Hoping For Those Three Little Words

June 27, 2013
three-little-words

You don’t want this

Dear Susan,

Love your website. Have been an avid reader for a couple years now. I hope you can take a look at my situation as outlined below. I’m having a hard time understanding if the relationship I am in currently is likely to lead to marriage.

We met online five months ago. We met for coffee and hit it off, then went out again on a more real “first date” (dinner and activity) two days later. We’ve been somewhat inseparable since. We’re both 26 years old, he’s a geoscientist and I’m a PhD student.

He’s been in one other long-term relationship that lasted about 2 years and just “fizzled” (his words) at the end. I’ve only dated men for very short periods of time (1 month-ish) because if I can’t see long-term possibilities with the guy, I don’t like to stick around or put out, so this is officially the longest relationship I’ve ever been in. We both were openly exclusive from the beginning, but we didn’t become bf/gf until almost three weeks after we met. We slept together a couple days before we confirmed bf/gf.

 

Since then, we’ve gone on weekend trips together, met each other’s friends, he’s met my parents, and we now spend more than 5 nights a week together. We both agree this is a serious relationship that has “value”, but we don’t talk about our feelings very often. We’re not gushy people. He especially doesn’t openly like to talk about how he feels, but instead says he likes to show his feelings in actions.

At about 3.5 months, I was bursting to say “I love you”, and finally said it to him early one morning. I was confident in saying it, and wasn’t fully expecting him to return the sentiment. That’s exactly what happened, and he was very appreciative, but wanted to think about how he felt. About a month passed, and I didn’t drop the words again in the space between because I didn’t want him to say anything he didn’t actually feel. It’s not fair to prompt someone to say it, but at the same time it’s hard to wait for reciprocitation. I said it again last week, in the hopes that his feelings were clearer, but I still didn’t get a return sentiment.

I’ve thought about how this could be a permanent long-term relationship, but I’m feeling less confident in his feelings developing in quite the same way as mine. For all the time we spend together and for all the fun we have together, it seems as if he should be at the same point as me, yet the words haven’t come out yet. I can respect waiting for his feelings to develop to the same place as mine, but I also think that I’m emotionally at risk if I wait too long to hear him say it back. Is there (or should there be?) an expiry date on relationships?

Alison

Dear Alison,

First thing: Stop saying it.

I understand the temptation to elicit the response from him, but trust me, he knows you’re waiting and he’ll say it if and when he’s ready. 

I’m very traditional about this – in my experience, things go better when men say it first. Women escalate emotionally to foster the desire for commitment, but I think it’s his job to let you know when you’ve succeeded. By telling him first, you’ve gotten out of sync with him, and made commitment seem like an obligation.

Second thing: Stop worrying and stop hurrying.

You’ve only been in a relationship for four months. Some couples don’t even get to bf/gf that fast. The fact that you became inseparable very quickly and spend most of your free time together clearly indicates that he enjoys your company, values the relationship, and is giving you pride of place in his life. His actions do indeed indicate a serious attachment. 

How do you feel when you are together? Is there emotional intimacy? Is the sex very connected? Is he spontaneously affectionate? He’s already told you he prefers to show his feelings – do you feel secure in what he is showing you? If you feel loved when he looks at you, trust that. If you feel like more of a sex partner without an emotional component, heed the anxiety that produces in you. If you feel like his kid sister or a buddy, pay attention to that. What does your gut tell you?

For many men, saying “I love you” is a very serious commitment. Some guys have told me they would only say it if they’re sure they want to marry the person, especially once they reach the age where settling down is a realistic option. I’ve known other guys who are serial monogamists, and have said it to ten different women. You don’t want a guy who throws those words around or says “I love YouTube” really fast. 

Third thing: Recognize that your feelings will never match exactly.

It’s not really valid to compare his feelings to yours. What amounts to “very intense” feelings may not be the same for each of you. There’s no metric that says you both need to reach precisely the same degree of emotional investment, passing 98.6 and heading to 103. You could both be very happy and not be in exactly the same place, because you’re different people with different personalities and attachment styles. 

A therapist once told me that every relationship is comprised of a pursuer and a distancer. Things can never be equal. It sounds like you’re the pursuer in this relationship, and that’s OK. There’s nothing wrong with knowing how you feel about someone. What’s important, though, is that you maintain your independence and ability to enjoy your own life without demonstrating excessive need. In other words, give him space. After just five months, asking him to be sure he wants to marry you is asking a lot.

Is there an expiration date? Not really, though I think the one year mark is a reasonable time to have a very frank conversation about where the relationship is headed. If he is not in love with you by that point, I don’t think he will be. But I think you’ll know intuitively if the relationship stalls. The emotional component between you won’t feel right. Trust your gut and let go of your expectations around the vocabulary. Give him the opportunity to demonstrate his feelings without pressure, in the way he has told you he prefers.

For the record, I can’t remember when Mr. HUS and I said “I love you” for the first time – I asked him and he doesn’t know either! In retrospect, that moment was not important, it’s what was happening without words that mattered.

I’m eager to hear what the other readers have to say – be sure to check out the comments, where you’ll get plenty of male and female feedback.

I hope this helps,

Susan

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    1:41 AM, Sept 30, 2011

    I KNEW I saw this post. I thought I was going crazy when I refreshed the screen and didn’t get anything.

    Sneaky Susan! :P

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

      Sneaky Susan!

      Haha, I wanted it on the “front page” but it got kicked off by my Google Reader RIP announcement, so I had to delay its publication a bit.

  • Angelguy

    “I’m very traditional about this – in my experience, things go better when men say it first. ”

    Susan, could you elaborate on this more?
    Like to get some more perspective on this.

    “For the record, I can’t remember when Mr. HUS and I said “I love you” for the first time – I asked him and he doesn’t know either! In retrospect, that moment was not important, it’s what was happening without words that mattered.”

    I think timing about this is important.
    But never saying it when you that far involved is not a good thing.

  • earl

    Women love with words…they say what they feel at that particular moment and time. The fact she said it first isn’t the worst thing in the world…it is actually worse if the guy says it first.

    Men love with actions. The words hardly matter unless there is evidence behind them. This takes longer to accomplish.

  • BuenaVista

    I don’t buy it. Five months of virtual co-hab? Exclusivity after two weeks? This girl has a different agenda than the guy.

    I’m incorrect if the three words just mean, “I want to work on our relationship and I’m not very romantic and maybe we’ll get married in a quiet sort of way.” But if they mean “I love you and jesus I’m totally fucked here because I have no choice but to love you”, presaging lifelong commitment and desire, that’s apparent in the first few seconds. It doesn’t take five months to figure it out.

    He wasn’t in love with his last girlfriend, either. That’s why it fizzled, and didn’t blow up.

    Wow, waited almost three weeks to go exclusive. Tilt.

    Exception would be if man was an abandoned/abused child, and he associates attachment with emotional disaster. So he’s careful. But, sadly, that sort of guy is a handful in marriage or an LTR.

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

      But if they mean “I love you and jesus I’m totally fucked here because I have no choice but to love you”, presaging lifelong commitment and desire, that’s apparent in the first few seconds.

      I think this is untrue for many people, both men and women. Different people have different levels of comfort with expression (or even feeling) strong emotion, and Alison’s bf has already told her he is not comfortable talking about his feelings.

      My college boyfriend sat me down at 9 months and told me like he was announcing an execution, and he was hopelessly besotted for 3 more years.

      I also think there’s something different about Millennials, who have grown up with a culture of casual sex. We see guys pretending to be assholes to encourage female interest, and struggling to avoid looking pussy whipped. I’m not suggesting this guy is playing games, but he may well be wary of declaring commitment too soon.

      The notion that exclusivity after three weeks is delayed is absurd in this SMP. They had sex at about the same time they went all in – that’s actually later sex and earlier commitment than most people have.

      One young woman I know has been dying to hear those words from her bf, whom she met on New Year’s. He just said them last week, and at the same time said, “I can see myself marrying you in a couple of years.” He’s 26, she’s 24, and I think this is it.

      I hope we get some comments from guys in their 20s on this thread :-/

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Alison “We’re both 26 years old, he’s a geoscientist and I’m a PhD student.”

    Ask him to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. I would suspect that he is an INTJ or at least an NT of some kind, and those types are very reticent to say the words “I love you.” It’s a big deal for them. They also hold back a lot, and tend to be very careful about who they let have access to their inner emotions.

    Also, you mentioned that he has met your parents, but you have not met his. That is a sign that he is not willing to let you into all of his private space quite yet. NTs are very logical people, and if they think that your relationship has not reached a logical “point” of seriousness, they will not rush it.

    So what you have to do is use this logic to get him to see your side. Sit him down and tell him that you love him, but that you cannot wait around for him to love you in return. So if he cannot see himself ever loving you, you cannot stay in this relationship. He should be able to see this logic and give you an answer. Good luck.

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

      @Hope

      Also, you mentioned that he has met your parents, but you have not met his. That is a sign that he is not willing to let you into all of his private space quite yet. NTs are very logical people, and if they think that your relationship has not reached a logical “point” of seriousness, they will not rush it

      Good point about MB. I should say that I edited her email quite a bit, including the part where she stated they live in somewhere that is far from home for both. He met her parents when they visited, but his haven’t yet.

  • Anacaona

    Hi mom! Why are you impersonating Susan this morning? Your English is great BTW ;)
    From the “wait until he says it first’ to the ‘If after a year a man is not talking marriage, move on” is pretty much pearls of wisdom my mom told me before I even hit puberty.
    I did learned from other sources about the pursuer and the distancer. But we called differently In ever relationship there is one that loves and one that allow him/herself to be loved.
    Very good advice :)

  • BuenaVista

    “So what you have to do is use this logic to get him to see your side. Sit him down and tell him that you love him, but that you cannot wait around for him to love you in return. So if he cannot see himself ever loving you, you cannot stay in this relationship. He should be able to see this logic and give you an answer.”

    Unless this dude is an omega with a terminal illness and a parole officer this is apocalyptically bad advice. This is the kind of discussion one has with a child or underperforming subordinate, who is not taking out the trash, eating his peas, or wearing the right tie with a patterned shirt.

    But by all means, tell him he’s on probation and he must fall in love *now*. At least, unless he’s an omega, the female will create a forcing event and (after two months of equivocation by this barely interested male) realize it’s time to move on.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan “A therapist once told me that every relationship is comprised of a pursuer and a distancer. Things can never be equal.”

    That’s because a therapist only sees dysfunctional relationships. :p In a healthy relationship, both parties are equally in love with each other.

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

      In a healthy relationship, both parties are equally in love with each other.

      The experience of being in love is different for every individual. Yes, both people can spread their arms wide and say “I love you thiiiiiisssssss much.” But you have no way to know their experiences are identical.

      I agree people can love each other equally in a general sense. But not precisely.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    BuenaVista, I had that talk with an NT once (I’m an NF). It was the best decision ever. I realized it was time to move on, and I met my husband.

  • Escoffier

    Fourth thing: stop having sex with him.

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

      Fourth thing: stop having sex with him.

      Why? What would this accomplish? Strategically.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    I think that men have three routes:

    1) The man really becomes infatuated quickly with the woman and as he gets to know her more his initial feelings and favorable impressions are confirmed and deepened, leading to love.

    2) The man likes the woman a lot but there are things that are missing somewhat and so his attraction and love triggers are kind of subconsciously debating whether the woman passes the threshold.

    3) Just doesn’t love her and never will.

    It sounds like this man is in category 2, liking her a lot but not feeling it as intensely. Now, over time his love can grow, especially his feelings of companionate love. It sounds like the lust is there as well.

    What might never fully arrive in all its splendor is that intense romantic love that gets triggered when a reciprocating woman just triggers all his buttons strongly enough.

    This raises the issue of relative value and how many men can really find those women in category 1 that just send them emotionally into the clouds. My observations suggest a lot more are in 2) and can have quite happy relationships and marriages of that form. A lot of the women who really would trigger 1) are either relatively rare or out of the man’s league.

    The man who will feel 1) is often not in the woman’s league and certainly not out of her league and so the mutual feeling of intense category 1) can happen from time to time, especially with two people who aren’t so “picky” but if even one of the two parties is “picky” then that mutual high of romantic elation almost becomes impossible and avenue 2 is the more likely path.

    I highly doubt that this man will ever become the highly romantically in love man the reader seems to be wanting. It does sound like he may develop a solid category 2) kind of love and treat her well and, yes, love her. But it doesn’t sound like he’s spending sleepless nights appreciating the wonder that his love for her is.

    The reader will have to decide if that solid yet unflambouyant love is enough for her…and if she does want the in-the-clouds love from a man she very may well not be able to feel that way for him.

    From a pure relative value comparison, it seems like she’s more excited about the whole thing than he is which implies that subjectively he is being perceived as higher value than she is (no implications intended about their “objective” SMV or MMV if put to a “vote” by all other people).

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

      1) The man really becomes infatuated quickly with the woman and as he gets to know her more his initial feelings and favorable impressions are confirmed and deepened, leading to love.

      I see no reason to believe Alison’s bf is not described here. Why is five months too long for his initial feelings to deepen?

      But it doesn’t sound like he’s spending sleepless nights appreciating the wonder that his love for her is.

      That is definitely describing a personality trait. Most men aren’t going to bask in sleepless wonder over their feelings.

      You’re a Bingley. Maybe he’s a Darcy.

      I strongly disagree with some of the naysayers here.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo, are you skeptical that 1) can happen for both people, then?

    Also, I think some men are just so logical about the whole thing (NTs — as I recall you are NF) that they never do 1).

    Anacaona, I said “I love you” first with my husband. He didn’t say it back immediately, but within the hour he said it in return.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier “Fourth thing: stop having sex with him.”

    Agree with this.

  • BuenaVista

    Escoffier: #11:

    That’s fine, but it’s way too late. The guy will just shrug and shamble on down the road. He’s not invested in this deal and at least he won’t have to break up with her. He’ll be so relieved when she breaks up with him.

    Hope: #10. Perhaps you didn’t notice, but this woman is in love. So putting her boyfriend on probation and running him off for not emitting the response she wishes when she wishes it is maybe not such a smart idea.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    @Hope

    I think that 1) can happen for both people but it requires a special blend of two people. What I see a lot more of is one or both having a strong number 2) kind of love, where, yes, they love each other but it’s not a mutual feeling of very strong romantic love. It’s more like they really like each other and, yes, love each other but the strong romance is not there in both parties.

    This is not to denigrate strong type 2 love. It seems to be the basis of most relationships, at least for one if not both of the partners.

    Some people, such as you and your husband, do have mutual type 1) love and that is wonderful. But I don’t see it as the majority of couples.

    And yes, some people, such as NTs may be quite cautious of expressing what they feel or may not just feel romantic things in quite the intense way that F’s do? That’s speculation but it seems like taking a logical decision to love and show love by action and not speak to it as much would be an NT way. (I’m just speculating on this NT part.)

  • BuenaVista

    Hans PIC: 2 and 3 are the same. He’s not in love in both instances.

  • Angelguy

    I have found anytime I have said “I love you” too soon, which wasn’t often, it would backfire.
    It is almost like giving someone a robe and telling them to put it around my neck. Once you say it, the relationship changes.

    So I don’t understand how is that “better”.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    BuenaVista “Perhaps you didn’t notice, but this woman is in love. So putting her boyfriend on probation and running him off for not emitting the response she wishes when she wishes it is maybe not such a smart idea.”

    Perhaps you also didn’t notice, but this woman wants a man who loves her in return and would like it to be “permanent.” So she wants to know if he’s on the same page. If she subordinates her own desires for fear that he will “run off,” that would be an even less smart idea. Do you disagree?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Also, “The guy will just shrug and shamble on down the road. He’s not invested in this deal and at least he won’t have to break up with her. He’ll be so relieved when she breaks up with him.”

    That’s the middle outcome.

    In the order of outcomes:

    Best -> He really does love her but is reticent to say it. Forcing the issue causes him to clarify his own feelings.

    Middle -> He really doesn’t love her and never will, and they part ways. She moves on and finds another man. This is what happened to me — actually an awesome outcome in the end.

    Worst -> He really doesn’t love her and never will, but pretends that he does to string her along in a multi-year cohabitation, until she is in her 30s and has much lower chance of finding another guy, then he dumps her unceremoniously.

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

      @Hope

      I agree with your potential outcomes. In this case, she has forced the issue, including just last week. He has stated he needs more time. In my view, ending the relationship would be premature and possibly foolhardy. She’s already in love with him, she should give him the time he needs and observe the relationship dynamic carefully. Much of the cost is sunk, while the potential benefit is still large.

      Obviously, if at any point he tells her he is not in love, she should move on immediately.

  • BuenaVista

    This couple is behaving — they’re mimicking — a married couple on the backside of the attraction curve.

    If the girl wants the guy to focus on her value, she needs to tell him that they went too fast, she wants to date, they’re not going to have slumber parties 5 nights a week (few execs are home five nights a week, why are they having sleepovers like they’re retired?), sorry, no can do.

    This whole relationship needs to start over with emotional reticence, sexual scarcity, firm boundaries, and conversational inquiry. If the girl can’t tolerate the risk of that, she has her own answer: he’s just not into her.

    It always comes down to the objective function. Are they the same? Doesn’t sound like it now.

    But I will say — the only times I ever fell in love, I fell in love on first glance. “Love” may mean something else to someone else. To me it means besotted. For life. On first glance. It’s just a wave you wish to ride, instead of drowning within. Everything else is room service.

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

      But I will say — the only times I ever fell in love, I fell in love on first glance.

      I hope you are unusual, because mutual love at first sight is not a very effective mating strategy. I also wonder whether it masks incompatibility and other clues that the match is not suitable.

  • BuenaVista

    #19. “Do you disagree?”

    Well, gee. It’s complicated. A 26 year-old man is supposed to sign a lifelong contract because he was cornered in conversation (as you describe) by a pursuing female, after five months of easy sex and coffee before lab? Let me consider that.

    I don’t know. It’s over my head. I mean, if I had sex and coffee for five months, I’m sure I would want to get married whether or not I had sick feelings for her. So I probably just need to be put on probation. Then, like a puppy with an electronic collar, I’ll do what I’m commanded to do.

    Because, as a man, my objective function is to provide happiness to whichever women sleep with me, or something, and my own opinions and life ambitions are thin gruel compared to what would make my snowflake happy.

    Or maybe not. This girl needs to take a half-step back and make her love-object earn some of his adoration. Going exclusive after less than three weeks makes this a comfort deal, not a romantic deal.

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

      @BV

      Going exclusive after less than three weeks makes this a comfort deal, not a romantic deal.

      I don’t understand this, as it appears to contradict the love at first sight thing. I’ve known people who get together on day one and literally never really separate again. The time was right, and the person was right.

      P.S. You are going to get married again.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    @BV

    Yes, 2) is not initially in love and will likely never reach a solid category 1) “in love” feeling. But over time it can reach a weak level of romantic love and a strong level of companionate love.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    BuenaVista “the only times I ever fell in love, I fell in love on first glance. “Love” may mean something else to someone else.”

    Different people are different, you know.

    HanSolo “yes, some people, such as NTs may be quite cautious of expressing what they feel or may not just feel romantic things in quite the intense way that F’s do?”

    I suspect this is the case. I don’t think I’ve ever met an NT who said he fell in love on first sight. There are lots of NTs here at HUS. Maybe I’m wrong.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    @Hope

    I’ve fallen in love (strong infatuaton) rapidly, and even once, at first read. I find that my take on the woman’s character is usually pretty accurate as I get to know her more. That’s one reason why all this taking so long to get to know someone always was difficult for me since I have found that my intuition about a woman’s personality is usually pretty good. But out of pragmatic reasons, namely that women usually don’t like the man developing feelings too soon, I’ve come to either not feel things as quickly or keep my cards close to my vest if I do.

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona, I said “I love you” first with my husband. He didn’t say it back immediately, but within the hour he said it in return.
    My husband said I love you first over email. I freaked out so much that I told a friend about it. She asked me if I loved him too and I was like “Wait I do” then answering him with an “I love you” in the reply.
    I don’t think I would had allowed myself to admit it without him telling it first tough. But I’m the coward in that aspect of our relationship. Specially since all my female friends that had said it first end up breaking up because the guy considers them “a sure thing’ and proceeds top find an additional woman. Dating jerks sucks! :(

  • BuenaVista

    Hans, 23: “O—kay, fine”, as they say in Minnesota. (Granted, there are too many Swedes in Minnesota.)

    However, I cannot imagine living with someone I didn’t worship. The dude here isn’t worshipping. YMMV.

  • BuenaVista

    O—kay fine. /withdrawing.

  • BuenaVista

    Before I go, however, I’m just curious which truths about men and women have changed since Shakespeare. (Given that everything is different now than 10 years ago.) Because I know of none. In 400 years.

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

      @BV

      I wasn’t asking you to depart, but come on, you have a daughter her age. You don’t think kids do things a bit differently today? You don’t think the SMP has changed?

      I would ideally like to see a diverse group of commenters, including old farts like us, but not exclusively. :P

  • Lok

    “Fourth thing: stop having sex with him.”

    Da fuq?

    Hi, so I’ve decided not to have sex with you again until you tell me that you love me.

    This is in no way manipulative or self-centered.

    ————————–

    @Alison

    Similar progression to my own relationship (thought I was reading my old journal from my wife’s POV for a second).
    Wife said ILU at ~3 months. I waited until ~6months.

    Like Hope said, probably INTJ (geoscientist) and I am very strongly INTJ so I’ll +1 what she said about their behavior.

    If his actions are saying he cares, is compassionate and actually wants to be around you there is probably not much to worry about.

    Give him time, 5 months is not that long.

    ———-

    Last, don’t expect him to share the same emotional state as you constantly.
    Let him do his thing as long as he acts like he cares about you.

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

      Hi, so I’ve decided not to have sex with you again until you tell me that you love me.

      Seriously. It’s literally begging him to turn into a cad.

      Yippee, Lokland and I are in complete agreement on this one!

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    @BV

    He’s definitely not worshipping. :)

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

      He’s definitely not worshipping.

      Didn’t you guys get the memo? We don’t like being worshipped. We don’t care much for besotted. Can you spell S-U-P-P-L-I-C-A-T-I-N-G?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan “In this case, she has forced the issue, including just last week. He has stated he needs more time.”

    No she has not openly forced the issue, unless there were parts of the letter that were edited out. She specifically said that she just said “I love you” twice without any further discussion of this matter.

    Quote: “I said it again last week, in the hopes that his feelings were clearer, but I still didn’t get a return sentiment.”

    So for all we know, he could be thinking, “Ah, she’s said what is on both our minds. I don’t have to say anything now.” She is only hoping for a return sentiment, but did not ask for it.

    Susan “Why? What would this accomplish? Strategically.”
    Lokland “Hi, so I’ve decided not to have sex with you again until you tell me that you love me.”

    It means she will be more clear-headed about the whole situation. Sex (at least generally speaking) is a very bonding thing. If she is unsure about aspects of the relationship, then having sex would make her more bonded to him and less able to walk away if he does indeed come back with “I enjoy the companionship and the sex, but sorry, I do not love you.”

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

      Sex (at least generally speaking) is a very bonding thing. If she is unsure about aspects of the relationship, then having sex would make her more bonded to him and less able to walk away if he does indeed come back with “I enjoy the companionship and the sex, but sorry, I do not love you.”

      Agree with this but that train has left the station.

      Also, I know, Hope, that you believe a love commitment is a necessary prerequisite to sex, but that just isn’t going to work for most people. It is not really practical advice, IMO. 9 guys out of ten (at least) will balk at that, especially if they are more emotionally reticent in general.

      She clearly followed the “no sex before monogamy” strategy – I can’t fault her.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Lokland “If his actions are saying he cares, is compassionate and actually wants to be around you there is probably not much to worry about.”

    Without knowing more about the specific person, I disagree with this. I know you are INTJ, but the geoscientist in question could be a different NT, like ENTJ. There are appreciable differences. For example, an ENTJ could be very caring and compassionate in action, but may not be in love to do those things. He may even care very much and says so, and also doesn’t like to about feelings, but still the caring does not translate into being in love. ENTJs are more social in general. I recall you saying that you hate hugging strangers. ENTJs don’t mind hugging strangers at all, and can be very flirty. So I would not jump to conclusions.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/ HanSolo

    @Susan

    She is besotted with him, she is in love with, and wants him to feel the same way.

    I was bursting to say “I love you”, and finally said it to him early one morning….

    I’ve thought about how this could be a permanent long-term relationship, but I’m feeling less confident in his feelings developing in quite the same way as mine. For all the time we spend together and for all the fun we have together, it seems as if he should be at the same point as me, yet the words haven’t come out yet. I can respect waiting for his feelings to develop to the same place as mine

    I think you’re taking our use of the word, ‘worship,’ too literally. We’re just saying that he is likely never going to be the expressive romantic type with her. This could be because he’s just not feeling it strongly enough (likely, in my opinion), either due to his own stoic nature or him just not being that into her. Or, if he is feeling it or could come to feel it later, he likely won’t express things in the way she wants.

    She needs to decide if he really loves her (or can grow into that) and whether she can live with him likely never verbalizing strong and convincing emotional outpourings of romantic love.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan “Agree with this but that train has left the station.”

    Why has the train left the station? Just because she has had sex with him up to this point, doesn’t mean she MUST continue to have sex with him no matter what. Nobody has a magic vagina that can make a guy fall in love with her. Whether or not she continues to have sex with him at this point is completely irrelevant to whether or not he actually loves her. It will not make him magically fall in love with her if she keeps sleeping with him, nor will it make him magically fall out of love with her if she stops sleeping with him.

    If he doesn’t truly love her and see a future with her, then continuing to sleeping with him is really just prolonging the inevitable heartbreak, which will be worse the longer this drags on.

  • Escoffier

    I guess no one else sees the inherent tension between “No sex before monogamy” and “Sex without love is fine”?

    Anyway, it’s worked out real well so far. I do agree that if she stops, he’s likely to bail. But if she keeps going, he’s likely to keep taking what he wants and still not giving her what she wants.

    The obvious solution–not to have gotten into this situation in the first place–is … well, it can’t possibly work for one reason or another.

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

      Anyway, it’s worked out real well so far.

      Is there any guy here besides Lokland who would need more than five months to fall in love, and to say you are in love? I believe this describes quite a few of the young relationships I know. I think saying it is tantamount to “you are the one” and in an era where both sexes are delaying marriage (he’s still 3-4 years younger than the average male age at marriage), delaying that commitment seems like an inevitable result.

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

      I guess no one else sees the inherent tension between “No sex before monogamy” and “Sex without love is fine”?

      People are usually monogamous before they decide to marry the person.

      You’re trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Not going to happen.

      “You should never have gotten yourself into this situation in the first place” is nothing more than a scold. It doesn’t address the reality on the ground.

