured the logical question would be, how does a woman discern character in the first six hours or the first twenty hours of face time? Particularly since actual testimonials are likely to be interpreted negatively.

    • @Richard

      From which I figured the logical question would be, how does a woman discern character in the first six hours or the first twenty hours of face time?

      She can’t, except perhaps in rare instances. That’s why women shouldn’t have sex after 6 or 20 hours of face time. It takes longer to assess character, which is why delaying sex is the most important tool a woman has in her toolkit.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Fish,

    I don’t think women want to actually BE protected, they want to FEEL protected.

    They don’t need to be taken care of either, but they want to feel taken care of.

    They don’t need a man but they want to feel wanted.

    They’re equal in status but they want to feel impressed by a guy.

    There’s a big discontinuity between what women have become and what women want to feel.

    • There’s a big discontinuity between what women have become and what women want to feel.

      +1

  • JP

    “People do Google searches for two reasons: to get information, i.e. learn, and to find solutions to specific problems. People comment on blogs to be part of a community.”

    Commenting on blogs is also a way to get information.

    The only time I was really part of a “blog community” (well, one where I actually knew who the people were), it had actually real life components (meaning some people actually met each other), and eventually had to start it’s own community blog.

    Then an untimely death crashed it.

    Not very durable communities.

  • Man

    @Morpheus/Fish: What I am trying to convey is that nowadays the average/common man has to “fabricate” value to be attractive to a lot of modern women. If you think deeply, a jerk serves that function to some degree, by providing a challenge, competition with rival females, by being emotionally unavailable and hence providing an emotional roller coaster which makes them feel “alive”. Susan has explored this somewhat at this article: “Hot & Mean” vs. “Not Hot & Nice”: What Do Girls Want?. In other words the assholes actually serve the recreational purpose of providing an emotional challenge/roller coaster to them (with the possible exception of very dysfunctional women due to child abuse, etc.).

    So basically, to my mind, there are many challenges to relationship orientated guys too:

    1. Avoid being an emotional tampon of female players (on the rise nowadays). He needs to realize that “Women Who Love Too Much” is a great lie and stop trying to save the purportedly “good girl” from the “bad boy”. Have you ever seen any woman love too much a timid “nice guy”, or a beggar?

    2. Tell the difference between a good girl and bad girl. Good girl here would mean the ones who are genuinely interested in a relationship and are often into the oblivion.

    3. Be able to identify and filter out narcissistic sluts and filter in the girls who might be a good mate/wife/mother (provided he’s interested in marriage, having children, etc.).

    I think that leaves him with not so many options on the table.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan,

    “”It’s no accident that the divorce rate is much lower when people delay marriage until age 25.””

    Chicken-egg thing. Might be that delaying marriage reduces the chance of divorce. Might be that the people who delay marriage are less likely to be the kind of folks who divorce.
    IOW, take an early-marriage cohort and magically make them delay while having the relationship variety you describe and you may–or may not–have reduced divorce rates.
    Chicken-egg; the grit in studies of human behavior.

    • Chicken-egg thing. Might be that delaying marriage reduces the chance of divorce. Might be that the people who delay marriage are less likely to be the kind of folks who divorce.

      True, but it makes sense that maturity as well as financial stability would play a role in marital outcomes, and both of those presumably increase with age.

  • JP

    “They are certainly not mature in their teens – this is why I believe it’s imperative that young men and women do have relationships – serially, most likely – before they marry.”

    I think that I was trying to form a permanent pair/marriage bond in my teens, however, I am so far out there in terms of psychological structure, asynchronicity, I don’t think I’m useful except as an outlier. I first became infatuated in first grade, and had no idea what was going on.

    “They need to mature and learn relationship skills, including compromise, unconditional love, loyalty, etc.”

    I developed negative relationship skills in my only long-term relationship, most likely because I had no interest in the relationship, so I’m not sure how this helps.

  • Man

    @Susan: You wrote while I was posting my comment.

    They are certainly not mature in their teens – this is why I believe it’s imperative that young men and women do have relationships – serially, most likely – before they marry. They need to mature and learn relationship skills, including compromise, unconditional love, loyalty, etc. It’s no accident that the divorce rate is much lower when people delay marriage until age 25.

    Agreed. Not so sure about having relationships “serially”. It’s best to aim straightforward for serious dating I think (especially if the woman is interested in a LTR/marriage), but delaying marriage until 25 might be a good option given that maturation takes longer nowadays for both genders. But I do know a few couples who just “fell in love” while young, married and are OK. Perhaps both were mature enough for a relationship or at least had the same goals.

    • It’s best to aim straightforward for serious dating I think (especially if the woman is interested in a LTR/marriage)

      I think that young people do this naturally. When people fall in love, they think it will last forever, that they have found “the one.” This is true at 16, 18, 20 and 22, etc. All of the young women I’ve known in LTRs have told me that somehow they would make the relationship last past graduation, despite geographic separation, etc. Obviously, few do – I think a very small percentage of people marry their first SO.

      Today we spend about 15 years between puberty and marriage. That is unprecedented in history, and serial relationships are the reality. You can’t advise them away.

  • JP

    “This is true at 16, 18, 20 and 22, etc. All of the young women I’ve known in LTRs have told me that somehow they would make the relationship last past graduation, despite geographic separation, etc. Obviously, few do – I think a very small percentage of people marry their first SO.”

    My college-educated SO who I didn’t want to marry or be in a relationship with had no problems whatsoever moving to follow me.

    Had I wanted to marry her or be in a relationship at all, I could have done so.

    I wanted her as a good friend, not as a girlfriend or wife, what I ended up with was a hole in my life because I was stupid in the first place.

  • JP

    “Today we spend about 15 years between puberty and marriage. That is unprecedented in history, and serial relationships are the reality. You can’t advise them away.”

    If a close relationship is severed without the real consent of both parties, meaning that it was caused by distance or circumstance rather than a real desire to not be together, there is a strong chance that it will implode you later because you will retrigger it and blow things up.

    I think this is what is happening with these “Facebook fiascoes” you have noticed. You have relationships that just stopped, rather than running their normal course. They are “off” but can be turned back “on” very quickly, and potentially completely overwhelm the current relationship.

    Apparently, due to the nature of human psychology, it’s just a matter of time before these prior unfinished relationships return.

    Basically, what you sow when you are 22, you will reap when you are 45.

    I personally don’t know of any “Facebook fiascoes”, but I think that this is the underlying psychology.

    • I think this is what is happening with these “Facebook fiascoes” you have noticed. You have relationships that just stopped, rather than running their normal course. They are “off” but can be turned back “on” very quickly, and potentially completely overwhelm the current relationship.

      I bet you’re right! If both parties let go reluctantly, or believe they might have made it if not for fate…that might be the first stop when one is feeling low, in need of validation, etc.

      However, even in those relationships, one person pulls the plug. Based on what I’ve seen, guys are usually more reluctant to do long-distance because of the lack of sex. Over the course of the breakup, many girls and guys do wind up acting like assholes, so there’s perhaps more closure than one might assume.

  • JP

    @Man:

    “Agreed. Not so sure about having relationships “serially”. It’s best to aim straightforward for serious dating I think (especially if the woman is interested in a LTR/marriage), but delaying marriage until 25 might be a good option given that maturation takes longer nowadays for both genders.”

    I’m pretty sure that if you want children, you should shoot for kids at 25. That’s just my guess, meaning 75/50/25/0 as the constellation you are shooting for.

    There are significant problems with generational stretch, meaning kids at 40, 30, etc. I know because I’ve lived it.

    Parents have *always* been subsidized. It’s basically a human requirement. Apparently, we are ignoring this at the moment, but it remains a truth, and is really unavoidable.

  • Marc

    @551 Loose vag is an issue for sure. Ruins the whole experience, and yes, she gets really wet also, so its “like punching an open window”.
    .
    Not really an ass guy. Im a vag man for life. Also, I found anal sex to be looser than all vaginal sex. The first 30 seconds are tight, then I believe the schpincter is tricked into thinking a log is coming out, and it relaxes.
    .
    The girls here in Ukraine tell me that guys absolutely dont eat vag. I love eating vag! So loose vag girl spends the night, and Id rather eat her than bang her. So this is how it went down, thought it was funny……
    .
    So she says the other night “teach me some English slang”. So I said “when something is really good, we say that was stU-pid, or even Retarded”.
    She says “hmmm interesting, stupid is good”. (TMI warning)…..next morning, I give her this shaking orgasm with my mouth, and I say “did u like that?”…..she says “that vaaas stU-pid”.
    .
    I have to stop seeing her. Shame, shes great.

  • Fish, re: perfect markets, clearing, equilibrium, etc. This has actually been researched to some degree in the world of strippers. Strippers frequently differentiate between “Dancers” and “Extras Girls.” Extras Girls are willing to perform sexual acts for clients, Dancers are generally not.

    The ideal situation for a Dancer is to be able to string out a series of well-heeled “regulars”, men who, sadly, continually return to the club and offer money and gifts to a Dancer who attempts to make them feel special. To create this fantasy,Dancers will usually try to get Regulars to come in on different nights. This way, the stripper can avoid having one man get pissed off and can simply stay at a single regular’s table for the whole evening, continually making money off of him via dances and overpriced drinks with attendant kickback schemes.

    Dancers often feel that Extras Girls can ruin a club, as male customers develop expectations, figure out who the Extras Girls are, and begin asking specific, impatient, fantasy-destroying questions.

    So if a Dancer has to persuade a man to go up with her to an expensive VIP booth, the man may reasonably ask, “What will this involve?” She needs to persuade him that the lapdance he receives there will be somehow qualitatively better than the one he would receive downstairs in the open club, when in fact the two products are probably almost identical.

    The Extras Girl, however, can quite honestly say that in the VIP booth she can give HJs and BJs, perhaps more, and this may be a compelling reason for the client to opt for a more expensive VIP experience. From the male POV, the Extras Girl is bringing a new transparency to the market, and allowing him to be a better-informed buyer.

    However, Strippers who are pure Dancers thrive on ambiguity and opacity in pricing, and thus many complain *bitterly* about Extras Girls. Off-duty Dancers will often tell you that their whole business is about creating a fantasy, about making the client (frequently derided as stupid) think that the stripper really likes him, thinks he is special, that it’s not just about money for her, etc. The appearance of even a few Extras Girls in a large establishment can create whole new expectations for stripper-client interactions, and can make life economically more difficult for all but the hottest Dancers.

    My friends in law-enforcement have informed me that a frequent source of prostitution/solicitation arrests has been Dancers who decide to do something about a popular Extras Girl because she is ruining their ability to extract maximum resources from men.

  • mr. wavevector

    The post WWII boom made most men marriageable, and people married and had families early and with enthusiasm.

    In addition to the opportunities of the post-war boom, the experiences of that generation – the deprivations of the Depression followed by the epic struggle of WWII – matured them into purposeful adults. The men returning from the war were men, not boys. Even the men who did not serve (such as my father, crippled from a childhood injury) assumed the same seriousness of purpose, as did the women. Few of that generation extended adolescence into their 30’s.

    • . Even the men who did not serve (such as my father, crippled from a childhood injury) assumed the same seriousness of purpose, as did the women. Few of that generation extended adolescence into their 30′s.

      And that’s why they deserve to be called “the greatest.” It’s unfortunate that complacency always follows the achievements wrought by hard work and purpose.

  • JP

    @Dancer:

    “This has actually been researched to some degree in the world of strippers. Strippers frequently differentiate between “Dancers” and “Extras Girls.” Extras Girls are willing to perform sexual acts for clients, Dancers are generally not.”

    That’s because they aren’t using the Japanese model for high-end Hostess clubs.

    A well-run tightly controlled Japanese Hostess club will extract a significant amount of revenue and you don’t even need “dancing”.

  • JP

    “In addition to the opportunities of the post-war boom, the experiences of that generation – the deprivations of the Depression followed by the epic struggle of WWII – matured them into purposeful adults.”

    That’s great, except that American might have completely torn itself apart during the 1930’s. FDR, as much as I dislike him for making bad macro decisions, was excellent at being a good fantasy leader and keeping the U.S. together.

    We’ve chosen “soft depression” this time around and things are much less chaotic than during the real depression.

  • Abbot

    More mainstream exposing of feminist hot-button “issues”. Thats twice in one week!

    http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/is-forced-fatherhood-fair/

    .

  • Fish

    Re: 20 hours

    I can understand 6 hours being not enough to filter, 20 hours is AT LEAST 4-5 solid dates. If a woman can’t make a yes or no decision on sex after 20 hours, I would suspect she’s pricing herself out of the market(or dating well below her SMV). I can accept being in the minority as far as sex quickly but I remember posting a survey that something like 70% of women have sex with 5 dates. If a woman can’t decide before 5 dates, she probably needs a better strategy.

    My concern here is not for guys like me. I’ve come to accept I’m STR or unicorn. Obviously unicorn can take as long as she wants. My concern is for women dating at appropriate SMV who are competing with other women at appropriate SMV.

    I really only have 1 female friend who delays past 3 dates for sex. Shes 29 and still single, desperately wants a husband and babies. She’s not unattractive (I’d say pretty average), and she seems to date average guys. However none of them seem to stick around. The ultimate irony is that one guy did stick around, she broke up with him because he was a bad kisser…

  • Fish

    @BB
    Yeah I tend to avoid both strippers and servers. Odds are they’re doing something shady & I prefer to just avoid the whole scene.

    I never understood what makes strip clubs appealing. If you want sex, try to pick up a “real” girl, if you want hot nudity, you can get all you want on the internet for free.

  • It seems to me like 3 really is established as a pretty firm norm now. So the argument could be made that the SMP is currently clearing sex at a price of about 11 hours and $150-$175.

    First date: coffee and stroll from 1 PM-4 PM (3 hours). Estimated cost: $25.

    Second date: pizza, bar for a few drinks, make out session. 8 PM-1 AM (5 hours). Estimated cost: $100 (often considerably less given current SMP standards).

    Third date: hang out at home to “watch a movie.” Begin at 8 PM, sex by 11 PM (3 hours). Estimated cost: ? Couple of bottles of Korbel for $15 each?

    • Estimated cost: ? Couple of bottles of Korbel for $15 each?

      Ouch.

  • Escoffier

    Re: shirt off one’s back.

    My wife and I did not get off to a great start when we met. We didn’t like each other, although she denies that on her part, but I will admit that I didn’t like her.

    Our lead prof held this legendary Christmas party at his home every year and it was coat and tie (amazing to think about, isn’t it?). A bunch of us went outside to smoke (it was during the ’90s “cigar boom”) where it was quite cold. Even though she did not and does not smoke she came with us, to be part of the scene I guess. Well, she was shivering like crazy. So I gave her my jacket to wear. Despite the fact that we were nominal adversaries at that time.

    A beta move, no doubt. And it was a different time and she is a quality girl. Yet it is possible that a small kind gesture will not be taken purely as evidence that you are a sap to be exploited and abused.

    • Despite the fact that we were nominal adversaries at that time.

      I’ve never had a nominal adversary IRL where sexual tension was not the result.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “I bet you’re right! If both parties let go reluctantly, or believe they might have made it if not for fate…that might be the first stop when one is feeling low, in need of validation, etc.”

    I don’t think that you even need to feel “low” or seek “validation.”

    I think that the people involved generally do not understand that their actions will trigger something that they did not expect, or even think would be possible.

    I suspect that the problem lies with the so-called “reminiscense bump”. Apparently, it’s with you forever, and in many cases, it’s just a matter of time before something happens at which you realize that the past is neither past nor dead.

    This is why I say that in some cases, the most important aspect of the stability of your current relationship is the nature of your prior relationships.

    Specifically the one(s) during this period of neurological activity:

    “A little-known but robust line of research shows that there really is something deeply, weirdly meaningful about this period. It plays an outsize role in how we structure our expectations, stories, and memories. The basic finding is this: We remember more events from late adolescence and early adulthood than from any other stage of our lives. This phenomenon is called the reminiscence bump.

    Memory researchers have been wrestling with the reminiscence bump since at least the 1980s, when studies began turning up evidence that memory has a peculiar affinity for events that happen during the third decade of life. They still aren’t completely sure what causes us to drench those years with special import, whether it’s the intrinsic qualities of events that happen within that time frame, a consequence of the way our 20-year-old brains encode information, or a recall strategy that arbitrarily favors milestones from our salad days.”

    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/01/reminiscence_bump_explanations_why_we_remember_young_adulthood_better_than.html

  • Escoffier

    BB, $15 for Korbel is a rip-off. For $15, you can get a decent North Coast sparkler. For $20, a great bottle. For Champs, double that.

  • Apple

    @Liz a lot of my biggest issues are how flagrantly a lot of men in the manosphere want to disregard their role in how things have gotten to where they are.

    The way things were for women before feminism happened may have worked great in a perfect world and with good men. But there are enough men who simply don’t care about women or who once they have power abuse the shit out of it, that yeah… women need to have choices and freedom. Whaaa if some menfolk don’t like it.

    It’s no secret that many of the loudest feminists had some Fucked-up abusive pasts. Of course they saw problems. The social systems we live under should not keep you from being systematically raped and abused only if you are “lucky”. I’m not saying most or all men are rapists or abusers. I don’t believe that. But there are clearly enough men out there (and from all evidence always have been) who are like that to warrant caution in giving the male of the species too much unchecked power over women.

    I don’t think it’s fair or okay the unfairness toward men in the legal system, but come on. Dude. SOME of those changes were good. I know I like knowing I can take care of myself. I like that I do not HAVE to make babies and be trapped at home raising them. Most men just don’t have any concept or grasp of what women’s lives were really like or what some women’s lives are not like. This doesn’t justify misandry or any of the ways men are disrespected or any of the ways the legal system is out of whack against them… however, some of that disrepect comes about because now women can do it without suffering some huge consequence.

    But… I guess my ultimate point is… the MRA can whine endlessly about how evil women/feminism is and Feminism can whine endlessly about how evil MRA/men are but… really it comes down to individual people. There are really good people of both genders and it’s not right to pit either gender wholesale against the other.

  • Apple

    *grasp of what some women’s lives are NOW like.

  • Apple

    @Susan re: men saying they are only interested in “what works” to me keeps reinforcing that attitude that women aren’t people. I started out pretty angry at feminism because I *do* see the problems some of it has caused. However, the way so many MRAs/MGTOWs/PUAs/Other manosphere men behave and talk… gee… I can sort of kind of see where feminists are coming from. I’m not sure I “buy” that that much hatred of women just sprung up overnight when men realized the legal system was stacked against them. Either way, I find it hard to believe some of them ever loved or respected women at all.

    Also, anytime a man says the phrase “red pill” to me, I just zone out now. Yawn. The Matrix wasn’t even that good of a movie. It’s kind of sad to build one’s entire “philosophy” on a crappy Keanu Reeves movie.

  • Fish

    @BB
    Sounds about right. There’s definitely texting in between, but as has been mentioned here, texting is impersonal, easy and doesn’t require full attention.

    I wonder if sex before emotional commitment is a guy thing, an unrestricted thing or just uncommon. Personally I don’t make a decision on keeper or not until we’ve been having sex at least a month (with VERY FEW notable exceptions)

    Re: long distance relationships
    My little brother is in one and loves it. He gets sex on the weekends and does what he wants on the weekdays (she goes to school two hours away). If it was long enough to preclude driving then that would be an issue.

    Stepping away from SMV, baseball uses a stat for players called WAR, wins above replacement. Its a measure of how many wins a player adds over an easily obtainable replacement option. This is much closer to how I generally approach dating. I.E. if a woman has no real differentiators (appearance, sex skills, etc), she is basically “replacement level”. To merit a long distance relationship a woman would have to be WELL above replacement level, obviously if she is easily replaceable, why deal with the distance?

    0 WAR players play on most major league teams. They are useful to have. However, if they start pricing themselves out of the market (unless they have a long term contract, i.e. marriage), they get replaced because they are, by definition, replaceable.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector: “A woman can’t use sex as leverage if he doesn’t want it as much as she does”. Yes, that’s what I’m saying, WHICHEVER partner wants it the least is the one with the most ‘sexual power’ in the relationship. And it’s a stereotype to say all young men want it all the time and all older men don’t and older women are all crazy voracious while young women aren’t. Human sexuality is highly variable.

    And while SOME women’s sexuality may go through the roof at 50, many women have very low libidos after menopause. For two people with low libido in their fifties, the relationship won’t be based on any kind of sexual power dynamics at all but other things entirely. On the other hand, some couples have a lot of sex well into their golden years. Different people are different.

    And I agree also re: more than just physical appeal, but I’ve “never” felt a stupid personality-free woman that dressed slutty was “sexy”. I know, being female that I’m not the “target market” of these displays, but I am a little bit bi, and ugh… not sexy to me. I’ve always thought “being sexy” encompassed a whole range of things, looks being a powerful factor, but certainly not the only one. Also, not sure how some men can stay hard in the face of a really hot stupid women who opens her mouth to speak.

  • Apple

    @Man, you said: “The biggest issue I see for women is the following: 1) They are always delegating their happiness to the collective manhood; 2) They want manhood to be able to do mind reading, change and adapt to their whims and wishes, on the fly; 3) If men don’t do mind reading, or cannot or simply don’t want to adapt (even if for inherent biological/instinctive reasons) then they are bad, controlling, misogynist, etc.”

    I don’t think like that at all. Or behave that way. Maybe a lot of women do, particularly very young women who don’t have the first fucking clue about who they are and what they could possibly want out of life besides penis and access to some guy’s wallet, but… yeah… none of this crap applies to me and it’s hard for me to really grasp this mindset, though I’m sure it’s out there. It’s not like I’ve never seen a “girl gone wild” before. I just think they are idiots.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector re: a deep-seated need to feel “taken care of” by a man. Yes and no. I think women who become more self-actualized and more independent, particularly financially feel less and less of that. I used to feel like that when I had no socioeconomic power OF MY OWN. Once I started making real money in life all of that shifted majorly, which makes me think perhaps it is more socially conditioned than biologically determined.

    So I disagree with you re: this need doesn’t go away even if they are earning money on their own. Though maybe it depends on who the breadwinner is. I’m the breadwinner. I like it. A LOT. I don’t lord it over him, but I get to be with him because I WANT to, not because I need him to magnanimously feed me and keep a roof over my head.

    I do agree with you re: the emotional responsiveness, though.

    And YES re: benevolent masculine dominance. I can’t speak for all women but YES for me. I like that shit.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo re: your points on ‘men changing to get pussy’. Fair enough. 🙂

  • Fish

    @Apple
    I don’t get the feminist bashing either. We’re in a different time. I get the whole “ignoring the mistakes of the past dooms you to repeat them” idea, but we are not living in an episode of Mad Men. The marketplace is what it is, so saying “we should just go back to the 60’s when me were men and women were women” has about as much value as me trying to become spiderman.

    I really see two major problems with the current marketplace. Asset boosted value & casual sex. When i say problems, i mean things that create market inefficiencies. Balding 60yo men being sugar daddies are just as big a problem as women marriage a rich guy then screwing him in divorce court. Its effectively doing the same thing. Obviously casual sex is another problem that keeps people of comparable SMV from getting together.

    As long as there are market inefficiencies there will be people who try to profit from them. In a perfect market, arbitrage doesn’t exist.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    “Also, not sure how some men can stay hard in the face of a really hot stupid women who opens her mouth to speak.”

    I briefly dated a college cheerleader. Believe me, its not difficult. Obviously she wasn’t lasting relationship material but yeah, super hot.

  • Susan…”I’ve never had a nominal adversary IRL where sexual tension was not the result.”

    There’s probably a breakpoint somewhere between “nominal adversary,” “serious adversary,” and “actual enemy” where the sexual tension stops. If Sandra and John are two attractive salespeople in the same branch competing for the President’s Club (or whatever they call it at that company), then yeah, sexual tension very likely. But if one of them starts knifing the other in the back, I think the sexual tension will likely dissipate pretty quickly…

  • mr. wavevector

    @ JP,

    The basic finding is this: We remember more events from late adolescence and early adulthood than from any other stage of our lives. This phenomenon is called the reminiscence bump.

    That is interesting. It’s true for me – the period of 20-29 has an outsized place in my memory. But it’s hardly surprising – the experiences one has in early adulthood are so novel. One’s first love, first job, first apartment, first trip across the country or overseas; all of these have an unique significance. Afterwards it’s a lot of been there done that.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple & Fish,

    “Also, not sure how some men can stay hard in the face of a really hot stupid women who opens her mouth to speak.”

    I briefly dated a college cheerleader. Believe me, its not difficult.

    I vote for Apple’s statement. I have never been attracted to stupid women. All my dates, relationships and crushes have been with the smart ones.

  • Fish

    @Mr. WV
    It may have been a product of going from dorky & unpopular to confident. None of the cheerleaders in my high school would give me the time of day. It was empowering because I could. And because she was pretty darn hot.

    Also, I’m pretty high N. I wasn’t before bad sexual chemistry ex gf. After her I kinda went nuts and kept going.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Morpheus
    Looking forward to the new post! I’ve checked out Four Guys so far and I am digging the vibe there. Little light on content so far, only that one Obsidian post, so hoping to see something cool. I’ll be watching and jump in on the conversation when you put your post up.
    I do appreciate the work you guys are doing. Running a blog is tough work. For a little while there I was running my own, but life kept on getting in the way. Everyone should be able to get behind the fact that you guys are helping guys and gals “build their own rifles.”
    Just make sure they don’t attach a laser sight to a .50 cal Baretta and expect to hit something from a mile away…there’s a little finesse in that shot 😉
    As for your question on the pain of being Beta…yeah, based on the moniker, you’re probably right: the draw-backs of the whole “beta” thing are definitely something of which I am aware. And, perhaps, the reason why “Betas” get stuck in this trap, how they get occasionally lucky, etc.
    And I think you are part-right, about getting priced out by SMV equals.
    And what I think sort of goes into that whole “No Man’s Land” that Susan was mentioning, and specifically the whole part about pluralistic ignorance and not even knowing what’s on the other side.
    And another quote a while ago about adults flying around on jet packs.
    I don’t have the original quote, but it was something along the lines of “when you are wrong, you think that adults spend their whole day flying around on jet-packs and fighting aliens. Then you get older and find out they work in a cubicle farm and it’s really depressing.” And the rub was, a lot of women, mostly the hypergamous and naïve and apex fallacy ones, sort of subscribe to the same view of men.
    My hypotheses is that a lot of young women, without a lot of experience in the affairs and the affirmation of the rougher sex, come to fill their heads with the grandest fictions, fueled by romance movies, Disneys, etc. I mean, Prince Eric from the Little Mermaid seems like a bit of loser to me compared to all the other princes, and he pilots a whole ship, by himself, in the middle of a thunderstorm, and plows it into a gigantic sea witch that would make Cthulu shudder in fear.
    BTW, he does this all for a girl he’s known for a day…that’s the kind of “sexual power” young women command, that older women can’t even touch 😉
    He’s probably the LAMEST of the Disney Princes.
    Fuck, if I was raised on that, and tales of what a “Real”man should be, and a healthy father-figure, and then at the middle school dance walked across the gymnasium only to find a guy who is stumbling over his words, I’d be under-whelmed, too.
    My suspicion is a lot of Beta guys fall into this trap, not displaying their dominance or their success, and they come across as un-interesting social robots. Losers. At the very best, non-descript monkeys that do a job. Not Men.
    And the Beta guys, in the relations with women, are often too worried about displaying kindness, as opposed to dominance, too worried about being nice, as opposed to creating and fueling tension.
    But we were never taught to do this, we were taught our own Disney Myths about women, about how they are all special snowflakes that need to be protected, and blah blah blah blah I can’t even say this crap without laughing out loud because most women I know are about as close to the Disney Princess model as the Andromeda Galaxy is to my backyard, a scant 2 million light-years distant in my eye.
    Anyways, I don’t believe Beta Guys can’t improve themselves. I think they just refuse to do the leg-work behind it, because it’s tough, and because it’s uncomfortable. Hell, the very first thing you need to do is destroy the pedestal, and realize that REAL women are NOTHIHNG like Disney Princesses and do not deserve to be treated like Disney Princesses, as much as real men are nothing like Disney Princes.
    (Though if you tell a father you shouldn’t be treating her daughter like a Disney princess he might want to strangle you)
    But if you can do the work….
    You know the biggest Alpha and the biggest Beta on Game of Thrones is the same guy, although they never mention it on the show. Rhaegar Targaryean.
    Most of the Targaryeans, as described, are giant douche-bags. The first one comes across the ocean and conquers the whole of Westeros with his dragons. The last was a delusional king who, at the end of a losing war, wanted to burn an entire city of half a million people to the ground.
    Rhaegar?
    Beloved by all. Just. Honorable. Capable. He was also a handsome night that dispatched a dozen of the best warriors in the biggest tournament held in all of Westeros, and at night played the Harp so well that many of the women-folk were moved to tears.
    He was Da Man, until he, you know, kidnapped a Stark girl and set off a war that ultimately got his entire House destroyed. Woops!
    Anyways, the boy started out Beta Beta Beta. When he was younger he was an INTJ that spent all his time reading old scrolls in the library, or an INFJ that spent all his time at a burned-out summer house by which he was intrigued.
    Pretty much everyone in the family laughed at him. He was compared to an old king that did nothing but pray all day and wasn’t really viewed as a man.
    Until he saw something in the scrolls that changed him, concerning a prophecy. Probably the Prince That Was Promised.
    And then he went up to the Master-at-Arms, said “it appears I must be a warrior,” and asked for sword and shield.
    A few years later he was the best knight in the kingdom.
    Most Betas are afraid to climb the ladder. Too fearful of the fall, and instructed to know their place.

    • @ADBG

      Let me save you some time. Morpheus is Mike C.

  • Apple

    @Fish LOL @ as much value as trying to become spiderman. I think you should consider being spiderman! I would take that gig! And LOL @ Mad Men.

    My biggest issue with feminism (if I can pick only one for right now lol) would be the concept that “the personal is political”. I think that’s what ultimately turned the sexes against one another. I’m not sure why we couldn’t acknowledge the fact that there were unfair issues in society and social systems without making every single thing any man every said or did about ‘oppression’. That clearly wasn’t helpful.

    And Agreed re: your points about the current marketplace.

    hahahaha @ the cheerleader thing. I admire your ability to laser focus on her hotless without letting her stupidity kill your boner. 😛

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector

    +10 for your good taste in women. 🙂

  • JP

    @Apple:

    “I like that I do not HAVE to make babies and be trapped at home raising them.”

    Except that this completely shreds significant portions of the civilization system.

    However, I don’t think that this is going to be our 21st century problem.

    There is some chance that our problems in the next 100 years are going to be much worse, depending on what happens with the energy and agricultural systems.

  • I think it is important to keep a certain executive distance when viewing sexual market efficiency. The sexual market does not exist solely to cater to the perceived wants and relationship needs of, say, Restricted women. It is efficient if it is successfully bringing together interested parties and they are having voluntary sex.

    I think that, generally speaking, parties will respond to underlying sexual economic incentives. Putting it cynically, a woman who is interested in having the SAHM option may of course be more inclined to want a high “price” for sex because she will ultimately be looking to make a reproduction/sex-for-resource-security exchange at the most favorable price that she can get. If other women around her are selling sexual access too cheaply, men may not take on the risks and commitments that she needs them to be willing to take and/or the men who would be so willing may come with other problems.

    Many models suggest that sexual demand fr0m the male side is relatively inelastic; men will pay what they need to in order to get sex. This assumption is probably still serviceable, although widespread porn use is clearly going to have effects.

    So, under the resulting, strictly economic “Gatekeeper Hypothesis”, if a man has 100 “Commitment Units” and a SMV-7 woman is asking for 50 units for sex while another SMV-7 wants only 3 units, the man will prefer to take the less expensive option. The woman who wanted 50 will need to A) price herself more competitively or B) raise her SMV. The SMP is essentially dominated by the level of intrasexual price competition set by competing females: high levels of female competition = male STR bias; low levels = male LTR bias.

    But we also know from HUS that there are Restricted men who would *prefer* to pay 50 Commitment Units for sex than to pay 3 units. At first I questioned why men would actually want to pay more than they notionally had to, but then I gradually came to realize that they are expecting to get a very different value for 50 Units than they would get for 3, so we were never really comparing apples to apples.

    For the premium commitment price, the men who want to pay more are expecting a woman who has a low N, with all of the attendant chastity benefits both real and imagined, and thus they are very concerned that they are only paying 50 Units to women that have charged ALL OTHER MEN AT LEAST THE SAME PRICE.

    The higher price also causes men to reinforce monogamous mating patterns because have so much invested in their partners, so the Restricted man in effect puts all of his eggs in one basket (but a basket he has judged to be very secure and lavishly padded), and then he watches that basket with terrible, terrible alertness.

    I can immediately see three major generators of potential price distortions in the SMP:

    1) Men who are able to counterfeit Commitment Units.

    2) Women who able to extract Commitment resources without showing appropriate sexual reciprocation (both initially and in an ongoing relationship).

    3) Women who are able to successfully price discriminate.

  • JP

    “I vote for Apple’s statement. I have never been attracted to stupid women. All my dates, relationships and crushes have been with the smart ones.”

    But the problem there is that when you are only looking at 1% of the female population to start with (my target demographic), you end up with extremely limited choices.

    Generally, either I wasn’t attracted to them or they weren’t attracted to me.

  • Fish

    @Beta guy
    Totally off topic but my ex believes that Jon Snow isn’t actually Ned Stark’s bastard, he’s Rhaegar’s. She thinks Rhaegar slept with Ned’s sister who got pregnant and Ned swore to protect him before she died. i’m a big fan of the books, I read them when they first came out. I was very disappointed waiting for 5 years for the latest book and I was very underwhelmed by it.

    Re: pedestals
    Its a tricky thing. There is a woman I know in this position for me. I used to do this a lot prior to becoming “skilled” at attracting women. I don’t know if it is a habit or what. At the very least, the good news is the one I have on a pedestal has me on one too so at least its a level playing field (as long as neither one of us falls off). I think it is a product of romanticizing women and relationships. You have this idea in your head, see someone who could be that and they become flawless.

    I realize after the replacement level comment I seem hypocritical or schizophrenic.

  • Jonathan

    David Foster:

    Susan…”I’ve never had a nominal adversary IRL where sexual tension was not the result.”
     
    There’s probably a breakpoint somewhere between “nominal adversary,” “serious adversary,” and “actual enemy” where the sexual tension stops. If Sandra and John are two attractive salespeople in the same branch competing for the President’s Club (or whatever they call it at that company), then yeah, sexual tension very likely. But if one of them starts knifing the other in the back, I think the sexual tension will likely dissipate pretty quickly…

    Yes. Also, major differences on fundamental values, for which politics and religion are often good proxies, are a deal killer for many people, and if they aren’t they probably should be despite any initial “opposites attract” frisson.

    (Of course there’s no guarantee that you and your SO won’t diverge on values over time, but that’s no reason to start a relationship in that situation if you have alternatives.)

  • Fish

    @BB

    I think at one point Susan wrote a post about women pricing themselves as “Luxury goods”, basically extracting a higher price for the same product.

    I agree with all your points 100%. My point is, if it were a perfect market, buyers (men) and sellers (women) would be matched up and everyone would get what they were actually “worth.” I don’t actually believe it ever will be a perfect market.

  • Apple

    @JP there are 7 billion people on this planet. Trust me, I can and will sit this one out. I don’t care what other women choose to do with their uterus. I am THANKFUL, however, that I have the option of not popping out babies. I have more valuable things to do with my time.

    And whatever you think about procreation as a concept, really… it’s diminishing returns now with THIS many people here. Me “making a baby” will not change the world in any measurably positive way, but it will cost me a HUGE amount of money and time that I could be spending on/doing other things I find more rewarding.

    I also don’t care what happens in the next hundred years. I won’t be here. By not making offspring I don’t “have” to care. And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?

  • JP

    “I also don’t care what happens in the next hundred years. I won’t be here. By not making offspring I don’t “have” to care. And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?”

    Presuming, of course, that you are gone forever and don’t have to come back and live with the consequences.

    Metaphysics is fun!

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    I think women who become more self-actualized and more independent, particularly financially feel less and less of that. I used to feel like that when I had no socioeconomic power OF MY OWN. Once I started making real money in life all of that shifted majorly, which makes me think perhaps it is more socially conditioned than biologically determined.

    That’s your experience, and it’s not a highly unusual one, but it is a minority one. I think it is likely to remain so. Just as your husband’s relationships with older women is a minority behavior. I think that’s likely to remain so as well.

    The biology vs society debate is hard to resolve, but more and more evidence is accumulating for a biological basis for sex differences in behavior. I expect these biases will persist, but we will see more exceptions to the biological bias as the societal norms that reinforce them are eliminated.

    Today we actually have a lot of societal norms that oppose the biological bias rather than reinforce it. There is much more societal emphasis on education and careerism for girls than boys today, because we are trying to counter a biological bias with a societal one in the opposite direction.

    Here’s a simpler example of a minority exception to a biological bias: I had a relationship with a woman who was taller than me for a long time. She did everything she could to minimize her height advantage. When we went out together she wore her flattest flats. When we made out she slumped down in the sofa so she wouldn’t be above me. The feminists would say she was catering to my male ego, but I don’t think so. She really, really did not want to be the “top” in the relationship. She wanted to be the “bottom”, and being in the physically dominant position of looking down on me detracted from that experience. It was her own need for a power differential that drove her behavior, not mine.

  • mr. wavevector

    I also don’t care what happens in the next hundred years. I won’t be here. By not making offspring I don’t “have” to care. And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?

    That’s the solipsism and narcissism of our era in a nutshell.

  • Escoffier

    Actually, that’s not metaphysics. And, metaphysics is not fun, though I suppose some may find it fun. I am extremely interested in it but I don’t find it fun.

  • JP

    “Actually, that’s not metaphysics. And, metaphysics is not fun, though I suppose some may find it fun. I am extremely interested in it but I don’t find it fun.”

    The question of the existence, purpose, nature, immortality, and/or transmigration of the soul is not a metaphysical issue?

    I’m pretty sure that touches on the nature of being, myself.

  • Escoffier

    627 is indeed the most dismaying thing I have read in at least a week. Modernity reduced to nappé.

  • Apple

    @JP,

    Humanity will eventually die out on this planet anyway. I am not saying I am actively doing anything to HARM the earth (plus an argument could be made that popping out a bunch more babies right now isn’t exactly doing our planet any favors from a pollution aspect.) A baby pops out of a vagina several times a second right now. I would find it pretty pointless to go through 9 months of crap, the pain and drama of delivery, and 18 more years of crap when babies happen SO freaking frequently anyway. As for “contribution to society” wow, yeah.