  • Escoffier

    Oops, Hope sees it, sorry Hope.

  • J

    Fourth thing: stop having sex with him.

    That horse is already out of the barn. Stopping the sex once it’s started most likely means breaking it off. If she thinks he doesn’t love her, that’s no loss. If she thinks he’s building up to that, she’ll kill it. OTOH, I think that when a man loves you, you know.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    J “If she thinks he’s building up to that, she’ll kill it.”

    She just needs to sit him down and talk to him, the next time they see each other (presumably to sleep together), before actually sleeping together. She doesn’t have to tell him, “If you tell me you don’t love me, I will not sleep with you anymore.”

    My suggestion that she stops sleeping with him is based on the assumption that he gives some no-answer like “give me more time to think about it.” That is in essence “a break” already, because it is essentially a “pause” on the relationship. No sex in that scenario is perfectly logical.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier, yeah I see it completely. If I was in her shoes, and I had said “I love you” without hearing anything in return, I would already be too upset to have sex with him. The lack of sex would not be some manipulative thing. It would be, “I don’t want to do this intimate act because I’m hurt like hell.” I’d bawl my eyes for a while and move the f on.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    I agree. I think that he should be feeling something pretty strong by now…maybe not full-blown love…but some significant seedlings should be growing.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    And if he’s not at least feeling those seedlings of love by now (not to mention some level of real love) then I would say she needs to move on.

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

      And if he’s not at least feeling those seedlings of love by now (not to mention some level of real love) then I would say she needs to move on.

      Well that’s what we don’t know. He did commit to an LTR very quickly, my impression was that there are seedlings, and she’s trying to rush things. I think we disagree here about the timing.

  • J

    I have a vaguely related question for the male commentariat. This situation reminds me a bit of one recently encountered by a divorced friend of mine. She was dating a man who was divorced from a woman he claims was a cheater. They quickly became inseparable, then things “fizzled.” What is it with men who do that?

    She was expecting a declaration of love and was falling in love with him, then he began blowing her off, not seeing her, sending a sexy text here and there and then withdrawing. She finally confronted the issue with him, and he said he did not feel attracted to her but he still wanted to date occasionally. She feels strung along. I told her to bail, but she’s hanging in there. What do you think?

  • Jackie

    @Susan (44)

    “Also, I know, Hope, that you believe a love commitment is a necessary prerequisite to sex, but that just isn’t going to work for most people. It is not really practical advice, IMO. ”
    ===
    This encapsulates a very interesting point: When does the practical trump the principle? When it comes to your heart, bonding, potential pregnancy and diseases, would it not be eminently MORE practical to only have sex when love and commitment are there first?

    Why has the “train left the station”? Is there some tacit pact with sex, like in for a penny in for a pound?

    Why do we as a society feel such ease in sharing our bodies yet such crippling trepidation in sharing our hearts and minds?

    I know that, as awesome as Susan and her stone-cold girl game is, by practicing my faith much of the discussions here are not on my path. So take this comment with a MASSIVE shaker of salt. 8-)
    ===
    If I was in Alison’s shoes, I think I would:

    1) Write it out and notice what you see– patterns, etc
    2) Imagine what advice you would give to a most beloved child/most beloved friend who was in that same situation.

    ===
    Actually, one of my mentors gave me the “Zen” when I asked her for my advice:

    She said, You already know the gut answer to this; you just want me to confirm it.

    Good luck and all the best to you, Alison!

  • J

    If I was in her shoes, and I had said “I love you” without hearing anything in return, I would already be too upset to have sex with him.

    Me too.

    The lack of sex would not be some manipulative thing. It would be, “I don’t want to do this intimate act because I’m hurt like hell.” I’d bawl my eyes for a while and move the f on.

    I get this completely, but I think she would have been better off not sleeping with him at all. At this point, I think breaking off the sex is breaking of the relationship–whic,h as I said, may well be no loss.

  • Escoffier

    Who knows the underlying reason, that’s going to be highly individual.

    However, the reason for the avoidance is 1) he’s a pussy who can’t tell her straight; and/or 2) he wants to keep her playing 3rd or 4th fiddle for when 1&2 aren’t available.

    Sounds like a combo in this case.

    I can be hard to tell someone “No, it’s not going to happen, sorry,” and many would prefer to avoid it. Girls do this too.

    I caught some of Saturday Night Fever the other night (yeah!) I was struck by the inherent decency of the scene where Tony tells Annette that it’s never going to happen and that he wants to dance with Stephanie. Direct. No BS. Clean break. Humane, you might say.

  • Jackie

    @Hope (52)

    I feel very similarly. Even kissing a guy where there is no emotional connection… unnerving isn’t the right word. But even that is just not worth it (to me :D )

  • Jackie

    Oops, I meant I agree with your statement, Hope. And I was just talking about myself in the next sentence; no reference to Alison & her BF. Sorry! :(

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jackie, love your thoughts as always.+

    How have you and your family been?

  • Jackie

    @Buena Vista

    I knew you were older (as in AARP-qualifying) but had no idea you were a quadcentennial! Congrats, you are super-sprightly for 400+!

  • Jackie

    Hi Hope!

    That is so kind of you– always thinking of others. ;-)

    Things are actually pretty challenging right now, to be frank. My dad’s recovery from surgery was a LOT slower than planned. (He had been hitting by the person who was driving while texting, less than a week after my car had been decimated by a drunk driver.)

    He ended up being “bought out” at his job since, to get down to brass tacks, it would be cheaper to hire a younger person without such health issues. The condition is to accept the package and not to sue. (I mean, can you imagine? As if, even if you won, that you would want to come back to such a place? Or tie your energy up in the legal system.)

    My brother is holding down the fort and has moved in, I am on KP (learning crockpotting!) and optimism patrol; my sister will be coming home from Africa to help as well.

    My dad would be the a zeta or omega, I suppose, in the ‘Sphere. But he has his children who are devoted to his happiness, as far as our strengths allow. (My brother was brushing his teeth at one point. That would be REALLY hard for me!)

  • J

    Hey, Jackie! Good to see you. Hope all is well.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    From reddit:

    most people know they’re in love sooner than later in the relationship. While this isn’t the case in all relationships, there is a biological foundation. Lovey-dovey hormones like oxytocin and vasopressin are at their highest levels in the first 12-18 months of the relationship. After that point, “falling in love” is a little trickier, and less likely.

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

      Lovey-dovey hormones like oxytocin and vasopressin are at their highest levels in the first 12-18 months of the relationship. After that point, “falling in love” is a little trickier, and less likely.

      So 5 months is definitely too soon to say it’s unlikely.

  • Escoffier

    Confused here, your tone says disagreement but the words seem to agree.

    If he’s not feeling it yet, chances are he never will. Continuing to sleep with him in the hope that he will is the “sunk cost” fallacy. Small chance of a happy ending.

    Now, supposing she were able to bottle up her pain, freeze it if you will, and say to herself “I won’t allow myself to feel any worse than I already do. I will stick around in the hope that he comes around. If he does, great, I win. If not, no prob, I’ve already cried this out and the pain is behind me, there will be no more pain.”

    But how many people can really do that?

  • Anne

    Of course there should be an emotional connection before sleeping with someone. But that doesn’t mean that sex always has to be emotional. In fact, it has to be just plain fucking sometimes.
    There was a segment about this somewhere on Rules Revisited, stating how important it is to have ‘pig sex’ now and then to keep a sex life alive. No emotions or foreplay or candlelight.

    I’m not saying she should have sex with him if she feels like he doesn’t love her. But I don’t see how withholding sex has any value. It’s basically an ultimatum, she will wear him down as long as he doesn’t say “I love you” back. Hopefully he will be the first one to give in, but they’ll both be miserable in the process. If you want to give an ultimatum, why not just give the ultimatum? Why the wearing him down period in between?
    Even if he does “clarify his thoughts” and say it back, I will imagine she has put herself in an unattractive light. There is no indication that Alison is the type of woman who always needs to be really “tuned in” for sex (if she was, she wouldn’t be sleeping with him now if she has doubts). He will realize that she uses sex as a bargaining tool and closes her legs every time she’s unhappy. I don’t think any man wants to marry into that.

  • AGuyInHis20s

    I think Susan’s advice is pretty spot on. The only real chance of this guy not having any feelings for Allison involves this scenario: He waits almost a month to sleep with her, eagerly jumps into the “boyfriend/girlfriend” label, spends almost all of his free time with her and is eager to be a part of her life, all as a ruse to get sex regularly. That’s sociopathic, and frankly, sociopaths can get laid way easier without any of the baggage. I don’t see any reason not to take this at face value, and accept that he does have a hard time communicating things. I mean the idea that he would wait a month to sleep with Allison, and accept the relationship label immediately is indicative of incredibly strong feelings. I know Susan is doing her part to change culture, but that’s just not how things WORK for kids my age. I’m sure there are plenty of people of all genders out there who don’t like it, but it usually goes sex, then casual intimacy, a relationship, real intimacy. The whole process is extremely confusing, and even guys who aren’t especially commitment phobic are often a little gun-shy about moving each step forward, even if only because the whole process is vague enough to allow for drama and hurt feelings on every step. (Side note: I don’t consider myself commitment phobic, and I was happy to be exclusive with my last serious S.O. since we started dating (immediately after hooking up the night we met) but I still didn’t let her know it and made her do all the DTR work. I wasn’t comfortable calling her my girlfriend for about four or five MONTHS. I’m not proud of it, but that’s how I was feeling at the time. All this was regardless of how I actually felt about her. It took another three or four months to say “I love you” and it took HER another month to reciprocate, despite the fact that she was the one advancing the commitment with the DTR talks and the like.)

    Okay so what’s with the lack of reciprocation of the words? Well, it’s scary. It’s unclear what “fizzled out” means in the context of his last relationship. Maybe his last S.O. stopped loving him, and he doesn’t understand why – to say those words then opens himself up to the same thing happening again. Maybe he stopped loving his last girlfriend, but cared about her enough to see that it hurt her, and doesn’t want to say it until he’s sure he won’t hurt another person he obviously has feelings for again. Maybe the whole thing just seems weird and trite and a little bit too much like what Disney characters say and not enough like what real people say. Maybe he’s super INTJ or whatever Myers-Briggs pseudoscience you’d like to use to describe the kind of people who aren’t in touch with or have trouble expressing their emotions. It’s hard to tell in an edited email. But whatever the reason, I think Susan is offering good advice to Allison: Back off, look at what he’s doing and not what he’s saying. He waited a month to sleep with her. He jumped into a relationship eagerly, he’s spending almost all of his time with her, and he wants to be a part of her life. Let him work through his emotions at his own pace.

    I also really, really wouldn’t bring up the idea of “is this relationship going anywhere?” at this point. I find women are a lot more teleological then men when it comes to relationships. I’ve had female friends say “We’re having a great time and we love each other but I don’t know that I could marry him,” which is a thought totally alien to me. Obviously there are some biological differences at work here, and I know Susan thinks 26 is a prime age for shopping around for marriage. I’m just telling you from the average psyche of a well-educated (mentioned because of their jobs and since it correlates to later age of marriage) normal guy, who one day really hopes to be a father and husband– the idea of talking about marriage less than half a year into a relationship would scare me deeply. It’s not that it’s inconceivable and it’s not that he’s not into her enough to marry her (it sounds like he is) but it’s just not, in my experience, a natural thought for a 26 year old, and trying to bring him around to thinking about that doesn’t seem likely to lead to positive outcomes at this early stage.

    Oh, and Buena Vista – Shakespeare was a genius, but yeah, relationships between men and women have changed a lot in four hundred years. I saw Whedon’s “Much Ado About Nothing” last week, and hadn’t seen the play in a while. The value placed on perceived virginity was so high that Claudio felt totally justified publicly shamming Hero. Leonato, who is portrayed as an incredibly loving father also felt fine publicly announcing he’d rather his daughter be dead than immodest. Hero is happy to take back Claudio as soon as he realizes she really was pure. The bickering/bantering/flirting between Benedick and Beatrice, on the other hand, is clearly as old as time. Some things change, some remain the same.

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

      @AGuyInHis20s

      Thank God, you got here just in time. :)

      I mean the idea that he would wait a month to sleep with Allison, and accept the relationship label immediately is indicative of incredibly strong feelings

      This is my sense as well, in an era when men generally do not feel any social pressure to be in relationships.

      that’s just not how things WORK for kids my age. I’m sure there are plenty of people of all genders out there who don’t like it, but it usually goes sex, then casual intimacy, a relationship, real intimacy. The whole process is extremely confusing, and even guys who aren’t especially commitment phobic are often a little gun-shy about moving each step forward, even if only because the whole process is vague enough to allow for drama and hurt feelings on every step.

      Exactly. That is the script – the four stages of Hell! And as you say, neither sex feels very comfortable navigating them. It’s awkward as hell every step of the way, or can be.

      I wasn’t comfortable calling her my girlfriend for about four or five MONTHS. I’m not proud of it, but that’s how I was feeling at the time. All this was regardless of how I actually felt about her. It took another three or four months to say “I love you”

      This is very interesting – you had the feelings but were hesitant to reveal them. I think your generation wants commitment but is wary of it. As you say, the vagueness of the process increases uncertainty, i.e. risk.

      he idea of talking about marriage less than half a year into a relationship would scare me deeply. It’s not that it’s inconceivable and it’s not that he’s not into her enough to marry her (it sounds like he is) but it’s just not, in my experience, a natural thought for a 26 year old, and trying to bring him around to thinking about that doesn’t seem likely to lead to positive outcomes at this early stage.

      I agree – my sense is that 26 can be a turning point for guys in that they are receptive to a very serious LTR, which one day, who knows, might…lead to marriage. We know that 40% of men marry after the age of 30. He may not have decided yet if he does want to marry her, which is fair. I have told my own kids that you cannot know if a person is right for you until the relationship has been tested with a crisis. For obvious reasons, no one should be rushing into marriage. Why not enjoy dating and enjoying one another’s company before ratcheting up the commitment further?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jackie, I’m sorry to hear that, but at least your dad has some wonderful children! Did you get another car for yourself?

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @J

    Sounds like a classic fling, perhaps even with some emotional rebound attraction to begin with. Sometimes men lay it on strong to begin with, to make the fling happen but they’re not really that into the woman. The woman, eventually warms up to his overtures and falls in love. By then, his lust and infatuation have withered to mere lust, thus the occasional sexy text and the offer to date when he doesn’t have better offers.

    Sounds like a classic case of the woman being put on the casual ladder from day one, albeit an intense casual ladder.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    AGuyInHis20s “the idea of talking about marriage less than half a year into a relationship would scare me deeply. It’s not that it’s inconceivable and it’s not that he’s not into her enough to marry her (it sounds like he is) but it’s just not, in my experience, a natural thought for a 26 year old, and trying to bring him around to thinking about that doesn’t seem likely to lead to positive outcomes at this early stage.”

    My husband and I met when we were 25, got married when we were both 26, and we’re 29 now. Thing is, he was definitely “scared,” but he didn’t let that fear get in between us. You could say that his love was stronger than his fear.

    Here’s the real deal. A 26-year-old woman doesn’t have the same “timeline” as a 26-year-old man. Let’s assume she meets a guy tomorrow, add another 2 or 3 years before she actually gets married, and maybe another year before she has kids. She’s 29, 30 at this point. If she doesn’t meet any guy until she’s 30, then push everything back by that many years. Now consider that 35 and older is medically a geriatric pregnancy!

    My husband and I got started with kids at 26, but I had a stillbirth and a miscarriage, so our son wasn’t born until I was 28, almost 29. We only want two kids, so we can wait another 3-4 years and still maybe be okay, but every year the risks go up. That’s the reality of the situation, and it does no good to tell a woman in her mid-20s that she has “all the time in the world.” She does not.

    So yeah, you’re a man in your 20s, and you have time. This advice is not for you though.

  • Lok

    Serious question for the married guys.

    Number of you that said ILU before having sex?
    Seems quite silly to me.

    A relationship was merely an agreement for monogamy with intent not to screw it up while seeing where it lead (amongst my friends). (This is my point of disagreement with Susan’s view on LTRs btw.)

    As a practical reality, for most people sexual attraction will develop more quickly than love.

    Similarly love will take longer to develop in men than women because men face more of a cost when committing.

    The point in delaying sex for a woman is not to guarantee love. Such an event is so unlikely as to be not worth discussing. It is to ensure monogamy which offers a higher likelihood of love occurring on the mans part.

    Regardless of what should or should not be most people are average and will need average strategies. A strategy that places either party at 100% risk is unlikely to work for anyone.

    ————————

    @Allison

    Regardless of what others say.
    I doubt he was offended by saying ILU.

    Think about the first time you said it.

    Were his actions dismissive or caring?

    My wife said it to me and I was dismissive in words but my actions demonstrated otherwise. She cuddled up to me and it felt great, I was happy to have her say it.

    He didn’t run away scared from you when you said it to him. That means it was obviously not some giant deal breaker for him.

    I suspect (again fellow scientist, assumed similar personality traits) that he was happy to hear it but is being cautious about returning the favor not because of any inherent lack on your part but a cautious approach to something he sees as a very big deal.

    Give him a few more months and watch his actions. Try the ILU (not now, later) and see how he reacts.

    Physically responsive- good. Physically dismissive- bad.

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

      A relationship was merely an agreement for monogamy with intent not to screw it up while seeing where it lead (amongst my friends). (This is my point of disagreement with Susan’s view on LTRs btw.)

      I agree with this!

  • Jackie

    @J

    Hi J! It is nice to see you, too! :D I hope you guys are all doing well?

  • Escoffier

    L, I did.

    Also, S, I knew if I was in love well inside a month. 5 is way more than enough time.

  • J

    Confused here, your tone says disagreement but the words seem to agree.

    @Esco

    If you mean me, yes, I know I’m expressing myself poorly here. My gut says that if she has to ask if he loves her, he most likely doesn’t. I would probably break it off if I were her. OTOH, I think Allison is still hoping that he’s in that trying to decide phase. If she was been willing to sleep with him sans a declaration of love or commitment, she may be comfortable in continuing that a while longer until she’s satisfied that she’s not driving him off by asking for love. Either way, it’s not a position I’d advocate getting into, but since she’s already there……

    There may really be no right answer here, or perhaps we don’t have enough real data about his feelings. Perhaps Susan is right in saying that he is waiting to go all in and it’s too early to see her investment as sunk cost. I’m waffling because we have no real info about him. We’re speculating.

    Thanks for your input regarding my friend. I absolutely agree that she should move on having definitely been told that there’s no attraction. I mean, how could he have made it any plainer? She does continue to ponder how he could have seemed so in love with her one week and so out of love the next. I wish I had an answer for that.

  • Jackie

    @Hope

    I forgot, you’ve had car calamities as well! :( Didn’t some jerk smash into you on the road? People drive like they’re crazy, I’m not even kidding.

    We (me and my dad) both got cars to celebrate our continued existence on this plane! I named mine Cinnamon, since Silver (Hi Yo, The Silver Bullet, the Silver Psycho when it being freaky with the radio) went to the great scrap heap in the sky, Rest In Pieces.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan “So 5 months is definitely too soon to say it’s unlikely.”

    I think it depends on the specific individuals involved, and without more information, it is better to cover all the bases (the best, middle and worst outcomes I mentioned earlier).

    Which is to say, I think all outcomes are possible, and it’s better to try for the best/middle outcomes than the worst outcome. The likelihood of the worst outcome rises the longer she stays put without doing anything to stir the pot.

  • J

    Sometimes men lay it on strong to begin with, to make the fling happen but they’re not really that into the woman.

    So he was playing her for sex? In this case, he had agreed to wait a while.

    Oh, so many mixed messages….

  • Jackie

    @Susan

    I know my advice is better suited to 1913 or 1813! ;) But the Zen thing still works.

    I, too, would like to know more than speculation about the guy, plus what kind of attachment style, does he come from a divorced/single parent home, etc. I think that sometimes without that info the other person can become a blank screen upon which we project. (That has been my problem in the past.)

  • Ramble

    that’s just not how things WORK for kids my age. I’m sure there are plenty of people of all genders out there who don’t like it, but it usually goes sex, then casual intimacy, a relationship, real intimacy.

    Please remember that these two are likely hardcore STEM.

    They may very well be following a different script (i.e. attached at the hip, patient with the physical, etc.).

    And, it is possible that he is really thinking, or over-thinking, about the power of those words and trying to figure out if and when he should say them and what that means.

    BTW, I am not on board with the idea that she withhold sex now.

    If she is physically turned off, fine. but not as some sort of relationship tactic.

  • JP

    “It’s not that it’s inconceivable and it’s not that he’s not into her enough to marry her (it sounds like he is) but it’s just not, in my experience, a natural thought for a 26 year old, and trying to bring him around to thinking about that doesn’t seem likely to lead to positive outcomes at this early stage.”

    I think I started panicking that I wasn’t married at about 22 or 23.

    So, my level of fear was zero.

    Being that marriage was my actual goal.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @J

    You didn’t mention they agreed to wait for sex for a while. How long? Your initial description sounded like they hit it off quickly:

    “They quickly became inseparable”

    There’s a class of men that become easily infatuated with women that are on the borderline of “good enough” for them to fall in love with, especially when the woman seems out of reach. However, once she becomes interested, and especially once she has sex, that spread-your-seed-fueled infatuation fades.

  • Ramble

    @Jackie

    While your advice about following your gut is completely understandable and reasonable, it is often not the best advice.

    Hear me out.

    There is a reason why so many people would love to have a Susan to sit down with, in a group of other girls in similar situations, and talk to about all of these things because for so many of them, their gut was not the best thing to follow.

    Many of these girls are trying to be smarter and that includes understanding when your gut is right and wrong.

    Think of those girls that wanted to tell their man that they loved them after the 2nd date.

    Sure, that is really sweet, but it could be a really bad move. But doing some mild emotional escalation? Great.

    Or, some girl that wants to scream at, or dump, some guy that doesn’t call her in between their weekend dates. He may have been ignorant of how important (emotionally) these things are to girls.

    Susan might tell her to tell him that she feels appreciated and cared for when he calls for no reason.

    The, when he starts, and she sees that he is responding to her needs and cares, that might make her like him even more.

  • J

    @Jackie

    We’re all good. I’m about to be an empty nester for a while next month. Sorry to hear that your dad isn’t doing as well as we all hoped. I hope things continue to improve.

  • Jackie

    @Ramble

    Interesting counterpoint– thank you for giving me a chance to refine my statement.

    For me, the “gut feeling” is different from the mind and even the heart. The gut feeling isn’t really about responding or reacting (which is what your examples appear to be).

    It is more a feeling of “know thyself.” It’s more like a plain statement of fact. There is no response or reaction, it just *is*.

    The other things you are talking about are more about responding from emotions (or an agitated mental state) which can be in a pretty heady brew when romance is involved.

  • Lok

    “I wasn’t comfortable calling her my girlfriend for about four or five MONTHS. I’m not proud of it, but that’s how I was feeling at the time. All this was regardless of how I actually felt about her. It took another three or four months to say “I love you””

    This just brought back a random memory.
    I remember wanting to ask my wife if she was my girlfriend (approx. 2.5-3 weeks in, apparently the timeline has been extended further in the past 6 years) but being hesitant to do so because I thought such a question would be a serious DLV.

    She cleared it up herself by asking me if she was my girlfriend shortly thereafter.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jackie, I like silver cars, too. May your old one rest in peace. The one we got for me is silver-ish sky blue.

    About the gut feeling thing, I think that’s an NF trait which not everybody cares for… some people trust logic more than gut feelings. That’s how they end up as not NF on the MBTI. :p

  • Lok

    @Susan

    “I agree with this!”

    I was under the impression that your definition was essentially the same as mine less the ‘intent not to screw it up’ part?

    By that I mean actively preventing other options from becoming available to oneself.

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

      By that I mean actively preventing other options from becoming available to oneself.

      No, I agree that this is an essential feature of the LTR commitment. Remember, I call anything you wouldn’t tell your S.O. a form of cheating. However, I’m also aware that sometimes people do get interested in someone else, and there’s nothing to prevent them breaking up with their S.O. and pursuing a new relationship. You can’t promise not to be blindsided by an attraction to someone else – if you’re still single, it’s not immoral to make that switch.

  • Lokland

    And wth is my tag Lok?

    Testing

  • J

    You didn’t mention they agreed to wait for sex for a while. How long? Your initial description sounded like they hit it off quickly:

    “They quickly became inseparable”

    They were but they weren’t having sex for the first few months, I think. There was some making out, but both felt they’d been burned before.

    There’s a class of men that become easily infatuated with women that are on the borderline of “good enough” for them to fall in love with, especially when the woman seems out of reach. However, once she becomes interested, and especially once she has sex, that spread-your-seed-fueled infatuation fades.

    There was a lot of “I dont what you see in me” talk from him before the sex, which was incidentally awful.

  • J

    @Han

    He had also told he he was afraid of being hurt.

  • JP

    ” A 26-year-old woman doesn’t have the same “timeline” as a 26-year-old man. Let’s assume she meets a guy tomorrow, add another 2 or 3 years before she actually gets married, and maybe another year before she has kids. She’s 29, 30 at this point. If she doesn’t meet any guy until she’s 30, then push everything back by that many years. Now consider that 35 and older is medically a geriatric pregnancy!”

    I don’t think a lot of people *have* timelines.

    Few people try to strategically plan their lives.

    Generally, because people don’t seem to try to think 50-100 years into the future.

  • JP

    ““They quickly became inseparable”

    They were but they weren’t having sex for the first few months, I think. There was some making out, but both felt they’d been burned before.”

    Hey, look!

    My college relationship.

    She kept wondering why I didn’t seem to be bothered when other guys hit on her.

    Uh, hello. Because I wasn’t actually attracted to you.

    If I *was* attracted to you, I would be “mate guarding” so to speak.

    Granted, I was never the one burned (unless it was by my own hand).

    I always did the burning.

  • Anacaona

    I know my advice is better suited to 1913 or 1813! ;) But the Zen thing still works.
    Actually your advice applies in any time to virgins. This girl is already having sex with the guy. Different strategy entirely. I myself was a picky bitch for a long time. not kissing if there was not a clear sign of love and commitment from the guy in question and it filtered out men for over 10 years. It worked as expected and I got a terrific husband eventually but this lady is trying something different I would go with Susan in her particular case, YMMV.