    And if my little sprogs were only encouraged to grow up and make more people instead of making anything else, of what useful benefit was it. It’s just mindless.

    What happens when our sun burns out? Everything is transient. Whether reincarnation is true or not, it would have to exist in multiple places besides this planet because Earth is not an eternal place. I am not invested in what happens to it after I’m gone, particularly since it takes a large change on the part of the inhabitants and not just one person’s behavior to make any positive effect.

    My contribution is not adding to the load. You’re welcome.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Susan

    @ADBG

    Let me save you some time. Morpheus is Mike C.

    I’ve been reading the comments 😉
    Honestly I don’t care that much. I would have made the longer comment I just did even if it were to Roissy. Authorship irrelevant in that particular case.

    @ Fish

    Totally off topic but my ex believes that Jon Snow isn’t actually Ned Stark’s bastard, he’s Rhaegar’s. She thinks Rhaegar slept with Ned’s sister who got pregnant and Ned swore to protect him before she died. i’m a big fan of the books, I read them when they first came out. I was very disappointed waiting for 5 years for the latest book and I was very underwhelmed by it.

    Re: pedestals
    Its a tricky thing. There is a woman I know in this position for me. I used to do this a lot prior to becoming “skilled” at attracting women. I don’t know if it is a habit or what. At the very least, the good news is the one I have on a pedestal has me on one too so at least its a level playing field (as long as neither one of us falls off). I think it is a product of romanticizing women and relationships. You have this idea in your head, see someone who could be that and they become flawless.

    I realize after the replacement level comment I seem hypocritical or schizophrenic.

    The Jon Snow thing is a definite possibility. We will see in the future books. Honestly this last one is supposedly quite underwhelming to everyone, my friend even said he is worried the show will die simply because, when they get to those story arcs, the entire thing will basically fall apart.
    But they are dumbing down a lot of the story arcs and changing them anyways…see the Iron Islands arc that’s coming up.
    Me thinks the show and the book are gonna diverge soon.

    Re: the pedestals, yeah, I do understand what you are saying. When romancing, a little pedestalization is helpful/inevitable/the whole damn point.
    Though I saw you getting into it with Abbott earlier.
    Trying to build a romantic pedestal for a promiscous girl, for a lot of guys, is like building a skyscraper on quick-sand.

  • Escoffier

    The declaration that “I don’t care about anything that does not affect my material well being” is a pretty banal and common thought that does not rise to the level of metaphysics or any other philosophical topic. You may say that in an (unintentionally) ironic way it points to them, but only by being pre-emptively and dogmatically closed to them.

  • J

    This fascinates me. The facial was not even invented when I was still single – it is strictly a product of porn. I had never heard of it, nor heard of a man requesting it, until it became prevalent in porn.

    Yeah, no kidding. I remember when having that happen by accident was something a man apologized for.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ JP,

    But the problem there is that when you are only looking at 1% of the female population to start with (my target demographic), you end up with extremely limited choices.

    That’s one of the reasons the “cognitive elite” are segregating themselves both culturally and geographically, as Charles Murray has written about. It makes it easier for the top few percent to mate among themselves. If you live in Cambridge MA or Palo Alto CA, there are no shortage of prospective mates in the top 1%.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector

    Yeah I wouldn’t argue that my experience is an “unusual one”. It probably is. I find I’m an outlier about a lot of my feelings and attitudes about the world. It’s alienating at times, but I’ve found pockets of others who I can relate to. So I appreciate that, at least.

    Also the whole minority behavior thing… I think like attracts like and with so many people on this planet and so much access to people on this planet, it’s just not (IMO) that hard to find the people out there who you can connect with. Which I guess is why I just don’t get the point of people flapping their arms wildly in freakouts worrying about ‘where all the good men have gone’? (or good women). If you’re a quality person, sooner or later you’ll find another quality person who matches your values and way of seeing the world.

    People who aren’t finding that should, IMO, chill out and work on themselves.

    I do think there is some biological basis for sex differences, but I also think we warp it to level 11 with social indoctrination. But again, I may be a total outlier.

  • Apple

    @Mr Wavevector:

    “That’s the solipsism and narcissism of our era in a nutshell.”

    And THAT is the selfish entitlement that I am obligated to live my life to serve your ideals.

  • Apple

    “The declaration that “I don’t care about anything that does not affect my material well being” is a pretty banal and common thought that does not rise to the level of metaphysics or any other philosophical topic. You may say that in an (unintentionally) ironic way it points to them, but only by being pre-emptively and dogmatically closed to them.”

    I’m sorry you find this offensive, but… as far as I know, I didn’t ask to be here. I was brought here without my consent because my parents had a drive to self-replicate. Why exactly am I obligated to do anything about anything? The world will change when it’s ready. When enough people want it to change, it will change. Until then I see no need to trouble myself with it. Also, saying it’s a “banal” way of viewing the world would come as some shock to many mystics and monks who have felt the same way. You know, we’re not all just “shallow” and “materialistic” because we are willing to accept the world as it is and don’t feel the need to constantly tinker with things not ready to change.

  • mr. wavevector

    Modernity reduced to nappé.

    nappé? Is that french for diaper? 😉

    1) In geology a nappe is a complex recumbent fold system.

    2) In geometry, a nappe is half of a double cone.

    3) In engineering a nappe can also refer to a sheet of water flowing over a dam or similar structure.

    4) In cooking, nappe refers to either the ability of a liquid to “coat the back of a spoon” or the act of coating a food (i.e. to nappe a leg of lamb with glaze).

    Considering the source, I’m going with #4.

  • JP

    @Apple:

    You realize that arguing with me about reincarnation isn’t going to change whether it’s a fact of life or not, right?

    It’s not like you or I get a vote. I don’t get a vote on whether gravity exists.

    Anyhow, I’m not sure what the actual human carrying capacity of Earth is.

    I just wanted to point out that you were betting on a (little discussed) version of Pascal’s Wager.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

  • J

    Yeah, somehow grandma never felt at ease with grandpa. If she only knew about the multipenis approach she would have been sooo much happier. Oh well.

    Abbott, I’m not promoting “the multipenis approach,” but I think it’s important to note that grandma may well have not enjoyed sex with grandpa. Plenty of women in my mother’s generation–she would be 89 if she were still around–regarded sex as a duty, not a pleasure. I had several aunts who were quite happy to not be bothered after their husbands got too old or died. I think your idea that having one partner necessarily leads to joy and bonding is a fantasy.

  • JP

    @Apple:

    “I didn’t ask to be here. I was brought here without my consent because my parents had a drive to self-replicate. Why exactly am I obligated to do anything about anything?”

    And that’s another issue on the same point that gets to the issue of the pre-existence of the soul and the question of whether you did, indeed, make that choice.

  • BuenaVista

    @621. “I can immediately see three major generators of potential price distortions in the SMP … ”

    There’s (at least) a fourth: the man who becomes *more* attractive to LTR-oriented females by stating that he is not marriage material. There’s *nothing* rational about getting laid for 0 commitment units with an LTR-oriented female, but I strongly suspect it is *more* likely than if the guy spends 50 of his commitment units. What does this say about female sexual ambitions?

    NB, I’m not talking about the man pretending to be all high-beta and cozy and on time like clockwork with his little car payment and everything (i.e., being a lying motherfucker in order to get some strange with a sensitive and vulnerable marriage-minded lass), I’m talking about a man saying, “I’ll cut my left arm off with a Stihl and cook it for breakfast, before I get married again — because that will be more enjoyable and productive than risking another divorce.” And the panties do fly.

    I don’t think this observation is very flattering to females. And no, I’m not George Clooney, though I am taller and stronger and smarter. But it seems to work this way for George, if my perspective requires celebrity context. There’s trouble with a capital T in River City, as Meredith Willson correctly noted. Chicks are still buying handyman-special dreamhouses, figuring they’ll fix ’em up.

    • Chicks are still buying handyman-special dreamhouses, figuring they’ll fix ‘em up.

      You just solved your own mystery there. We women love a good fixer upper. Also, once a man says no how no way to marriage, a woman of a certain age is free to recreate with him while waiting for something more stable to come along, or may even double dip.

  • JP

    @J:

    ” I had several aunts who were quite happy to not be bothered after their husbands got too old or died. I think your idea that having one partner necessarily leads to joy and bonding is a fantasy.”

    I don’t think it’s the question of “having one partner”. I think it’s a question of emotional-sexual compatibility.

    I don’t think that lots of these couples were even “in love” with each other.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Apple,

    Socially liberal views do not really “offend” social conservatives on this board or, say, VP. You might offend run-of-the-mill Republicans, but the social conservatives here are little more secure and developed in their views.

    TBH, I get the impression that most of us social conservatives view social liberals as children.

    “I don’t care what’s going to happen in 100 years” sounds like a child saying “I don’t care about my life at 30, that’s so far away”

    “I don’t want to have children and I don’t want to feel pressured” sounds like a child stamping her feet and screaming that she doesn’t want to eat her vegetables.

  • Esau

    Apple: “It’s kind of sad to build one’s entire “philosophy” on a crappy Keanu Reeves movie.”

    So much for my conversion to Buddhism, after seeing Keanu as Siddhartha in “The Little Buddha” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Buddha

    And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?”

    Along the same lines, do you give a fig for people currently alive in distant places, whom you will never meet and who will have little or no effect on your life? Are you moved, or not at all, by the presence or absence of justice and dignity in the world, outside your immediate vision? One of the first precepts of Buddhism is reflexive compassion for others, which I find very intriguing; not that I’d ever make you sit through a Keanu Reeves movie, though.

    Honestly, I doubt if you’re as cynical as you make yourself out to be. No proof, just call it a hunch.

  • Fish

    @Beta Guy
    I think they are going to combine a feast for crows & a dance with dragons but make 2-3 seasons out of them. I think the major plot points will stay intact. i think the major problem is going to be when the show catches up and GRRM doesn’t have a new book. Or he dies (hes pretty heavy and not in the best health from what I’ve heard). I have also heard the producers know the main plot points how the series is going to end.

    I think there are different types of promiscuous women. I have a really good friend, N higher than mine who has been married twice, regularly cheated on husband #1. I don’t know about husband number 2. I’d never consider a relationship due to the odds of it happening to me. I have a different friend, N close to mine, been married once before as well. Very unrestricted, likes very adventurous sex, but never cheated. Desperately wants a relationship, just filters poorly.

    As much as I believe that you can make generalities with statistics and trends (thats kinda why they’re there), everybody is different. I think if you understand someone at all levels and you know what youre getting, “slutty girls” are still viable for LTR. I think a lot of peoples’ concepts about what “kind of person” to date are due to lazy thinking. I have probably been guilty of it myself (restricteds being less fun in the sack for example).

    Now, obviously the risk to me is less. At this point, me having sex with one more person raises my N less than 2%. I understand the logic that it is damaging for women to sleep around due to some males’ stigma towards it. Personally, I just don’t get it. i think my “crush” knows in spite of my high N, if we ended up together i’d never cheat on her and i’d treat her as well as i was capable.

  • BuenaVista

    Or they don’t want what they say they want.

  • Escoffier

    Apple, the problem is not whether you or any other individual holds the views you do. One person is irrelevant. Lots of people can also be irrelevant if their overal percentage is small and IF society treats their option as a disreputable outlier. And, given what you have written, I totally agree that it would be best for everyone–you, your hypothetical children, society–that you not have children.

    The problem is when the idea you expressed becomes, first accepted en masse, and later the governing principle of whole segments of society. Aside from it being false, but like I said, falsehood is not so much of a problem when it is confined to the margins.

  • JP

    “And, given what you have written, I totally agree that it would be best for everyone–you, your hypothetical children, society–that you not have children.”

    Some women insist over and over again that they never wanted children and then become excellent mothers.

    So, Apple might enjoy the mothering experience and might actually be good at it.

    She could be one of those people who becomes more mature if she has children.

  • Fish

    @Apple/Beta Guy
    Kids vs no kids is a couples’ choice. Personally, I think DINK is a great way to go through life although I’m not in a hurry to get married. There really are enough people having kids that I don’t get the pressure to have kids.

    I’m at the age now where facebook is all “my kid pooped today”. There is a girl I graduated high school with who has FOUR kids. One of my ex’s has three. People are still having kids, its not like the human race is dying out. I saw my grandparents last night. Of their five grandkids (ages 22-33) there is one great-grandchild. As the oldest, i am constantly being pressured about it “When are you going to settle down & have kids?” I said “Grandma, you have a great grandkid already.” She said “yeah, but I can want more.” More mindsets I just don’t get.

    I think if people really want kids, great, have at it. Keep popping out babies till your uterus falls out. Maybe if I married someone who REALLY wanted them, I’d be open to it.

  • Fish

    re: good parents

    Why does being good at something obligate you to do it? By that logic, I should be a contract killer. Good shot, ROTC, martial arts training, criminal justice background so I know how not to get caught.

    I hear all the time “you’d be a great dad.” I have 3 cats. I love them dearly. I have zero desire to be responsible for a human being besides myself. One of my good friends said it best (I think) “Being a parent teaches you a lot of things. But they are things that you wouldn’t need to know unless you have kids.”

    • I hear all the time “you’d be a great dad.”

      Oh boy. Get those women to HUS asap.

  • J

    @Marc

    her vagina is so loose (shes 21) that it makes the entire experience a non-event. I can barely finish. I like her a lot, but the thought of a lifetime of sex like this is a deal breaker. I dont look forward to being intimate with her. I realize we can have vaginal tightening surgery. What if shes not willing to do this? Can I bring this up now? I am going to stop seeing her for this reason. What if we waited 6 months for this? Not good.

    That is really unusual in a woman who has not kids, and the traumatic birth of several kids at that. There are non-surgical interventions for this problem, usually exercise or electric stimulus of the pelvic floor muscles. I would be leery of surgery as a first resort. It can excise valuable nerves or do damage that otherwise reduces sensation for the woman. She should definitely see a doctor, especially if the problem is accompanied by incontinence.

  • Apple

    @JP, I’m not arguing with you about reincarnation. I actually BELIEVE in reincarnation. I still don’t think I’m obligated to trouble myself with what everybody else is doing on this planet or try to change things not ready or willing to be changed, or pop out babies into an overpopulated world with too much suffering already.

    I don’t know whether you do or don’t believe in reincarnation. Neither does it really matter since it either is or it isn’t.

    I’m not “betting” on anything. I am opting out of the things I don’t think I need to be involved in. You know… I actually think I’ve lived many times before and don’t you think that MAYBE as a freaking woman, I should get a single lifetime where I don’t have to pop out some babies and spend my entire life dedicated to just that one thing? You don’t think i could possibly find anything ELSE of value to do? the mind boggles.

  • Emily

    >> “Honestly this last one is supposedly quite underwhelming to everyone, my friend even said he is worried the show will die simply because, when they get to those story arcs, the entire thing will basically fall apart.”

    Sorry, I had to jump into the Game of Thrones discussion. 😉 I JUST finished the last book (I started reading the series earlier this year) and I remember feeling sorry for all the readers who would have had to wait five years for that.

    IMO the main reason why the last book was so lame was because the storylines from the previous book didn’t start moving forward until the very end. I’m assuming that HBO will show the plotlines from books 4-5 at the same time, which will hopefully make things less annoying.

  • JP

    @Fish:

    “Kids vs no kids is a couples’ choice. Personally, I think DINK is a great way to go through life although I’m not in a hurry to get married. There really are enough people having kids that I don’t get the pressure to have kids.”

    Here’s one of Goldman’s articles on demographics. He’s generally an odd read, but he makes excellent demographic points.

    “A man walks into a Jewish restaurant and asks the boss: “How do you prepare your chickens?” “We tell them up front they’re not going to make it,” he replies. To those Italians who voted for Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Alliance, or Greeks who support the Golden Dawn movement, or Jobbik Party voters in Hungary, among others: Permit me to tell you up front that you are not going to make it, either. Your countries are dying because you no longer wish to live. One can “foresee a time when your land with its rivers and mountains still lies under heaven as it does today, but other people dwell there; when your language is entombed in books, and your laws and customs have lost their living power,” to paraphrase Franz Rosenzweig.

    These political parties have returned old-fashioned Jew-hatred to the political mainstream. Southern Europe’s economic crisis and social dissolution, the new anti-Semites imagine, is the work of a global conspiracy of Jewish bankers run by the Rothschilds, the Illuminati, and the Freemasons. Beppe Grillo, the recipient of a fifth of the Italian vote in Italy’s February elections, says: “Hitler may have been sick, but the idea of eliminating the Jews was to eliminate their financial dictatorship.” A Jobbik candidate for the European Parliament wrote: “Anti-Semitism is not just our right, but it is the duty of every Hungarian homeland lover, and we must prepare for armed battle against the Jews.” A member of the Greek Parliament for the Golden Dawn read out extracts from the anti-Semitic forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

    May I ask you to consider — just for the sake of argument — an alternative explanation? Hypothetically speaking, is it possible that the Jews have nothing at all to do with your misery, but that you are destroying yourselves?

    Consider the facts: by 2040, you will have about 60% more elderly dependents than you have now, and about half as many young workers. Your economies will collapse, along with your social safety net. The trajectories in the chart below well may understate the problem. In the United Nations’ low variant, Hungary’s total fertility rate stays above one child per female. Excluding the Roma (Gypsies), though, Hungary’s fertility rate has already fallen to a chillingly low 0.85:”

    http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/04/08/memo-to-jew-haters-on-yom-hashoah-you-are-dying/

  • Apple

    @JP

    IF I made the choice to be here, then I should be allowed other free choices, no?

    IF I chose to be here, I’m about 99.9999999% certain I would want to choose DIFFERENT opportunities than would be statistically available to me in previous lifetimes. How many opportunities do you really think I’ve probably had in previous lifetimes (should my beliefs have any merit at all) to just opt out of procreating altogether?

    I’m really thinking not many. So yeah… that’s what we’re doing this time.

  • JP

    “I’m not “betting” on anything. I am opting out of the things I don’t think I need to be involved in. You know… I actually think I’ve lived many times before and don’t you think that MAYBE as a freaking woman, I should get a single lifetime where I don’t have to pop out some babies and spend my entire life dedicated to just that one thing? You don’t think i could possibly find anything ELSE of value to do? the mind boggles.”

    My reincarnation point was more related to the “I don’t care about what happens in 100 years” statement not the “I don’t want to have kids” statement.

  • J

    See if she would he open to anal, that would definitely solve your first problem if she can do it. .

    That might solve his problem, but it might also worsen hers. I suspect the problem is an extremely weak pubococcygeus muscle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubococcygeus_muscle). Since that muscle extends from coccyx to pubic bone and lies along either side of the anus, I can’t imagine that anal sex will improve that situation. In fact, it might cause further damage.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Fish
    I dunno. Cautiously pessimistic about the future seasons. Honestly? This one sort of sucked. The deviations from the book don’t even bother me that much, it’s more that the whole show is becoming a lot more “two people talking to each other” and not a lot “stuff is happening!” Plus, there are a lot of story-lines going on at once. Easy to read…watching not so much.
    I bought my Dad the Ender’s Game prequels, I’ll steal those and see if they are any good, lol.