    I was thinking about you. I hope things improve from now on and that they start a safety driving campaign where you live. It seems you need it.
    Many blessings :)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I hope we get some comments from guys in their 20s on this thread :-/

    Too much focus on three words too soon in a relationship, IMHO. 5 months is not a lot of time for a lot of people, particularly ones that have been burned before.
    If he is communicating by his actions that he is committed to you, that’s a good sign.
    I only said it to one person, though, so I am a kind of an outlier in this regard.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @J

    Well, I don’t know then what was going on with him. It seems like he wasn’t into her enough or maybe his fears of being hurt got the better of him. It seems that for a little while he was able to convince himself to go for it but then couldn’t feel enough interest for her or the fear of being hurt rose again. Without know more, hard to say but hope those different ideas might be fertile springboards to brainstorm more and better understand.

  • JP

    *URGENT HARVARD UPDATE*

    Re: Brown and Cornell are Second Tier

    I interrupt this thread to bring exciting news of a two year old article that I found when I was searching for “decline of legal profession” stuff.

    (I really *love* bear markets, and boy, is the legal profession in one now.)

    Anyhow, here’s the article:

    “If you want to get a job at the very best law firm, investment bank, or consultancy, here’s what you do:

    1. Go to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, or (maybe) Stanford. If you’re a business student, attending the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania will work, too, but don’t show up with a diploma from Dartmouth or MIT. No one cares about those places.

    2. Don’t work your rear off for a 4.0. Better to graduate with 3.7 and a bunch of really awesome extracurriculars. And by “really awesome” I mean literally climbing Everest or winning an Olympic medal. Playing intramurals doesn’t cut it.

    That’s the upshot of an enlightening/depressing study about the ridiculously narrow-minded people who make hiring decisions at the aforementioned elite companies. The author of this study—Lauren Rivera, an assistant professor of management and organizations at Northwestern University—gained inside access to the hiring process at one such (unnamed) business, and picked the brains of recruiters at other firms.”

    http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/brown-and-cornell-are-second-tier/27565

    *URGENT HARVARD UPDATE END*

    You may now return to your regularly scheduled “Ask Susan” discussion.

  • Escoffier

    JP, that was quality.

  • J

    Thanks, Han. I’ve kicked all that around with my friend. It’s good to have a male erspective and know that we were on the right track.

  • Vitor

    Hoping For Those Three Little Words…

    I think that for us guys is quite simple, because if the girl isn’t into us we are not even given a chance. It took me quite a while to realize that, but I think that girls are generally quite honest in this regard: they quickly dismiss us, or suggest they’ve already got a boyfriend, etc. At least with rejections and indications of NON-interest where I have been the pursuer or admirer I am quite experienced with. :) I have also received some indications of interest, but usually from girls I had no interest in them… sometimes playing the distancer… sometimes literally running away.

  • queeninjun

    Seems as though sex are the wages that women have to pay these days for a shot at love. Personally, even though this is the way it is, I personally believe men are asking too much. For an audition at love, a woman has to literally give her body, which engages her emotions in a powerful way and if the guy decides that he’s not into it, he can just take off after wasting 2-4 years of a woman’s life. This is very practical for a male, but it’s completely impractical for a woman. Allison probably should have told the guy that if they were going to sleep together, she was going to consider them ‘exclusive’ before she actually slept with him. She lucked out because it seems like the guy thought it was a good idea to stick around. I have lived with two boyfriends I was crazy about in the past, going through the paying-for-my-audition-with sex strategy, and it puts women in an extraordinarily weak position. I called each relationship off after a year (my self-imposed timeline for deeper commitment) with extraordinarily high levels of self-recrimination, doubt, and psychotic back-and-forth. My emotions were so engaged along with my body that it felt like a physical death when I finally had the strength the pull the plug. All I wanted was to fall apart, whine, and cry, but I learned that if you’re doing the auditioning-for-love-by-paying-with-sex-and-cohabitation thing, you have to realize that you might not get anything for your sunk costs, and you have to be 100% okay with that. If you can’t refrain from asking for something in return, and then you try to withhold, create drama, whatever, it should tell you that a) you should have never moved in with him b) done a better job of going out on dates with different men (not sleeping with them), to keep your options open without leading anyone one c) not expected ILU in return right away, or ever (when and if you say it first to a man, you say it unconditionally, end of story) d) don’t commit so soon even though it might feel good e) don’t overestimate the power of chemistry and attraction to stick around. When love strikes, it’s popular in America to go on that hormone-driven ride. In fact, men and women consider it their cultural birthright to do so. This attitude has many arranged-marriage types (like my parents) shaking their heads due to the extremely inherent riskiness of the whole concept of chemistry leading to love. Even before I met my husband, I was considering a semi-arranged marriage. My life didn’t work out that way, but considering that many of those relationships worked out, I was willing to try that versus the kind of humiliating and soul-crushing experience Allison is going through at the moment.

  • Ramble

    When I was a kid, I honestly thought that places like Harvard were really there for accomplished students to become great thinkers.

    I was somewhat stunned when it dawned on me that Harvard (and it’s ilk) were more like clubs that enabled you to meet the right people so that you could make lots of money.

    For those of you that are interested, please take a look at NSSE, the National Survey of Student Engagement (http://nsse.iub.edu).

    They don’t really do rankings, and for the longest time many top schools would not let them on their campus to survey their students and many still won’t let them release their findings, but they are genuinely interested in finding out which schools are actually engaging their students.

    One of my favorite questions on the survey goes something like this: “How much time did you spend talking with your professors, outside of class and about and about things that were unrelated to the topic of study”.

    Unsurprisingly, state schools and Ivies have not done well in NSSE and smaller Lib Arts schools with little “publish or perish” pressure on their professors.

  • JP

    “However, I’m also aware that sometimes people do get interested in someone else, and there’s nothing to prevent them breaking up with their S.O. and pursuing a new relationship. You can’t promise not to be blindsided by an attraction to someone else – if you’re still single, it’s not immoral to make that switch.”

    Except that there’s nothing magical about marriage that prevents this from happening the day *after* the wedding as opposed to the day *before*.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @queeninjun

    “sex are the wages that women have to pay these days for a shot at love”

    “if the guy decides that he’s not into it, he can just take off after wasting 2-4 years of a woman’s life.”

    Women wanted a sexual free-r market and it’s the natural twist that happens in safe and rich environments–they don’t NEED the provider that will stick with them and are free to attempt out-of-their-league or unsuitable-for-long-term men.

    http://www.justfourguys.com/evolutionary-incentives-why-women-are-going-for-badboys-and-players-instead-of-stable-providers/

    It doesn’t benefit most men, mostly those at the top that can now sleep with hundreds or thousands of women.

    I can’t speak about your situation personally but a lot of the time women are trying to go for guys that are just not that into them. This is women’s responsibility to fix primarily. However, the two dominant female voices out there today are feminists and pop-culture raunch queens that both play into conducing women to go more for casual. But these forces didn’t just arise in a vacuum. Sufficient numbers of women wanted the sexual freedom to try for the higher-value guys and not be tied to their assortative potential partners anymore…at least while they are young and focused on fun and career.

    http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares

    There are many good-hearted guys that want commitment and yet the women chose HIM? Meanwhile those good guys are out in the cold while you’re supposedly sympathy-inducing woman is giving her very body to try and get commitment from a guy that isn’t into commitment with anyone or with her.

    Regardless of how you look at it, women need to do far better at selecting the men they attempt to be with. Yeah, they can get sex with the sexy badboy or the out-of-their league guy who wants commitment from his equal…but the hard truth of the sexual free market of today is that they can’t get these men to commit.

    As to the man taking off after 2-4 years and ruining her life…well, once again you’re making the woman out to be a powerless victim. Women need to women up and truly empower themselves and see that which men they choose is probably the most important sexual market signal that can be sent…

    Because by and large, men present, women choose.

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

      @HanSolo

      Women wanted a sexual free-r market

      It is inaccurate to say “women wanted.” There was no gender-wide vote on sexual market dynamics. The Pill and abortion threw the doors wide open, and both men and women eagerly embraced the Sexual Revolution initially. The Women’s Movement was ushered in enthusiastically by men as well, or appeared to be. The resulting shifts in the market environment were largely unanticipated and unintended. Assigning blame or responsibility in hindsight doesn’t really make sense.

      it’s the natural twist that happens in safe and rich environments–they don’t NEED the provider that will stick with them and are free to attempt out-of-their-league or unsuitable-for-long-term men.

      At the risk of repeating myself, the first part of this statement is true, but the second, which may be technically true, has not happened. Women don’t NEED the provider financially, but they still very much want the man who will stick around and co-parent. That is why they prefer suitable (lower T, “lesser” genes, beta) men over unsuitable (higher T, “good genes,” alpha) men. It simply is not correct that women have gone for unsuitable men in large numbers. Only 10-20% employ this strategy, so to characterize the SMP in this way is deeply flawed at best, highly misleading at worst. It perpetrates a trope that simply does not stand up to scrutiny via data.

      The number of men who can or have slept with hundreds of women is extremely small. According to the CDC, only 21.4% of men have had more than 15 lifetime partners, with a median of 5.1. (That includes prostitutes.) I don’t have any data regarding the percentage who have reached 100, but I think it’s likely to be 1% or less. That’s far too small (by a long shot) for the generalization you’re making.

  • JP

    “Because by and large, men present, women choose.”

    I don’t think this is true, at least in my experience.

    And I’m not really that attractive.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @JP

    You don’t think it’s true by and large? Are you extrapolating your experience to all men and women?

    Of course there are outliers, like yourself, but that’s why I said by and large.

  • MARY

    All this I love you business is for the birds!

    My grandparents had an arranged marriage and met each other for the first time only 1 week before their wedding day. Several decades and kids and grandkids later they are the best of friends.

    Both of them said they DID NOT fall in love with each other immediately after marriage but GREW to love one another over the course of the first few years.

    Needless to say I don’t think they ever had the “hottest” sex life.

    But they are together today and together in love.

  • JP

    “You don’t think it’s true by and large? Are you extrapolating your experience to all men and women?

    Of course there are outliers, like yourself, but that’s why I said by and large.”

    I would suspect that it’s true for most, with a sizable minority that’s the opposite.

    I don’t know of any studies on this, though.

  • Joe

    @Susan

    I agree – my sense is that 26 can be a turning point for guys in that they are receptive to a very serious LTR, which one day, who knows, might…lead to marriage.

    That’s funny. My nephew just turned 26. He’s been dating a wonderful young lady (she’s 25, I think) for a couple of years now, and I was beginning to think he was being an idiot not thinking about marrying her (much like his *other* uncle, who also took too long, in my estimation, to pop the question to the terrific girl he had been dating).

    So about three weeks after his 26th birthday, I get the news from his dad that the wedding is planned for early next year. The only surprise was in how long it took him make this no-brainer of a decision.

    And that other uncle of his is celebrating their 20th anniversary soon. He was just the last one to realize that it was the (obvious) right step to take. Sometimes the guys are just slow about these things.

  • queeninjun

    @ Han Solo, I think everything you said is spot on. Women do have to be the ones who are better at choosing – you’re absolutely right about that. This didn’t hit me until a (former) girlfriend of mine ‘accidentally’ became pregnant with someone she had had a long on-again, off-again sexual relationship with. She had laid the groundwork for this ‘accident’ for a long, long time – she had gotten him accustomed to using the basal temperature method of ‘birth control’ and kind of led him to believe it was effective. Of course, he was very happy to have sex without a barrier, so he trusted her to avoid sex during the time she was ovulating. She’s one of those spiritual mamas, so she presented herself as this wholly well-intentioned woman with an almost holy aura. She chased him, she called him, she just wanted to be around him all the time – totally smitten. He was happy that he had someone DTF any time he was in the mood. I don’t fault the guy for that. She was the one making it seem like this DTF arrangement was okay with her. Anyway, she got pregnant. Of course he’s shocked, feeling rightfully betrayed by her. He bails, and she has yet to let him see their child, although he has offered to help her. I guess she wants him to fall at her feet before she will even let him see his child. I tried to get in touch with her about the issue and she severed contact with me. Around the time she gave birth, she got a restraining order against him. She then quietly, without letting anyone know, moved out of state with the child. He tried to help her, but she turned out to be a deeply manipulative person. I was surprised that she really thought that she could go from slut to wife overnight, but apparently, she felt like she was in the running for an engagement ring by virtue of her pregnancy. She’s crazy, and the guy isn’t a DB, but he really wasn’t the right choice for an LTR. So, definitely agree with what you’ve said. I know that many, if not most, of the faulty dynamics that you speak of were at play in my failed relationships, and I wish I had known better sooner. I had made many of the same mistakes that my friend had made, and what happened to her might have happened to me, too, if I had allowed it.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @queeninjun

    I’ll totally say that men have to be better at choosing too. And know that in the current climate he really has no ownership of his sperm once it’s out of his body. So men need to be very careful in sex if they don’t want to get someone pregnant. I think certain laws need to be changed but that’s another matter and until they are men need to be very careful.

    As to the mistakes you made, well, I’ve made my own and likewise wish I could go back and change things but the best we can do is learn from them and apply that stuff to the future.

    Sites like this that get women and men thinking about the issues and what they really want and some of the unspoken realities are very important. I wish I’d learned of game and HUS and red pill many years earlier.

  • MARY

    That dude was a damn fool for not wearing condoms.

    No sympathy.

  • queeninjun

    One thing no one has discussed in any great depth is whether human males and females are really designed to make good choices in mating given that IRL, the complex data on each person that one will date is so overwhelming and will take so much time to synthesize and process. The quality of that decision-making is affected by experience, education, the guidance you get from peers or family, and the culture you’re raised in and the stories about love to which you are exposed. All of this conditioning hasn’t made us better at making decisions about love – it seems that it’s actually made us worse at making good mating decisions. Dating can be so fraught with fraud and bad faith on the side of either party. Even if you know rationally the best course of action that you should be taking to avoid hurt, it’s very difficult to do so when every new piece of data you learn about a potential mate complicates the picture and leads you away from a black and white decision on whether a person can be right for you or not. Most often, since chemistry is such a strong bellwether, we will trust that signal immensely and go full steam ahead because sussing out all the other traits, character, truthfulness, morality, etc take a long time to process, and if we’re being honest with ourselves, who is 100% accurate at making good judgements about people? Research shows that humans are horrible at making accurate judgements about people. Often, as a woman, you have to pay with sex in order to even get a few more chances at data-gathering dates/hangout sessions with a new mate. You might collect bad data, or your emotional state during those encounters will cloud your judgement. I think we’re all trying to live by certain ideals, but I don’t think the way we’re talking about dating in the comments is the way it works IRL. IRL, it’s so much harder to know if you’re doing the right thing in the moment. Personally, I don’t think our brains are designed to make optimal decisions in the modern dating environment. What if you don’t show enough emotion, or too much? What if you find a guy with a few flaws, but keep him? The next year, what if you find the same type of guy and kick him to the curb? Your past experiences will always distort your present judgement. I wonder if you can really screen for character in any kind of reliable way.

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

      Often, as a woman, you have to pay with sex in order to even get a few more chances at data-gathering dates/hangout sessions with a new mate. You might collect bad data, or your emotional state during those encounters will cloud your judgement.

      Certainly women perceive this to be the case, and perception is reality.

      What if you don’t show enough emotion, or too much? What if you find a guy with a few flaws, but keep him? The next year, what if you find the same type of guy and kick him to the curb? Your past experiences will always distort your present judgement.

      We never can know the benefits we’ve missed out on or the costs we didn’t incur because of the decision we made. If Alison were to break up with her bf, as some here have suggested, certain that he just isn’t that into her, she would eventually get over him, perhaps meet someone new, perhaps not. Perhaps she would never feel quite that way again. If she stays with him for another 7 months, and he doesn’t love her, the outcome would be similar. If they stay together and have a great relationship, she’ll be happy and so thankful she didn’t preemptively dump him.

      What she decides may determine her future, yet she cannot have perfect information. As I see it, the opportunity cost of breaking up with him now is potentially sky high. Whereas the additional cost of staying with him for another seven months of uncertainty is marginal.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    I co-sign everything AGuyInHis20s wrote.

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

      @Jimmy Hendricks

      Good to see you, thanks for weighing in. I don’t want to beat a dead (or old) horse, but I do want to point out that the response has differed enormously between the younger and older guys. This reflects the change in the SMP during the last 20 years. Now we need Zach to come along and give his .02.

  • Valentin

    I’ll totally say that men have to be better at choosing too.

    Most men get to choose? That’s not quite the reality of it all now, as far as I can tell.

  • Valentin

    There’s a time and place where a woman becomes less passive and gets actively forceful to make his man buy a ring and say I love you.

    This is by far the worst advice I’ve read in the comments this year. If you have to morally coerce and guilt a guy into making that choice I have to say: you better hope he dumps you. Because if this works a marriage that starts on the basis of “being actively foreceful” is not only sour from the get-go but has a due-date of about five years tops.

    Why would you even want to marry a guy that had to be goaded into proposing?!

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

      @Valentin

      That ring buying comment was spam from someone with a site selling something. Deleted.

  • Lara

    Hi! Long time lurker here. I’d like to offer to the OP an additional piece of advise: to try to run something like Athol Kay’s MAP on her guy. To raise her SMV a little. Good nutrition, working out, getting enough sleep, better clothing, a little bit of makeup. Also, to improve her “vibe” by doing things she likes: maybe see her friends more, or take up some new hobby. Martial arts is a good bet, as it’ll both improve her body and place her around guys. I don’t advise flirting with them-just her going to a place full of guys who take good care of their bodies will threaten her bf enough. She can also dedicate more energy and zest into her Ph.D. These will accomplish three things: 1)She’ll be having fun and will worry less about whether her bf will reciprocate. there won’t be enough brain space left for worry. 2) She’ll be more attractive, which might inspire the guy to say ILU eventually. 3) If the guy still won’t reciprocate after a 5-10 months or so, she’ll have much better chances of finding someone who will.

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

      @Lara

      Thanks for de-lurking and leaving a comment! I agree that working on oneself, or “inner Game,” (or MAP) is always good advice, even after one gets into a relationship.

  • JP

    “Women don’t NEED the provider financially, but they still very much want the man who will stick around and co-parent. That is why they prefer suitable (lower T, “lesser” genes, beta) men over unsuitable (higher T, “good genes,” alpha) men.”

    I suspect that men NEED (in terms of emotional stability) to be the provider financially, make more money, etc. due to the hierarchical nature of men’s emotional topography.

    It’s not clear that this can be changed unless you somehow change men’s neurological wiring.

  • JP

    “It is inaccurate to say “women wanted.” There was no gender-wide vote on sexual market dynamics. The Pill and abortion threw the doors wide open, and both men and women eagerly embraced the Sexual Revolution initially. The Women’s Movement was ushered in enthusiastically by men as well, or appeared to be. The resulting shifts in the market environment were largely unanticipated and unintended.”

    Technology lags culture.

    Culture leads, technology follows.

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

      Technology lags culture.

      I disagree in this case – the tech breakthrough of the Pill changed culture dramatically.

  • Maggie

    “Why would you even want to marry a guy that had to be goaded into proposing?”

    I agree, and this has me wondering about Alison’s boyfriend. She writes that she told him she loved him and “he was very appreciative, but wanted to think about how he felt. About a month passed…”

    Now, after five months the bf still hasn’t been able to say it. Maybe he does really love Alison. but unless he is strongly showing it in every other way I have to wonder just how strong his feelings are. This is the time where a new couple tend to be “gaga” (limerance?) over each other. If bf can’t say it after five months, would he be more likely to say it one year or two years into the relationship? My experience tells me he won’t.

    Maybe young men are really different in 2013, but do many really have trouble saying “I love you” after five months?

  • http://manangbok.wordpress.com Aida

    Great discussion. Coming from someone who was born and raised in a different culture, I must say that I agree with Susan, J, Jackie and queeninjun.

    Love this statement from queeninjun.
    “Seems as though sex are the wages that women have to pay these days for a shot at love.”
    Yup, it seems to have been that way since Shakespeare’s era. And I also agree with your 2nd statement: “Personally, even though this is the way it is, I personally believe men are asking too much.”

    But then I may just be biased towards the female sex since I am one :)

    Hey Han Solo, haven’t been reading justfourguys in a while but as usual, you are articulate and very smart.

    @ Han Solo: “I can’t speak about your situation personally but a lot of the time women are trying to go for guys that are just not that into them. This is women’s responsibility to fix primarily. However, the two dominant female voices out there today are feminists and pop-culture raunch queens that both play into conducing women to go more for casual. But these forces didn’t just arise in a vacuum. Sufficient numbers of women wanted the sexual freedom to try for the higher-value guys and not be tied to their assortative potential partners anymore…at least while they are young and focused on fun and career.”

    I agree with this except for the statement , “this is women’s responsibility to fix primarily.” Why is that? The last time I checked it takes two people to play poker, just like it takes two people to have sex [masturbation is another story :)] .

    I’ve been reading HUS for a while and I tend to get lost in the acronyms so I would like to be enlightened as to the meaning of the ff:
    1. LTR – long term relationship?
    2. INTJ
    3. NT
    4. NF
    5. SMV
    6. MMV
    7. MB
    8. YMMV
    9. SMP
    10. ENTJ
    11. DTR
    12. SO
    13. STEM
    14. DLV
    15. MBTI

    Sorry guys, I’m just too lazy to google them up right now :)

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

      @Aida

      There’s a glossary tab on the site that should explain most of those terms.

  • Vitor

    The number of men who can or have slept with hundreds of women is extremely small.

    I know this might sound ridiculous, but I have always been sort of intrigued if these guys are happier. I mean, I grew up with that feeling of falling in love with a princess, marrying her, having kids a beautiful family and being happy forever.

    Alright, a little or quite childish now I realize. Then I wonder: would I have been happier if I had instead followed the other route and strive instead to have, say, 50, 100 or 500 women or young girls in my track record? Pretty ridiculous, I concede, and it’s even a kind of envy. But I wonder: if love, commitment and devotion from women is hard to get, than perhaps lots of sex with diversity and young, beautiful girls might just be the best a guy can get… Well I guess I envy these guys. :)

  • Kree!

    Hi Susan! I’m in a similar situation. I’ve been in a long distance relationship for the past 5 months and will be seeing him in August next :)
    We haven’t said our ILY’s yet either. I was thinking that I’ll MAYBE say it when I see him next, but had to think twice about saying it first because of your advice here. Roissy at Chateau Heartiste recommended that the girl say it first though! :P
    So yeah.. I’m slightly conflicted about this as well!! Maybe it will come out of my mouth when the moment feels right. I think if I hold back my emotions, it will feel like too much like a game.
    Every moment spent together in my case is very precious. Especially when we don’t see each other that often, being 5000km apart. Yes, I plan to eventually move to his part of the world sometime.
    My bf is an INTJ from my observations too and not particularly vocal about his emotions. Not too worried though because I think his actions speaks volumes.

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

      @Kree

      Good heavens do not take advice from Roissy! Any advice he gives to women is designed to make them losers. Men are the gatekeepers to commitment, and ILU is a commitment, or should be. Roissy wants you to say it first because the anxiety will make you feel so insecure you’ll put out early and often, and the guy will always have the upper hand.

  • Largo

    Perhaps the guy sees the word “love” as both semantically overloaded -and- emotionally overcharged, and so makes a principled decision to never use the word, except perhaps at the conclusion of a discussion of what they both mean by the word? Perhaps this is motivated by his good faith desire to treat her with -respect-, even as he might be what one might consider “head over heels” with her? After more than twenty years of marriage, I can say that my understanding of how to use the word “love” has diminished year by year. But then, I am INTP.

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

    @SW

    I don’t have any data regarding the percentage who have reached 100, but I think it’s likely to be 1% or less.

    The GSS (2012) found remarkably similar results to the CDC data (2008), but much more granular:

    Sample: 10,921 men (all ages)
    N = 0 to 14: 75.4%
    N > 14: 24.6%
    N > 99: 3.2%

    Sample: 14,259 women (all ages)
    N = 0 to 14: 93.9%
    N > 14: 6.4%
    N > 99: 0.3%

    It’s been noted that certain N intervals (20, 25, 50, 100) show obvious spikes in reporting frequency. For higher N men, this undoubtedly indicates rounding up, and for really high N, the use of sex workers to some degree.

    Given this pattern of reporting, a significant number of men and women who report N > 10 probably don’t keep a very good track record of past lovers (or strangers). They just round to the best of their knowledge. I can’t relate to that kind of lapse in memory!

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

      @MM

      Thank you! We have a number! – 3.2% of men have N of at least 100, let’s assume they qualify as “unsuitable” in Han’s eyes.

      Picture 100 men and 100 women in a room.

      3 men are highly promiscuous, let’s assume an equal number of highly promiscuous women zero in on them. Let’s also assume their bad boy vibe attracts or at least distracts another 17 women, a liberal assumption, IMO. But those 20 women keep these 3 bad boys very busy. That leaves us with 97 men and 80 women unmatched.

      Han Solo is describing the “top” 3% of men and “top” quintile of women as representative of the SMP today.

      Getting this right is very important? Why? So that Pluralistic Ignorance, which generally has the effect of making people feel miserable and insecure, doesn’t take hold.

      Telling guys that “women” want that 3% is neither true nor helpful. Telling guys that Game alone can get them in that 3% is neither true nor helpful. Look at all the potential happiness we’re leaving on the table by spreading the notion that 80% of the women want 20% of the men.

      20% of women (at most) want 3% of the men. That leaves a whole lot of room for mating opportunities, but not when one is focused like a laser on that 3%.

  • Escoffier

    “Good heavens do not take advice from Roissy! Any advice he gives to women is designed to make them losers.”

    Not so. Or, not entirely. His general advice is typically good for men and either neutral or bad for women. Or at least intended as such. However, he occasionally writes posts based on emails from women asking for advice and he does answer them in ways intended to help them.

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

      However, he occasionally writes posts based on emails from women asking for advice and he does answer them in ways intended to help them.

      I don’t read him, but the only one I’m aware of was a hoax perpetrated on one of my readers (someone submitted her photo without her knowledge) and Roissy “helped” her by ridiculing her looks and telling her she was a six on a good day.

      She had to hire an internet reputation management firm as a result.

  • Hope

    Maggie, some guys do have trouble saying the four-lettered L word. But those guys tend to also not use that word often in everyday speech. I guess it depends on the individual.

    Susan, I disagree about the opportunity cost of staying in a dead end relationship for a year. At 22, no problem. At 26, I think it’s high time to get a certain answer about love, kids and marriage from the beginning.

    But that is because I had a goal in mind, and I was already in the workplace as opposed to the prolonged adolescence of school. My husband noted when he was in grad school that his fellow classmates seemed a lot more immature than him. They were basically still discovering themselves and figuring things out, while he had already done most of that in the break between graduating college and going back to get a graduate degree.

    It’s not that I think a relationship shouldn’t be given time to flourish, but I did get a “I can see us being married and having kids” statement in writing from my husband before I quit my job and moved over a thousand miles to be with him. One should not be foolish nor simply hoping for things to happen. Sometimes you have to grab life by the reins and get things moving.