    Re: the girls. Well. You hit on something with people being lazy. But what do you expect? Not everyone has the time or inclination to spend hours researching stuff at HUS or the PEW website or whatever. We need, and have evolved to, develop heuristics that can serve as valuable instruction. We need, and have evolved to, look up to certain people as role models, to mimic and try on new roles to see how they fit.

    That’s how we do things. Rules of thumb. Avoiding promiscous girls is a good rule of thumb, especially since there are so many restricted, low-N girls from which to choose. Sure maybe there is a promiscous girl out there for you, but why bother taking the chance?

    But I was referring to the whole pedestalization thing. Sometimes men like Disney princesses, too. Belle didn’t “hook up” with someone at a party. Ariel didn’t get drunk in Cancun and have a one night stand. Jasmine did not flash her breasts in a wet t-shirt contest on spring break. Cinderella did not attend a wedding with Prince Charming where a handful of men had naked pictures of her.

  • Apple

    @Beta Guy

    I’m not a social liberal, but way to stereotype someone you don’t know. I think both the far left and far right are equally wrong. Just in different ways. I believe in “I will leave you alone if you will leave me alone.” Which political philosophy is that? (I’d say libertarian but the morons in the MRA who seem to think libertarianism only really mean freedom for THEM but not for the evil womminz have made me shy away from continued use of that label.)

    Social liberals are into controlling everybody around them, as are social conservatives. One group wants to control my money. The other wants to control my uterus. Not really interested in either group’s politics to be honest. I’d be interested in a world where we could all respect each other’s free will and bodily autonomy. Since that’s too much to ask, I find it bizarre that you would ask me to subject a child to this stupidity by bringing one here.

    And… So you think my uterus is obligated to pop out a baby because you say so? And if I choose to do ANYTHING different with my life it is equivalent to “stamping my feet about vegetable eating”? WOW.

    Hold on… I need a second.

    Okay, all better.

    My husband and I have BOTH decided we do not want children. He’s in his mid forties. Please tell me about his childish stamping.

    You know, perhaps the childfree would haven’t to come across as “foot stampers” if the rest of the world didn’t hound us endlessly about when we were going to narcissistically self-replicate. If I wanted to parent, I would adopt a kid already here, not indulge in the supreme act of narcissism… making little mini-mes.

    Just a thought.

    Everything you’ve said here sounds like: “All my clever manipulations work on other girls so well… why can’t it work this time?!?!?!”

  • Fish

    @JP
    Its not like we have a shortage of children. I am of the same opinion as Apple, we’re set for my lifetime, I don’t really care past that.

    @Emily
    I know right!?!? My biggest problem with ADWD was too much dany. I just don’t like her story arc and through the book it was BORING. More Tyrion, more Arya Stark (who is actually my 2nd favorite character in the series. Jon is my overall fav) and it will be fine for TV.

  • Anacaona

    It’s no secret that both men and women are struggling to find good relationships in this SMP. We’ve already discussed the factors at work there. 50% is a lousy success rate if 80% want relationships.
    Yeah they lack the safety and simplicity of the old courting rules. Society and parents helped to smooth the dating process and now is a personal issue with little guidance besides what the ‘successful kids’ are doing. Is not hard to see how since the unrestricted crave excitement they become the only example to follow for long. The problem is that most people find relationships after they had been lonely for longer than they should given market circumstances, YMMV.

    I think that I was trying to form a permanent pair/marriage bond in my teens, however, I am so far out there in terms of psychological structure, asynchronicity, I don’t think I’m useful except as an outlier. I first became infatuated in first grade, and had no idea what was going on.
    Likewise. I was ready to be married young but I didn’t met anyone that was ready too.

    But I do know a few couples who just “fell in love” while young, married and are OK. Perhaps both were mature enough for a relationship or at least had the same goals.
    Add the relationship skills picked from coming from a functional intact marriage and the fact that the whole concept of personal growth and spiritual enlightenment was the role of religion not the husband.

    Strippers frequently differentiate between “Dancers” and “Extras Girls.” Extras Girls are willing to perform sexual acts for clients, Dancers are generally not.
    Oh this is the difference. All strippers I knew were Dancers so I don’t think of them as dirty necessarily. Funny that.

    My friends in law-enforcement have informed me that a frequent source of prostitution/solicitation arrests has been Dancers who decide to do something about a popular Extras Girl because she is ruining their ability to extract maximum resources from men.
    And you advocate mate poaching. Back in the old time the very few mate poachers were identified by a scar on their face done by the lady who got her man stolen as a warning for others. Now they use acid. 🙁

    There’s probably a breakpoint somewhere between “nominal adversary,” “serious adversary,” and “actual enemy” where the sexual tension stops. If Sandra and John are two attractive salespeople in the same branch competing for the President’s Club (or whatever they call it at that company), then yeah, sexual tension very likely. But if one of them starts knifing the other in the back, I think the sexual tension will likely dissipate pretty quickly…
    When I was younger I wanted to fell in love with a guy I hated like in Pride and Prejudice. I quickly realized that I like most people and the very few I don’t are always jerks. So never happened I don’t think this will ever turn in “hate sex’ for me.

    BTW, he does this all for a girl he’s known for a day…that’s the kind of “sexual power” young women command, that older women can’t even touch
    He’s probably the LAMEST of the Disney Princes.

    What?! How many times had you watched the Little mermaid? Eric is only second to Philip as best prince. In the first minute Ariel lay eyes on him we see that he is young handsome guy. He commands a ship full of old sea wolves that respect him and follow him (prestige and leadership), he has a dog (kindness), and instead of trying to save his royal ass from the sinking ship by taking a lifeboat first, he almost loses his life trying to safe his inferiors (courage and nobility). Ariel had to be crazy not to fall for him. That was one of the best “show’ in the history of Disney movies or even movies ever. Within five minutes you are sold this guy is worth getting legs for and we all agree quickly. You need your subjective gland checked 😛

    I also don’t care what happens in the next hundred years. I won’t be here. By not making offspring I don’t “have” to care. And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?
    I’m the only one that things this is the ultimate entitlement? “The universe cannot touch me and give me cosmic level of consequences for my actions”.
    No wonder atheism is a elite, first world popular take. “If I don’t see/experience/proof/understand God/Karma/Divinity, it doesn’t exist”

  • J

    Today we spend about 15 years between puberty and marriage. That is unprecedented in history, and serial relationships are the reality. You can’t advise them away.

    I don’t understand why this is so hard for people to understand. You can like or dislike it, but you can’t deny it. It is obviously what’s going on.
    And the only thing that’s going to change it will be changes in the educational and work enviorment that allow young people to settle down in one place at an earlier age.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    “That’s the solipsism and narcissism of our era in a nutshell.”

    And THAT is the selfish entitlement that I am obligated to live my life to serve your ideals.

    No, your confusion is so profound you have it exactly backwards. Civilization has always depended on people limiting their own goods and freedoms for the well being of others. That’s altruism, not selfishness. And it is those who live life only for their own benefit who exhibit entitlement, not we who accept the duty to work for the welfare of others.

    I agree with ABDG – the refrain of “you can’t tell me what to do” is a marker of arrested adolescence and not becoming of an adult.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    “All strippers I knew were Dancers so I don’t think of them as dirty necessarily.”

    Huh? Care to elaborate on this? In general I like sluts, but I can’t stand strippers, the whole industry is sleazy. . .

  • Apple

    @Esau LOL don’t ruin Buddhism for me, Noooo!!!

    It’s not that I don’t have any compassion for others on this planet now or in the future, it’s that I do not feel I am here to “save the world”. I don’t have a savior complex. I do what I can to help who I can but I cannot help everybody, and being constantly overly emotionally attached to everybody’s personal outcomes is a way to land in a mental institution rocking in a padded room. This place has too much suffering. Yes, I care about it. But I think we should be careful when we “help” that we are actually helping and not adding to overall suffering to make ourselves feel like “good people”.

    However, I won’t be manipulated into taking ANY action in life based on someone else trying to moralize or guilt trip me.

    Oscar Wilde said something interesting that I very much agree with. “Selfishnes is not living as one wishes to live. It is asking others to live as one wishes to live.”

    Telling me what I “should” do or what I “must” do is ludicrous because my personal life choices have nothing to do with the person pushing their agenda on me. No. When it comes to how I live MY life, my consent matters.

    I know the things I need to work on in this life and i don’t need input from random strangers on how I can best serve their personal moral infrastructure.

    I’m not actually that cynical at all. But social manipulation doesn’t work on me.

  • JP

    @Anacoana:

    “I’m the only one that things this is the ultimate entitlement? “The universe cannot touch me and give me cosmic level of consequences for my actions”.
    No wonder atheism is a elite, first world popular take. “If I don’t see/experience/proof/understand God/Karma/Divinity, it doesn’t exist””

    I think atheism is more a feature of a high culture that’s entered it’s ossifying civilization stage.

    I don’t think that the (pagan) citizens of the Late Roman Empire really believed in the gods anymore.

    I think increasing atheism is sign of peaking/decadence/decline from a cultural perspective because it means that the ideas of the culture are pretty much developed to the extent that they can be.

  • J

    I don’t think it’s the question of “having one partner”. I think it’s a question of emotional-sexual compatibility. I don’t think that lots of these couples were even “in love” with each other.

    Absolutely, many of these women got married because they had no other options. It was just what women did, usually in order to have economic support/children because they weren’t able enough to have careers. It amazes me how many guys would like to return to that.

  • Emily

    >> “Within five minutes you are sold this guy is worth getting legs for and we all agree quickly. ”

    Speak for yourself! I first saw Little Mermaid when I was too young to really care about boys, so I always thought she was INSANE for giving up her life as a Mermaid Princess. Did she not hear the crab’s song??!

  • Apple

    @Escoffier

    “Everybody” will never do “anything”. Because that’s not how people work. We are different. That’s a feature, not a bug, IMO.

    Telling me it would be best for me not to have children is about the most backhanded compliment ever but… um… thanks, I guess. One of my main reasons besides wanting to live my own damn life unemcumbered by pointless things, is that I refuse to bring someone to THIS world to suffer, but okie dokie.

    But… just for the sake of argument… what does it really matter if vast swaths of people chose not to procreate? Though there would be some social problems from a diminished younger population, with increased technologies we could figure out ways to deal with this. (We will have to anyway, because the earth has a carrying capacity, whether we are at it or not is irrelevant to the basic point of at SOME POINT the population must seriously decline or… issues.)

    So, if there were not that many people on the planet… why is that such a terrible thing? Are humans the only species with the right to live here? What would it matter if the deer took over? Or lions? Or another primate?

    What is so unbelievably special about mindless drones of humans not interested in doing anything but popping out the next generation of either consumers (first world) or sufferers (third)?

  • @Marc

    The first 30 seconds are tight, then I believe the schpincter is tricked into thinking a log is coming out, and it relaxes.

    That was some of the grossest but, at the same time, funniest imagery I’ve read in a long time! LMAO

  • Apple

    @JP

    Actually, I would be a badass mother. That is not the point. That’s not what I’m here for right now. I am 34, my husband is 46. It would be HARMFUL (above and beyond bringing a soul here to suffer) for us to procreate. Given that after 40 male sperm quality significantly starts to diminish and more and more birth defects and issues like autism and schizophrenia happen.

    Also, neither of us wants children.

    Assuming my maturity is contingent on motherhood is seriously condescending. I’m immature because I don’t want the same things society has drilled into my head since birth? Really? That’s an interesting premise, but probably not one with much merit. Try again.

  • @Bastiat

    Fascinating comment about the dancers and the extras girls that are ruining the “dancers cartel” by offering sex acts instead of just cock-teasing fantasy.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ J,

    I suspect the problem is an extremely weak pubococcygeus muscle

    The Pubococcygeus muscle controls urine flow and contracts during orgasm.

    When my wife orgasms sometimes it feels like she’s going to crush me inside of her. She’s got some strong pubo muscles! She’s still tight after 3 big headed babies too, even for my little dick.

    I understand that you can control this muscle and do exercises for it. Perhaps this woman is under the impression that she needs to relax completely during sex. That’s not a good recipe for fun.

  • Apple

    @Fish, thanks! Mr. Apple and I enjoy our DINK life very much.

    The pressure to have kids IMO is because misery loves company. People can’t stand the idea of not everybody be saddled with the choices they made. Parenthood is NOT (IMO) a good deal. Particularly not now. I find it interesting that men are allowed and encouraged to “go their own way” and avoid marriage and commitment (and presumably babies) but the womminz still all have to have some babies. Because my womanhood is totally defined by my lady business. /sarcasm.

    And I’m meant to believe that this isn’t misogynistic or controlling? Wow.

    The narrative I’m meant to swallow is that everybody must have children and those who don’t are infertile and in deep distress over it. The idea of a person, particularly a woman, going through life enjoying it and never having a child is just… well that’s just horrible. Women ought to suffer!!

    And I think the whole grandparent thing is just bizarre. So I should make a totally life changing decision that is definitely not “mostly good” so my parents can get to take a little kid to the park. Seriously? This is why they have the Big Brother/Big Sister program. And it’s open to all ages.

    I’m not reproducing so my mom can take some little kid to go feed ducks at the pond.

    • And I think the whole grandparent thing is just bizarre. So I should make a totally life changing decision that is definitely not “mostly good” so my parents can get to take a little kid to the park. Seriously? This is why they have the Big Brother/Big Sister program. And it’s open to all ages.

      Uh oh, now you’ve gone too far. I have such a case of baby rabies for a grandchild. BBBS is a great program but of course that’s just a silly comparison. We want blood of our blood. Reproduction baby, that’s why we’re here.

  • JP

    “Absolutely, many of these women got married because they had no other options. It was just what women did, usually in order to have economic support/children because they weren’t able enough to have careers. It amazes me how many guys would like to return to that.”

    I don’t think that guys necessarily want to “return to that”.

    I think they often assume “that” was different.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Apple
    I am not trying to shame you in having children. Merely giving you the idea of how social conservatives view social liberals, and I would characterize “You do what you want and I do what I want” as a socially liberal attitude in these days.
    Social conservatives do not view the world this way. We view it as very childish. Like economic libertarians that do not want regulations on the banks, because, hey, they aren’t hurting anyone right now and everyone knows what they are getting into and it’s all freely agreed to! Bank regulati0n=bad and immoral.
    Yes, social conservatives view social liberals as that naive.
    Actually, the not wanting children thing doesn’t bother me, by itself, for one person. Most people seem to know that some people aren’t going to make the best parents or really, really, really do not want kids and do not think these people should be forced to have children.
    It’s when we see trends of massive depopulation among advanced nations and are met with an attitude of “well, I don’t care what’s going to happen in 100 years,” that we start getting a little annoyed. 100 years is pretty much a blink of an eye.

    FWIW, I don’t think I am trying to manipulate anyone. I am actually trying to be forth-right with you.

  • Apple

    @JP re: I don’t care what happens in a 100 years… but it was in context of talking about making babies. I fail to see how procreating or not procreating would impact what happened to the world for me in a future lifetime. Plus, I’m REALLY hoping this is my last time here. I can’t deal with humanity in general. Now I get why those monks were all sequestered and living in mountain caves and shit. After awhile you just have to withdraw.

  • @mr. wavevector

    In addition to the opportunities of the post-war boom, the experiences of that generation – the deprivations of the Depression followed by the epic struggle of WWII – matured them into purposeful adults. The men returning from the war were men, not boys. Even the men who did not serve (such as my father, crippled from a childhood injury) assumed the same seriousness of purpose, as did the women. Few of that generation extended adolescence into their 30′s.

    I think it is interesting how many people get serious about surviving and life when they’re in or have been through tough times. After many decades of relative material ease, our culture is much more about pursuing pleasure, promiscuity one such pleasure.

    I wrote a post today on how different environments provide different mating incentives and will bring out somewhat different mating and economic behavior. You might like to take a look.

    http://www.justfourguys.com/?p=52

    • @Han Solo

      I’m curious to know what you think of this finding in light of your own post:

      Masculine faces appeal most to women in countries where disease is rife

      Women who live in healthier countries prefer more feminine-looking men, compared with women living in regions where life-threatening diseases are rife, psychologists say. Their research suggests masculine men have the greatest appeal for women who live in areas where a strong genetic make-up is critical for survival.

      A study of women in 30 countries found they were more likely to choose a masculine-looking partner if their country scored low on a health index based on World Health Organisation mortality figures. By contrast, in countries where people have a longer lifespan, women favoured more feminine-looking men, even though they might not have the healthiest genes available.

      As you say, in developed societies, which have much higher gender equality, there is a narrower gap between the sociosexuality of the sexes. And yet at the same time, those more promiscuous women prefer to mate with more feminine men.

      Why Women Don’t Want Macho Men

      While a man can sleep around with 100 women in a year’s time and have 100 kids, a woman who sleeps with 100 men in a year will only have one baby (barring multiples). She has more at stake in each pregnancy. Therefore, it is in her best interest to at least choose a high-quality mate. And one of the hallmarks of a quality male is good health.

      But what does health have to do with masculinity? The link is testosterone, the hormone behind manly muscles, strong jaws, prominent eyebrow ridges, facial hair and deep voices. Testosterone is immunosuppressive. This means a man must be healthy and in good condition to withstand its effects on his development. Testosterone is also linked to other traits related to strength: fitness, fertility and dominance. From an evolutionary perspective, masculinity is basically man’s way of advertising good genes, dominance and likelihood to father healthier kids. When disease is a real threat, as it had been—and arguably still is—heritable health is invaluable.

      Masculinity, however, can come at a high price. Women often think of high-testosterone types as uncooperative, unsympathetic, philandering, aggressive and disinterested in parenting. In fact, there is evidence that they really do have more relationship problems than other men. In a small study led by psychologist James Roney at the University of California, Santa Barbara, 29 women were asked to look at photos of men and rate their masculinity and fondness for infants. (The men had already been tested for child-friendliness and testosterone levels.) The men who were rated as the most masculine generally had higher testosterone levels; the women also were generally accurate in assessing child-friendliness.

      …if health comes at the expense of fidelity and good parenting, how much does masculinity really matter?

      The apparent answer is not so much—if you’re a woman living in a country with a decent health-care system and few harmful pathogens. While a masculine father’s “good genes” may confer health advantages to children, so do good medical attention and a clean environment.

      …Meanwhile, women with the strongest masculinity preferences tended to hail from the countries with higher disease and mortality rates and some of the poorest scores on the health-care index: Mexico, Brazil, Bulgaria and Argentina.

      Interestingly, in 2009 the U.S. ranked 20th out of 30 nations on the health index. It may be that women with poor health care are more likely to mate with dangerous or alpha men, which is exactly what we see in lower SES groups in the U.S., while affluent, educated women are more likely to mate with beta males.

  • Escoffier

    Apple, basically every premise in your post is wrong and Susan would probably complain about me taking the thread way OT. That’s a cop-out admit, but one made out of laziness and disinterest, not fear or inability to respond.

    You really, really, really don’t want children, you have a horrible opinion of them, and you have a completely nihilistic, left-wing (consumers v. sufferers), self-interested and false view of life and the world so, yeah, don’t have children. That’s not a compliment, backhanded or otherwise, it’s a statement of agreement not on the underlying facts but of how you choose to implement your worldview.

  • JP

    “The pressure to have kids IMO is because misery loves company. People can’t stand the idea of not everybody be saddled with the choices they made.”

    I certainly didn’t have kids because I was pressured to have kids.

    Every time my wife got pregnant, her mother was relatively angry about it. I think she wanted her daughter to become a career woman or something. I’m actually not sure what the internal logic was.