  • Hope

    Lara, I agree with you about self improvement, but generally speaking, that is something you do for yourself, and to re-ignite a long-term marriage, not to jump start a 5 month relationship that still hasn’t gotten off the ground.

    I like to use the plane taking off analogy. You need to have a lot of initial passion and fuel to get up to speed and gain altitude. It is usually a very rocky and bumpy ride at the beginning, and can be very scary. Once you get up to cruising altitude, you still need fuel to maintain, and you do run into turbulence and bad weather sometimes. But a healthy relationship or well-maintained plane will fare just fine.

    In this case, one person is hoping for lift-off, while the other is just content to go around the run way without any risk. Yeah they can go on like this for a long time, but they’ll never get to the destination she wants without taking flight. Without that initial passion and crazy limerence push, they are stuck in runway limbo.

  • JP

    “They were basically still discovering themselves and figuring things out, while he had already done most of that in the break between graduating college and going back to get a graduate degree.”

    I still haven’t “discovered myself,” so I’m not quite sure how this matters.

    Marriage and kids allow you to “figure things out.”

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    RE: Roissy saying that women should say ILU first.

    It isn’t to inspire dread, per se. More that men who say ILU first are stealing something from women. As he puts it, women like the struggle to fall in love with a guy, want to feel they have climbed a mountain, etc. Guys who say ILU first sorta flatten all the mountains, but if there is no struggle, there is no point.

    I understand the point of commitment-gatekeeper and that guys shouldn’t play fast and loose with emotions, Roissy says the time to signal your commitment is after the girl has said it first.

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

      As he puts it, women like the struggle to fall in love with a guy, want to feel they have climbed a mountain, etc. Guys who say ILU first sorta flatten all the mountains, but if there is no struggle, there is no point.

      He’s wrong. Not uncommon, btw, when he talks about women.

  • AGuyInHis20s

    @Hope: Look, all we can do here is relate our anecdotal experience. Susan cites studies whenever she can, which is helpful as that’s the only place where empirical truth lies. However, in my experience, you and your relationship are significant outliers. I know exactly two couple in the around 26 age range who are married; both are rather religious. I know two couples who are engaged around that age too, both have been together for four or more years. The numbers for both increases as they approach thirty, but still, for two people dating in my age range to talk about marriage it seems they have to be approaching thirty and to have been together for years. For the record, I’m exactly what you’d expect demographically from that data: An upper middle class, white, comparatively well educated, secular, coastal liberal.

    Perhaps the distance enhanced your relationship? You say you quit your job and moved over a thousand miles to be with your husband. That kind of significant life change is an extreme commitment, and for you to feel comfortable with doing that it makes sense you’d need to see a demonstration of commitment in turn. I know distance has a way of clarifying relationships. My last attempt at distance crashed and burned. Meanwhile I have friends who have been living with long distance relationships for years, with no end in sight, and I would be shocked if they didn’t end up married.

    Either way we only have anecdotal date, so I guess both of our perspectives are valuable. I also am aware that biologically, things are different for women, so you provide a perspective I physically can’t. Still, from what I’ve personally seen, knowing you want to marry your S.O. after five months and expressing that is something that happens primarily to religious couples. A strong but more secular couple in my demographic tends to have a more vague start and tend to get engaged after dating for a year or a whole lot more (the length of time seems to get lowered around the thirty-year old mark, but I would be hesitant if any of my friends, regardless of gender, were engaged to someone they were dating for less than a year, even as they passed thirty. Perhaps as the mid thirties approach that gets more normal, but none of my close friends are in that age range yet.)

  • JP

    “Technology lags culture.

    I disagree in this case – the tech breakthrough of the Pill changed culture dramatically.”

    You are looking at this backwards (and at the wrong technology).

    With respect to technology, I would start here:

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

    During each spiritual awakening, there is a major influx of the new, in this case it occurred during the 1960’s during the “consiousness revolution.”

    In the case of the 1960’s, the seeds had already been sown during the unraveling of the 1920’s.

    What you are looking at is the mass movement that brought what was already there into the mainstream. It only worked because the foundations were already cracked.

    The major crack in the foundations (which I suspect led to the Flappers in the first place) was this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage

  • JP

    “You say you quit your job and moved over a thousand miles to be with your husband. That kind of significant life change is an extreme commitment, and for you to feel comfortable with doing that it makes sense you’d need to see a demonstration of commitment in turn.”

    I would have no problem doing this, but that’s because I’m, by nature, a wanderer, and I have a very high risk tolerance for such changes.

    A mere 1000 miles in not particularly significant in America.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I love this quote from Dune: “A beginning is the time for taking the most delicate care that the balances are correct.”

    It doesn’t really matter who says ILU first. The more important thing is that both people are on the same page emotionally, and that they are balanced.

    All of the strict rules and games and whatnot are just “pearls of wisdom” for how to make things balanced, but people apply them often without regard for the specific situation and individuals involved, which can throw things out of balance.

    What I *feel* (here comes the NF) from the letter is that they are not balanced. She says it plainly: “I’m feeling less confident in his feelings developing in quite the same way as mine.” They are not balanced, have not been balanced, and she has tipped the balance even further. That is part of why I think she needs to stop having sex and protect herself. She is becoming more and more invested, while he does not appear to be growing in his feelings.

    In a different scenario, the ILU wouldn’t matter at all. She would *feel* the strength and conviction of his love. She would not have so many doubts that she felt compelled to write to someone she doesn’t personally know about them. Sometimes, to ask the question is to answer it.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    AGuyInHis20s, okay. My husband and I are not religious, but I guess we’re kind of “spiritually-inclined” wackos. On the other points, we are educated, not coastal, not totally liberal nor conservative, and we both know tons of people who got married in their 20s, precisely because the “heartlands” of America has a different demographic from the big blue coastal cities.

    My current and past coworkers (from Illinois and Utah) and high school classmates (from Ohio) generally have had their first kids around 30. They generally got married in their mid-to-late 20s, and so our getting married at 26 was only maybe 2 years earlier than the average for college graduates in these regions. My Facebook is lit up with baby pictures.

    As an aside, I’m not saying that having a child after 35 is a very bad thing. After all, my mother-in-law had my husband when she was 36. But she had to have an amniocentesis and other procedures to rule out chromosomal abnormalities. It’s better to know all of the risks and issues than be fooled by the Hollywood stories (most of those celebrity women have had frozen eggs, donor eggs, IVF treatments, etc.).

  • MARY

    Alison, if you are still reading here then my advice to you is to open borders. See other people. You can keep waiting for this dude to say I love you and go on seeing him as well, but as you are two are not engaged or even in any sort of mutually beneficial and balanced exclusive relationship, there’s no need to stop at just him.

    ABDG,
    “Guys who say ILU first sorta flatten all the mountains, but if there is no struggle, there is no point.”

    – If there’s no struggle there’s no point? What the hell is the point of a “struggle”?!

    ” Roissy says the time to signal your commitment is after the girl has said it first.”

    – Roissy can f*ck off.

  • Escoffier

    Hmm, he has written that women have sent him their photos asking for an assessment but he has never, from what I have seen, posted one nor ridiculed anyone. He can be blunt, however, as in “you’re only a 5, trying to date out of your league,” that sort of thing.

    A while back (2 years ago now?) I read through the whole archive and I didn’t see anything like you describe.

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

      @Escoffier

      A while back (2 years ago now?) I read through the whole archive and I didn’t see anything like you describe.

      Of course, once she found out someone had impersonated her with a letter and photos, she immediately wrote to him asking him to take it down. Which he did. Smart move, that’s how Obsidian lost his WordPress blog.

      She went by the user name verie44, and she shared details here the way so many young women do. Someone apparently painstakingly tracked all the details, found pics of her on facebook via sleuthing, and pretended to ask Roissy for advice. There are some commenters here who were around then, perhaps someone will recall.

      I read the post and it was brutal. She was devastated.

      However, I do not feel the need to argue that Roissy is a sociopath. His work speaks for itself.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, the point about not saying ILY first (for a guy) fits perfectly with your oft-repeated maxim about “emotional promiscuity” and neediness being major turn-offs for women, and also that men are the gatekeepers of commitment. So I find your blanket “he’s wrong” puzzling.

    FWIW, I said ILY first once and that was easily the worst, most tumultuous relationship I had. You can say there were lots of reasons for that, and you’d be right, but many of those reasons also contributed to the fact that I said it first. So there is a connection.

    Obviously the mere timing of a statement, even one this important, is not the decisive factor in any relationship. But the general principle and underlying dynamic are important here.

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

      Susan, the point about not saying ILY first (for a guy) fits perfectly with your oft-repeated maxim about “emotional promiscuity” and neediness being major turn-offs for women, and also that men are the gatekeepers of commitment. So I find your blanket “he’s wrong” puzzling.

      Saying it on the third date is needy and creepy. Saying it first after three months is wonderful. No woman wants to say it first. It’s mortifying, and incredibly anxiety provoking, as we see in this post. When women do it, it’s because they generally can’t help it.

      Roissy is wrong about a lot of things. Sorry to burst your bubble.

  • Joe

    @Susan

    3 men are highly promiscuous, let’s assume an equal number of highly promiscuous women zero in on them. Let’s also assume their bad boy vibe attracts or at least distracts another 17 women, a liberal assumption, IMO. But those 20 women keep these 3 bad boys very busy. That leaves us with 97 men and 80 women unmatched.

    I don’t think that’s right, Susan.

    If 3% of the men have N~=100, then three men have had all the women. That is, none of the women (statistically speaking – the deviation will never be 0) have an N of 0, and nearly all will have an N of 3 (which is average, right?). There are about 97 males, though, who have an N of 0.

    They are deemed SMP losers. That’s quite a number of disgruntled people.

    You can say that an equal number of women are disgruntled at having no relationship after sex, but you can’t say the women are losers like you can about the men. In fact, you cannot even say the men are pluralistically ignorant. They know exactly what’s happened – they’ve been totally left out of this game – and in this slightly simplified universe of 200 people, they are correct.

  • Angelguy

    “You can say that an equal number of women are disgruntled at having no relationship after sex, but you can’t say the women are losers like you can about the men. In fact, you cannot even say the men are pluralistically ignorant. They know exactly what’s happened – they’ve been totally left out of this game – and in this slightly simplified universe of 200 people, they are correct.”

    I think there is more emphasis on a Man having sex than a Woman.
    Women get offers all the time, mostly from Men they are not attracted to.
    So sex isn’t that special for them, the same way commitment is.

    Sex has become this badge of merit for Men, and unfairly so, because the ones who are not getting any are labelled as losers.
    You never hear people say, “That man is a loser because he is not married”. The high number of divorced shattered stories have put an end to that label. Being married and having sex are not always mutually exclusive.

  • Escoffier

    Joe, I read Susan’s post to mean, put 200 people in a room, but they walk into the room with the Ns she stated already “under their belts” as it were. That is, they don’t accrue their Ns there, with that cohort in the room, but have already accrued them before they even arrive.

    One problem I see with Susan’s assertion here is that N=100 is insanely high. I don’t think anyone would assert that these are the “only” top men. My estimation is that “top man” starts way lower, maybe around 15 or 20. So, what will happen (sticking with the thought experiment) is that the majority of the women (after checking out all the guys’ looks AND crucially, talking to them to gauge their attitudes) will tend to cluster around not just the 3 who have N>100 but around the 25 who are 14 and above.

    Although, even if one holds to your interpretation, I must say, the 97-80 ratio is not that great for men, nor for a well functioning SMP.

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

      Joe, I read Susan’s post to mean, put 200 people in a room, but they walk into the room with the Ns she stated already “under their belts” as it were. That is, they don’t accrue their Ns there, with that cohort in the room, but have already accrued them before they even arrive.

      That is correct.

      One problem I see with Susan’s assertion here is that N=100 is insanely high. I don’t think anyone would assert that these are the “only” top men. My estimation is that “top man” starts way lower, maybe around 15 or 20.

      I was responding to Hans’ general assertion that what’s wrong with the SMP is that women need to stop going after the top men who can bed hundreds or even thousands of women.

      You’ve made my point for me – there are hardly any men like that, so they couldn’t possibly be having a dramatic effect on the SMP.

      Only 2% of college men have had 10 or more intercourse partners. One study that looked at players drew the line at 3 or more hookup partners per year. If the distribution of N is a bell curve (and it seems to be), the men that Han describes as sucking all the female attention out of the SMP are 2 or even 3 standard deviations from the mean. They’re a mere blip on the radar, and they certainly do not explain anyone else’s failure to get female attention or sex.

      Although, even if one holds to your interpretation, I must say, the 97-80 ratio is not that great for men, nor for a well functioning SMP.

      Mating is not “fair.” Within those 97 men are some very handsome ones and some less attractive ones. Fortunately, the distribution is similar among the females, and most people do wind up dating and marrying people of similar physical attractiveness. The playing field is never level, it’s always a competition. For women too.

  • J

    @QI #107

    Excellent analysis of the SMP works against women.

    @Viktor

    I’m not a guy, but I’ve known a few ultra high N men in my lifetime. They are not necessarily happy men.

    @Aida

    Welcome. I know that you’ll be a wonderful addition to the blog since you aleady agree with me. ;-)

    It is inaccurate to say “women wanted.” There was no gender-wide vote on sexual market dynamics. The Pill and abortion threw the doors wide open, and both men and women eagerly embraced the Sexual Revolution initially. The Women’s Movement was ushered in enthusiastically by men as well, or appeared to be. The resulting shifts in the market environment were largely unanticipated and unintended. Assigning blame or responsibility in hindsight doesn’t really make sense.

    Having actually lived through that era, I would agree with this narrative wholeheartedly. I would add though that the women’s movement was but one of many liberation movements and the second to last one to occur chronologically. (Gay lib folowed women’s lib.) It was not something that happened in isolation but was part of a far more sweeping social trend. It grew orgainically in a social climate of rapid change. I’m always somewhat perplexed by the idea that things were going swimmingly in some sort of Beaver Cleaver/Mad Men paradise until a handful of ugly neurotic women came along to stir the pot. That was not the case. Many economic, social and technological factors were already in place as well as an underlying sense of emptiness.

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

    Someone threw this around on an earlier post, but I can’t remember the statistic. What % of male profiles receive general “Hot” vote ratings from females surveyed on internet dating sites?

  • J

    It’s better to know all of the risks and issues than be fooled by the Hollywood stories (most of those celebrity women have had frozen eggs, donor eggs, IVF treatments, etc.).

    Yep.

    I was an older mother, but it was a long hard slog to get there. I wish I would have had a better picture of the risks of last childbearing when I was younger.

  • MARY

    “Women get offers all the time”

    Not.

    “There was no gender-wide vote on sexual market dynamics. The Pill and abortion threw the doors wide open, and both men and women eagerly embraced the Sexual Revolution initially. ”

    If the Pill and abortion are to be blamed for promiscuity then how come there are countries where the Pill is available over the counter in the market for a very low price that are not only not promiscuous, but dating is almost unheard of and marriages are arranged?

    Abortions are available in those countries too and the majority of women having them are married.

    The Pill will not change a culture but a culture will change The Pill.

    “I’m always somewhat perplexed by the idea that things were going swimmingly in some sort of Beaver Cleaver/Mad Men paradise until a handful of ugly neurotic women came along to stir the pot. That was not the case. Many economic, social and technological factors were already in place as well as an underlying sense of emptiness.”

    Correct.

    Culture. Culture. Culture.

  • J

    Getting this right is very important? Why? So that Pluralistic Ignorance, which generally has the effect of making people feel miserable and insecure, doesn’t take hold.

    Absolutely true.

    Telling guys that “women” want that 3% is neither true nor helpful. Telling guys that Game alone can get them in that 3% is neither true nor helpful. Look at all the potential happiness we’re leaving on the table by spreading the notion that 80% of the women want 20% of the men.

    Yet I believe that a lot of men who are probably in the lowest 3% do hide behind the notion that that 80% of the women want 20% of the men. I think it’s easier to do that than it is to look at one’s self or try to improve core traits that may be so easy to change.

  • Escoffier

    BB, you may be referring to the following. (From memory, so take with caution.) Somebody ran the numbers from an online dating site of how men rated women and vice versa. This was purely from photos: see pic, rate.

    The men’s rating of women came out like a standard issue bell curve: small % of women rated extremely hot, ditto for very ugly, big bulge in the middle, most were rated average.

    But the women overall rated 80% of the men “unattractive.” When this was discussed here, most of the women chimed in to say, yep, about right, 80% of the men I see in daily life are unnattractive.

    Thank goodness looks count less for overall attraction for women than for men, but still …

  • Escoffier

    J, a man in the lowest 3% is probably SOL no matter what he does, and regardless of whether the 80 chasing 20 meme is true or not.

  • Hope

    BB and Escoffier, here’s that article:
    blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/

  • J

    She had to hire an internet reputation management firm as a result.

    I recall the incident, but I didn’t realize that she had to hire an internet reputation management firm. Wow! I hope the guy who sent her pic to Roissy had to pay for that. I wonder what Roissy’s liability was. He did acknowledge his error and claimed to have been duped himself, but he should have done his due diligence before publishing the pic.

    It would be interesting to know what a blogger’s responsibility/liability might be in a case like this.

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

      It would be interesting to know what a blogger’s responsibility/liability might be in a case like this.

      If he’d left it up, he would have been liable, but he knew better. AFAIK, she never learned who had set her up that way. The incident turned her life upside down. She quit her job in NYC, moved to Seattle, and vowed never to comment on a blog again. I spoke with her at length by phone – I felt terrible about it.

      Obsidian would also remember – she and he corresponded, as I recall. She was a 24 year old virgin, quite attractive IMO (Roissy was crazy to call her a 6), and struggling to find a man who would tolerate her virginity.

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

    Escoff, yes, that’s the one! It seemed that the male views of women formed a smooth continuum while the female views were violently abrupt and binary.

    So *if* a woman actually operated using an (online dating) arbitrary attractiveness filter for initial screening of potential mates in the real world, she would, riffing on Susan’s example, immediately and permanently disqualify 80 of the 100 men in her mating candidacy pool on physicality grounds alone.

    If the other women tended to use the same model for assessing physical attractiveness, then she and her 99 friends would be left competing for the attentions of the 20 men who passed the first hurdle.

    Team, is this reasonable…? Just throwing it out as a straw man for group dissection…

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

      I don’t have time to look it up, but wasn’t the OK Cupid study a fairly small sample? I recall feeling it was a bit thin to extrapolate from with confidence.

  • Hope

    Bastiat Blogger, you might want to read the article first. Even though the women thought most men were ugly, they still messaged most men. And even though men thought most women were okay looking, they actually messaged the best looking women much more. It’s men who do the shooting for the stars when it comes to online dating.

  • Vitor

    20% of women (at most) want 3% of the men. That leaves a whole lot of room for mating opportunities, but not when one is focused like a laser on that 3%.

    So I hold some chance too. :) Actually sometimes I look around and it’s hard to imagine that one in every five women I see is “riding the carousel” (or has ridden it, if married or with a boyfriend). I think there is indeed something wrong about these numbers/widespread beliefs.

    @Escoffier: I would be interested in knowing how you see the numbers and distributions in the hypothetical example given by Susan.

    I’m not a guy, but I’ve known a few ultra high N men in my lifetime. They are not necessarily happy men.

    Thanks, J. Actually I am not sure either that adding to my number of sexual partners would make me happier. I think it’s just that silly feeling of missed sexual opportunities or not being as male, stud, smart and desired as those guys purportedly are (given their popularity or “success” with women). I don’t know why, but this feeling is real. It seems to be primitive. I believe it could only be appeased by feeling loved, admired and respected by a mate I equally love, desire and respect.

    I think it’s easier to do that than it is to look at one’s self or try to improve core traits that may be so easy to change.

    I am working on that. But I think my main weakness had always been somewhat needy in my quest for a mate, escalating emotionally fast, lack of confidence, etc. even though externally I might look handsome, healthy, etc. Yet at the same time I think I was behaving just like I was taught is right, without a focus on sex and more into getting a long term life mate. It actually took quite a long time to realize that feeling sexual attraction for my mate is not only welcome, but actually to my best interests. :) I was always trying to find and enter a relationship with that idea that love would come with time, and that passion was not only not so important but that should also be avoided. I mean, agreeableness and having a focus on a long term relationship/marriage was much more important to my mind.

  • Escoffier

    BB, another interesting finding was this. While the women’s ratings ran 80% unattractive, 20% attractive, many of them nonetheless sent messages to those 80%. No doubt for a variety of reasons, but one of them sure is that, for women, looks just aren’t as important for generating that initial attraction as they are for men. If a guy’s look is a bit blah but not hideous, and he has something else to offer, he still may have a shot–and she may even make the first move.

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

      If a guy’s look is a bit blah but not hideous, and he has something else to offer, he still may have a shot–and she may even make the first move.

      I’ve read that wit or humor in the profile is the number 1 predictor of popularity for men online.

  • Joe

    @Escoffier

    Joe, I read Susan’s post to mean, put 200 people in a room, but they walk into the room with the Ns she stated already “under their belts” as it were. That is, they don’t accrue their Ns there, with that cohort in the room, but have already accrued them before they even arrive.

    Hum. You’re quite right, Escoffier. That’s what she meant.

    But actually, that doesn’t change things. If 3% of men actually do have N=100 (Susan’s statistic, which seems high to me too, but there it is) and the average N for women is something like 3 (which seems reasonable), then it actually does mean that a large percentage of men (a percentage that is acutely sensitive to N=4, 2 and 1 for both sexes) have fewer partners than the “average” would dictate. It’s another way of saying that the distribution of N for men is very broad and skewed to the low end. That’s the way the stats work.

    I call it “The Wilt Chamberlin Effect”.

    What it doesn’t tell us is that those men on the low end are, as I say, pluralistically ignorant. Their perception is pretty much correct, and as Susan said earlier today in a different context, perception is reality.

  • J

    J, a man in the lowest 3% is probably SOL no matter what he does, and regardless of whether the 80 chasing 20 meme is true or not.

    Sadly, I have to agree with that. I do think there is a small minority of people, both male and female, who are just too something–weird, ugly, spergy, drunk, nasty or whatever–to be part of a marriage. It’s sad but true. OTOH, when that misery aggregates itself on the net and begins to repaint reality and to apply that new image where it’s not really relevant it does create PI that makes people unnecessarily unhappy.

  • Escoffier

    Viktor, I am not sure what you are asking.

    But sticking with the numbers as posted, the stipulation (I take it) is that of our 100 Ms and 100 Fs, we have a perfect cross section of N as found in society for that age cohort. What will happen at this theoretical “mixer”?

    Presumably, just like in life, the most attractive of both sexes will garner the most attention. Also, much like in life, the most attractive MEN (but not necessarily the women) will have above average N. So, the women will, at least at first, be attracted to most attractive men/men with high N. Not only to the 3%, but probably to the top 20-25%.

    This is to speak about initial attraction only. How everything shakes out–who goes home with whom, who goes home alone, etc.–will depend on a lot of factors.

  • Gin Martini

    Sue: “For many men, saying “I love you” is a very serious commitment. ”

    Exactly this. My wife said it first, not long after we met. My response was something like “I’m not ready to say that just yet” and she didn’t grouse about it, but was actually comforted, and impressed with me taking a stand.

    Having no prior realtionship experience, I wanted to be sure, to my level of satisfaction. Otherwise it’s just empty words.

    Hope: “I would suspect that he is an INTJ or at least an NT of some kind, and those types are very reticent to say the words “I love you.” It’s a big deal for them. They also hold back a lot, and tend to be very careful about who they let have access to their inner emotions.”

    Yep.

    Hope: “Also, you mentioned that he has met your parents, but you have not met his. That is a sign that he is not willing to let you into all of his private space quite yet. NTs are very logical people, and if they think that your relationship has not reached a logical “point” of seriousness, they will not rush it.”

    Yep.

    Hope: “So what you have to do is use this logic to get him to see your side. Sit him down and tell him that you love him, but that you cannot wait around for him to love you in return. So if he cannot see himself ever loving you, you cannot stay in this relationship. He should be able to see this logic and give you an answer. Good luck.”

    And… NOPE. Someone trying force the issue would soon be on the way out. My emotional space is emotional, it is just guarded with logic, and I would resent the intrusion, even if I actually *agreed* with the logical statement.

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

    Hope, Escoff: yes, good point. I was actually adjusting the model and using a more stringent controlling assumption that the woman *had* to find the man physically attractive as her first filter. If she can mate with a man that she is not physically attracted to, then the online dating findings become far less meaningful.

    The next obvious question is what percentage of that 100 women have ever had casual sex. I think the restricted/unrestricted attitudes thing can break down for us here because theoretically a restricted woman can simultaneously have had 3 or more one night stands in her life. If we use her self-reported restricted orientation as the only guide to her behavior, then we might be lead to mistakenly assume that she would never be up for a same day lay, when in fact she may have been, perhaps multiple times, in the past.

    The question after that would be if those women—restricted or otherwise—that have had one night stands have tended to have them with men that they are physically attracted to.

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

      I think the restricted/unrestricted attitudes thing can break down for us here because theoretically a restricted woman can simultaneously have had 3 or more one night stands in her life. If we use her self-reported restricted orientation as the only guide to her behavior, then we might be lead to mistakenly assume that she would never be up for a same day lay, when in fact she may have been, perhaps multiple times, in the past.

      It’s not binary, it’s a continuum. She would obviously get a point for having had same day sex, but she might also have scored low on other questions. There are many possible permutations here!

      There is no way to use restricted vs. unrestricted in taking the measure of a person, unless you’re talking about the top or bottom quintile.

      The question after that would be if those women—restricted or otherwise—that have had one night stands have tended to have them with men that they are physically attracted to.

      Why would any woman (or man for that matter) have sex with someone they are not physically attracted to?

  • J

    Thanks, J.

    You are welcome

    Actually I am not sure either that adding to my number of sexual partners would make me happier. I think it’s just that silly feeling of missed sexual opportunities or not being as male, stud, smart and desired as those guys purportedly are (given their popularity or “success” with women). I don’t know why, but this feeling is real. It seems to be primitive. I believe it could only be appeased by feeling loved, admired and respected by a mate I equally love, desire and respect.

    LOL, maybe not. I have a male cousin, about 15 years older than me, who is very happily married to a woman he adores and vice-versa. They are an extrememly close couple. He once told me he thought men on my age were very lucky to be free during the sexual revolution and that he worried he had missed out on something. I think men just may be wired to feel that way, even if it objectively is not the case that high N guys are better off.

    But I think my main weakness had always been somewhat needy in my quest for a mate, escalating emotionally fast, lack of confidence, etc. even though externally I might look handsome, healthy, etc.