    She pretty much avoids taking care of the grandkids whenever possible.

    And my father doesn’t seem to have any interest in them either.

  • Apple

    @Mr. Wavevector re: limiting goods and freedoms… how convenient. Tell me, please exactly who am I personally hurting by not having a child? Considering the number people already here and the rate of self-replication.

    THere is NOTHING altruistic IMO about having children. I’ve never met a single person who had a baby for any other reason than something dumb like they “just wanted one” or “that’s just what you do”, or “it would be SO cute!!!”

    Wow, how selfless.

    You’re confusing taking on needless responsibilities that don’t really improve anything and then having to be responsible for those responsibilities with selflessness.

    You’re confusing the choice NOT to obligate oneself to totally unnecessary things to selfishness.

    Who says I do nothing for the welfare of others? Also, which lifestyle gives me more financial means and time to actually do things for others? making babies or not making them?

    “You can’t tell me what to do” is also the mark of someone wise enough not to allow other people to manipulate them. But nice try. What you’re basically doing is insulting me until I cave. You don’t think that’s an immature stance to hold in and of itself?

  • JP

    “After many decades of relative material ease, our culture is much more about pursuing pleasure, promiscuity one such pleasure.”

    Wrong.

    We’re inefficient workaholics with a warped view of life.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/30/americans-now-view-40-hou_n_888231.html

  • @Bastiat

    It seems to me like 3 really is established as a pretty firm norm now. So the argument could be made that the SMP is currently clearing sex at a price of about 11 hours and $150-$175.

    You really do like to throw around the cash! 😉 lol

    Or I must be a really cheap bastard. 😀

    Pretty much all my dates are fairly cheap and often I have had sex without spending any money. I do think that my lay rate could go up a bit if I were a little less “frugal,” however.

  • JP

    “I’ve never met a single person who had a baby for any other reason than something dumb like they “just wanted one” or “that’s just what you do”, or “it would be SO cute!!!””

    Babies are cute. They’re full of wholesome baby goodness.

    Teenagers are the opposite.

  • JP

    ““You can’t tell me what to do” is also the mark of someone wise enough not to allow other people to manipulate them. But nice try. What you’re basically doing is insulting me until I cave. You don’t think that’s an immature stance to hold in and of itself?”

    I’m in agreement with you that men your husband’s age should not have children, so I recommend that you continue being DINKs.

  • Fish

    @Jp
    “Teenagers are the opposite.”
    18-19yo girls can be full of goodness, mostly from the neck down. . .

  • Apple

    @Beta Guy, if you consider personal autonomy and responsibility socially liberal we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Social liberals IMO are mainly democrats who for the most part are pro-socialism. Socialism is extremely controlling of everybody’s decisions. It’s hardly a live and let live philosophy.

    Also, it should be noted that me having that philosophy does not imply I don’t have a moral code or think there are things that are right and wrong. It means it’s not my right to manipulate and control other people. Your free will is yours and it’s not my business to monkey with it.

    You have to understand though that my “I don’t care what happens in 100 years” is a direct response to the social pressure that it’s my DUTY to procreate. If no one ever pushed that shit on me, I would not feel compelled to respond in that way.

  • @Escoffier

    I cracked up how you said about your then unbeknownst future wife, “but I will admit that I didn’t like her.”

    I don’t think giving your coat to her was particularly “beta.” Many actions can be effective or not, depending on the frame they’re done from. A simpering “take my coat and I hope you’ll really like me” will be ineffective while ruggedly taking the coat off and sheltering her from the cold wind with a slight yet aloof twinkle in your eye will likely be much more effective.

  • JP

    “@Jp
    “Teenagers are the opposite.”
    18-19yo girls can be full of goodness, mostly from the neck down. . .”

    My 17 year old cousin’s boyfriend noticed this.

    Then he got to experience wholesome baby goodness.

  • Fish

    @JP
    “Then he got to experience wholesome baby goodness.”

    I laughed so hard I scared my cats. Seriously.

  • Apple

    @Escoffier

    HOw about you stop making judgments about me, a person you don’t know. If you can’t stop doing that, we can both ignore each other’s post in future.

    I do NOT dislike children at all. I happen to like children a lot. I just do not wish to be a PARENT. And I do not want to bring another soul here to suffer unnecessarily. Which, I do feel it’s extremely pointless, all the suffering here.

    I am not nihilistic. I’m not sure that word means what you think it means. But, IF my view is correct (reincarnation) I would really like to never return here again. This is not a good place. I will not bring someone here when I don’t want to cycle through here again.

    It’s incredibly arrogant to tell me I have a “false view of life”. Why? Because you have all the correct answers to everything?

    You know what? It’s clear you have zero respect for me. I don’t feel compelled to engage with people like that, so let’s agree to ignore each other from this point onward.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Apple
    Yeah, we might be using different terms here. I’ll think more about this during my lunch break.

    Then maybe I will do more work in the afternoon, or perhaps post my thoughts here 😛

  • Apple

    @JP

    “I’m in agreement with you that men your husband’s age should not have children, so I recommend that you continue being DINKs.”

    Well, now that you’re in AGREEMENT with us, we can just breathe a big fat sigh of relief. Because we were almost going to procreate since JP said so. 😛

  • JP

    “This is not a good place.”

    That’s because the arc of the world is a gentle decline. Entropy and all.

    The corporate goal of humanity is to make it a good place.

    The corporate not-goal is to make it the hell of the war of all against all.

  • Apple

    @Definite Beta Guy, Okay, let me know what you figure out. 🙂

  • @Susan

    True, but this too is a natural progression of pluralistic ignorance. Guys go through college believing that assholes get all the girls, and eventually try acting like assholes. My guess is that if they roll out this new and improved persona with highly unrestricted women, they’ll have some success.

    I agree that pluralistic ignorance is a huge factor. I used to feel like a failure for not having a high enough N and now I know mine is much higher than most men’s!!!

    It doesn’t strike me as a good strategy for beta guys. IMO, losing the anti-game should be sufficient, as long as they’re not trying to swim in the PUA pond.

    I agree that losing the anti-game is a big thing for most guys and will drastically improve their odds. I do think that being able to generate a bit more short-term attraction is also important for guys to get in the door so that their good long-term traits will be given an audience.

    A lot of those guys are betas. The guy with two women is known to me personally, and he is a beta guy. That’s one of the reasons neither woman suspected. As soon as the woman I know learned the truth, she broke contact and never spoke to him again.

    This goes to show that beta doesn’t equal good.

    By your description, he was both a deceiving asshole and a beta. And it shows how many women need to do better at filtering.

    That raises the question of how do women filter when their heart and their hormones may be saying one thing, “I want him!” while their brain is saying “He’s not treating me right.”

    It’s like the girl and the bike shop guy. She probably knew in her head he wasn’t respecting her and so on but her heart and her hormones kept her coming back for more.

    • @HanSolo

      I do think that being able to generate a bit more short-term attraction is also important for guys to get in the door so that their good long-term traits will be given an audience.

      Sounds like a good strategy.

      By your description, he was both a deceiving asshole and a beta. And it shows how many women need to do better at filtering.

      I agree that women could always do better at filtering. I write a lot about filtering. There are no guarantees, however. This guy grew up in my neighborhood, I’ve known him a very long time. There was no one, except maybe his frat brothers, who wasn’t completely shocked by this revelation. He was literally a mastermind. The fact that one girlfriend was “at school” and one was “at home” made the subterfuge fairly easy to pull off, especially since he and the “at home” girlfriend went to colleges thousands of miles apart.

      She is a friend of my daughter’s and when I saw that couple together he appeared to adore her. In fact, he claimed right up to the end that he did love her, and that the college girl was just “for convenience.” Sociopath.

  • Apple

    @JP agreed, and I would be happy to participate with the good side of that when enough people wake up that such a change can REALLY be made. Until then it’s masturbation and I refuse to bring my offspring here to suffer through everyone else’s clumsy muddling through bullshit.

  • Escoffier

    “I do feel it’s extremely pointless, all the suffering here.

    I am not nihilistic.”

    I was going to put elipses between these two statements but then I saw that they follow directly in the orignal.

  • Escoffier

    Han, if I thought it would illuminate any topics that Susan really cares about, I would tell the story of our first 4-5 months of dislike. I say, mutual dislike but as noted, she denies that and says it was all on my side.

    Perhaps it does illuminate something, I need to think about it. At the very least, there was a happy ending!

  • Hope

    Back to the earlier conversations…

    For what it’s worth, I’m not into the guys that other women say are hot and give them tingles. I can easily see why some women go for and fall in love with men who are not traditionally good-looking. I am pretty sure that Catherine Zeta-Jones is in love with her husband, and age is only an issue for them insofar as it affects his health.

    As for top three traits that define alpha for me:

    Confidence (courage, self-awareness, calm in a storm)
    Leadership (head of the pack, others follow naturally)
    Excellence (better than most people by multiple measures, competent, masterful)

    There are women with these traits, but I would say it’s generally men that tend to cultivate this specific set of characteristics. And my husband does have these traits, which is why I call him my alpha. Whether or not other women feel womb clenching for him is irrelevant to me. I do, and I don’t care for Ian Somer something.

    However, that is not to say I don’t notice or value good looks. They just don’t carry the day for me. A guy can be excellent in looks but a dud in other ways, and that does not satisfy my personal view of “alpha.” My husband is good looking and six feet tall, and amazing in many other ways that are important to me. I can look at what some other girls tingle for and understand on an intellectual level why there is attraction, but my personal attraction triggers are different.

    It goes back to what I said about different women are different.

  • BuenaVista

    #688: “You really do like to throw around the cash! lol.”

    $175 for a night of romper room with someone who says “I never do this”, until she does it, again, is less than 10% of the price with a pro who inhabits the 8-9 range. (Not true in NYC.) Since I find the three date rule void in my cohort (it will happen day 1 or 2, if it happens, or if it’s worth it), $175 is probably on the high side. It may be that relationship-oriented women are the ‘extras’ girls of the SMP.

    • @BV

      Since I find the three date rule void in my cohort

      I’ve asked this question before, but can you name a single reason why a woman in her 30s or older shouldn’t have sex on the first date? The strategy of delaying sex to secure commitment only makes sense in a woman’s fertile years, IMO. I can’t even imagine a 40 yo woman being described as a slut. No one cares.

  • @Susan

    So when you say many women want cads, you’re saying that many women want to be lied to?

    I don’t mean they want to be lied to, but kind of like in my last comment, their head may be saying one thing but they’re attracted enough that they keep putting up with crap, even in cases where the guy is fairly straight forward about not wanting a relationship (at all or with them).

    Kind of like that girl (Alexis was it?) and bike shop guy and the other hipster artist or whatever. Bike shop guy was a bit deceptive at one point (can’t remember what he said but something like he felt a connection) but I think he made it clear he wasn’t really looking for a relationship and then after sex he didn’t contact her and after a couple weeks she contacted him.

    And I think she said that the artist guy said he wasn’t looking for a relationship but then a while later got into an LTR with his female friend.

    Well we know that half of college students are in LTRs at any point in time, and 75% will graduate having had a serious relationship. That tells me that the vast majority of women are choosing fairly well now.

    Here, I would say that being in an LTR isn’t equal to having chosen well. Your acquaintance or friend that dated the guy that had the gf back at home too is an example of being in an LTR but having chosen unwisely. And it’s unfortunate for her and I hope she at least learned from it to be more cautious and discerning.

    If only 10-20% of women are having casual sex, then you can hardly claim that women in general need to be better gatekeepers, can you?

    Well, that number is more how many are having casual more often. But even the women that are having it less frequently, especially if it is with assholes, are sending out a signal. Also, when women LTR jerks then they are not being careful sex gatekeepers because they’re having sex with jerks (even though it’s within an LTR).

    Also, as we have both noted before, small percentages can sometimes have a big impact. So, a small % of sluts, along with non-slutty girls engaging in casual sex even just a couple times, can have a big impact on the actual or perceived price of sex in the market. (Of course, I’m not condemning such women since I’ve indulged often enough myself; I’m simply pointing out the impact on the market.)

    I see that at Four Guys you intend to be clear about how the population for these behaviors is distributed. I think that’s very important. The extremists get a lot of the media attention, which is how people get erroneous impressions and Pluralistic Ignorance takes root.

    Yes, I definitely want to provide accurate information on the distributions. I think that likely 50% of western culture is still pretty assortative and not promiscuous or hypergamous, and then another roughly 25% is somewhat but eventually settles down and becomes realistic about who and what they can get for an LTR. And then probably another 25% is more promiscuous or hypergamous (not necessarily both) and these may or may not settle down eventually.

  • @Escoffier

    I’d be interested in hearing and I bet Susan would be too, though she can speak for herself.

  • Anacaona

    Huh? Care to elaborate on this? In general I like sluts, but I can’t stand strippers, the whole industry is sleazy. . .

    I met a couple of friends that made a life out of stripping one them is now a teacher married mother of 1, the other was a Presbyterian minister daughter that paid college with it, married and now is a SAHM with 2 kids. Other one is married cat couple and she supplements her stripping with modeling. They only danced but never had sex with their clients. So I find them more sort of ‘stripper by night/ normal girl by day’ There was a discussion here that shows that most women find them disgusting and wouldn’t date a guy that dated or used strippers. I’m guessing they think of them as the extra girls, YMMV.

    I think increasing atheism is sign of peaking/decadence/decline from a cultural perspective because it means that the ideas of the culture are pretty much developed to the extent that they can be.

  • Anacaona

    QUOTE FAIL:
    I think increasing atheism is sign of peaking/decadence/decline from a cultural perspective because it means that the ideas of the culture are pretty much developed to the extent that they can be.
    True but is always the richer and educated. Is there is such a thing as a starving atheist? For example.

  • Anacaona

    Speak for yourself! I first saw Little Mermaid when I was too young to really care about boys, so I always thought she was INSANE for giving up her life as a Mermaid Princess. Did she not hear the crab’s song??!
    Heh I can see age being a factor. But it was the way to sell the love for sure.

  • @A Definite Beta Guy

    I’ve checked out Four Guys so far and I am digging the vibe there. Little light on content so far

    Check out my new post there on environment-dependent evolutionary incentives and how it applies to men and women in the present.

  • Anacaona

    Absolutely, many of these women got married because they had no other options. It was just what women did, usually in order to have economic support/children because they weren’t able enough to have careers. It amazes me how many guys would like to return to that.
    I don’t think it was as bad as you think. My muslim friends that were in arranged marriages seemed as happy or as unhappy as my married occidental friends, I mean normal bitching about hubby’s forgetting to take out the trash or spending more times in hobbies than on them and so on…. And they definitely had orgasms. I think there was a convo of devaluation of the role of housekeeping and child rearing that created a lot of discontent with one’s marriage during the transition. The idea that women wouldn’t enjoyed sex in mass until the sexual revolution doesn’t seem quite real from my POV, YMMV.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    I guess we differ. To me, strippers are the lowest form of users (on par with guys who lie/manipulate to get sex, below prostitutes/extra girls). I get sex for sex and sex for money. But to say that using sexual manipulation without follow through to get money is ok, then say that a guy lying/manipulating to get sex is not is hypocrisy in my mind. Its why I don’t feel sorry when gold diggers get conned, used for sex, not paid and cast aside. Its karma.

    It reminds me of one of my ex’s college roommates. She called her “the virgin whore.” Never had P in V sex, so allegedly N = 0, but did everything but with TONS of guys. Nobody respected her because at least the “slutty” girls are honest and upfront about it and own it.

    Again, I recognize that i’m an outlier, but I think strippers are the lowest of the low. I can at least have some measure of respect for “extras girls”.

  • Man

    @Susan/HanSolo: What do you mean by “losing the anti-game”?

  • Hope

    I don’t think that anybody who is not 100% certain about having kids should have them. I mean, I was definitely certain, and there are still days when I’m like, this sucks. I am only 70% for having another baby at this point, and I definitely want to wait until I’m ready 100%.

    It is a huge commitment, the biggest of one’s life, and I live in Utah where having kids is socially supported and supported by companies. People have like ten kids here. I don’t know how they do it, but yeah, max of two for us. I definitely will not be trying to convince anyone who doesn’t want kids to have them.

    As an aside, it’s fun seeing a new, opinionated female commenter here. I would guess Apple is either INTJ or ENTJ. I don’t agree with a lot of what she says, but she’s sure stirring up the pot with the NTs.

  • Man

    Whether or not other women feel womb clenching for him is irrelevant to me… It goes back to what I said about different women are different.

    Hope is our only Hope. 🙂 Kidding and flattering apart, I think that collective manhood is drowned in confusion nowadays. The sphere is contributing a lot to that.

  • Anacaona

    But to say that using sexual manipulation without follow through to get money is ok, then say that a guy lying/manipulating to get sex is not is hypocrisy in my mind. Its why I don’t feel sorry when gold diggers get conned, used for sex, not paid and cast aside. Its karma.
    Except that the strippers are not in the normal environment anyone that goes to a strip joint is looking for a ‘sure sexual experience with a hot girl’ a bit higher than porn. While the guy that lies to get sex is pretending to be for a relationship when he is only want to screw someone. The equivalent would be a woman going to a establishment full of ‘ handsome lying romantics’. That recite them Romance lines to them for a fee.

    Again, I recognize that i’m an outlier, but I think strippers are the lowest of the low. I can at least have some measure of respect for “extras girls”.
    Of course you hate them. You are unrestricted “No one should mess with your thrill seeking experience of sex. How dare them to smooth the process using money, making sure I will have no doubt I will get what I want with no effort? That is no fun!”

  • JP

    @Hope:

    “People have like ten kids here. I don’t know how they do it, but yeah, max of two for us.”

    Uh, because it’s obligatory once you pass the frontier into Mormon-World.

    You are living in one of the last significant true theocratic states in the world, where the religion thoroughly permeates the entire culture.

    You want to make sure that you have as many children as possible because you have all those souls waiting in line to be born.

    The neat thing is that they give the church 10% of their gross income.

    And they also serve as volunteer clergy.

    And the men all go on unpaid two year missions.

  • @A Definite Beta Guy 617

    Great comment! Approaching epic! 😀

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Apple,

    Review your own statement:

    I also don’t care what happens in the next hundred years. I won’t be here. By not making offspring I don’t “have” to care. And if the human race were to die out… I don’t care about that either. What difference does it make to me after I’m already gone?

    There’s a whole lot of self centered thinking there. That’s the point, not whether you want to have kids or not.

  • JP

    “I would guess Apple is either INTJ or ENTJ. I don’t agree with a lot of what she says, but she’s sure stirring up the pot with the NTs.”

    It the combat debate experience. Reminds me of my high school days.

    I once got into some sort of theological argument with my Mormon girlfriend where I ended up failing to notice that I was running out of gasoline until the car sputtered and rolled to a stop.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan & Han

    Susan, Han is getting at some very real things here, many of which I have personally seen and lived (and no doubt he has too per his comments here), which inform my perspective. I rarely have the time to get into picking apart minute details like he has done, but understand some of the things he is explaining, and the perspective he is bringing to interpreting the same facts that you have come to a different conclusion on, should be paid attention to, and are right along the lines of what I have said here regarding the numbers not telling the whole story in real time.

    At the end of the day, a guy who wants to not just take what’s handed to him in the “mating market” right now in 2013 cannot afford to be one-dimensional. Neither in the sense of just having strong career prospects and earning potential versus avocations that make him passionate (and therefore happier and more attractive), nor in the sense of being able to generate short term chemistry versus only being able to generate long term interest in women. Versatility is key no matter what your aim, short term or long term.

    At the risk of speaking for Han, I will say that the perspective that he appears to be speaking to is one that results from having to balance between the generalities of sussing out a person’s general nature, and also setting aside those assumptions and watching how they are acting in the here and now. He’s speaking to the nuance between the numbers- just understand that for a lot of guys, accepting some of the theories here completely at face value, as if they will hold true today and tomorrow and with every person they deal with (regardless of what orientation or category said person is supposed to fit into) is not always that productive. As you both have said, the small temporal deviations in an overall trend can have a big impact, even if they are momentary, when the scale is large enough, to the point that sometimes concrete conclusions don’t always describe what’s going on.

    • @BroHamlet

      I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in your comment at 2:29. Not sure if you thought I would. *Shrug*

      Han has already stated he does not intend to speak in generalities, which is a welcome departure from much of the writing in the sphere.

  • JP

    “I think increasing atheism is sign of peaking/decadence/decline from a cultural perspective because it means that the ideas of the culture are pretty much developed to the extent that they can be.

    True but is always the richer and educated. Is there is such a thing as a starving atheist? For example.”

    I’m talking about religiousness of the economic/intellectual/social elite, not about the religiousness of the lower classes.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    “How dare them to smooth the process using money, making sure I will have no doubt I will get what I want with no effort? That is no fun!”

    Noooo, thats not it at all. I don’t care about money for sex swaps. I don’t really care about guys who want to be sugar daddies or what have you. My issue is that strippers are basically money leaches and use sexual manipulation to do so. I don’t see any difference at all between that and lying to get sex. Stripper wants money, dances naked, makes guy feel valued, gets guy to give her more money. Guy wants sex, tells girl what she wants to hear to get sex. With strippers, when the money runs out, the attention stops. With liars when the lies stop, the sex stops. Guys have exhausted resources on the stripper getting no real value. Girl raised her N based on lies getting no real value.

    I don’t see how you can approve of one but not the other. I personally approve of neither. OK, so I fit the definition of a “player”, but I’m honest and upfront.

  • Anacaona

    I’m talking about religiousness of the economic/intellectual/social elite, not about the religiousness of the lower classes.

    Okay that makes sense.

  • Anacaona

    I don’t see how you can approve of one but not the other. I personally approve of neither.
    The guys that visit a strip joint are consenting and willingly purchasing manipulation and the average girl going on a date is blind about the transaction and is not consenting to be lied to? How can you equal both?

  • Fish

    @Ana
    Girls are willingly dating. Manipulation is not consent. Entering a strip club is not consent to be fleeced of $$ just like a woman entering a bar is not consenting to sex. Strippers are manipulators. Plain and simple. Do the men play into their hands? Yep. So do the women who get used for sex.

    To me, your moral character is who you are 100% of the time. your stripper friend could have paid for college other ways, she chose to manipulate your way through it. I reserve the right to judge her for it. If I got married tomorrow, I could be the best husband ever, people would judge me for having had sex with a lot of people. again, same thing.

    I see it as the same, I guess you don’t. You’re married and don’t have to worry about it and I don’t go to strip clubs, so I guess we’re in the same boat there.

  • Fish

    correction:
    manipulate her way through it.

  • Apple

    re: the little mermaid… I never liked that one either. The message is basically that you should give up your VOICE for a man. They aren’t even subtle. That “metaphor” is like a 10 ton brick. I mean they said exactly what they meant. That’s just gross.

    No thanks. I also agree with the poster who thought her life under the sea was way better. I would have preferred staying a mermaid princess, too.

  • Apple

    @Hope I feel the same way re: if you aren’t 100% certain you want kids, don’t have them. I respect the work that parents do, but it’s just not for me. I’m not even “ambivalent” about it. I am 100% certain I do NOT want them. If I had a dollar for every person in real life who tried to change my mind about this or tell me something stupid like “it’s different when they’re yours” (I highly doubt that because the issue is not that I don’t like kids. I think kids are a ton of fun. It’s that I don’t want the job of “parent”)… but if I had a dollar for every time, I’d be on a luxury cruise right now.

    Do you get a lot of pressure about having another kid? I have a friend in Utah and she has decided to only have one because she doesn’t think she could handle a second one and she is constantly harassed about it. It’s almost bizarre the lengths her church has gone to to try to get her to make another baby. I find it completely fascinating. I also sometimes wish I was her because… oh I would have such fun with those people. 😛

    HA, Myers-Briggs! Actually I’m an INFJ. So probably why I’m an outlier on a lot of things. INFJ is also the introverted type most likely to be confused for extroversion. (We’re also most likely to be thought to be somewhere on the autism spectrum even if we are not.) Mr. Apple is an INTJ though. (Weirdly we have an extremely peaceful home life.)

    And thanks! 🙂

  • Apple

    @Mr Wavevector I think you’re confusing detachment and not being overly emotionally involved to EVERYTHING that goes on anywhere with “self-centered”. Also… are you currently freaking out about what’s going on on other planets?

    According to the Hubble Deep Field there are billions of planets out there, many many of them “Goldilocks” planets (close enough to a star like our sun. If you already knew that… apologies.) That means it’s highly unlikely that Earth is the only planet in the universe with intelligent life.

    So… are you worried about what’s going on on those planets? Do you care what’s going on on those planets? If not, why not? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that one who is really worked up about what’s going on on their own planet but really doesn’t care at all about other planets is more self-centered? After all, what happens here could directly affect you in some way, unlike planet Snarfblat68 (totally made up planet name).

    Also, re: this planet, most people don’t care about what happens on the other side of the world to nearly the same degree they care about something that happens in their own backyard. Or to someone they personally care about. You would cry if a close friend died, but how many tears do you routinely shed for the starving children in Ethiopia or China? Don’t play the “you’re heartless and selfish” card with me simply because I’m not flailing my arms over what happens to this planet after I’m gone from it.

  • Lokland

    @Han/Apple

    “So, I think game is much different than how you described it and it can help a lot of good-hearted guys. I think A Definite Beta Guy and Lokland on here have also benefitted from reading some game stuff (but correct me if I’m wrong).”

    Late to the party but;

    Apples description of game is about as accurate as a description of Atheism given by an evangelical Christian (or vice versa…fairness and all that.)

    Similar to Han, read DeAngelo’s Double Your Dating.
    Similar amount of agreement with the material.

    I personally never practiced bar game and was restricted to day game so focused more on funny with a hint of cocky. I’ve never done most of the things suggested by Apple as part of the game routine. Mostly because what Apple described is just the slightest hint of what game is about.

    90% of game is how to not be ugly (removal of anti-game) and approach anxiety the other 10% is more active and mostly unnecessary unless one is attempting to shoot out of ones league.

    Most facets of game have nothing to do with lying or being an asshole and the parts that require it are not entirely necessary if one just wants a quality girlfriend.

  • Anacaona

    Girls are willingly dating.
    Dating for a relationship or for sex. The problem is when a man display relationship seeking in order to get sex.
    Manipulation is not consent. Entering a strip club is not consent to be fleeced of $$
    Yes it is. The strip club was created specifically for men willing to pay good money to watch pretty girls dance.
    just like a woman entering a bar is not consenting to sex.

    True that.
    Strippers are manipulators. Plain and simple. Do the men play into their hands? Yep.
    Paid manipulators.

    So do the women who get used for sex.
    No if she doesn’t know he is lying.

    To me, your moral character is who you are 100% of the time. your stripper friend could have paid for college other ways, she chose to manipulate your way through it.
    Stripping are girls making a living with their bodies and the costumers know they need to pay to get what they way. There is no equivalent with dating.

    I reserve the right to judge her for it.
    Never said otherwise. But you are wrong. There is no “cad joints” for women to get lied to by hot men. This are business regulated establishments and no one old enough to go in expects to find a girlfriend that loves him there. Dating has the expectation of finding mate.

    I see it as the same, I guess you don’t. You’re married and don’t have to worry about it and I don’t go to strip clubs, so I guess we’re in the same boat there.
    That is irrelevant. This is trying to like a business into the same as dating because it involves sexuality. A date is not a business transaction at least no for most people.

  • Apple

    @Lokland, I’ve read plenty about Game. Including books about it and websites recommended to me by “red pill guys” trying to show me how it’s “not misogynistic”. Without writing a dissertation on something I’m not THAT interested in to begin with, I think I’m fairly accurate in my assessment. Again, the problem isn’t that none of it can be used for good, it’s that there is so much misogynistic and manipulative bullshit embedded into it’s very core that it’s like trying to find the goodness and silver lining in con artistry. I’m sure being a con artist teaches you some “good life skills” but it doesn’t keep you from being douche-y for treating other people that way.

    Obviously if you use any part of Game or have respect for it or whatever, you’ll have a different perspective. Also, most atheists have a fairly accurate description of Evangelical Christianity because many of them have BEEN Evangelical Christians, which is why they are now atheists… more or less.

  • Apple

    Given the various threads here… I would like to put a stripper, a PUA, and a garden variety con artist in a locked room with cameras everywhere and just watch what happens.

  • Anacaona

    @Fish
    PS
    The real equivalent of cads are gold diggers. They pretend they love a man to seek money without his knowledge or consent. I do fault them morally. Dating should be free of manipulation. But strip joints/Chippendale are visited by people that are not looking for love but sexual experiences.

  • @Apple

    My biggest issue with feminism (if I can pick only one for right now lol) would be the concept that “the personal is political”. I think that’s what ultimately turned the sexes against one another. I’m not sure why we couldn’t acknowledge the fact that there were unfair issues in society and social systems without making every single thing any man every said or did about ‘oppression’. That clearly wasn’t helpful.

    I agree that there were unfair things to women and women still suffer injustices. I definitely don’t like the way that some feminists are always looking to interpret the things men do or say through a lens of oppression.

    I think that both sides looking at the issues and trying to be as fair is possible and care about people and improving their lives is the best thing, rather than just looking at one camp or other as the victims or the oppressors.

    I know I talk a lot about the injustices or difficulties men face but I think I try to offer good, practical advice to women on here.

    I (and others) gave Bells some good advice on how to navigate things as a restricted woman with the guy that wanted to kiss her but she refused on the first date. I’m happy things have worked out well for her and last I heard he was her bf.

  • Apple

    @Lokland, also… the issue with Game is… it’s a PACKAGE for the most part. Everybody is “teaching a system” and there seems to be a lot of smarmy and gross bullshit in each system. Teaching someone basic social skills and how to stand up for themselves and improve themselves is not Game. It’s just basic social skills, standing up for yourself, and improving yourself. But if you’re selling yourself as something you are not in order to get into bed with someone… sorry but I don’t think that’s virtuous.

    You don’t have to care what I think. But Game is not necessary to learn any of the benign passive skills of Game that don’t require manipulation. But how many horny guys who would go to the internet and take advice from a boob named “Mystery” (or any of the others like him) is really sitting around going: “Well, I’m just going to do the ethical stuff”. Um, yeah. I doubt it.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “This is why I’m surprised. I would have imagined it feels better to come inside a woman’s body than to use your own hand for the final bit.”

    It does but the point of a facial is not physical pleasure. Its to dominate the woman.

    I said earlier, knelt down, head down—> BJ is inherently submissive regardless of how a women is feeling while giving it. (Note: feeling submissive is not mutually exclusive with enjoyment.)

    The facial takes it a step farther.

    “The young women I know do not object to being ejaculated on – no big deal. But they do often feel uncomfortable at the idea of acting out porn, of having the guy’s desires coming straight from porn, which, after all, does not concern itself with female pleasure at all.”

    Yes but our culture lacks quite a bit of male dominance. In a culture where men are quite feminine its unsurprising to see their fantasies take on extra dominance that they lack in their real lives.

    Then the feedback loop where they start actually acting out said fantasy and become more dominant.

    And as I said before. For me its an occasional enjoyment, the PinV finish is better both in feeling and emotional connection by magnitudes.

  • Hope

    JP, I was more talking about the logistics of it. It’d be like hosting Thanksgiving-sized meals all the time. Or think about family reunions? I hear some people just go camping as family trips instead of hosting in a house, because of so many people.

    Man, well the manosphere is quite diverse as well, and there are those who say game trumps looks, looks trumps game, and/or you need both. I think it’s good to take into consideration all the different perspectives and see how they stack up in your own situation.
    I was in the manosphere for a long time, and I think it has helped me.

    Apple, how fascinating. I am also INFJ, and my husband is as well. You remind me somewhat of my mother-in-law, who is INFJ and more likely to be mistaken for an extrovert. She is also extremely blunt and says exactly what’s on her mind. She clashes with my husband, whereas I get along great with both of them.

  • Lokland

    @Ana

    “The strip club was created specifically for men willing to pay good money to watch pretty girls dance.”

    I’ve been to a strip club once (shortly after turning 19). It was by far the most uncomfortable thing I have ever done.

    Sitting around in a dark room with a bunch of loser 40yo guys trying to secretly jerk it under the table was the weirdest thing ever.

    We also had more women in our group than the club itself did.

  • @Bastiat 621

    +1 Good comment.

    I think that most men will fairly inelastic demand for sex but…it will be somewhat geared towards the kind of sex they want.

    So for restricted guys like Cooper, Ted and JP (JP, correct me if you’re not but you seem pretty restricted), they could potentially “buy” casual sex for 3 units but they no more want to buy that than a non-smoker would want to lick an ash tray. They want committed sex and it may cost more but that is the kind of sex they want to buy.

    The middle-spectrum guys that would make up the majority IMO could be swayed a bit one way or the other, depending on market conditions. Like a manufacturer that can substitute canola oil somewhat for corn oil, they will “buy” a bit more of whichever is cheaper, though in practice most of these guys will find that they prefer committed and more frequent sex to “cheaper” yet more sporadic bargain sex.

    The unrestricted guys that can’t get laid easily will likely go the commitment route too.

    The unrestricted guys that CAN get laid will often just pursue lots of partners.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Where are we supposed to learn these supposedly basic social skills?

    I was supposed to be socialized by “school,” but spent most of my middle schools living in sheer terror and high school wasn’t exactly social central for me either.

    My sports teams were based on a code of honor and competition among males that wasn’t supposed to apply to issues dealing with the fairer sex.

    My parents taught me little and my relationship with them was complicated to say the least.

    Male friends had no idea what was going on.

    Female friends said “just be yourself.”

    Where are these basic social skills supposed to come from?

  • Fish

    @Ana
    “Its why I don’t feel sorry when gold diggers get conned, used for sex, not paid and cast aside. Its karma. ”

    I look at strippers & gold diggers as the same. And I believe the guy mindset is the same for both, just one guy goes to the stripper, the other attracts gold diggers.

    @Beta guy
    “Avoiding promiscous girls is a good rule of thumb, especially since there are so many restricted, low-N girls from which to choose. Sure maybe there is a promiscous girl out there for you, but why bother taking the chance?”

    Missed this one. I don’t think I could date a low N, restricted girl. First of all, I don’t think she would be interested, second of all, I don’t think I would get past the probationary period into her panties. My theory on marriage is don’t until you’re 100% sure. Bare minimum 3 years. However, I’m not going to filter promiscuous girls because in my experience, I get along better with them. I don’t necessarily think they’re better or worse than restricted women, just a different filtering process.

  • Apple

    @HanSolo

    heh, regarding that girl… that story reminds me… I didn’t kiss on the first date with guys, either. I told them up front that it wasn’t some prude thing it was that I wanted to start getting to know them as a person. Kissing may not be a super sexual act, but it is an intimate act. I want to go on a second date before I kiss someone because I want to know that I like that person and not feel pressured to kiss them as a social expectation.

    I might think they are gross or totally hate their personality. (Or they may find they aren’t really that into me.) So I shouldn’t be in that situation to begin with. Plus I wouldn’t want to go through the whole date angsting about it. So I always just took it off the table to begin with. Both of us (me and my date) were always a lot more relaxed on the first date than a lot of first date people because we weren’t putting any pressure at all on anything. We were just hanging out and talking and flirting and getting to know one another a little bit.

    Mr. Apple is the only man who broke my no kissing on the first date rule. If he hadn’t been an excellent kisser I would have smacked him. Cheeky thing, he was. 😛 (But yes, I would have gone on a second date had he respected the rule.)

    That policy was also a REALLY good way to weed out PUA types because if my line is “no kissing on the first date”, they think “PRUDE” and that they aren’t getting any (they were right) and they go away.

    Re: men’s rights vs women’s rights. It really needs to just be “human rights”. MRA to me is basically feminism for men. It’s just a zone where men can get more and more amped up and angry and the more extreme members of the group start running the show (just like the more extreme feminists seem to get more attention.)

    It makes more sense IMO to focus on single issue causes instead of build oppression narratives on either side. Like… “Rights for Fathers”. “Reproductive rights” (for both genders. I think women should be able to get abortions but men should be able to sign something that allows them to opt out of fatherhood and not be financially responsible for children they don’t consent to having here.) etc.

  • Apple

    @Hope, considering how rare INFJ is, it’s weird to even KNOW ABOUT so many INFJs. We’re a bit like unicorns. hehe @ blunt and says what she thinks. No one can ever be confused on where they stand with me, either. 😛

  • Man

    @Anacaona:

    The problem is when a man display relationship seeking in order to get sex.

    Conversely, the “challenge” if any, for women, is:

    Women need advice on how to filter for character and cad “tells.” IOW, women know how to choose good men, but cads, wanting to get in there with women who are not sluts, are quite skilled at pretending to be good men.

    By (a woman’s) definition, I think, a cad have much better communication skills with women than the average guy. So my guess is that if the woman is really naive, then she’s likely to filter out the guy who’s looking for a relationship and filter in the cad. So, in the end, the woman shares at least 50% responsibility for the outcome. I wonder, what about the so powerful female intuition when she needs it most? Isn’t it written on their foreheads?

    Player or Boyfriend? It’s Written On His Forehead

    • @Man

      By (a woman’s) definition, I think, a cad have much better communication skills with women than the average guy. So my guess is that if the woman is really naive, then she’s likely to filter out the guy who’s looking for a relationship and filter in the cad. So, in the end, the woman shares at least 50% responsibility for the outcome. I wonder, what about the so powerful female intuition when she needs it most? Isn’t it written on their foreheads?

      Most women do not find hypermasculinity attractive. Very high T is not considered good looking. Women can look at the guy with the prominent brow and lantern jaw and know that odds are he’s not dad material. However, most men are not hypermasculine, including most cads.

      The distinguishing feature of a cad is that he deceives to get sex. His excellent communication and mimicking skills help him in his subterfuge. Many a woman has been genuinely fooled by a cad, through no fault of her own. Sometimes bad people win.

  • Apple

    @Definite Beta

    Fair enough re: “Where am I supposed to learn these basic social skills”, but my rejoinder is: why does it seem like there are no books about this to help guys, no systems about this that don’t also include a healthy dose of misogyny in the attitudes of many of the “teachers”, manipulation tactics, and treating women like conquests?

    Your fellow males are failing you as well since any good information they’re giving you is wrapped up in stuff that, if also swallowed, isn’t going to exactly improve your respect for the opposite sex.

  • Man

    @Hope:

    Man, well the manosphere is quite diverse as well, and there are those who say game trumps looks, looks trumps game, and/or you need both. I think it’s good to take into consideration all the different perspectives and see how they stack up in your own situation.
    I was in the manosphere for a long time, and I think it has helped me.