    A lot of people are like that. Sometimes we don;t appreciate themselve until they are older and settled. Sometimes I look at pics of myself as a young woman and wonder why I was so insecure. I wish I knew what to tell you to do to get over that.

    It actually took quite a long time to realize that feeling sexual attraction for my mate is not only welcome, but actually to my best interests

    No, reciprocal passion is a wonderful thing.

    I mean, agreeableness and having a focus on a long term relationship/marriage was much more important to my mind.

    That is also very important. Attraction starts a relationship; the other stuff maintains it. The trick is to find a person to whom you feel intensely attracted but who also has the character traits that will enhance your life together. Not always so easy.

    Good luck with this. You sound like someone who will eventually find a good relationship.

  • Escoffier

    Joe, of course you are right in the main. That is, every survey I’ve ever seen places both mean and median N higher for men than for women. Since the sexes are more or less equally distributed in the population, this MUST mean a few men on the right tail are skewing the numbers by having sex with a broader (heh) cohort of women who over their lives maintain a low or lowish N with a couple of ONSs or flings thrown in. That’s the only way the numbers could possibly work.

    Exactly how they break down is the question. It’s not one that has been yet resolved, though Susan has cast significant doubt on the 80/20 meme. Yet, even if the 80/20 meme is not true, the mathematical point you bring up must still be true, unless people are lying about their N and all the surveys are way off.

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

      That is, every survey I’ve ever seen places both mean and median N higher for men than for women. Since the sexes are more or less equally distributed in the population, this MUST mean a few men on the right tail are skewing the numbers by having sex with a broader (heh) cohort of women who over their lives maintain a low or lowish N with a couple of ONSs or flings thrown in. That’s the only way the numbers could possibly work.

      When they take prostitutes out of the data, the numbers match. In addition, both sexes lie, but men lie more than women. Not more frequently, but they tend to round up their N to the nearest 5 or 0, so the effect is larger.

  • Hope

    Gin Martini, I think in your case with your wife, your actions were sufficient to reassure her of your feelings. Plus you were both young and had plenty of time. This case is different because they are both older, she feels unsure that he would ever grow to love her the same way, and it’s been several months, long enough for most guys to figure out if they could grow to feel love or not.

  • MARY

    “But the women overall rated 80% of the men “unattractive.” When this was discussed here, most of the women chimed in to say, yep, about right, 80% of the men I see in daily life are unnattractive.”

    That’s true for me too. Here.

    I believe the OK Cupid survey participants were largely from here and probably another country where people looked similar to here, right?

    The same survey in better looking countries would have a higher percentage of men rated attractive. For shizzle.

  • Escoffier

    “theoretically a restricted woman can simultaneously have had 3 or more one night stands in her life”

    In which case the term loses all meaning.

  • Vitor

    He once told me he thought men on my age were very lucky to be free during the sexual revolution and that he worried he had missed out on something. I think men just may be wired to feel that way, even if it objectively is not the case that high N guys are better off.

    True. :)

    The trick is to find a person to whom you feel intensely attracted but who also has the character traits that will enhance your life together. Not always so easy.

    Good luck with this. You sound like someone who will eventually find a good relationship.

    Thanks. Actually my previous girlfriend had to my mind all the desirable traits for a long term mate. But I think she had her own issues and I am also a little guilty of sabotaging the relationship out of my own. But overall it was a high quality relationship. Even if it eventually didn’t work out, I was happy with the relationship: it provided me with a foundation to feel more secure and optimistic.

  • Gin Martini

    Hope: “it’s been several months, long enough for most guys to figure out if they could grow to feel love or not.”

    They met 5 months ago, and she said ILU at 3.5, so there is a 1.5 month lag. You can’t charge the first 3.5 months as negative against him, since she didn’t say it either herself.

    1.5 is not a lot of time.

    Simply put, he might be feeling love, but being forced to go on the record about future actions could easily kill it, *even* if he is feeling it, or agrees with it.

    I was this guy, almost exactly. The way to play it is to say “I hope you feel the same, someday” and if someday doesn’t come soon enough, move on.

    Escoffier: “In which case the term loses all meaning.”

    No… That’s like saying anyone who gets married MUST be restricted. Read the SOI. That’s just one small component of it. Attitude, history, and desire all are equally weighted.

  • a definite beta guy

    So about to board the plane. Gf has no underwear.

    Just felt like sharing

  • Hope

    Gin Martini, Susan’s advice is to wait for the guy to say ILU first. If that’s the way to play it, then nobody moves anything forward?

    Anyway, I think it depends on how the guy feels, whether he feels “pressured” or “ecstatic” with the woman escalating and asking where he sees things stand. So I always asked.

    I think all the dancing around and not communicating clearly are silly, but then again I’m kind of masculine-minded. I want straight answers, not hemming and hawing.

  • a definite beta guy

    It is mortifying for some guys just to talk to women

  • Laurel

    What matters isn’t just the three words of course, though they ARE important, but the feelings and actions they behind them**what Alison really needs to know is whether Mr X is “head and heels” for her or not. (I guess the technical term is limerence, but I like head & heels better.) If he is, maybe the 3 words can wait a while.

    Can we come up with a list of signs & symptoms that show someone is head & heels, and then A can compare them with what Mr X is doing?

    For instance I think if someone is head & heels for you, he’s really interested in your history…I don’t mean your sexual history, your N (though he’ll probably care about that too) but your family, what you were like as a child, what your dreams were & are, etc. He might even want to see your old family videos!

    He introduces you as his GF and seems proud about it.

    He says things suggesting your uniqueness, like “you’re the only person I’ve ever met who (something)”

    Just for starters…Other ideas?

  • Gin Martini

    I don’t get the no-underwear thing. It seems like admitting you don’t have very much sex. SGG complains (with a smirk, mind you) about constant “seepage”, all day, even with underwear.

    She’s tried commando, but it meant constantly running to the bathroom at really inopportune moments, and still having a mess.

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

      SGG complains (with a smirk, mind you) about constant “seepage”, all day, even with underwear.

      She’s tried commando, but it meant constantly running to the bathroom at really inopportune moments, and still having a mess.

      Ewww, that is gross. Seriously, GM, please share fewer details.

  • Anacaona

    So about to board the plane. Gf has no underwear.
    I once considered to join the mile high club with my hubby. We both need training to do the deed in such a small space and ignore the germs that might be there. GOOD LUCK! :D

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Susan

    It is inaccurate to say “women wanted.” There was no gender-wide vote on sexual market dynamics. The Pill and abortion threw the doors wide open, and both men and women eagerly embraced the Sexual Revolution initially. The Women’s Movement was ushered in enthusiastically by men as well, or appeared to be. The resulting shifts in the market environment were largely unanticipated and unintended. Assigning blame or responsibility in hindsight doesn’t really make sense.

    I didn’t say only women wanted. Just that they wanted it, though I should have phrased it as “women wanted it too.” I was responding to queeninjun who was making it sound like men were mostly the ones responsible for today’s SMP and that women were just helpless victims that had to put out with no say in the matter. And I think it was more of a change of women being willing to be more sexually unrestricted in behavior than in men’s desire. Culture likely caused a lot of men to self restrain somewhat 100 years ago but, without the pill and the freer-love and lower-stigma culture that came along later, women of 100 years ago were self-restraining even more than men.

    it’s the natural twist that happens in safe and rich environments–they don’t NEED the provider that will stick with them and are free to attempt out-of-their-league or unsuitable-for-long-term men.

    At the risk of repeating myself, the first part of this statement is true, but the second, which may be technically true, has not happened.

    Can you clarify what you mean by saying it hasn’t happened? I think that if you look at the number of N that women are having now as compared with 100 years ago that it has risen a lot and that many of the men that many of these women were having a few of their Ns with were the type I described–higher-value that won’t commit to them or unsuitable-yet-sexy badboys. That said, I’ve always held the opinion that a good 40 or 50% of the population is carrying on in very assortative ways and not being very promiscuous. But it’s the other half that has been somewhat or highly promiscuous that is having the huge effect on things.

    As some women on here have said, if you’re going to have casual sex, why not do it with the most appealing that are available?

    If you’re referring to the Swedes vs. the Mexican thing, then you have to compare the Swedish women to how they behaved back when Sweden was a harsh environment or how the current women would behave if Sweden suddenly reverted to that condition. Obviously there was a much lower N back then. Also, you have to compare what kind of men Swedish women would choose if constrained to have a very-long-term partner vs a short-term partner. I have no doubt that the sexier men are being chosen more for casual (however Swedish women define sexy; and sexiest doesn’t mean highest-T).

    Women don’t NEED the provider financially, but they still very much want the man who will stick around and co-parent.

    I’ve never said that most women don’t want the provider guy to stick around–they do–just that they’re free to pursue other men that have no intention of sticking around with anyone or with them and that some of these women are doing so and affecting the market.

    And for nearly every one of these women that is choosing poorly there are good, stable men that she could have shown more interest in and yet she chose the other guy that turned out not to commit to her or be faithful or whatever. Since most women have some number of men presenting to them over their lifetime and it’s up to them whom they choose then it makes sense that women need to do a better job in choosing. I realize that can be tough when the sexier guy seems obtainable but after getting burnt once or twice you’d hope more would learn. Luckily most do eventually.

    That is why they prefer suitable (lower T, “lesser” genes, beta) men over unsuitable (higher T, “good genes,” alpha) men. It simply is not correct that women have gone for unsuitable men in large numbers. Only 10-20% employ this strategy, so to characterize the SMP in this way is deeply flawed at best, highly misleading at worst. It perpetrates a trope that simply does not stand up to scrutiny via data.

    Can you clarify why you’re using lower T when what the study showed was that the most preferred for an LTR had higher-than-average T or facial masculinity? Yes, they were lower than the highest-T faces but that would classify them as lower-T males. Calling them lower-T males without clarifying that they’re higher than average makes it sound like women are preferring lower-than-average T males.

    And once again, highest T doesn’t mean best genes or most alpha. The biggest alphas will have a combination of brute force T but be softened by emotional intelligence and charisma.

    As to the last bit, you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said what percentage of women were acting in these ways. Just enough to have a big effect on the market. I said to queeninjun:

    Sufficient numbers of women wanted the sexual freedom to try for the higher-value guys and not be tied to their assortative potential partners anymore…at least while they are young and focused on fun and career.

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

      @Han Solo

      Sorry for the delayed reply, I am away this weekend and don’t have much time.

      And I think it was more of a change of women being willing to be more sexually unrestricted in behavior than in men’s desire. Culture likely caused a lot of men to self restrain somewhat 100 years ago but, without the pill and the freer-love and lower-stigma culture that came along later, women of 100 years ago were self-restraining even more than men.

      I don’t understand this. Why do you think women’s attitudes changed more? The Pill and the Sexual Revolution resulted in a bacchanalia of free love that was embraced by both sexes, as the “costs” of sex plummeted, for both sexes. Since we know that women generally exhibit lower sex drives, it doesn’t seem logical to claim they were “self-restraining more than men.”

      I would also point out the burst of female promiscuity in the 1920s. Even the Pilgrims had a 50% premarital sex rate.

      Can you clarify what you mean by saying it hasn’t happened?

      You said ” are free to attempt out-of-their-league or unsuitable-for-long-term men.” I agree that they are free to do so, but it’s very clear that most do not attempt it. Pointing out that they have the option is not meaningful if few care to exercise it. You assume that because a badboy has slept with 100 women that all women want the badboy. In fact, the badboy has simply tapped into a niche and markets himself effectively to women with certain preferences and traits.

      I think that if you look at the number of N that women are having now as compared with 100 years ago that it has risen a lot and that many of the men that many of these women were having a few of their Ns with were the type I described–higher-value that won’t commit to them or unsuitable-yet-sexy badboys.

      Where can I see that data? How do you know which type women have sex with? This sounds like pure speculation on your part.

      I’ve always held the opinion that a good 40 or 50% of the population is carrying on in very assortative ways and not being very promiscuous.

      Again, what is the basis for this claim? The data clearly demonstrates that the number is more like 80-90%, and I have written dozens of posts that confirm and highlight this.

      As some women on here have said, if you’re going to have casual sex, why not do it with the most appealing that are available?

      And again, the number of women doing that is very small. Most casual sex is a “crime of opportunity” – both sexes will indulge with the best available option at a time when they are likely intoxicated. In any case, the number of female “players” who go trawling for casual sex is extremely small, and generally correlated to poor mental health.

      I’ve never said that most women don’t want the provider guy to stick around–they do–just that they’re free to pursue other men that have no intention of sticking around with anyone or with them and that some of these women are doing so and affecting the market.

      There is a market effect, but they are not the norm. So when we describe the SMP, we should not generalize this dynamic as representative of the whole. In fact, it appears that high N women are primarily mating with high N men, and vice versa. In this way the market is quite efficient now. The men they are with are not suitable or even desirable in most cases to lower N women.

      And for nearly every one of these women that is choosing poorly there are good, stable men that she could have shown more interest in and yet she chose the other guy that turned out not to commit to her or be faithful or whatever

      But these are women who are not wired for relationships. Their triggers and behaviors are STR-oriented. Since they represent a small percentage of women (20%) why not just ignore them? They wouldn’t be good partners for good, stable men in any case.

      Re testosterone, I wasn’t attempting to make a point about it – just trying different phrases to attempt to zero in on what you mean by unsuitable. My point is that only a small percentage of women are aiming out of their league with unsuitable men. They are the top quintile unrestricted – and as I’ve said, the men they’re going after are in fact quite suitable for them.

      I never said what percentage of women were acting in these ways. Just enough to have a big effect on the market.

      This is where we disagree. The effect is cultural in the form of Pluralistic Ignorance. The number of women behaving this way is quite small, so the solution is not to encourage women to change their behavior, but to get out the truth about who’s having what kind of sex, and why.

      If I may borrow from your most recent post:

      “The raunch queens both drive the market but also cater to an underlying demand deep within their female customers for such a slut-empowering product.”

      This is false. The raunch queens do not drive the market, as most people seek and find relationships. They don’t even drive market behavior among college students. They do impact the culture, which has a deleterious effect on the market for both sexes equally.

      The female customers for raunch queens who have a deep need for slut empowerment – they are outliers. Perhaps 1-3% of the population.

      I have no problem with an analysis of that niche market, but I do believe it is extremely unhelpful to characterize the general SMP using these outliers as a norm. It perpetrates the ignorance that keeps the market dysfunctional.

  • Hope

    Susan, I think it’s also possible that there is sample bias in the okcupid post. It’s not a scientific study but a blog that is meant to generate publicity and marketing for the site.

    For one thing, what type of woman is more likely to rate guys’ photos? Presumably she places more importance on looks. I have never done such ratings myself, nor have I known girls in real life who spend time rating guys’ looks.

  • Hope

    Han solo, have you considered the male counterpart to that theory? That is, many young men spend their 20s playing video games and trying at the hottest girls, instead of their assortative potential partners? This leaves fewer men who appear attractive to women, except for nerdy girls who actually like video game playing men.

    That’s definitely a dynamic I saw.

  • Vitor

    Saying it on the third date is needy and creepy. Saying it first after three months is wonderful.

    I never said ILY to any girl so fast, except perhaps for my first passion with whom I was really infatuated. I actually ended up rather traumatized by the way she rejected me.

    But what comes to my mind is an episode with a former girlfriend. On our first date I told her I was thinking about dating her. She was pissed off and even asked me how could one possibly think of dating someone on the first date. I had to explain to her that dating was meant to know each other better for a possible engagement. Eventually I found out she had a promiscuous past and then I was the one who bailed out. :) But overall she was a nice girlfriend.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins MM

    @SW

    20% of women (at most) want 3% of the men. That leaves a whole lot of room for mating opportunities, but not when one is focused like a laser on that 3%.

    Agreed, though I’m doubtful it’s even that lopsided (20% want 3%). Given CDC and GSS data, I consider N = 15 to be where “high” begins. Let’s assume everybody under that (75% of men and 94% of women) will mate together for the most part. Let’s further assume men lie up a bit and women lie down a bit WRT their N, and split the difference: that’s like an 85% overlapping segment of the population. Why spend so much time talking about the 15% crowd that’s swimming in the STD petri dish?

    BTW, in those samples I cited, here are the summary statistics. Shows you how skewed to the left N distribution is. “Normal” is quite wrong to use to describe things, unless you cap N at something like 10-14:

    For men, Mean: 14.91; Median: 5.00; Mode: 1.00.
    For women, Mean: 4.90; Median: 2.00; Mode: 1.00.

    As to why men consistently report higher mean and median N than women in every survey, beyond lying up and down, it’s quite simple: We know for a fact that there’s a tiny population of women that sleeps with a significantly larger population of men. They’re called escorts and prostitutes, and they wreak havoc with sex statistics. They are never represented in these kinds of surveys, but their clients most definitely are (10% of men, and 25% of men who’ve been in the military).

  • Valentin

    …and struggling to find a man who would tolerate her virginity.

    Aye, the sad fact is men take virginity past 20 as a sign of two things. One: too picky and takes sex too serious. Two: hypergamy in waiting to be unleashed.

    Most guys want a woman at the end of her hypergamous career to judge her suitability for an LTR, in terms of assessing how hypergamous she’s been and how reformed she is. A virgin has the disadvantage of coming with zero data on her hypergamic tendencies and thus has an SMV of practically zero. It’s the same mathematics of a decent guy ignoring any 9 or 10 showing any interest in him: chance of success / reward = point in making the effort. Zero divided by anything is still zero.

    Disclaimer: this idea is of course based on anecdotal information and of course my personal projection as well. I’m not criticising I’m just trying to add five cents…

  • J

    Actually my previous girlfriend had to my mind all the desirable traits for a long term mate. But I think she had her own issues and I am also a little guilty of sabotaging the relationship out of my own.

    Everyone has issues. You have to be able to sort out what sort of issues you can tolerate and what you can’t. It’s also good to understand how your own stuff can impact a relationship.

    But overall it was a high quality relationship. Even if it eventually didn’t work out, I was happy with the relationship: it provided me with a foundation to feel more secure and optimistic.

    Great! Now you know what to look for. You can fine tune based on your past relationship.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Susan

    I was responding to Hans’ general assertion that what’s wrong with the SMP is that women need to stop going after the top men who can bed hundreds or even thousands of women.

    That’s a distortion of what I was saying. It’s not only the top me who can bed 100’s or 1000’s that are being sought after that’s distorting things but also the less overall-appealing men that are being sought after by even less appealing women.

    And as I said in my reply above, I think that a good portion of the population is still quite assortative but it’s the somewhat promiscuous 3rd quartile and the more-promiscuous 4th quartile of women that is distorting the market, with the maybe 1 or 2 dalliances by women in the 2nd quartile.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Yes, I believe that boys gaming and checking out, MGTOW, herbivores, etc. all has an impact on the market as well.

    Any boy going for a girl out of his league is likely to get nowhere fast though while the opposite can often result in a pump and dump.

    So the guy who is wanted by lots of women is P&Ding here and there, or having sex while the average guy that’s doing video games and hoping for the hotter woman only has few girls, if any, that are interested in him while he’s younger. Later, when he’s older and if he does something with his life he will have a higher SMV than in his teens.

    Also, boys and young men, collectively, say 14-24 have less sexual market power than 14-24 y/o girls/women.

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

    I do not believe that male N follows a Gaussian map. Notice how sigma is rarely reported—if you had, for argument’s sake, a mean N of 5 and a sigma of 2, then an N=50 man would never have existed in the history of the universe.

    If, on the other hand, the sigma is very large, then you run into a new set of problems with standard error and so on.

    What we have is a pathological distribution with an anchor of 0 and a long, long right tail that stretches out into some big numbers. It is a commonly observed statistical issue within the social sciences.

    In fact, it may be possible that male N is not adequately captured by a single distribution at all, and we may have two very different regimes generating two very different distributions, one fairly well-behaved and approximating the normal and one that produces monsters. Financial markets reveal this kind of behavior, a “tame” regime and a “wild” regime.

    As Han indicated, the presence of statistical pathologies would mean that saying the average man has an N of 7 or whatever would mask an underlying dynamic in which there were truly gross disparities in terms of an individual male’s experience of the realities of the SMP.

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

      As Han indicated, the presence of statistical pathologies would mean that saying the average man has an N of 7 or whatever would mask an underlying dynamic in which there were truly gross disparities in terms of an individual male’s experience of the realities of the SMP.

      The mean alone is nearly meaningless because of that very long right tail. At the very least we need the median to even begin to understand the distribution in any sample. For example, in a study where men were asked how many lifetime sexual partners they preferred, the mean was something like 15, but the median was 1. The men in the long right tail were saying 10,000, and that was calculated in the mean. Schmitt’s refusal to share the median data in his study (same topic) is highly dubious for that reason, IMO.

  • Joe

    @BB

    In fact, it may be possible that male N is not adequately captured by a single distribution at all, and we may have two very different regimes generating two very different distributions, one fairly well-behaved and approximating the normal and one that produces monsters. Financial markets reveal this kind of behavior, a “tame” regime and a “wild” regime.

    This is interesting and certainly explains a lot. I’m a little surprised now that this kind of statistical analysis is rarely done on this topic.

  • MARY

    “She went by the user name verie44, and she shared details here the way so many young women do. Someone apparently painstakingly tracked all the details, found pics of her on facebook via sleuthing, and pretended to ask Roissy for advice. There are some commenters here who were around then, perhaps someone will recall.

    I read the post and it was brutal. She was devastated. ”

    – Um, and these are the same dudes who bemoan “sensitivity training” in the work place.

    “Male sexuality is demonized! Waaaaaaaaaah! We are told we are predators! Waaaaaaah! We are called creeps! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!”.

    If the shoe fits…..

    (and it sure seems there’s a lot of guys out there with the same shoe size)

  • Bully

    “Yes, I believe that boys gaming and checking out, MGTOW, herbivores, etc. all has an impact on the market as well.”

    Indeed. Also consider that with fewer men offering commitment, it becomes a scarcer (and more valued) commodity.

    I posted something very similar on another blog that must be named – honestly, if I can P&D girls 1 or 2 points below me as is, if I were to commit to a marriage, I would want someone equal or even a notch higher to compensate for what I’m sacrificing (variety) and risking (assets). The risks and benefits for marriage are not evenly distributed. The higher you go up on the SMP ladder, the more the man risks and the more the woman benefits.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Bimodal and skewed distributions tend not to get used much in the social sciences. The results are usually means and medians of an assumed normal distribution.

  • Bully

    *must not be named, naturally.

  • http://Bastiatblogger@blogspot.com Bastiat Blogger

    In one case, N would by a physically constrained phenomena, like, say, height. So you would have a male average height of 5’8, with some guys being shorter and some taller (but no guys being 0′ tall and no guys being 150′ tall). Knowing nothing else except for the mean, we could be pretty confident about the error bands as we predicted the height of the next guy to walk into the room. If the room contained, say, 100 people, then we could be even more confident about the effect that the new man’s height would have on the average for the whole room.

    If N was distributed like income instead of height, however, we’d have a different story on our hands….

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo “Also, boys and young men, collectively, say 14-24 have less sexual market power than 14-24 y/o girls/women.”

    I agree with this, and I’ve thought about it in terms of large coastal cities vs. heartlands demographics. It seems like in the heartlands (where I’ve resided most of my life), people tend to pair off around 24-29, around the time when the female SMV begins to decline and when the male SMV begins to increase, and they meet somewhere in the middle. If the couple pairs earlier than this age range, the relationship tends to be unstable in the long term (I’ve known quite a few divorces that stem from early 20s marriages). The couples I have known who paired off after 24 or so have remained very stable.

    In the large coastal cities, this natural dynamic is disrupted for numerous reasons. For example, the propensity for people to go to graduate school, have very demanding careers, have more of a nightlife, go to parties, bars, clubs, etc. Big city men in their mid-20s and older are more likely feel that they have the upper hand. Demographically it is is the case that there are more single women than single men in large blue coastal cities. All of these conditions work together to delay male commitment and female childbearing well into the 30s, by which time men have far higher SMV/MMV than women of that age.

    Now here’s the feminist twist. Those 30+ women *would* face stiff competition from 24+ women, if those women were seeking marriage. So the cultural norm in large blue coastal cities is to discourage those women from seeking marriage. There are lots of Hollywood and mass media messages targeted at women to tell them to “shop around” and not “marry early,” Sex in the City being one famous example. Even here on this blog there are lots of people exhorting a 26-year-old woman to take a “wait-and-see” approach to marriage, and “don’t rock the boat” of a relationship that doesn’t appear to be headed to marriage, because she is “still young.”

    What do you think?

  • MARY

    “Those 30+ women *would* face stiff competition from 24+ women, if those women were seeking marriage. ”

    That’s why Roosh and Roissy’s plan to wait until their 60’s (not too far off) and then settle down with a 20-something to finally experience fatherhood (but not legal marriage, mind you) will never materialize.

    The few men that do manage to marry women 20 and more years younger than themselves know the score. There is an unstated assumption that she will discreetly see men her own age and as long as she doesn’t make TMZ’s first page about it, it will go “unnoticed” by the husband.

  • Bully

    Isn’t Roosh like 30..?

  • MARY

    Bully, Roosh is pushing 40 – and looks it!

    ABDG, another point Lenon Honor makes in his Visions of Manhood series is that boys are consumers while men are producers. If a man is not in service that means he is not producing value for someone other than just himself. He is stuck in the consuming stage of early human development.

  • JP

    SMV/MMV is still too abstract of a concept.

    These are actual people who need to be in an actual relationship, and this bizarre 1 to 10 thing is getting in the way of addressing this problem.

    I mean, the entire concept of the SMV increasing/decreasing makes a complete hash of this entire project.

  • MARY

    JP,
    “SMV/MMV is still too abstract of a concept.
    These are actual people who need to be in an actual relationship, and this bizarre 1 to 10 thing is getting in the way of addressing this problem.
    I mean, the entire concept of the SMV increasing/decreasing makes a complete hash of this entire project.”

    All kinds of people are in “actual relationships” but they are just not getting married like before. Its not like completely unattractive people are going without either. Many of them also get boyfriends and girlfriends who are more or less as unattractive as they are.

  • JP

    “All kinds of people are in “actual relationships” but they are just not getting married like before. Its not like completely unattractive people are going without either. Many of them also get boyfriends and girlfriends who are more or less as unattractive as they are.”

    That’s not even my point.

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

    Hope, that’s a very interesting analysis. I would even add another factor to your framework and suggest that, for the college-educated demographic, the hypothesized female 14-24 SMP pricing advantage has possibly been shortened to 14-18, as these young people are going into a 60/40 campus reality and its attendant consequences. The pressure starts there and doesn’t let up, increasing as the fertility cues and so on begin to factor in a few days later (especially in the big cities).

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

    Oops, meant *years* later, not *days.*

    MARY/PJ: Roy Baumeister has commented that traditional notions of manhood generally are consistent in saying that a man produces more than he consumes, and thus makes a surplus available for his family.