    Yes. In the end there are sphere blogs for every taste. Just out of interest, what were you doing in the “manosphere” and how it helped you?

  • Anacaona

    I’ve been to a strip club once (shortly after turning 19). It was by far the most uncomfortable thing I have ever done.
    My husband had been to a strip club once. Rescuing a friend after he ran out of money and gas and needed a ride and a loan. He finds them uncomfortable too.
    Funny enough this friend was sort of a GTWO and supplementing his needs with strippers and another friend was supplementing his needs with video games. I was worried about them but then once my husband got engaged to me, all his single friends started to find girlfriends, get married and have babies. And he is only the second in command of the group. Is interesting to see how much pressure is secondarily enforced by the highest ranked male choices.
    I suspect that here is some sort of signal that is ‘okay’ to settle down coming from the top down that might be missed in certain groups or individuals, YMMV.

  • Hope

    Lokland, when is your wife due again? Are we going to see pictures? 🙂

    Apple, I grew up in China and without a religion, and my husband’s family is also not religious. We get no pressure from people we know to have another. It’s mostly that we had already had a loss, and it’s more real to us. We would be having another kid partially because we don’t want to be in the position again of being a parent without a living child. It’s somewhat illogical and based mostly on feelings, but I’ve heard others say similar things. Then again, I have a friend who had just one kid (non-Mormon family), and she is definitely not having another.

  • Anacaona

    And I believe the guy mindset is the same for both, just one guy goes to the stripper, the other attracts gold diggers.
    Nope men know a stripper is playing a game and they pay for it willingly. Unless she starts to date them outside working hours of course. Gold diggers pretend they love for real and most men hate them. You conflating the two is not only odd is wrong. Maybe because for you seeking LTR and seeking LDR is the same so anyone not being honest about LTR reads the same? dunno.

    I wonder, what about the so powerful female intuition when she needs it most? Isn’t it written on their foreheads?
    I had never being used for sex so my intuition is working well. Not sure what is wrong for the ones that don’t.

  • Apple

    @Hope so do you think you want another one but you’re just working through stuff?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Apple
    As to our conversation earlier, re the liberal v. conservative.

    Yeah, the terms are a little tough to define, especially using them in isolation…I like to use the term social liberal and social conservative, to separate it a bit from economic issues. You can theoretically be quite liberal economically, wanting signiicant taxes and redistibution and public schooling, but take a “laissez-faire” approach to people’s personal lives.
    IME, most liberals do this.
    Libertarians would be govt minimalists, no govt intervention that ain’t absolutely necessary.

    It’s tough to talk to the libertarians about the way social conservatives view the world sometimes, I generally let the alt-right people talk amongst themselves.

    The analogy I like to use is that social conservatives tend to view societies as delicate eco-systems, and therefore can be zealous in defending what exists, much like enviromentalists might want to protect threatened riverlands. Sometimes this can get a little extreme, like defending the spotted owl or INSISTING on virgins before marriage, but intentions are usually positive.

    And they do tend to like to use shame as a way to enforce social norms.

    The problem is, how much shame, how to use it, and what space are we going to grant for the minority outliers?

    And I can see that you are sort of running into that problem, because being pressured and shamed can feel like hell. I don’t feel much of this from my parents, but I get to hear about it from the GF.

    HER mother is strict, strict, strict. No premarital sex, no premarital “staying over” should be allowed, hell, she got upset because her 22 year old daughter got her ears piereced.

    And it’s damn near unbearable sometimes.

    I don’t understand what she thinks she is accomplishing. She can heap shame upon shame on her family but it is only making the children miserable. There’s one kid that straight-up does not want anything to do with the family. Half the time I hear about some family issue, the GF is in tears because Mommy dearest makes her feel like crap.

    I can guarantee you that no one here is interested in pressuring you like that. If you really don’t want kids? okay, some people are like that, sure. It’s a minority, though. The rest of us can have kids, want kids, and quite frankly we need a decent bit to repopulate society.

    We just get a little touchy about our delicate eco-system here, especially since it looks like rot is spreading, everywhere we look. See: OOW births, incarceration rights, etc…

  • Escoffier

    “You are living in one of the last significant true theocratic states in the world, where the religion thoroughly permeates the entire culture.”

    An idiotic statement.

    NB, Susan: I would not be so blunt to a girl, nor to someone I thought would fly into a rage, but JP is such a Vulcan I am certain he can take it.

    • NB, Susan: I would not be so blunt to a girl, nor to someone I thought would fly into a rage, but JP is such a Vulcan I am certain he can take it.

      Absolutely agree. And JP has dished out some pretty harsh stuff of his own from time to time.

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “I don’t understand what she thinks she is accomplishing.”

    She’s a perfectionist idealist who is committed to doing what is right regardless of the cost and regardless of whether it accomplishes anything.

    Evil can be given no quarter and must be purged.

    Error has no rights.

  • @JP

    And that’s another issue on the same point that gets to the issue of the pre-existence of the soul and the question of whether you did, indeed, make that choice.

    Mormons think we chose to come to earth (or some other habitable planet) while those that chose not to were cast out along with Lucifer to become devils.

  • Fish

    Re: No kissing on first date

    I remember very well, I did not kiss my ex fiance on our first date. I brought her home & gave her a hug. Sex on date 2. I don’t know if she would have kissed me had I tried. I have also had women who did kiss on date 1 who did not pass the three date rule. I don’t really think it correlates.

    For me, I don’t think not kissing on a first date or a girl telling me she wouldn’t would be a deal breaker. As I said before, I try to analyze as much data about someone as I can before making decisions. I guess that’s why my count of restricted women is lower, my brain pretty effectively filters for them (and they probably filter for me).

  • @BuenaVista 646

    Conquering the unconquerable man is a form of validation for some women.

    She was the only one that had enough “value” to get you to give up your declared life of no marriage.

  • Escoffier

    Never kissed a girl on the first date. I was kissed once on a first date–literally, my first–and it so freaked me out that it was three years before I went on another date.

    • I was kissed once on a first date–literally, my first–and it so freaked me out that it was three years before I went on another date.

      And you wonder why women aren’t hitting on you right and left, lol.

  • JP

    “An idiotic statement.

    NB, Susan: I would not be so blunt to a girl, nor to someone I thought would fly into a rage, but JP is such a Vulcan I am certain he can take it.”

    Han Solo is in a better position to comment on this anyway.

    I’m not a Mormon, Jack or otherwise.

    I do tell the Mormon missionaries that I will agree to convert to Mormonism if they will grant me a position on the Quorum of the Twelve.

    That is my price.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum_of_the_Twelve_Apostles_(LDS_Church)

  • JP

    “Never kissed a girl on the first date. I was kissed once on a first date–literally, my first–and it so freaked me out that it was three years before I went on another date.”

    I kissed my first girl in first grade, I think. I didn’t end up dating her however. She cried and ran away.

    The only reason I got my first girlfriend in college was because I was talking to her in her room and she started randomly kissing me.

  • Hope

    Apple, our son is 9 months old. Young babies are rough. I actually can’t wait until he’s a teenager and I can talk to him on a more adult level, teach him about social dynamics, and have him play video games instead of eating random lint on the floor. I’m not really a baby person, even though I find them cute. I’m thinking of waiting another year or two at least. I still have a bit of time as I’m 29, but I feel myself aging all the time… must be the parenthood thing. :p

    Man, I think the manosphere helped me really become aware of a lot of issues, especially what men really think. I grew up online as a nerd, so I already relate to many male perspectives, but the manosphere is more directly related to sexual and relationship dynamics. I was around 22 or 23 then, and mostly clueless. I attribute much of my self-improvement as a girlfriend/wife to reading those blogs. I didn’t let it get me too pessimistic, although that did happen for a while. The knowledge empowered me and allowed me to go into my relationship with my husband with some strong girl game.

  • JP

    @Han Solo

    “Mormons think we chose to come to earth (or some other habitable planet) while those that chose not to were cast out along with Lucifer to become devils.”

    And the ones who didn’t fight as valiantly during the War in Heaven bore the mark of Cain and had to be born as African Americans.

    I think that was changed in the 1970’s or 1980’s, though, so it’s no longer dogma.

  • Apple

    @Beta Guy,

    I don’t think “positive intentions” stops ruinous consequences. Like most social conservatives are pretty pro-life to the point of being rabidly anti-abortion. They can’t seem to grasp that what happens in another person’s body is not their damn business, no matter what they “believe” about it. They also take for granted that their religious beliefs are “right” and nobody else has the right to have different religious beliefs that think other things.

    But I don’t really like politics or politically labeling at all. I don’t even vote. So I’m pretty apolitical. Other people can get involved in that stuff if they want to but I opt out.

    re: shame… yeah, I’ve slut shamed a bit. I don’t think I necessarily “should” shame anybody really for anything. It’s a form of manipulation and it’s shitty of me. It’s not my business or right to do that. But, I also don’t have slutty friends as a general rule so it’s not like I am exposed to sluts super frequently to begin with. Still, sluttiness as a concept sort of irritates the shit out of me. But it really shouldn’t. It’s not my business, and people will do what they will do. And it’s not like they are killing anybody or robbing banks.

    Meh, being pressured and shamed really just irritates me. It makes me want to make the other person as uncomfortable as possible simply because they are inconveniencing me with their bullshit. You can’t “socially control” me. But I can tie up a bunch of your time arguing that you might have spent manipulating someone else who could be controlled that way. (And by “you” I don’t necessarily mean “you” personally.)

    re: your girlfriend… I had similar problems from my mother. I love my mother. She’s awesome and when I was still a minor, those boundaries were beneficial. There is a reason I can’t be socially controlled by random peons. Because I broke out of a religion that told me I was going to burn in hell (and I had panic attacks from it). And my family was pulling a lot of that same shit. Mostly my mother. It comes from love and fear but I am not here to live other people’s fears for them.

    When you elect to be a part of a religion that insists that everybody who doesn’t think exactly like you is going to be tortured for all eternity… that is one of the consequences of picking that religion. You cannot MAKE everybody agree with you, so you’ll just suffer fearing for the souls of those you love. It’s asinine and it’s mental abuse. But me putting up with it is not an acceptable option.

    I will tell you what I did to stop my mother from doing this… again as an adult… I set up major boundaries. My biggest issue was all the religious crap. I told my mother what I believed and at first I thought we could have meaningful discussions. But I was naive in thinking that. In the end, she would freak out and start crying and going on about hell and how the devil “had me” and trying to get me to go back to her crazy church. She didn’t seem to fundamentally grasp that my panic attacks were a direct result of that indoctrinating bullshit.

    So I set up boundaries. I told her that religion was a topic that was off the table because we couldn’t discuss it without it devolving into tears and hysteria and she wasn’t going to change my mind so all she was doing was getting herself upset.

    EVERY TIME she brought up religion or hell or the devil or tried to force me into church… if we were on the phone I said: “Well, gotta go” and hung up. If I was at her house. I just left. I would wait a few days and try again. Eventually she respected my boundaries, and we’re very close now. But if your GF does not put up firm boundaries and create a consequence for not respecting her, her mother will run her until the day she dies.

    Re: having babies… I don’t think you should worry. I don’t think my views regarding having children will never be the majority. People are too irresponsible and like sex too much. So even if most people decided they didn’t want babies, babies would still happen.

    But even if your fear came to pass… I really just don’t see why it’s that grand of an issue. The earth DOES have a carrying capacity. I don’t know what it is, but this planet is finite. At some point, reproduction will have to ease back and the population will have to shrink. That may create some negative consequences but continued overpopulation will be worse. Just my two cents.

  • Apple

    @Hope LMAO @ eating random lint on the floor! I’m definitely not a baby person. Though I like to hang out with kids, I find babies a little bit icky lol. If I wanted to parent I’d adopt a 6 or 7 year old. But neither me or Mr. Apple feels compelled to parent.

    From everything I hear, new babies (at least up until toddlerhood) will make you feel OLD. But you’ll bounce back.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ JP

    She’s a perfectionist idealist who is committed to doing what is right regardless of the cost and regardless of whether it accomplishes anything.

    Evil can be given no quarter and must be purged.

    Error has no rights.

    Unfortunately, as the real world has figured out, I am pretty difficult to purge. Would recommend whipping out a gun and putting my full of lead, because the shaming of other people just does not affect me.

    @ Apple

    Fair enough re: “Where am I supposed to learn these basic social skills”, but my rejoinder is: why does it seem like there are no books about this to help guys, no systems about this that don’t also include a healthy dose of misogyny in the attitudes of many of the “teachers”, manipulation tactics, and treating women like conquests?

    Your fellow males are failing you as well since any good information they’re giving you is wrapped up in stuff that, if also swallowed, isn’t going to exactly improve your respect for the opposite sex.

    If certain knowledge is considered sociopathic, then only sociopaths are going to learn it.
    And when they teach it, well, they are going to sound like sociopaths, because they are 😛
    It would be nicer if some of these places were kinder to the women-folk. That’s why I am a member of this community and not, say, Heartiste. I quite like women when they are dignified and well-behaved like the women on this blog, much like the women here appreciate men when they are practicing Benevolent Male Dominance and not raping and pillaging college towns.

    As it was, though, most of us had only the misogynists to teach us, because no one else gave a crap about teaching us ANYTHING.

  • Apple

    *I don’t think my views will ever (not never. double negative there.)

  • Apple

    @Definite Beta

    Wow… you like us when we are dignified and “well-behaved”. How on earth did I ever give the impression of being “well-behaved”? What am I? A poodle? Can I have my treat now? You do get that’s a little condescending, right?

    “Them there women on that blog stay in line!”

    And yeah… we vote “no, thanks” on the raping and pillaging. Wacky, I know.

    And knowing those jokers are misogynists is half the battle. I wouldn’t find it nearly so obnoxious if most guys saw through and recognized the misogyny and just took what they could and left the rest instead of turning into apologists for assholes. But it does beg the question… why can’t one of THOSE guys (the ones who see the misogyny for what it is) get the non-sexist information together and create a book or blog? I know HanSolo is creating a blog. Is that the point of it? If so, awesome.

  • Fish

    @Apple
    “The earth DOES have a carrying capacity. I don’t know what it is, but this planet is finite. At some point, reproduction will have to ease back and the population will have to shrink.”

    Thomas Malthus came up with that theory in the 1800’s, we havent quite gotten there yet.

    I never had much use for religion myself (good thing, apparently half of eastern europe is up in arms at the Jews. Now I can just be a non-religious money grubbing corporate type, the not reading the torah or keeping kosher makes us way more tolerable 😉 ). Boundaries are really important. I’m so happy I never had kids, geeze. just reading half of these threads makes me wonder how I ended up reasonably normal. . .

  • Fish

    @apple
    “why can’t one of THOSE guys (the ones who see the misogyny for what it is) get the non-sexist information together and create a book or blog?”

    There probably isn’t much of a market for that type of blog. Some things provoke a strong response, positive or negative. “Hey guys, lets not be douchebags…” doesn’t seem like it would get a passionate response. I’m sure there probably is some blog somewhere like that. What seems popular:
    1 – Women suck, they just want a free pass and to take my money and stuff
    2 – Guys suck, they just want sex
    3- Women suck, they won’t give me the time of day but just want to friends & dump their emotional problems on me
    4- Guys suck, why are they also sleeping with the slutty girls but won’t date awesome girls like me?

    I think people that have a generally agreeable moderate view and do ok in relationships aren’t concerned with that stuff. . .

  • @J

    Absolutely, many of these women got married because they had no other options. It was just what women did, usually in order to have economic support/children because they weren’t able enough to have careers. It amazes me how many guys would like to return to that.

    Men needed women too back then. Lots of people back then were agrarian and if you go further back in time even more were and it took a real team effort between wife, husband and children to make the farm work and survive. So, I would argue that both great-great-grandma and great-great-grandpa did have a career in the general sense of the word where they both worked their ass off (in most cases, some lazy louts existed of course) and there was a division of labor with men in European-based economies doing more of the heavy labor while women tended to the garden and the time-intensive domestic needs (along with caring for children).

    Now I will grant you that grandma (say a woman born in the 1930’s who was a young married woman in the 50’s) may not have had a career similar to great-great-grandma’s per se if she didn’t work outside the house and since so much of her housework was made easier by improved technology as compared with 50+ years earlier.

    I don’t know that a ton of guys want to return to that though I’m sure some do. No doubt some nostalgic traditionalists and religious people would like that and attempt to live that way in the present.

    I talk a lot about the issue of males not being needed as much as a provider/protector but it’s not that I long to go back to that. I just don’t think much about it happening one way or the other because it’s not going to happen so I try to adjust from a lot of the things I was taught that was in that mindset to how the world is actually working today.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I suppose I would be handing out treats if the women here at HUS were my personal pets, but I believe their husbands would take issue with that.

  • JP

    “Thomas Malthus came up with that theory in the 1800′s, we havent quite gotten there yet.”

    Mostly because we found a bunch of stored sunlight in the ground and have been burning it for energy as fast as we can.

    The issue of the 21st century is cheap energy.

    Jeremy Grantham’s looking out over the 21st century for us and has noticed the zero (economic) growth problem.

    http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2012/11/jeremy-grantham-on-american-economic.html

  • Apple

    @Fish, I know about Malthus 😛 He was right. I mean, any limited space has a limit for the number of anything that can go on it. It’s the most basic level of common sense.

    And when people talk about about how you could fit the entire world’s population in the state of Texas, they’re just being goofy. Nobody wants to live shoulder to shoulder. Mammals in general get very stressed when they are packed right on top of each other.

    Where I live has grown a LOT in the last 10 years. I want to move someplace more rural because I just can’t handle all these people. Sitting in this traffic I honestly can’t believe anybody says: “Hey, you know what we need? MORE BABIES!!!” It’s like they don’t grasp that babies grow into adults and then those adults are on the road and cramming every store and restaurant. It’s stifling and distressing. To me anyway.

    People need to realize that we don’t just need room FOR people, we need enough potable water. We need enough animals to feed people (since everybody is not going to be vegetarian). We need places for those animals to live (those animals take up space). We need to grow stuff to feed those animals. That takes up space. We need to grow food for the people. That takes up space. We are using the resources on this planet 50% faster than those resources are being created.

    All that lies ahead is major suffering and wars over resources if people don’t dig their heads out of their asses enough to see it and maybe just… minimize their reproduction slightly. If everyone had one kid we would have population reduction. (I’m not saying everybody has to do this or they are evil. I’m simply saying the result of not reducing the population is going to be great suffering.) What about having one and adopting however many more you want? I wish more people would start doing that.

    Additionally we need space to LIVE. Already we’re seeing more and more crowding in places all over the globe. While there ARE some places nobody lives, there is a reason for that. The conditions are too extreme. And we can’t grow things there either. And also… we’ve got this little thing called climate change happening. I’m not saying it is ‘man made climate change’. I’m saying… clearly and obviously we’re starting to have some funky/insane weather. That unpredictable weather… more droughts, more crazy storms, etc… creates a situation where a lot of our food that is being grown or raised doesn’t reach maturity. It gets destroyed. Which leads to more shortages of things.

    I really don’t understand what about this is so hard for people. Or why it’s not just patently obvious. But apparently it’s not. Maybe we can carry another 7 billion people. I doubt it. I think we’ll all go bug-shagging crazy if we get to that point, anyway. But the point is… even if Malthus was a little early in his predictions, it doesn’t mean a finite place with finite resources can have infinite growth. That’s just stupid math.