    As the traditional male breadwinner has become a much-lampooned, tragi-comic figure on the Disney Channel, the next generation of young men are implicitly informed that this surplus is no longer necessary nor even appreciated, so male consumption patterns should more or less equal their production patterns. The economic basis of a relationship becomes “my money is my money, your money is your money”, courtship goes into a deep recession, and cheap “dates” come to dominate.

    I think this shows up practically in two ways: 1) young men rejecting heavy workloads and preferring an easier lifestyle with more leisure time available for sports, drinking, games, etc.; and 2) the young men who do want heavy workloads also want to spend more of their money on luxury toys (clothing, cars, gadgets, party trips), in ways that would have perhaps been considered self-indulgent in the past.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    And now for anecdata.

    My high school graduating class had around 80 people. Since it was a small private prep school, we also knew most of the school. I don’t keep up with all of them, but I know at least what half of them are up to, plus a few others from other graduating classes. 95%+ went to and graduated from college.

    Of the females who went to school in the heartlands, most of them are not living in the coastal cities. Most of them are either in LTRs or married, with many of them that already have had kids before 30.

    Of the males who went to school in the heartlands, most of them are also not living in the coastal cities. Most of them are in LTRs or married, with also a fair number that already have had kids before 30.

    Of the females who went to Harvard, Princeton, Cornell and other big name schools on the coasts, and especially who continued to live in NYC, Boston, etc., no one is currently married, and many are not in LTRs. One of them did get engaged recently and will be married this year. I know her brother, who is one year older and attended the same school, and he doesn’t live in a coastal city, is married and has a baby who is a year old, so there is family influence.

    Of the males who went to the schools on the coasts, most are in LTRs, with several already married, and a few among them that have a young baby. Three have had babies without being married. Most of them do still live in the coastal cities. Two are gay.

  • Lokland

    “Why would any woman (or man for that matter) have sex with someone they are not physically attracted to?”

    Because they cannot have sex with people they are physically attracted to. (a more common occurrence among men.)

    Similarly its probably more common for women to be in relationships with men they are not physically attracted to.

  • JP

    “Of the females who went to Harvard, Princeton, Cornell and other big name schools on the coasts, and especially who continued to live in NYC, Boston, etc., no one is currently married, and many are not in LTRs. One of them did get engaged recently and will be married this year. I know her brother, who is one year older and attended the same school, and he doesn’t live in a coastal city, is married and has a baby who is a year old, so there is family influence.”

    Most people are shaped by their social environment, so this makes sense.

    Are people drawn to where they belong? Or are they shaped where they land?

  • JP

    “Why would any woman (or man for that matter) have sex with someone they are not physically attracted to?”

    “Because they cannot have sex with people they are physically attracted to. (a more common occurrence among men.)”

    This was the reason that I tried dating someone I wasn’t attracted to. Nobody who I wanted to date wanted to date me, leaving me with the people who wanted to date me who I didn’t want to date.

  • Lokland

    @JP

    “Are people drawn to where they belong? Or are they shaped where they land?”

    When one partitions environmental vs. genetics effects on a trait it can be a bit of both.

  • queeninjun

    I will say that in Los Angeles, the dating market is very, very tough for women and most men seem to be able to have their pick of women. Several of my friends who still live there are single and are paying for a shot at love with sex. The auditioning never ends. While I lived there, I told a boyfriend who insisted we move in together because he liked the part of town I lived in and that my apartment was so close to the beach that under no circumstances was he ever moving in unless we were engaged. This made him SOOOO mad at me. I was inconveniencing him, and that was a bad faith move on my part according to him. Men in LA are like that. Maybe the time I spent there skews my perception, but I felt like even the men I met felt very entitled to have anything they wanted in exchange for commitment. They were very aggressive about making sure their piece of the pie was larger and larger. And it’s not like any of them were even that impressive, anyway.

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

    @BB

    In one case, N would by a physically constrained phenomena, like, say, height. So you would have a male average height of 5’8″, with some guys being shorter and some taller (but no guys being 0′ tall and no guys being 150′ tall).

    Intriguing. I’ll state in advance that height definitely gives a guy a leg up in the relationship market, lest Thras drop by and chop my head off with extreme prejudice.

    However, if male height follows a decidedly normal distribution, with the median being less than 6′ tall:
    http://investing.calsci.com/statistics.html

    But reported male N is skewed to the left of 10:
    http://imageshack.us/a/img5/8493/pnrz.png

    What can be concluded from this?

  • Joe

    @MM Interesting graph. But the numbers for 1, 10, 15, 20, 50 and 100 are visibly out of whack. It looks like 1 is a special case (it says “I’m faithful to my one and only.”) and the others are examples of people combining rounding up (by at least 5) to a convenient number combined with exaggeration, wishful thinking and braggadocio.

    The other Ns seem to show a ring of truth.

  • queeninjun

    @ Hope

    *** Even here on this blog there are lots of people exhorting a 26-year-old woman to take a “wait-and-see” approach to marriage, and “don’t rock the boat” of a relationship that doesn’t appear to be headed to marriage, because she is “still young.”***

    I think the advice that everyone is giving Allison to take a wait-and-see approach is wrong for several reasons. Allison has already shown low value even if she has high SMV. Why? Because she is starting to appear needy. Once you know that you’re in a weak position (she said ILU first), you will start to lose it emotionally, and Allison is already on that slippery slope. The fact that she wanted to hear ILU in return and be ravished with mad desire and is now feeling unfulfilled that he doesn’t feel the same way puts her in a position of NEEDING to hear it in order to feel okay in the relationship. Now, there is no way that she can unhear the lack of a reciprocal ILU and this is going to taint her entire view of the relationship. Now, she will just be waiting for him to say it, and if he doesn’t she’s gone. He knows this and is probably feeling pressure. He probably think she’s putting unreasonable pressure on him to figure it out. She will never have to say another thing about the subject, but both he and she know that it’s sitting there, and he knows that if he doesn’t say ILU, she’s gone. So now he doesn’t trust whether she can be truly giving without strings attached (guys only commit to women who don’t want to be loved in return, but give love – this is somewhat paraphrased from the teaching of David Deida), and a man’s greatest fear is feeling manipulated by a woman (even if it’s not manipulation, he will see it this way). He only trusts male ways of expressing emotion. He wants her to be casual and fun, like a guy. Only by imitating a male friend and by providing hot sex and never complaining when he does something that would justifiably cause a woman anger will this guy commit. She already showed too much emotion, and men don’t know how to deal with that. She’s not the ‘cool girl’ that most guys want anymore. As a result, her very normal need to feel love and reciprocation will be viewed through the lens of neediness on his part. This relationship is going nowhere. I disagree with Susan about this one – there is a huge opportunity cost for Allison. Unlike a guy, Allison will not immediately go out to seek another mate. She will grieve for a longer period of time than a man will over the relationship failure precisely because she had invested more than he did emotionally. The die is cast. Moving in with him, having sex before exclusivity (presuming sex would lead to exclusivity and then to emotional attachment), and being upset at the lack of ILU puts her in a loser position. She lost this round and frankly, this relationship is not going to lead to marriage. By virtue of her neediness now, his attraction level will plummet through the floor. And a guy who’s hooking up with a girl with high SMV will not stick with her if she exhibits neediness. All of a sudden some other chick will look better even if Allison and the new girl have objectively the same SMV. This is how emotions and fear are going to distort Allison’s boyfriend’s perception of her, and naturally, like men do, he will start to compare her to the way other potential mates make him feel. If he feels like any other gal will make him feel less encumbered, that gal is going to start to look more attractive to him. He will think, I love Allison, but I just can’t be with her. Next thing you know, moving vans and broken hearts. He will stick around long enough so she feels she got her ‘ILU’s worth’ and then he’ll bail. It’s a good skill when hanging out with a new guy, when you can sneak it in, to learn how to nonchalantly ask “What is your opinion about marriage?” and let him talk, and listen, listen, listen – do not say a word (we women aren’t good at listening to what men actually say). Screen out cads by asking this question by assessing their sincerity in answering. Vague or glib answers need to be seen as red flags. Once you decide that you’re in it for the long-haul POST-SEX, you cannot ask this question and make it seem like an innocent conversational topic – he will never see it that way and he will always suspect your intentions. Trying to find out if a guy’s interested in marriage once you’ve had sex is such a weak strategy on a woman’s part. It never works. I know from my own experience. Anyone telling Allison to stay to see if he ‘develops feelings’ is just indulging her rom-com wishes of an eventual engagement ring and you guys are still making her believe she has a shot with this guy. She’s is going to go back in with renewed hopes that she can keep it together and wait it out and the red herring that is going to make her double down on this crappy hand is going to be his continued sexual interest in her although his mind has already counted her out of the running as his future wife. It’s not like he’s going to tell her that. The break up will come as a surprise. She’ll feel cheated, foolish and betrayed. But maybe I’m cynical and wrong. Please someone tell me I’m wrong. I so want the heroine to be happy and have a happy ending. I really do even though you all probably won’t believe me.

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

      Anyone telling Allison to stay to see if he ‘develops feelings’ is just indulging her rom-com wishes of an eventual engagement ring and you guys are still making her believe she has a shot with this guy.

      I don’t believe anyone has told her that. It’s clear to me and several others here that he does have strong feelings. It’s about his readiness to share them in a way that binds him to a lifetime partnership with her.

      I do agree with you that she is in a weak position, but I’ve seen women ride that to marriage many times. Some men like knowing a woman is a sure thing – for them.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    As the traditional male breadwinner has become a much-lampooned, tragi-comic figure on the Disney Channel, the next generation of young men are implicitly informed that this surplus is no longer necessary nor even appreciated, so male consumption patterns should more or less equal their production patterns. The economic basis of a relationship becomes “my money is my money, your money is your money”, courtship goes into a deep recession, and cheap “dates” come to dominate.

    Bastiat,

    Some/many men are hearing the message loud and clear from women that “they don’t need a provider”. A guy is better off hitting the gym 4-5 times a week and taking Krav Maga classes than maximizing his provisioning capability. Han covered this in his Evolutionary Incentives post

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

    @Joe
    Yes, HS had originally noted a spike in reported N at regular intervals. Women followed a similar pattern. Rounding… the best so-called adults can do when they can’t recall exactly how many other members of the opposite sex they’ve had intimate relations with!

    As to braggadocio, my suspicion is that a good many guys who can only truthfully claim N = 7 to 9 probably round up to 10. That would explain why the first tranche that seems to stick out.

    Here’s the exact same distribution, except I’ve filtered to only show N for currently married men. Sample size is about half of the first one:
    http://imageshack.us/a/img802/3048/v6y.png

    I don’t think most guys who report N = 1 are necessarily lying down to appear romantic in anonymous surveys. It may not be as high as 25%, but the CDC reported a solid 19% of married men in that category.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    Han solo, have you considered the male counterpart to that theory? That is, many young men spend their 20s playing video games and trying at the hottest girls, instead of their assortative potential partners? This leaves fewer men who appear attractive to women, except for nerdy girls who actually like video game playing men.

    That’s definitely a dynamic I saw.

    Hope,

    I think you are somewhat correct here. 2 things here. First, I think you have guys that for a variety of reasons simply give up especially if they hit a certain age and have experienced nothing but failure or disappointment. As I recall, prior to your husband meeting you, he had basically resigned himself to living the MGTOW lifestyle? At some point, if someone doesn’t get any positive feedback or results, they simply say f*ck it.

    Secondly, I think the widespread availability of porn is a gamechanger for many of those guys. It provides an outlet for at least on some basic level for satisfying that sexual drive/urge and therefore reduces the incentive to “get out there” and pursue, approach, and interact with women.

  • J

    Saying it on the third date is needy and creepy. Saying it first after three months is wonderful. No woman wants to say it first. It’s mortifying, and incredibly anxiety provoking, as we see in this post. When women do it, it’s because they generally can’t help it.

    Exactly.

    @ADBG #185, GM#191

    Thanks for sharing.

    @SW

    She quit her job in NYC, moved to Seattle, and vowed never to comment on a blog again.

    Cripes! Did being outed really have such a horrrible effect on her life that she had to move? That’s incredible and terrible. Verie seemed like such a nice girl. It’s a pity. At least Seattle is pretty, but where can you go to really get away from the net?

    Remember when Roosh outed that other poor girl? That was vicious.

    that’s how Obsidian lost his WordPress blog.

    Obs outed someone?

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

      Obs outed someone?

      No. He put up a photo of a woman, and proceeded to criticize/ridicule her. She wrote and asked him to take it down. He refused. Her lawyer went to WordPress and they nuked his blog permanently.

  • purplesneakers

    for the men, I wanted to pop in with a random question, seeing as how the thread is no longer just about the original topic anyway (I hope that’s okay Susan): would you marry a girl who was fit but had a lot of visible stretch marks? like shoulders, armpits, thighs, hips?

  • J

    Secondly, I think the widespread availability of porn is a gamechanger for many of those guys. It provides an outlet for at least on some basic level for satisfying that sexual drive/urge and therefore reduces the incentive to “get out there” and pursue, approach, and interact with women

    I have mixed feelings about this. It’s sad, but it also culls out the anti-social. More social men will still feel a need for female company, not just for sexual release.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    Someone threw this around on an earlier post, but I can’t remember the statistic. What % of male profiles receive general “Hot” vote ratings from females surveyed on internet dating sites?

    Bastiat,

    Here you go:

    http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/

    “As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway.”

    An interesting experiment would be to take guys of average looking appearance and have them approach average looking girls, and see how it plays out. Then take “hot” guys and have them approach average looking girls, and see how it plays out.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    I have mixed feelings about this. It’s sad, but it also culls out the anti-social. More social men will still feel a need for female company, not just for sexual release.

    Partly true, but you are mostly projecting here.

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

      More social men will still feel a need for female company, not just for sexual release.

      Partly true, but you are mostly projecting here.

      In Amber Madison’s survey of over 1,000 men, she measured their interest in being in a committed relationship.

      99% of men would welcome a relationship with the right girl
      73% said their primary interest in women is “someone to have a relationship with”
      18% are interested in companionship or short-term dating
      9% want women primarily to have sex with or impress their friends
      95% intend to marry

      Many other studies show similar results.

  • Anacaona

    I have mixed feelings about this. It’s sad, but it also culls out the anti-social. More social men will still feel a need for female company, not just for sexual release.
    I think you are having the image of an undeatble guy resorting to porn as a last resort. A lot of males that are social in every other way but feel at lost with women take refuge in porn/other sexual outlets. A man just need a strong emotional response to rejection to calls it quit. If the pool of potential dads keep shrinking it will affect the perception of the other men standing because most women will be competing for the men that are still interested in dating. That works against monogamy, marriage and kids as shown countless times. More women then men available is a disaster for LTR’s. We need to find balance in the amount of marriageable people to correct the SMP, YMMV.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    for the men, I wanted to pop in with a random question, seeing as how the thread is no longer just about the original topic anyway (I hope that’s okay Susan): would you marry a girl who was fit but had a lot of visible stretch marks? like shoulders, armpits, thighs, hips?

    PS,

    Speaking for myself, and I think most guys, this absolutely would NOT be a deal breaker, and I’m speaking with direct personal experience.

    FWIW, Retin-A works…I used it myself many years ago. At least for me, they have really faded with time.

    http://www.drgoodlerner.com/blog/?tag=retin-a-for-stretch-marks

    Do what you can to reduce the visibility within reason, but don’t sweat it that much. I’d say 99% of guys would prefer a fit girl with stretch marks over one who is carrying 25-40 pounds or even more in excess bodyfat.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Morpheus “First, I think you have guys that for a variety of reasons simply give up especially if they hit a certain age and have experienced nothing but failure or disappointment. As I recall, prior to your husband meeting you, he had basically resigned himself to living the MGTOW lifestyle?”

    Yes, but I think it’s also a function of what “marriage and LTR-minded women” tend to look for in men, which often involves financial stability, which an early 20s guy cannot generally offer.

    When I met my husband, he was living the MGTOW lifestyle because he had just come back from Peace Corps in Africa, was living in his dad’s basement, making less than 10k a year, and thinking about going to grad school which would still give him less than a livable wage.

    So he was not in any hurry to look for a woman to date, because he figured (probably correctly) that most physically attractive women in their 20s who have it “together” in their personal life would find him to be “undateable.” He most likely thought that he would finish grad school, get a job, and by then he’ll be stable enough and attractive enough personally to find a girl. He did not plan on meeting a weirdo like me who fell in love with him as he was back then.

    He might have become one of those guys saying “Why should I get married?” if he got to the point he is at today (that is, graduated with a master’s degree and working with a good salary) without a girl. Because then he would have a lot more to lose, and no guarantee of what he would gain. When we got married, I was making more than him and basically supporting him through grad school. I think that definitely factored into his willingness to marry me so soon — he had less to lose, and he knew that I wasn’t with him for his money.

    Many of the men saying “Why should I get married?” have already reached a high earning potential, and it is now that women start lining up. I have to admit that I have a bit of complex about men who make a lot of money, as in I was never very trusting of them and would always feel weird about dating them. Probably father issues (my father is a rich anesthesiologist). I went to Northwestern and knew a lot of guys who were from wealthy backgrounds, or went to the big name Ivies, and I had guys interested in me. I just didn’t go for that.

    Anyway, I digress. Long story short, money is definitely a factor in the marriage market.

  • MARY

    Morpheus,
    “Some/many men are hearing the message loud and clear from women that “they don’t need a provider”. A guy is better off hitting the gym 4-5 times a week and taking Krav Maga classes than maximizing his provisioning capability. Han covered this in his Evolutionary Incentives post”

    – First you guys tell us that we are hypergamous gold-diggers. Even if we ourselves make 200k per year, we want a man who makes 300k. Now all of a sudden you say we don’t need providers and don’t care about your money?!?!

    Which is it?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    queeninjun, I don’t think it’s necessarily that dire. I just think she should be looking out for her own interests — as she is the one seeking advice. A lot of the advice here is based around the “best case scenario,” which is that the guy will come around and love her “someday.” That result is good for both their interests. However, that is not taking into account the fact that there are other possibilities which are to her detriment, but work out fine for the guy.

    I’m not a cynic, but a realist.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    queeninjun “She already showed too much emotion, and men don’t know how to deal with that.”

    Also I think you are projecting a bit here. There are men who adore women who show a lot of emotion and demonstrate love. My husband is such a man.

    There’s a reason you don’t see people seeking advice going, “I told him I love him, and he said I love you back! We’re so in love with each other… help!” :p

  • http://www.decoybetty.com Deidre

    I just asked IC about this example. IC was 26 when we met, he said he loved me first about 1.5 months into dating.

    His basic response was “why is she asking you – the bloggers – and not him” and also “if his actions are saying “I want to be with you and care for you” then what’s the big deal?”

    IC and I had a very similar start to our relationship in that we met when we were in our mid 20s and were pretty much inseparable straight away.

    I guess the one thing that kind of concerns me about it is he says he wants his actions to show it – and the email doesn’t really say if his actions (besides spending so much time together) do show it? Since the ‘I love yous’ has he pampered her with her favourite dinners? Massages? anything that she loves that he knows she loves to say he cares?

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

      @Deidre

      Thanks for consulting IC! I agree that we don’t have enough information to know how he is showing he cares – I assumed that she feels very secure in his actions, or she wouldn’t have been bursting to say ILU.

      I know one couple who met on New Year’s. They were bf/gf after three weeks, just like this couple. I recall everyone was amazed at how quickly that happened. He said ILU in early March, and again, we were all happily surprised. Also, he confessed that he had wanted to say it on Valentine’s Day, but figured that was way too soon. In the end, I think he sort of blurted it, but she felt the same way so it worked out. Now, after six months, they openly state they will marry at some point.

      That’s the quickest relationship progress I know of personally, and it’s quite similar to yours.

  • SayWhaat

    Asian guys.

    Clubs.

    Damn.

  • jack

    Roissy is wrong about a lot of things. Sorry to burst your bubble.

    But is he wrong about this? Look at this very situation with Allison. She is lovesick over a man who won’t say ILU. The geo-scientist is basically using Roissy’s strategy and his girl is crazy about him, so much so that she is writing in to you for help.

    Susan, I like your main message but you are in danger of counseling men to return to the very beta behavior that has made them suffer in this smp. The more important thing to discuss is what Allison should do now; and what strategy women should use in general.

    Allison correctly waited for monogamy before sex. But if she, or any woman, has interest in marriage and family there is more to do. Should there be a time limit that girls give to every relationship? Should there be a time limit that women have for hearing ILU and declarations of potential marriage? How much time should a woman give any one man? How should this be adjusted for age?

    These are questions that need to be answered. Women need to be given a system or a methodology that is every bit as structured as what the PUAs give the guys. PUAs teach men how to get from meet to mate as quickly as possible. You should be teaching women how to get from meet to marriage as smoothly as possible. They’re going to need techniques for doing this, just the same way men need techniques for every stage of a seduction.

    Reading stories from girls like Allison almost makes me feel sympathy for women in today’s smp. Almost.

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

      @Jack

      The geo-scientist is basically using Roissy’s strategy and his girl is crazy about him, so much so that she is writing in to you for help.

      First, I seriously doubt whether he is deliberately withholding the truth about his feelings to manipulative her into feeling anxious and worried. He is clearly not a Machiavellian type, based on what we know of his history.

      Second, she was already crazy about him- she blurted out ILU and had he responded in kind, she’d be over the moon. Instead, she’s frantic and basically knows there’s a good chance this won’t work out. If he does love her, and he’s deliberately caused her pain, the LTR is doomed.

      Susan, I like your main message but you are in danger of counseling men to return to the very beta behavior that has made them suffer in this smp.

      Saying ILU is not beta, and refusing to say it is not alpha. Commitment is not beta. If you want to define Roissy = alpha = what men need, that’s fine. But Roissy is a lone wolf. Don’t follow his advice if you don’t want his life.

  • Bully

    Bastiat: makes sense. File me under #2.

    The massive flaw in PUAs intending to keep it going well into old age is the they neglect the personal empire needed to keep that kind of thing going. There’s no self investment. And game alone will NOT suffice.

    When a woman says “you’re too old for me” I’m sure that can be taken at face value enough of the time but just as often it means more like “you’re not alpha enough to mitigate the age difference.” Most PUAs don’t seem capable of the level of self investment needed to make that happen.

  • Liz

    @Susan

    No woman wants to say it first. It’s mortifying, and incredibly anxiety provoking, as we see in this post.

    Maybe… if it’s done in the hope of a like response. But shouldn’t it be possible to share how you feel without neediness? That’s how I did it.

    I think part of the problem is they’ve gotten ahead of themselves, and she’s only now realizing that, as much as he enjoys her company, maybe he doesn’t love her. She needs to scale back their time together and carefully examine her feelings, desires, and expectations.

    Unfortunately, when one or both parties is thinking “strategy” the relationship is probably doomed.

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

      But shouldn’t it be possible to share how you feel without neediness? That’s how I did it.

      Perhaps it should be possible, but communicating that information will change the relationship the moment the words are uttered. It will either intensify if the person reciprocates, fall apart if the person declares alarm or disinterest, or become stressful and anxiety provoking if the person’s response is ambiguous. There are risks and benefits to sharing your feelings, waiting, or not sharing them at all.

      ILU is a request for commitment – you’re asking someone to partner with you in a presumably permanent way. Timing is important.

  • Vitor

    Great! Now you know what to look for. You can fine tune based on your past relationship.

    Thanks, J. This last relationship happened naturally. I was doing an excursion and I saw that nice girl whom I would usually sit by her side and then we started exchanging some conversations which eventually escalated into a relationship.

    I think I have a better time with girls when I can talk with them for some time without any specific focus. If I am actively looking for a mate, though, such as in social gatherings, parties, etc. although I do not have any problem approaching and talking with girls, I feel sometimes a little awkward, unless she is already attracted to me and has showed me some signs of interest.

    Actually my experience has been that when I approach girls with the specific intent of looking for a mate, I am usually given a very clear sign of NON-interest, at the least. :) I do not have the skills to do magic talking or approaching that will sweep a girl off her feet, even though I am able to approach and entreat normal conversations.

  • Vitor

    No woman wants to say it first. It’s mortifying, and incredibly anxiety provoking, as we see in this post.

    Maybe… if it’s done in the hope of a like response. But shouldn’t it be possible to share how you feel without neediness? … Unfortunately, when one or both parties is thinking “strategy” the relationship is probably doomed.

    That’s how I see it. A girl who’s always expecting the guy to express feelings first strikes me as being manipulative, or wanting to have the upper hand in the relationship, etc.

  • Vitor

    I think you are having the image of an undeatble guy resorting to porn as a last resort. A lot of males that are social in every other way but feel at lost with women take refuge in porn/other sexual outlets. A man just need a strong emotional response to rejection to calls it quit.

    I can definitely relate to that. I have used porn a lot which to my mind was mostly to mediate feelings of rejection, feeling unattractive, mild depression, etc. I would download the latest gonzo clip with a stunning and fully compliant porn star and have a “high” which would make me feel satisfied for a while.

    Eventually I had to quit because I realized how it was screwing me up, including my very motivation to look for and pursue real women. When those girls started to do ATM scenes I realized something was very wrong about all that, including the fantasies I was feeding. It’s an easy trap.

    I don’t know how I could explain this to women. But porn is more or less like chick flick movies for women. They feed our fantasies and unfulfilled desires/dreams. This feeds a vicious circle in which doing something to be happy and realize our dreams, which could be something as simple as just having a normal relationship with a normal girlfriend is much harder than feeding the fantasy. Eventually we might actually lose contact with planet earth and live in a fantasy world. :)

  • J

    Commitment is not beta.

    It is in Roissy world where an alpha is defined by high N.

    He put up a photo of a woman, and proceeded to criticize/ridicule her. She wrote and asked him to take it down. He refused. Her lawyer went to WordPress and they nuked his blog permanently.

    Just some random woman? Not some who asked to be rated?

    SSM did that recently. She posted random photos of fat women and criticized them. One of the fat women showed up and demanded that the photo be taken down. SSM took it down, but she did npt remove the remaining photos. It all seemed vey unChristian to me, mean spirited.

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

      Just some random woman? Not some who asked to be rated?

      No, I think she was a celebrity or something. He violated the copywright, but would have been OK if he’d just taken it down. But he dug in his heels as Obs is wont to do. He came back with some other platform, but his blog and his following were never the same.

  • Sassy6519

    But the women overall rated 80% of the men “unattractive.” When this was discussed here, most of the women chimed in to say, yep, about right, 80% of the men I see in daily life are unnattractive.

    Thank goodness looks count less for overall attraction for women than for men, but still …

    Yeah, I can say that I am very visually/looks oriented, when it comes to selecting a man I would consider dating.

    In my opinion, 75%-80% of men are average looking to me. When I look at them, my reaction is of a “meh” quality. It’s really hard for me to get past that hurdle too, so the ability to be physically/sexually attracted to them is very low.

    Does that limit my options? Yes.
    Am I willing to put up with that? Yes.

    I’m not in a rush to find someone, especially since my desire to not have children has negated the effects of a “biological clock”. I’ll just bide my time until I meet someone that I am really excited about. Whether that happens now or in the next 10-15 years is up to chance.

  • JP

    “But these are women who are not wired for relationships. Their triggers and behaviors are STR-oriented. Since they represent a small percentage of women (20%) why not just ignore them?”

    Because we don’t want 20% of the male population wandering about aimlessly looking for a roving band of marauders to join in order to pillage the locals?

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

      Because we don’t want 20% of the male population wandering about aimlessly looking for a roving band of marauders to join in order to pillage the locals?

      Ha, they have watering holes they meet up in, and have no desire to interact with the locals.

  • Abbot

    Love is easier when there are fewer barriers. Here’s a bigee:

    “To test the conditions under which a sexual double standard is endorsed, 110 male and 146 female college students (94% white, 3% black, 3% all other ethnicities) responded to vignettes depicting either a male or female target as having a low or high number of past sexual partners within committed or noncommitted relationships. In general, little support for the endorsement of a sexual double standard was found. However, participants consistently made differential judgments on the basis of sexual experience: Targets described as having more permissive sexual histories received more negative evaluations than did those described as having less permissive sexual histories.”

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01544609

    Also, this is a good read. See page 335:

    http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/pregan/PDF%20files/Sprecher,%20Regan,%20et%20al.%20(1997)%20-%20Preferred%20Level%20of%20Sexual%20Experience.pdf

    .

  • angelguy

    “This feeds a vicious circle in which doing something to be happy and realize our dreams, which could be something as simple as just having a normal relationship with a normal girlfriend is much harder than feeding the fantasy. Eventually we might actually lose contact with planet earth and live in a fantasy world. :)

    @Vitor

    Having a normal girlfriend isn’t a common thing anymore, not in the way it is portrayed in the media. Hook-up culture has changed that.
    All of this stuff we see on TV isn’t reality. And I am not just talking about Men with Porn. If you compare the Men on TV to that of the real world, it is much different. I guess you can say people are living in a fantasy world, if they are measuring their standards to what they see.
    If you carefully listen to how media portrays relationships, it is very depressing.

  • JP

    “But Roissy is a lone wolf. Don’t follow his advice if you don’t want his life.”

    More like a rabid wolf whose brain is already partially deteriorated.

  • JP

    “No. He put up a photo of a woman, and proceeded to criticize/ridicule her. She wrote and asked him to take it down. He refused. Her lawyer went to WordPress and they nuked his blog permanently.”

    Internet defamation cases are the best!

    And I mean fun!

    Literally the most fun you can have as a litigator.

    My favorite part is sitting down in a deposition and interrogating a witness for hours about e-mails they wrote.

    Kids, remember, don’t put things in intra-office e-mails that you don’t want some random lawyer to ask you about three years later!

  • JP

    I’m going to do something unusual and respond to the letter in this blog.

    Yes, I’ve actually taken the time to *read* the *actual* blog post.

    To me, the question is whether the same thing that is happening here is what happened in the *last* two year relationship.

    Is it following the same track as the last woman?

    If, so, then the outcome is likely to be the same (same pattern means same likely outcome).

    I don’t know how to easily find that out.

  • Valentin

    I wish most women were as frank and content with their choices as Sassy.
    But then I guess most women have a hard time giving up the attention of orbiters despite all the negative impact it has on the SMP.

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

      I wish most women were as frank and content with their choices as Sassy.

      I propose we name this the Hooking Up Smart Fallacy. Would anyone care to add it to wikipedia?

  • JP

    “I propose we name this the Hooking Up Smart Fallacy. Would anyone care to add it to wikipedia?”

    I’ll add it to my list of Wikipedia edits.

    Now my list contains two things to fix.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Valentin

    I wish most women were as frank and content with their choices as Sassy.
    But then I guess most women have a hard time giving up the attention of orbiters despite all the negative impact it has on the SMP.

    My brain really doesn’t understand the appeal of having orbiters. I understand that some women like keeping orbiters around for emotional support and validation, but it just seems unnecessary and somewhat cruel in my opinion.

    I’ve stated a few times that I don’t have any male friends. I don’t see the point because I don’t think that a true friendship is possible between myself and a man. Attraction, or sexual tension, usually rears its ugly head at some point and it can either be one sided or mutual. If it’s one sided, someone is getting their feelings hurt. If it’s mutual, I don’t consider that person my friend. I consider them a romantic interest instead.

    Maybe it’s like collecting beanie-babies for some women. I don’t know.

  • Valentin

    Hooking up smart fallacy? I… I don’t get it. ;>_>

    Sassy I think it has to do with those women in general relating to men from that utilitarian viewpoint which is the basis for hypergamy. In that context you can find many uses for different types of men if validation to increase your sense of self-worth is what you’re after.

    You however have a different (normal) way of relating to men as men. I’m not trying to flatter you but you have a maturity about you and naturally you’re alot more clear on how relationships work and what can work. That’s what I was saying I guess: I like your acceptance on the reality of friendship and sexual tension. It would do both parties of this messed up SMP good if we were alot more straight-forward with eachother.

  • JP

    “I’ve stated a few times that I don’t have any male friends. I don’t see the point because I don’t think that a true friendship is possible between myself and a man. Attraction, or sexual tension, usually rears its ugly head at some point and it can either be one sided or mutual. If it’s one sided, someone is getting their feelings hurt.”

    Well, yeah.

    It appears, nothing happens, and you stay friends.

  • Sassy6519

    @ JP

    Well, yeah.

    It appears, nothing happens, and you stay friends.

    That’s the thing. Something always happens. Usually, the men confess having feelings for me, or the desire to sleep with me. This happens often, and is the primary reason why friendships don’t form between myself and men.

    After such confessions, everything that they say is viewed as suspicious to me. Typically, the confessions occur within 2 months of meeting the men. I respect them for that, at least. I’d rather know that a guy is interested in me within 1-2 months of knowing him than for him to waste several months or years pining after me when I don’t feel the same way.

    That seems like a very misguided form of masochism.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Valentin

    You however have a different (normal) way of relating to men as men. I’m not trying to flatter you but you have a maturity about you and naturally you’re alot more clear on how relationships work and what can work. That’s what I was saying I guess: I like your acceptance on the reality of friendship and sexual tension. It would do both parties of this messed up SMP good if we were alot more straight-forward with eachother.

    Well, thanks for the kind words. :D

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    I propose we name this the Hooking Up Smart Fallacy. Would anyone care to add it to wikipedia?

    Haha!

    Well, for the record, I know that plenty of the women on this blog besides myself are very honest about their wants and motivations too.

  • JP

    “After such confessions, everything that they say is viewed as suspicious to me.”

    I would expect that after a clear “no”, as in “no, not now nor ever”, then their feelings would dissipate and you can move forward with the friendship again.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Interesting theory and anecdotes about the differences amongst the college-educated of the heartland and the coastal cities. This seems to speak mostly to the cultural expectations where marriage and family at a somewhat younger age (not that young though) is more sought after than amongst the more left-wing and somewhat feminist average college-educated crowd of the liberal/coast cities.

    It makes sense to me. Would be interesting to see the state by state data on the marriage age and age of having first child by region or state.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope
    Above should read:

    It makes sense to me. Would be interesting to see the state by state data on the marriage age and age of having first child for college-educated people by region or state.

  • Sassy6519

    @ JP

    I would expect that after a clear “no”, as in “no, not now nor ever”, then their feelings would dissipate and you can move forward with the friendship again.

    In an “ideal” world, perhaps. Reality begs to differ, however.

    What has happened, time and time again, is that the men disappear from my life after I reject their feelings. I don’t blame them for it one bit actually. It seems to be the smartest thing to do, in my opinion.

  • Anacaona

    ARGGH! Terrible wording let’s try again.
    Do you take requests?
    There is a big stupid claim in Luis Miguel English Wiki that is cruel and inaccurate but I’m teaching myself so many stuff as off now that I don’t want to learn how to edit Wikipedia as well.

  • jack

    The mean alone is nearly meaningless because of that very long right tail. At the very least we need the median to even begin to understand the distribution in any sample.

    The number of male N will never be a Gausian distribution. It will be a Pareto one; i.e. a power law distribution. In other words, when a man is good with women he is extraordinarily good with women; i.e. your natural friend who had sex with a hundred girls a year from the ages of 23-26.

    That dude is so far beyond the norm that he’s in a different world when it comes to women. Those guys are rare but they do exist. How they affect the SMP is a different question. But a number of the girls they sleep with are unrestricted girls. I know this because I had exactly that natural friend. He slept with more than a few phd and masters candidates who “never go for a guy like that”. Well they did. Sure they eventually found a normal boyfriend. But they all hoped my natural friend would commit. Which is sad if you think about it because their boyfriends and even husbands have received a spiritual / romantic type of “sloppy seconds”.

    I hate that fact of the SMP but it is what it is.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Susan

    I don’t understand this. Why do you think women’s attitudes changed more? The Pill and the Sexual Revolution resulted in a bacchanalia of free love that was embraced by both sexes, as the “costs” of sex plummeted, for both sexes. Since we know that women generally exhibit lower sex drives, it doesn’t seem logical to claim they were “self-restraining more than men.”

    I would also point out the burst of female promiscuity in the 1920s. Even the Pilgrims had a 50% premarital sex rate.

    Of course women clamped down on their sexuality much more than men back then. They were the ones that bore the brunt of pregnancy and there wasn’t DNA testing or enforced child support back then. Men clamped down somewhat too but with women doing most of the clamping down the men didn’t have much choice but to go along with it.

    The roaring 1920s proves my point of how society started to prosper more and those women who were working and self-sufficient in the cities didn’t need a provider as much so they could be more promiscuous. Then came the Depression that brought hard times to a lot of people so they toned it down. Then the post-war economic boom (along with the pill, welfare and other factors that made the overall environment MUCH more favorable to having OOW pregnancies) helped enable the sexual revolution of the 60’s and the gradual acceptance of loosened sexual mores and attitudes about having children OOW over the subsequent decades.

    As to the pilgrims having premarital sex, that doesn’t speak to whether it was with lots of partners or whether it was with the man that would become her husband. If the woman got pregnant the man was forced to marry her.

    http://voices.yahoo.com/sex-pilgrim-thanksgiving-facts-liven-up-666176.html

    An intriguing analysis by the University of Virginia found that 11% of the marriages at Plymouth Colony had births from premarital sex. The same analysis estimates that as many as 50% of the Pilgrims engaged in premarital sex. That’s not something that fits the modern image of the staid Pilgrim. It’s when sex begins to deviate from married couples, that the stories get a bit salacious.

    Sex outside of marriage usually meant a whipping and fines. If the woman became pregnant, the man had to either marry her or pay for the child’s upbringing. The man was usually placed in stocks and whipped. The woman was made to watch.

    You said:

    You said ” are free to attempt out-of-their-league or unsuitable-for-long-term men.” I agree that they are free to do so, but it’s very clear that most do not attempt it. Pointing out that they have the option is not meaningful if few care to exercise it. You assume that because a badboy has slept with 100 women that all women want the badboy. In fact, the badboy has simply tapped into a niche and markets himself effectively to women with certain preferences and traits.

    I never made the assumption that ALL women want to sleep with badboys. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.

    I think that if you look at the number of N that women are having now as compared with 100 years ago that it has risen a lot and that many of the men that many of these women were having a few of their Ns with were the type I described–higher-value that won’t commit to them or unsuitable-yet-sexy badboys.

    Where can I see that data? How do you know which type women have sex with? This sounds like pure speculation on your part.

    We know the number of sexual partners has risen dramatically. I don’t think you’re arguing that but just in cases, here’s a link:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7450868/Young-women-have-three-times-as-many-sexual-partners-as-grandmothers-did.html

    “The average was 5.65 people. By contrast, women of their mother’s generation, who were in their early twenties in the 1980s, had had an average of 3.72 sexual partners by the same age. And the previous generation were even less promiscuous. Women of their grandmother’s generation, aged 24 in the 1960s, averaged just 1.67 partners.”

    But to your point, from the article on attractiveness vs. numbers and types of sex partners, we see that the most attractive men had more partners than the others, the reverse of the effect seen by the women:

    Looks……….M…….F….
    very attr…9.92…..5.14
    attractive..7.23…..5.59
    average…..6.97…..5.69
    unattr…….6.01…..6.03

    Also, looks doesn’t encompass most of a man’s SMV so if you could do a combined looks+charisma vs N then you would likely see an even starker trend.

    So, who are these most attractive men getting sex from if not from the most attractive women? From the “lesser” women.

    Also, the very attractive men were the most likely to report a sex-only relationship –2x more likely than the very attractive women–so they must be having these sex-only relationships with lesser women or there’s some serious delusion going on where the women think they’re in a serious relationship but the men think it’s just sex–probably a bit of both going on.

    Also, the very attractive men were more likely to report sex in the first week than the other men–the opposite of what the women report.

    Combining this paper with lots of anecdotes and the logic of women compensating for the risks of casual sex by going up in male value, there is good reason to believe my claim: that when women go for casual sex they do so with guys that are more appealing for said activity. This will either be with higher-value guys they would like to date or with guys that have higher short-term sexual value (local rockstar or badboy) that they wouldn’t think of marrying.

    I’ve always held the opinion that a good 40 or 50% of the population is carrying on in very assortative ways and not being very promiscuous.

    Again, what is the basis for this claim? The data clearly demonstrates that the number is more like 80-90%, and I have written dozens of posts that confirm and highlight this.

    I was meaning people that have somewhat like 0-2 partners before marriage, get married in their early to late 20’s and stay married for life. I probably wasn’t clear in communicating but I meant that they were acting in ways very similar to 50 or 100 years ago. More religious and traditional people would come to mind, along with the unrestricted. Also, I was meaning that the women were not particularly hypergamous. Your 80-90% is talking more about people who are not engaged in acquiring high sex numbers but doesn’t talk about whether they are always being assortative (non-hypergamous) and marrying at a not-too-old age.

    As some women on here have said, if you’re going to have casual sex, why not do it with the most appealing that are available?

    And again, the number of women doing that is very small. Most casual sex is a “crime of opportunity” – both sexes will indulge with the best available option at a time when they are likely intoxicated. In any case, the number of female “players” who go trawling for casual sex is extremely small, and generally correlated to poor mental health.

    I said nothing about trawling or frequency. Just that if they’re going to do it they’ll go for what seems most appealing of what’s available at the time.

    But it isn’t a small number who has ever done it. A large percentage of both men and women have engaged at least once in at least one of the following: a hookup, ONS, fling, FWB, STR, STR they hoped would become an LTR.

    There is a market effect, but they are not the norm. So when we describe the SMP, we should not generalize this dynamic as representative of the whole. In fact, it appears that high N women are primarily mating with high N men, and vice versa. In this way the market is quite efficient now. The men they are with are not suitable or even desirable in most cases to lower N women.

    I’m not generalizing the dynamic as representative of the whole. You’re the one misinterpreting what I’m saying.

    I disagree that the market is quite efficient. If it were you wouldn’t have so many people that are single so late into life when they really are wanting a relationship. You wouldn’t have all the women searching “Why don’t I have a bf?” At any rate, it’s less efficient than it used to be.

    Re testosterone, I wasn’t attempting to make a point about it – just trying different phrases to attempt to zero in on what you mean by unsuitable. My point is that only a small percentage of women are aiming out of their league with unsuitable men. They are the top quintile unrestricted – and as I’ve said, the men they’re going after are in fact quite suitable for them.

    Here we have a fundamental disagreement. If men can get casual by going down, often with women that think they’re auditioning for a relationship by giving up sex, then it’s not just the top quintile of unrestricted women engaging in this, at least once or twice and getting burnt.

    “The raunch queens both drive the market but also cater to an underlying demand deep within their female customers for such a slut-empowering product.”

    This is false. The raunch queens do not drive the market, as most people seek and find relationships. They don’t even drive market behavior among college students. They do impact the culture, which has a deleterious effect on the market for both sexes equally.

    I was speaking to the actual market of selling their product (e.g. music) and there is no doubt that they are selling a lot to women who don’t fully engage in lots of slutty behavior. So why are the non-sluts or occasionally promiscuous buying this music (either through direct purchase or via the advertisement-supported youtube and radio) from women that dress provocatively and speak of casual sex?

    Just one example is Rihanna, who is quite successful in her sales, dresses provocatively, has a badboy relationship and offers lyrics that speak to the sense of sexual empowerment that many young women like to feel (I personally like some of her music and this song but it exemplifies my point):

    “Don’t Stop The Music”

    I wasn’t looking for nobody when you looked my way
    Possible candidate, yeah….
    But now we’re rocking on the dance floor, actin’ naughty
    Your hands around my waist
    Just let the music play
    We’re hand in hand, chest to chest and now we’re face to face
    I wanna take you away….
    Baby are you ready cause it’s getting close
    Don’t you feel the passion ready to explode?
    What goes on between us no-one has to know
    This is a private show

    Sounds like some grinding and naughty dancing that’s leading her to want to “take him away” so that their passion can orgasmically explode.

    The female customers for raunch queens who have a deep need for slut empowerment – they are outliers. Perhaps 1-3% of the population.

    Not just 1-3% is listening to her music, liking it, thus creating the demand for it while simultaneously being influence to some small degree by it.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Susan

    Meant to say about OOW pregnancies that the pill reduced the likelihood and then the other factors like welfare, increased female earning power and lesser stigma made the environment more favorable in case OOW did happen.

  • Hope

    Sassy, I agree with you about not keeping orbiters around, because often male friends end up wanting something more. I did befriend one guy at a time to get to know the guy better as an alternative to dating though. I basically asked my husband for his info under the guise of friendship, fully with intentions of more.

    Hansolo, I think when women go for men who don’t commit, it is not necessarily that the man is higher than her in “rating,” but more that the woman has failed to engage the man on a deep emotional level, thinking that dating, sex and time are sufficient to make the man fall in love with her.

    So women try to audition for the spot of girlfriend via sex, when that is really backwards. It’s the same idea as a man trying to get sex from a girl via offering her a relationship. The first step has to be deep mutual attraction on an emotional level. Without that, even a guy lower on smv would not marry a high smv woman who just offers sex. Why would he?

  • Big Bill

    “Here’s the real deal. A 26-year-old woman doesn’t have the same “timeline” as a 26-year-old man. Let’s assume she meets a guy tomorrow, add another 2 or 3 years before she actually gets married, and maybe another year before she has kids. She’s 29, 30 at this point. If she doesn’t meet any guy until she’s 30, then push everything back by that many years. Now consider that 35 and older is medically a geriatric pregnancy!”

    Not to mention she is working on a PhD, has several years more research, then will have to get a position somewhere, maybe 6-8-10 years for tenure, maybe have to move on again and try elsewhere. Piles of debt to pay off, which she is going to need help with. Maybe no kids ever.

    From a guy perspective, why waste time and effort on someone you may even love, but is so far from being a wife and mother (if ever) that there really is no point in settling down. Enjoy the sex and company, and if it happens to work out, then fine. If not, you really haven’t lost anything.

    There are no jobs for PhDs. When the immigration hill passes there really arent going to be jobs, period. With no social security, you need a woman who invests in children not some flunky adjunct job after piling up beaucoup debt. Does she love you enough to make mac and cheese with spam while herding two little ones in married student housing like my mother did? Then keep her.

  • MARY

    “SSM did that recently. She posted random photos of fat women and criticized them. One of the fat women showed up and demanded that the photo be taken down. SSM took it down, but she did npt remove the remaining photos. It all seemed vey unChristian to me, mean spirited.”

    – You have to understand that this is a woman in a very, very, very insecure marriage to a promiscuous philandering so-called “husband”. Every woman to her is a threat. Every woman to her is “the enemy”. She said it herself on her very own blog.

    Her blog is actually a cry for help.

  • MARY

    ” When the immigration hill passes there really arent going to be jobs, period. With no social security, you need a woman who invests in children not some flunky adjunct job after piling up beaucoup debt. Does she love you enough to make mac and cheese with spam while herding two little ones in married student housing like my mother did? Then keep her.”

    – If there’s going to be “no jobs” then how will this woman and her husband afford to have kids in the first place ?!

    This one commenter on SSM’s blog said that “children are a blessing from god” and she doesn’t use any natural or artificial birth control method because “god knows” when children need to be born or not. So her and her husband are having a lot of sex and a lot of kids and she said that they “rely on the government sometimes” when needed until “god” gives them better job oppurtunities.

    Great. That’s my tax dollars going to some fundie nut case and her brood all because they don’t want to exercise sexual restraint and self control, which I thought was supposed to be an integral part of that religion.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    I agree that many women are poor at creating emotional bonds with men they want to date or marry and so more attention to this should be given, like the post on 25 Ways to Get a BF or whatever it’s called.

    But did you see the study I posted in my massive :) comment above?

    The hottest guys are having the most casual sex while the hottest women are having the least so who are these “lesser” women having sex with? Well, the hotter guys.

    Also, way more men claim to be in a sex-only relationship than women–and the hottest men are the most likely to report that–so the women are deluding themselves into thinking that they’re not in a sex-only relationship. They’re thinking that it’s something more or that it has potential while the men are just saying, “I’m a happy tapper for now.”

    And since the hottest men are in “sex only” relationships more than the other men while the women’s numbers are flat from very attractive down to avg, some of the hottest men must be having these “sex only” relationships with lesser women.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    Here’s the link to the study I’m talking about. Find Tables 2 and 3 for a good look at what the hottest and not hottest are doing. Remember also, these are young adults, average age of about 21.5 I think, so the men’s total N will rise a lot more as they age. The most attractive are the least likely to be in “dating exclusively” relationships so they will be more likely to raise their N going forward.

  • J

    and she said that they “rely on the government sometimes” when needed until “god” gives them better job oppurtunities.

    So, indirectly, I suppose this makes me,as a taxpayer, a god.

  • Liz

    Sure they eventually found a normal boyfriend. But they all hoped my natural friend would commit. Which is sad if you think about it because their boyfriends and even husbands have received a spiritual / romantic type of “sloppy seconds”.

    WTF? Just because you fell for a Casanova once hardly makes you “sloppy seconds.”

    Disappointment is part of life, and who among us hasn’t had unrealistic hopes? We DO get over these things.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    Okay, I promise, this time I really will include the link! :D

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19485565.2011.615172#.Uc8lyvmkpd6

  • Vitor

    Attraction, or sexual tension, usually rears its ugly head at some point and it can either be one sided or mutual. If it’s one sided, someone is getting their feelings hurt. If it’s mutual, I don’t consider that person my friend. I consider them a romantic interest instead.

    +1 All of my friendships with women ended up in sexual tension. When it’s one sided, it can happen also on the woman’s side. Quite normal for an heterosexual friendly interaction.

  • Vitor

    @HanSolo: I have seen some of your comments here and I wonder: what are you trying to prove exactly? Do you remember that hypothetical example Susan gave in a previous post about how the probability distributions would be if you gather together 200 random people in a room, 100 being male and 100 being female? How do you see the distribution in that hypothetical example, given real life probabilities or dynamics?

  • MARY

    “The hottest guys are having the most casual sex while the hottest women are having the least ”

    Depends on how you define “casual”.

    A pretty girl ( 7.5 and higher) will experience no dearth of suitors and boyfriends from (on the conservative side) the age of 14 onwards.

    If she restricts herself solely to “relationship sex” and she has only (on the conservative side) 1 boyfriend per every two years (but in real life we know she has more than that), then by the age of 26 her number is, on the conservative side, at least 6.

    But in real life its closer to 8 or 10.

  • Abbot

    “Just because you fell for a Casanova once hardly makes you “sloppy seconds.”

    True. Unless the future dude thinks it does.

    .

  • Vitor

    @Jack:

    Those guys are rare but they do exist. How they affect the SMP is a different question. But a number of the girls they sleep with are unrestricted girls. I know this because I had exactly that natural friend. He slept with more than a few phd and masters candidates who “never go for a guy like that”. Well they did. Sure they eventually found a normal boyfriend. But they all hoped my natural friend would commit. Which is sad if you think about it because their boyfriends and even husbands have received a spiritual / romantic type of “sloppy seconds”.

    I hate that fact of the SMP but it is what it is.

    I understand what you’re talking about. That’s why a girl’s past speaks volumes or at least issues a lot of red flags for a guy who’s looking for a relationship. One thing is a girl who had a relationship, say, with a decent, honest guy. Another completely different is another who has had ONS or dated the popular jerk or cad. This issues a huge red flag. I don’t know if this is always fair, but it’s how it works for guys who are not so naive about women’s behavior and preferences.

  • Abbot

    “I don’t know if this is always fair, but it’s how it works for guys who are not so naive about women’s behavior and preferences.”

    Why / how is it unfair?

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

    What are you trying to prove exactly?

    This has been a perennial theme around here. As there isn’t hard data on who’s sleeping with who, what their respective N is, and how often, I’m not sure what such hypothetical speculation accomplishes.

    Unless the goal here is to enlarge the % of women who meet the new definition of promiscuous (N = 1 with the wrong type of guy, under the wrong circumstances), and disqualify them accordingly. Nothing wrong with doing that BTW, though it will dramatically shrink the dating pool.

    And who’s to say a man with 1 or 2 so-called casual encounters under his belt is any more suitable for a relationship than a woman with the same experience?

  • MARY

    “Unless the goal here is to enlarge the % of women who meet the new definition of promiscuous (N = 1 with the wrong type of guy, under the wrong circumstances)”

    LOL @ that new definition of promiscuous!

    “And who’s to say a man with 1 or 2 so-called casual encounters under his belt is any more suitable for a relationship than a woman with the same experience?”

    Bingo!

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Vitor

    This discussion got started by me responding to queeninjun, as I told Susan,

    “I was responding to queeninjun who was making it sound like men were mostly the ones responsible for today’s SMP and that women were just helpless victims that had to put out with no say in the matter.”

    Queeninjun responded that what I wrote was spot on and she’d seen it in her life:

    “So, definitely agree with what you’ve said. I know that many, if not most, of the faulty dynamics that you speak of were at play in my failed relationships, and I wish I had known better sooner.”

    My main point is that due to a much more rich/safe/birth-control environment that women are freed up to try to get relationships or sex with men that wouldn’t be their assortative partners if you paired everyone off.

    With unpaired men roaming around then women of lesser value are free to try and get with them for either short or long-term and more importantly, many women actually do this, as I showed with the numbers from the study in the link in comment 301, where the hottest men had the highest N and were more likely to be engaged in 1st week sex and “only sex” relationships while the women’s numbers had a slight decline as you went up in hotness.