    LOL @ wondering how you ended up reasonably normal. I’d say the same thing, but by most people’s definitions I’m not very normal. Normal is sometimes crazy. If everybody is crazy.

  • Apple

    @Fish LOLOL @ “Hey guys, lets not be douchebags”… and your list.

    I often forget the Internet magnifies everything. You get on the internet and you think: “God, people are assholes.” And maybe they are assholes anyway, but in real life, in person, most of them are a little more restrained so you don’t have to know about it at least.

  • Apple

    @Beta Guy: “I suppose I would be handing out treats if the women here at HUS were my personal pets, but I believe their husbands would take issue with that.”

    LOL probably so.

  • JP

    “All that lies ahead is major suffering and wars over resources if people don’t dig their heads out of their asses enough to see it and maybe just… minimize their reproduction slightly. If everyone had one kid we would have population reduction. (I’m not saying everybody has to do this or they are evil. I’m simply saying the result of not reducing the population is going to be great suffering.) What about having one and adopting however many more you want? I wish more people would start doing that.”

    JMG (everyone’s favorite Archdruid) thinks that we’re heading toward 500 million as the industrial age enters it’s twilight and decline.

    I think he also thinks that there is nothing that we can do about it.

  • Apple

    @JP how would that happen?

    I think a lot of people think there is going to be a massive population shrinkage… like through famine or disease or major disasters or nuclear war or something. But wouldn’t it just be kinder and gentler if we could all learn to control ourselves a little bit more? Mother Nature will eventually attack viciously to keep things in balance, which is why I don’t get this rush to make more people who will probably be swept up in that attack.

  • JP

    “@JP how would that happen?”

    I think he’s looking toward standard issue famine, plague, and war combined with peak oil (really peak cheap energy) as industrialization and progress go into reverse.

    Basically, he thinks that we won’t be able to afford (in terms of energy consumption) the current structures that enable the earth to have significantly overshot what he considers to be it’s natural carrying capacity of about one billion.

    I like him because he actually talks about macro-history (Spengler, et al.)

    As far as I can tell, we haven’t hit Peak Oil or Peak Cheap Energy yet. I just don’t argue with him about those things.

    http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/

  • JP

    @Apple:

    We are about to find out what a declining and aging population looks like in Japan (which is now peaking and declining).

    And China’s going to grow old before it grows rich, anyway.

    Everywhere the Faustian West goes, it eventually smashes fertility rates.

    The only country that has really rebounded and shot up in terms of fertility is Russia. Specifically, rural Russia.

  • Ana, re: strippers and mate-poaching. I actually meant to say that the Dancers were finding ways to snitch on the Extras Girls in order to bring in a prostitution-bust scare or two and “clean up the club” (in a way that benefited them, of course). I think I may have made it sound like the Dancers were being physically violent to the Extras Girls; that may also happen from time to time.

    Fish, I agree that many men would prefer an honest prostitute to a dishonest gold-digger.

    I have a few stripper friends and they have told me with great candor that the customers that they hate the most are the guys who, when hustled, say something like, “You should really go over there and ask my friend if he wants a dance. He’s the one with the money.” One might think that this guy is doing the girl a favor by preventing her from wasting her time, but the girls hate him because he’s completely exposing the fantasy world. So she is caught in a position where she may have to awkwardly move around the table trying to sniff out the money.

    The stripper knows that it is in fact all about the cash, but she does not want the men do not know this. Ideally the man will actually think that the girl is there because she really likes him, and she must regrettably charge him some money for dances and so on because the club owners are watching her, she has to tip-out the DJ and bartenders at the end of the night, etc. It’s complete BS; the guy is simply an ATM machine for the girl. But, for men,hope springs eternal…

    Han, BV: my 11 hours/$175 was really just a guess. I probably was overly generous with the second date expenses. My stats are actually worse than this: over the past 3-4 years, I bet that I have averaged $300+ per N and 4 dates (typically two day dates, an expensive third date in the evening, and then sex on the 4th date. Almost all of my costs come on date 3 for whatever reason. I could probably be more aggressive on the 3rd, but my counterparties are often aware of the 3-Date Rule and give me (dangerously undeserving) credit when I don’t push hard on that evening.

    In my defense, my operational tempo is quite high and the stream of activity is fairly constant.

    The exceptions would be the same-day-lays, but to be perfectly honest I don’t have these very much anymore unless I am meeting girls while traveling. ONS stuff did more or less dominate large stretches of my 20s, but now I find myself with this pattern of meet—day date #1, day date #2, traditional date, fuckee-suckee.

    I am old-fashioned in my own small ways, I don’t ask the girl to share any costs and will not allow her to pay for anything, and I can perhaps be overly excitable about gratuitously lavish date gifts (day date #2 often includes a bookstore visit and I like to reward a girl who shows intellectual vitality and let her know that I appreciate it). I am not including such gifts in my cost-per-N calculation.

  • Apple

    @JP aside from the peak oil issue, what do you think about the rest of what he says?

    I don’t worry a ton about peak oil because I do think we have other resources. We have a ton of coal, but that’s very polluting.

    I think people should just maybe have fewer babies LOL. Or… it would be good if we got away from pronatalism and the assumption that women just aren’t complete unless they become mothers. Not saying that motherhood is a ‘bad’ choice, only that I think if parenthood wasn’t so heavily pushed as part of the lifescript, a lot fewer people would do it. Of course most of the population is in developing countries, not first world countries. But most of the first world countries are the major consumers of… everything.

    I think the estimate is that 1 first world baby uses in a lifetime the equivalent resources of 20 from the first world. I try not to feel too smug about abstaining. But I’m a little smug about it. I won’t lie. 😛

  • Apple

    @JP re: Japan, I know. They have huge incentives now for procreating over there. I’m not saying it’s not going to cause major problems with their population decline, I just think it’s going to cause bigger problems when we reach “critical mass”.

  • Apple

    *of 20 from the third world. (stupid typos)

  • Fish

    @JP
    “The issue of the 21st century is cheap energy.”

    I looked into this a lot before deciding to go into the energy sector. I’m pretty confident we will keep producing oil & gas for at least 30 years (at which point I’ll be retired), then maybe cold fusion or whatever new fangled tech they come out with. I read somewhere they were going to come out with long haul trucks that ran on natural gas because it is way cheaper than diesel, which would have a trickle down effect on our pricing (diesel would be cheaper, heating oil would be cheaper).

    Thats my guess. I know the super majors whose books are public have millions of barrels of likely reserves. Thats not counting companies like saudi aramco which aren’t publicly traded so who knows what they have. . .

  • Apple

    hahaha Susan! Well I was likely to go that “one step too far” now, wasn’t I? My brother is going to have some babies. So it’s cool! (And I must confess, I cannot WAIT to be an aunt. I’m going to spoil the shit out of that kid.)

    Re: blood of our blood, but WHY do we want that? (and I mean the royal ‘we’. I obviously never got that or I would want that and yeah.)

    I get that people want to make babies, I just don’t get why they want to make so freaking MANY of them. I mean, even many species of wild animals control their own population and cut back on reproduction when conditions aren’t right. Except deer. Deer seem to be dumber than rocks. And then when the deer population gets too big, if hunters don’t come clear them out, they starve.

    Is that what we want for ourselves? Is the call of mini-mes just that great? I get it’s not a rational choice to become a parent. I just don’t get how anything can override logic that much when it can have so many drawbacks.

  • @Man 715

    Losing anti-game would mean to stop doing things that kill attraction in women, like pedastalizing them, feeling or showing your infatuation too soon, acting needy around them, treating them like you’re desperate for them and have no other options, etc.

  • Apple

    @Fish supposedly there is new technology to reach previously unreachable oil in the US. I’m confident we’ll run out of food way before we run out of oil. So we’ll be able to drive places while we’re starving. Yay, progress.

  • Anacaona

    Ana, re: strippers and mate-poaching. I actually meant to say that the Dancers were finding ways to snitch on the Extras Girls in order to bring in a prostitution-bust scare or two and “clean up the club” (in a way that benefited them, of course). I think I may have made it sound like the Dancers were being physically violent to the Extras Girls; that may also happen from time to time.

    Oops sorry. I would guess they would be disfigured so whatever first world version of girl on girl violence is is probably less cruel than mine.

    It’s complete BS; the guy is simply an ATM machine for the girl. But, for men,hope springs eternal…
    My husband’s friend that spend quite amount of time and money in strip joints played along with the girls on the basis of “having some fun with girls that he could never have in normal circumstances but he never actually bought it beyond the table. I think your strippers friends might be a tad delusional themselves if they think any grown man is going to go a strip joint and really think those girls like him for him and not his wallet, YMMV.

  • JP

    “@JP aside from the peak oil issue, what do you think about the rest of what he says?”

    It’s generally interesting since he seems quite intelligent, so I enjoy reading it.

    I’m not buying the ecotechnic future that he’s selling, but a lot of what he writes is pretty solid in terms of “things to think about”.

    There aren’t many people out there talking about meta-history, Spengler, et al.

  • JP

    @Fish:

    “I looked into this a lot before deciding to go into the energy sector. I’m pretty confident we will keep producing oil & gas for at least 30 years (at which point I’ll be retired), then maybe cold fusion or whatever new fangled tech they come out with. I read somewhere they were going to come out with long haul trucks that ran on natural gas because it is way cheaper than diesel, which would have a trickle down effect on our pricing (diesel would be cheaper, heating oil would be cheaper).”

    Which is why I’m not seeing Peak Oil/Peak Cheap Energy yet.

    I had no interest in being a chemical engineer, which is why I didn’t go into the sector.

    However, I think that Jeremy Grantham is probably right and actual economic growth is going to head toward zero over the longer term.

    Economic growth and peak cheap energy are two separate issues, to me.

  • Hope

    I grew up in a very developing world/third world sort of place, where running water was often a problem. I would like to think that the solution is not to go back to that, but to progress forward via intellect and engineering. After all, we got computers and technologies from the nerds. I’m having babies with a high IQ nerd. We may produce nerdlings that help solve problems. My husband works for a bio tech company that can help with faster diagnostics, for example. I think it’s better for smart people to reproduce while young and healthy, and bring up an educated, intelligent and civil next generation, rather than sit on the sidelines watching the world go down in flames of debauchery and suffering.

    There are some brilliant minds that brought us the very technologies that we’re using to communicate. I think it would be better for that to continue, even if we take a little while longer to find a better energy solution. I’d much rather see a star trek kind of future than all the post apocalyptic stuff that’s all the rage right now.

  • Apple

    @JP i’m going to read his site. I find that kind of stuff pretty fascinating. I like knowledge!

  • JP

    “I’m confident we’ll run out of food way before we run out of oil. So we’ll be able to drive places while we’re starving. Yay, progress.”

    Uh, isn’t the oil what enables the food?

    Green Revolution and all?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

  • Apple

    @Hope hehe @ nerdlings. If you produce a girl nerdling, don’t pressure her to make babies because then she won’t have time to fix all the world’s problems. 🙂

    I agree that it’s better for smart people to breed than stupid people. (Sorry for withholding my DNA and stuff). But… you can’t outbreed stupid. It’s a fool’s errand. And I know, especially for Mr. Apple, he was so smart that he just couldn’t identify with a lot of people around him. Plus all these people… when there is just one more person in line at the drive-thru for wherever, I just don’t even CARE if they are smart or stupid. I want them to not be there in that line at all.

    And oh, I’m sitting on the sidelines because I’m not bringing a kid to suffer. I think it will go down in flames. I think there is no saving it. I’m not as optimistic as you.

  • Apple

    @JP I was thinking more in terms of having so many people and not enough land to grow all the crops on.

  • JP

    @Apple:

    “I get that people want to make babies, I just don’t get why they want to make so freaking MANY of them.”

    Fertility is collapsing in many places (again from Goldman, since he’s really into demography)

    “”The great and still ongoing declines in fertility that are sweeping through the Muslim world most assuredly qualify as a “revolution” – a quiet revolution, to be sure – but a revolution in which hundreds of millions of adults are already participating: and one which stands to transform the future,” writes demographer Nicholas Eberstadt in the June 2012 issue of Policy Review, the journal of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. [1]

    Eberstadt and co-author Apoorva Shah conclude, “The remarkable fertility declines [sic] now unfolding throughout the Muslim world is one of the most important demographic developments in our era. Yet it has been ‘hiding in plain sight’ – that is to say, it has somehow gone unrecognized and overlooked by all but a handful of observers, even by specialists in the realm of population

    studies. Needless to say, such an oversight is more than passing strange, and we do not propose to account for it here.”

    As Eberstadt and Shah indicate, the evidence has been in the public domain for years, and well known to demographers. “In most of the Islamic world it’s amazing, the decline in fertility that has happened,” Hania Zlotnik, head of the United Nations’ population research branch, told the New York Times in 2009. [2] As early as 2008, a study by the Institute for Applied Systems Analysis concluded, “A first analysis of the Iran 2006 census results shows a sensationally low fertility level of 1.9 for the whole country and only 1.5 for the Tehran area (which has about 8 million people) … A decline in the TFR [total fertility rate] of more than 5.0 in roughly two decades is a world record in fertility decline.” ”

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NF12Ak02.html

  • Apple

    @JP you’re right, it is re: fertility. But we have so much fetishizing of big families still like Duggar family and Octomom, etc. Then you have all these stupid girls with 5 different baby daddies. It’s discouraging.

    But when they say declines in fertility… do they mean declines in capability to reproduce or just the declining numbers of actual reproduction? Are they able to separate it out in any meaningful way between choice for fewer or no kids or infertility as an actual medical issue?

    When he says “millions of adults are participating”… participating makes it seem voluntary. But when people talk about declining fertility I hear it like it’s a medical issue.

  • Apple

    @Susan, I’d delay sex no matter how old I was. I don’t want an STD or to have sex with someone who doesn’t love me. If that meant I was single til the end of time after Mr. Apple, that’s fine. I have other interests. But I sure as hell wouldn’t have sex with someone on the first date.

  • JP

    “But when they say declines in fertility… do they mean declines in capability to reproduce or just the declining numbers of actual reproduction?”

    Declines in actual reproduction.

    Total Fertility Rate, meaning number of children per woman.

    Currently at 1.3 in Iran, which is much lower than the U.S., France, which are about 1.9/2.0.

    I think you need about 2.1 to keep a stable population, absent immigration, emigration.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iran

  • Susan, those are very interesting links. I think that, from at least an evo psych perspective, the suite of hardwired female attractiveness triggers would be linked to the conditions found in the prehistoric environment of evolutionary adaptedness. So women would be hardwired to physically favor men who displayed the capacity for physical strength and presence, ability to withstand hardship, superior genetic health, etc.

    I just saw “Man of Steel” yesterday and Mr. Cavill certainly looked the part of godlike superhero jock, but IMHO he also looked like he was a fundamentally gentle old soul capable of nuanced decision-making, strategic sophistication, social intelligence, sensitivity, etc. So perhaps we guys spend too much time focusing on manifestations of “alpha brawn” and not enough time on manifestations of “alpha brainpower”…?

    • So women would be hardwired to physically favor men who displayed the capacity for physical strength and presence, ability to withstand hardship, superior genetic health, etc.

      Exactly. So as the environment changes, becomes safer, better health care, etc. women are more than capable of observing that they don’t need to risk the downsides of high T because no mastodon or opposing tribe will be attacking her family. (In places where that is still the case, no doubt higher T men are in greater demand.)

      just saw “Man of Steel” yesterday and Mr. Cavill certainly looked the part of godlike superhero jock

      Cavill’s face is beautiful, not ruggedly handsome. Like Tom Brady, and Taylor Kitsch, and so many men women consider “10”s. High estrogen there, for sure. Or lower T perhaps.

      nuanced decision-making, strategic sophistication, social intelligence, sensitivity, etc.

      Those are the beta traits shining through.

  • Anacaona

    I just saw “Man of Steel” yesterday and Mr. Cavill certainly looked the part of godlike superhero jock, but IMHO he also looked like he was a fundamentally gentle old soul capable of nuanced decision-making, strategic sophistication, social intelligence, sensitivity, etc. So perhaps we guys spend too much time focusing on manifestations of “alpha brawn” and not enough time on manifestations of “alpha brainpower”…?
    That is the essence of Superman. I loved the movie too. Henri might be in the same level as Christopher Reeves in portraying the character.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, I was 13 and a group of us went roller skating. I barely even knew the girl. The skating was OK, though I was terrible. We all went outside to wait for our ride and couples were sort of pairing off at discrete distance. Next thing I know there is a second tongue in my mouth. I was like, WTF? Except I was afraid to swear at that age.

    I assert that this is a perfectly rational response for a 13 y/o with zero experience (and no limerence for the girl in question).

    • @Esco

      I assert that this is a perfectly rational response for a 13 y/o with zero experience (and no limerence for the girl in question).

      13! I agree. I approve of your waiting three years in that case. I thought maybe you were already in college. 😛

  • JP

    “Absolutely agree. And JP has dished out some pretty harsh stuff of his own from time to time.”

    It only made me feel a little sad and only made a single tear fall from my eye.

    🙁

    If you prick me, do I not bleed?

    If you sue me, do I not counterclaim?

    And I thought that it was brilliant prose, rendered with eloquence that would, uh…

    I’m really not sure what I expected the eloquence from that particular prose to do.

  • JP

    “I assert that this is a perfectly rational response for a 13 y/o with zero experience (and no limerence for the girl in question).”

    So what *was* your specific reaction at the time?

  • Escoffier

    I pushed her away, gently but firmly, then sat as far as I could from her in the car. I never called her again. (Thank God she went to a different school.) But she talked a lot of crap about me, along the lines that was a homo or something.

    Come to think of it, I might have been 12, but I think 13 is correct. Certainly not older than that because this was pre-high school.

  • JP

    “I pushed her away, gently but firmly, then sat as far as I could from her in the car. I never called her again. (Thank God she went to a different school.) But she talked a lot of crap about me, along the lines that was a homo or something.”

    In hindsight, given what you know now, would you have chosen a different course of action?

    Like never asking her out on a date in the first place?

  • Apple

    @JP wow, I had no idea it was so low in Iran. You would think it would be much higher there. I didn’t even think they believed in birth control.

  • Susan, re: female preferences. Have they had time to adapt to the modern, safe, egalitarian conditions? I wonder if in the Cavill/Kitsch/Hemsworth thing we are seeing an idealized female preference for a big guy with an extremely athletic, mesomorph body combined with a face that shows some balance of square-jawed T, softness in the eyes (empathy, intelligence), and an honest-looking, easy smile (good humor).

    It’s a guy who in aggregate looks like he can develop wise strategies, build necessary teams and coalitions through social intelligence, and of course beat the fuck out of people and throw them through windows, etc.

    • @BB

      Susan, re: female preferences. Have they had time to adapt to the modern, safe, egalitarian conditions?

      Good question. We know that most “wired” traits are about half heritable, and half subject to environmental influence. (Some mutations can be far more influential, e.g. DRD4 dopamine receptor mutation, BRCA gene, but they are the exception.)

      Obviously, the wild swings we’ve seen in the SMP during the last 50 years demonstrates the power of cultural norms to shift behavior.

      So yes, I think most women want to feel protected – that hasn’t changed – but we look around us and feel quite secure in general. The threats are minimal. If Armageddon was tomorrow, we’d all be looking to join forces with guys with huge biceps, but in the meantime we feel perfect safe going for the broke poet.

      As we’ve discussed here many times, the