    So for the 200 people together, the most attractive men will get more of the attention. Now if they were living on an island with no outside contact for decades then what would happen exactly would depend on how safe/rich the environment was and whether women really needed a committed provider/protector. If women really did need such a man then they would be more likely to form such relationships and soon. If it was more of a Paradise Island setting then there would be little survival pressure to find a mate and so the women could spend more time hoping and pining for one of the upper 20% of the men to go for them. I imagine that a good half of the women wouldn’t spend much time on them (besides a few idle thoughts of adoration) and would sooner or later find a compatible man more at their level. The other half would likely hypergamously compete for the upper 20%. Some of the less hypergamous would tire of the pump and dumps and heartbreak and eventually settle with a man in their league. Perhaps the most hypergamous would never settle and neither would many of the most unrestricted who would just enjoy the higher-value men they can get.

    At no point have I ever said ALL women are going for the top 3% or the top 20% so no one needs to trot out that red herring again.

    What do you think would happen on Paradise Island?

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

      @Han Solo

      Of course women clamped down on their sexuality much more than men back then. They were the ones that bore the brunt of pregnancy and there wasn’t DNA testing or enforced child support back then. Men clamped down somewhat too but with women doing most of the clamping down the men didn’t have much choice but to go along with it.

      My point was that women are less promiscuous than men, having a lower desire for sexual variety and a greater desire for sexual monogamy with commitment. For most women, female sexuality may be fulfilled Pilgrim style.

      I never made the assumption that ALL women want to sleep with badboys. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.

      I apologize, I spoke carelessly there. You have indeed made it clear many times that you do not believe all women are hypergamous sluts by nature. Where you and I differ, I believe, is in the following areas:

      1. You believe a higher percentage of women goes for unsuitable men than I do. (50% vs. 10-20%)

      2. In discussing promiscuous or unrestricted behavior, you often include women who have had even one casual experience with an “unsuitable” man. I focus on N without regard for the “type” of male, mostly because that information is not available.

      The finding that good looking men have more options for sex, more unrestricted sociosexuality and more sexual partners has been covered here many times. It’s hardly controversial. Still, the number of men, good-looking or not, who pursue a high number of sexual partners is a very small percentage of the population. AFAIK, we do not have any data on the relative attractiveness of the partners of these men. I have speculated that the most attractive women and the least attractive men are the losers in this SMP, because the natural partners of the most attractive women avoid commitment, while the most attractive women demand it.

      3. You ascribe far more influence to the SMP of the behavior of a small minority of the population than I do. I believe that Pluralistic Ignorance is the primary factor that makes partnering in relationships difficult, especially during the college years. There is consensus on this view among colleges who have studied it.

      I believe that promiscuous men and women are mostly getting what they want in this SMP, and that promiscuous females do not in fact want commitment – as they are wired for STRs.

      So why are the non-sluts or occasionally promiscuous buying this music (either through direct purchase or via the advertisement-supported youtube and radio) from women that dress provocatively and speak of casual sex?

      Extrapolation from consumer purchasing behavior to sexual behavior is invalid. It is very clear from the data that the percentage of women listening to pop music is many times higher than the percentage of women who are promiscuous. Whether they are influenced “in some small degree” or any degree to have sex is pure speculation.

      My main point is that due to a much more rich/safe/birth-control environment that women are freed up to try to get relationships or sex with men that wouldn’t be their assortative partners if you paired everyone off.

      This is true. For most of history, marriage has been an economic transaction, arranged by family. The lucky woman who was attracted to her betrothed was unusual. Many women were unhappily married off to rich, old farts, lol. Of course women will exercise choice if they are not required to depend on a spouse financially. That’s a good thing, IMO. Why would you want marriages where people are “paired off” against their will? Like Elizabeth Bennett, most women would rather not marry than marry where there is no love.

      If women really did need such a man then they would be more likely to form such relationships and soon. If it was more of a Paradise Island setting then there would be little survival pressure to find a mate and so the women could spend more time hoping and pining for one of the upper 20% of the men to go for them.

      As I’ve already pointed out with the 48 nation study, women in safe environments go for less dominant, more suitable men. They choose unsuitable partners when they require extreme dominance for safety.

      Re the new study you referenced here detailing the change in female N over generations, I would point out two things:

      1. The study was conducted in the UK, the most promiscuous country in the world.

      2. The average age at marriage has increased from 20.3 to 26.5 between 1960 and today. In my view, four additional partners during that additional 6 years of dating is hardly surprising.

      I will close by making one final point about studies.

      I certainly wouldn’t risk my life for a study – I don’t know who would live and die by them. From my POV, studies vary in quality and are simply an attempt to add to a body of knowledge by asking questions and considering the answers. No one study is proof of anything. Rather, we increase our understanding by gathering as much information as we can, and welcome the opportunity to have others gather it for us, providing they have done so in a manner that is reliable. My own views of the SMP are informed by well over 100 studies, not all of which are consistent, though there is strong evidence for all of the claims I have made here.

  • Vitor

    @Abbot:

    Why / how is it unfair?

    I guess that MM has just answered your question:

    Unless the goal here is to enlarge the % of women who meet the new definition of promiscuous (N = 1 with the wrong type of guy, under the wrong circumstances), and disqualify them accordingly. Nothing wrong with doing that BTW, though it will dramatically shrink the dating pool.

    And who’s to say a man with 1 or 2 so-called casual encounters under his belt is any more suitable for a relationship than a woman with the same experience?

    Perhaps this is the “double standard” people talk about here at HUS. As I said before, I don’t know if it’s always fair, in the hypothetical example of a genuinely naive girl, fooled by the culture and her own illusions, but who got burned and learned fast. I don’t really know if it’s always fair, but women do have to be very careful about whom they sleep or have relationship with.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @MM

    Did you not see the study I linked to?

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19485565.2011.615172#.Uc8lyvmkpd6

    That was the basis of saying the prettiest girls have casual the least.

    Well, from that same study, you can also see that the most attractive men are having the most partners, the most “sex only” relationships, the lowest % of “dating exclusively” relationships, and the highest amount of first-week sex.

    So if the women’s trend is for lower N and less casual sex as their attractiveness increases while it’s the exact opposite for men, then who are these hot men having casual with?

    After subtracting off the hottest women that are doing it with them then the remaining difference is being made up for by the “lesser” women.

  • Vitor

    @HanSolo:

    I imagine that a good half of the women wouldn’t spend much time on them (besides a few idle thoughts of adoration) and would sooner or later find a compatible man more at their level. The other half would likely hypergamously compete for the upper 20%. Some of the less hypergamous would tire of the pump and dumps and heartbreak and eventually settle with a man in their league. Perhaps the most hypergamous would never settle and neither would many of the most unrestricted who would just enjoy the higher-value men they can get.

    At no point have I ever said ALL women are going for the top 3% or the top 20% so no one needs to trot out that red herring again.

    What do you think would happen on Paradise Island?

    Thanks. I don’t what would happen on paradise island, but I think that your estimates of 50% of women being “relationship material” could be realistic. But perhaps we could use normal distribution properties, which is said to be applicable to most events in nature, and state that probably 68% or so fit in the criteria of besides a few idle thoughts of adoration would be just interested in finding a mate of their own level? Most importantly, what I try to do however, is to include in these estimates women who guys do not find so attractive. So, once in a while, I look around myself everywhere I go and try to imagine that 1 in every 5 women I see are riding or have ridden the carousel in their past. It doesn’t look like so. :)

  • MARY

    “So if the women’s trend is for lower N and less casual sex as their attractiveness increases while it’s the exact opposite for men, then who are these hot men having casual with?

    After subtracting off the hottest women that are doing it with them then the remaining difference is being made up for by the “lesser” women.”

    Nonsense.

    You really think the hottest women have lower N than average and below average women? Since when are hot women EVER without a boyfriend?

    When they break up with one, there’s another already in line to take his place.

    They go from boyfriend to boyfriend to boyfriend much easier than average and certainly below average women.

    Sure, they may not be having one night stands, but their Ns will be high by their time they reach mid or late 20s because of all the boyfriends they’ve had.

  • http://Bastiatblogger@blogspot.com Bastiat Blogger

    Han, I thought that was a very interesting and quite enjoyable study.

  • Fish

    i’m way late here but. . .
    @J
    “They quickly became inseparable, then things “fizzled.” What is it with men who do that?”
    My guess is she was in his SMV sweet spot, but he saw something while they dated that made him think “no long term potential.” I have done this myself. Frequently.

    @Susan
    re: ILU
    Told ex fiance around 6 months. I was intoxicated at the time, but meant it. i think 6 months-1 year is “normal”. . . maybe?

    just giving the guy the benefit of the doubt, her escalating so quickly could also have have muddied the waters for him, as in pushed his brain in a direction he wasn’t ready to go yet. My realization that I was in love with ex fiance was as much as surprise to me as it was to her (not that I didn’t love her, my brain just had an emotional epiphany). Maybe the guy would have gotten there by now, but by her escalating first, it cast confusion and doubt on his feelings, like he feels like he has to say something but he’s unsure. . .

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Vitor

    Why are you saying it would be 68%? What you’re getting at but misapplying is that in a Gaussian (aka bell curve or normal) distribution 68% will be within one standard deviation of the mean (which also happens to be the mode and median).

    Whether or not the Gaussian distribution is applicable to events in nature has no bearing on what the central or most likely value is. You are assuming that it’s centered on restricted behavior and that then 68% of people are that way. But! That’s just an assumption.

    Also, many phenomena in nature are not “normally distributed.” They are very much skewed, as we see with the number of partner graphs MM has produced.

    http://imageshack.us/a/img5/8493/pnrz.png

    The peak is at 1, with slightly less with 0 and then a decaying tail as N increases (with the exaggerators or forgetful choosing round numbers to produce the spikes at multiples of 5 or 10).

    So, N is not a normal distribution and not even close.

  • Abbot

    “And who’s to say a man with 1 or 2 so-called casual encounters under his belt is any more suitable for a relationship than a woman with the same experience?”

    He is not more suitable. Its the woman’s choice to proceed with him or not. Thus it is absolutely not a double standard.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Vitor

    We know that more than 32% (100%-68%) have had a fling, ONS, STR etc. so it doesn’t make sense to just think that 68% of the women on Paradise Island would automatically settle down with a long-term assortative bf/husband without first having some other fling, failed relationship, whatever first.

  • Abbot

    “Sure, they may not be having one night stands…”

    In the US, thats a heck of a leg up (yes, its pathetic). Plus ya get the hottie.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Bastiat

    Thanks. I hope those that live and die by studies will now be a little more accepting of the idea that the hottest men get the most casual and the most number of sex partners.

    And the study doesn’t even take into account charisma. If you combined that with looks to give a charisma+looks rating and correlated with N and casual you would likely see even more differences amongst the men.

    And this study definitely agrees with what I’ve seen in my own life, those of other guy friends and a lot of other field reports I’ve read about.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Mary

    Are you saying the hottest women in the study are lying down their numbers so that they come out with the lowest N?

    I agree that hot women can get bf’s but by that very logic they can keep them longer too. I’m fine with the conclusion that the hottest women are somewhat less “slutty” than the rest. Of course, there are some exceptions and they can rack up lots of numbers if they choose but their hypergamy or isogamy might keep them from doing so.

    I suppose that a hypogamous unrestricted gorgeous women could and would just rack up shit-loads of N but such a woman seems quite rare. If you add in men paying to induce the woman to ACT hypogamously then that is a perfect description of a prostitute.

  • Vitor

    @Han:

    We know that more than 32% (100%-68%) have had a fling, ONS, STR etc. so it doesn’t make sense to just think that 68% of the women on Paradise Island would automatically settle down with a long-term assortative bf/husband without first having some other fling, failed relationship, whatever first.

    Yes, it’s just an assumption that it’s a normal distribution based on the fact that people who engage into casual sex are “unrestricted” versus, say, people who marry their first and only sexual partner. If we are to discard all the women who’ve had a failed relationship, then we should count only the virgins? :)

    But I also see your point: you’re trying to tell everyone here that you’re hot and has charisma, and that your track record attests to that? :)

  • Abbot

    “he saw something while they dated that made him think “no long term potential.”

    …um, the entire football team she serviced while in college…is that what “he saw?”

    .

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Vitor

    I’m saying I believe that in the real world about 1/2 of women are sufficiently restricted and assortative (non-hypergamous) that they have 0 or few partners before marriage. Now, within that half there were some who had a hookup or a fling or whatever but it was more of the try it once or twice and not repeat.

    As to Paradise Island, maybe 50% that have no flings or failed relationships and get with an assortative mate is too high, though that is what I told you orginally–this would probably be lower as some portion of that 50% would have a failed reln or a fling or what not but would very soon find an assortative long-term partner/husband. But you said you thought it was 68% of getting into a reln with no flings or failures, which would then be even less in line with what I think would happen.

    As to my other point, of course I’m hot and have charisma! :D Okay, just kidding. But I’m not trying to tell anyone that I’m all that. I’d say I’m above average but not at the top. The point of mentioning my experience is that about 1/2 of my N are close enough or definitely above my looks threshold for a relationship while the other 1/2 were a point or more lower (according to me). The vast majority of my N comes from women who were trying to get a reln with me, even when I told them I didn’t want one with them. But they did the hope for relationship thing anyway. With the upper half, I was serious about considering an LTR with them or had an LTR with them so they weren’t being delusional in thinking they could get one with me. But the lower 1/2 clearly was trying for someone out of their league.

  • MARY

    “Are you saying the hottest women in the study are lying down their numbers so that they come out with the lowest N?”

    – Could be.

    “I agree that hot women can get bf’s but by that very logic they can keep them longer too. ”

    – Longer means what? How “long” do Junior High School and High School romances last? How long do college and post-college romances last?

    I stated on the conservative side a pretty girl may have her first boyfriend at 14 and if she only has 1 boyfriend per every 2 years, at 26 she will have an N of 6. Now these are very conservative numbers.

    Most of the 7.5 and higher women that I know in countries that have dating cultures (I’d estimate I know about 400 7.5s and higher globally just from my work alone) have new boyfriends at least once every two years until they get married. I rarely ever meet a pretty woman who does not have a boyfriend. When she doesn’t, its not long until she does.

    I don’t know why the average and below average Joes on this blog want to make it out that average and below average Janes (their natural counterparts) have astronomical Ns and Ns higher than pretty women.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    I’m not sure who is saying average and below-average Janes have astronomical N’s but the total N is pretty similar across attractiveness, ranging from 5.14 from the very attractive to 6.03 for the unattractive and about 5.65 for the combo of the avg and attractives.

  • MARY

    “I’m not sure who is saying average and below-average Janes have astronomical N’s”

    Its a theme I’ve read here over and over again. Average women and “fatties” sleep with “alphas” and “hot guys” thinking they can get them as boyfriends but the alphas and hot guys just use them for pumps and dumps. Then when these average women reach their late 20s, after at least a decade of “riding the cock carousel”, they snare a hapless beta into marriage.

    “Alpha Fucks. Beta Bucks.”

    Abbot said about an average Jane:

    “…um, the entire football team she serviced while in college…is that what “he saw?”

  • Vitor

    I rarely ever meet a pretty woman who does not have a boyfriend. When she doesn’t, its not long until she does.

    I actually have a cousin who fell on this pattern. She’s very beautiful, her mother was rather liberal and so she started dating young. I don’t know how are her numbers, but it seems she has stopped dating for a while and focused now on work and studies. Last time I talked to her mother she was complaining that she cannot find a decent boyfriend…

  • Bully

    The same is true for men. I know what I can pull and sometimes I am happier to waste time on hobbies and career in lieu of dating for weeks or months even depending on what I feel like. I think my longest spat was when I was pulling 15 hrs of OT a week for something like a year.

  • MARY

    Vitor, yeppers, that’s the patter for pretty girls and women in countries that have dating cultures. I mentioned before a pretty, introverted home schooled girl that had no social life and mostly hung out at home or with her mom. She began having “boyfriends” at 14 and she is now 17 with an N of 4 because she has had 4 boyfriends, 1 per year, since the age of 14.

    Now, if this is an INTROVERTED HOMESCHOOLED GIRL WITH NO SOCIAL LIFE – then you tell me what the “pattern” is for the pretty popular girls in public and private high schools across this country – hmmmmmm?

    To ask the question is to answer it.

    ;)

  • JP

    “Now, if this is an INTROVERTED HOMESCHOOLED GIRL WITH NO SOCIAL LIFE – then you tell me what the “pattern” is for the pretty popular girls in public and private high schools across this country – hmmmmmm?”

    You realize that you are a textbook example of a monomaniacal blog/chat board commenter, right?

    You have hit this note about 100 times.

  • MARY

    JP, I have Aspergers.

    “Then when these average women reach their late 20s, after at least a decade of “riding the cock carousel”, they snare a hapless beta into marriage.”

    Abbot and Costello: “So what? Seems like a win win, no?”

    – Yes. Except its not an accurate herstory.

  • JP

    “JP, I have Aspergers.”

    There’s no such condition, per the DSM-V.

  • MARY

    JP, that book is nonsense.

  • JP

    Seriously, one note, over and over and over and over.

    Nails on a chalkboard.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo “The vast majority of my N comes from women who were trying to get a reln with me, even when I told them I didn’t want one with them. But they did the hope for relationship thing anyway. With the upper half, I was serious about considering an LTR with them or had an LTR with them so they weren’t being delusional in thinking they could get one with me. But the lower 1/2 clearly was trying for someone out of their league.”

    That’s really sad on their part. However, do you think that most women are doing this, or a specific subset that you have met?

    For example, I and most of the girls I know in my social circles have not had such an experience. Maybe that is also a self-selected group.

  • Abbot

    “…one note, over and over and over and over. Nails on a chalkboard.”

    These symptoms point to only one diagnosis: pheminist.

    .

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    I think most women are attempting relationships, with the exceptions of those few that openly love unrestricted sex and the women who have consciously chosen to avoid relationships for a while but still want to have sex often or occasionally.

    None of the women in your social group has ever just had sex (eventually) with a man that she hoped to get a relationship with but he didn’t want one or didn’t give her one? That seems pretty rare. I know you are an outlier in many ways (positive ways) that won’t have sex until there’s enough commitment and love (or what you thought was love with your 1st bf, I think). Are your friends all very-low-N women? If so, then they and you would fit more into what I’m calling the roughly 50% that are very low-N and assortative.

    I think the women I have been with are a fairly wide cross-section and would actually have less “bar slut” types since I rarely try to pick up women at bars/clubs. I tend to give off a “good boy” vibe in person and so I think that repels most of the hard-core sluts and attracts women that are looking for a relationship.

  • Gin Martini

    Sue: “ILU is a request for commitment – you’re asking someone to partner with you in a presumably permanent way. Timing is important.”

    Huh? Explain.

    You’ve said that college LTRs are “I loke fucking you, until I find someone better” (which I consider a fling). Does this mean that, then, such LTRs are not Love?

    Monogamy is don’t have sex with someone else. Simple.

    Boyfriend/girlfriend seems to be something on top of that. (Silly me thinks of it as Love and no expiration date, but I am a dinsoaur) But what do others think?

    ILU means… more on top of that? What kind of commitment, since it’s not monogamy and not BF/GF?

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

      You’ve said that college LTRs are “I loke fucking you, until I find someone better” (which I consider a fling). Does this mean that, then, such LTRs are not Love?

      First, many LTRs never get to ILU.

      A college LTR is not as you have written here, but is rather, “I love fucking you and spending time with you. I’m willing to do those things with you and only you. If that changes I’ll let you know.” Both parties are free to leave if they find something better, because they are not married, duh. Why do you think most LTRs end? And they should end – we do not want people marrying who are not 100% in love in invulnerable to falling for someone else.

      Saying ILU takes the commitment a step further to indicate “I don’t see this ending.” I think a lot of young kids who say it feel that way, even as they realize that at age 20, the deck is strongly stacked against them. When 26 year-olds say ILU to one another, it usually means, “This is it. You’re the one.”

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    I think I wasn’t clear enough (though literally I was clear) when I said

    “The vast majority of my N comes from women who were trying to get a reln with me, even when I told them I didn’t want one with them. ”

    This is not saying that I told the vast majority of all the women that I didn’t want a relationship with them.

    Rather, it is simply saying that the vast majority DID want a relationship with me. With most of the upper half I did consider or have a reln with while the lower half I never really considered having a reln. This lower half includes some that I told that I didn’t want a reln with them so that they wouldn’t be led on before sex. These informed lower-half women still had sex and still wanted a reln. There were some others who when informed decided not to and that is totally fine. That’s why I told them, so they could make an informed decision.

    Now that that’s cleared up, are you still unable to think of any women that fall into the kind of women I’ve had sex with? Because the ones that did become my gf I certainly didn’t say that I didn’t want a reln with them. :D

  • JP

    “You’ve said that college LTRs are “I loke fucking you, until I find someone better” (which I consider a fling). Does this mean that, then, such LTRs are not Love?

    Monogamy is don’t have sex with someone else. Simple.

    Boyfriend/girlfriend seems to be something on top of that. (Silly me thinks of it as Love and no expiration date, but I am a dinsoaur) But what do others think?

    ILU means… more on top of that? What kind of commitment, since it’s not monogamy and not BF/GF?”

    I have no idea, but then I had no idea what I was doing in the first place.

    It’s not like life comes with a rule book.

    I’m still trying to figure out how marriage magically changes all of this, given that you spend all this time in some sort of amorphous LTR/boyfriend-girlfriend weirdness.

    For some people, marriage apparently doesn’t change anything. I mean, one guy I know kept trying to date women after he married his girlfriend.

    It was bizarre.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Maybe the way I worded DID make it sound like I told all of them that. The later info of considering 1/2 for LTR should have made it clear that I was only speaking about saying that to some of the women in the lower 1/2.

    I should have said, “even when I told some of the women I wasn’t interested in for an LTR that I wasn’t interested.”

  • Anacaona

    Seriously, one note, over and over and over and over.

    Nails on a chalkboard.
    Welcome to the club. :(

  • queeninjun

    @ Susan, can you provide specifics about the relationships in which the woman said I love you first and she eventually was able to get commitment? It happened in my case, but I had to display zero neediness and I don’t think most women can do this. Not tooting my own horn, but I had to learn to ‘sit on it’ for a while and act cool before he said ILU back. It was not a good feeling and it took every shred of emotional strength I could summon to keep it together while I was imploding. There are a lot of wrinkles to these situations, and I would like to know when you noticed the relationships you mentioned turning into marriage, and what in your eyes were the decisive factors; are you recounting recent examples, or examples from 10 years ago? How old were/are the couples you speak of? I appreciate your high-level thinking, seems you’d be a natural for strategy, but I like to recount specifics and I’d love to see some road-tested advice that works for women. My position is that a guy who’s giving all the signs of commitment is a commitment tease if he doesn’t intend to ‘give it up’ as it were. No, I’m just kidding. Well, not really.

    @ Laurel, none of the men I ever dated or the one I married ever asked about my baby pictures or was lovingly obsessed with my background in the ways in which women wish men were obsessed with them. That idea that that’s what a man will do when he’s in love with you is mostly rom-com fodder and emotional porn for women – it’s a cultural lie that scriptwriters (I worked in the entertainment industry in Hollywood for a while) and media types perpetuate because they speak to the deepest desires for women wanting and yearning to be seen and understood. IRL, it usually doesn’t play out this way. You cannot assume a man doesn’t love you if he doesn’t ask you all those questions that make you feel like the center of the universe, and many times sociopaths will ask you those questions, so that female-centric idealization of how a man should behave in a relationship versus how he *actually* behaves in a relationship with a woman he loves are two completely different things. Men will show love by doing things with you and for you, but (mostly) they won’t have emotional chat fests with you into the night on a routine basis. They’re not your girlfriends. Plus, any guy who knows how to flatter you with that kind of fawning attention should be suspect. Even the most lowly of betas won’t behave like that with you. I don’t want to be too harsh, but this kind of cultural brainwashing of women teaching them that men who really care will act and behave just like their best girlfriends if they truly loves women has made American women’s expectations of men very high and men are never going to measure up to that fantasy, at least not right away. Many women are going to go on many OKCupid dates and come away sorely disappointed, but mostly not disabused of their false notions – many good men are out of the running because American women’s expectations of what the first date should be like are through the roof. I know I’m lecturing, but I was actually willing to ‘settle’, even though I didn’t see it that way.

    Actually, it’s not so much brainwashing as it is the media playing to women’s most simple immature desires and fears (they’re just telling women what women desperately want to hear and what they would really like to be true), the desires and fears that keep you from interacting with reality as it is and learning how to deal with it effectively. If women didn’t have rom-com escapism though (I like it, too), reality would harden us, so I understand why you believe what you believe even though it’s not congruent with reality. We all want to be told we’re right and that our fantasies are justified – we feel emotionally vindicated and soothed when we indulge in them. Just because women’s fantasies are on a big screen somewhere doesn’t mean that they’ve been sanctioned as dreams that should come true for women. But believing in that claptrap wholeheartedly will not serve any woman’s success in the current SMP. Just remember ladies, you are being told what you want to hear by the media, chick lit, and the rest because you are unwilling to hear and accept the truth. People probably make more money off telling women what they want to hear than what they need to hear.

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

      @queeninjun

      @ Susan, can you provide specifics about the relationships in which the woman said I love you first and she eventually was able to get commitment? It happened in my case, but I had to display zero neediness and I don’t think most women can do this. Not tooting my own horn, but I had to learn to ‘sit on it’ for a while and act cool before he said ILU back. It was not a good feeling and it took every shred of emotional strength I could summon to keep it together while I was imploding.

      I didn’t specifically mean women saying ILU first – sorry if that wasn’t clear. I was thinking of several women I’ve known in my own generation who went all in on day one – taking an extremely submissive role with cooking, cleaning, sex, and professions of ardor and devotion. In most cases they were the “needy psycho” type going after commitment-avoidant men, and surprisingly, several of these badboys kept them around and even married them eventually. The relationships were quite one-sided.

      As I said in the post, I’m very traditional about this and I recommend that a woman hold her tongue and not say it first. I agree that displaying zero neediness is key.

  • queeninjun

    No one can tell Allison to stay with this guy (Allison, my advice is worth what you pay for it) because we need to know the following about Allison to give better advice:

    1. Her SMV
    2. Her neediness quotient post-ILU (on a scale of 1-10, I put her at a 9)
    3. Previous relationship history of guy
    4. Allison’s overall mental health
    5. Her pickiness with men (does she/can she have other options?)
    6. Does she expect commitment and sex to coincide?
    7. Is marriage really a serious goal, or does she get overwhelmed with emotion and feel like marrying a guy if she has ‘feelings’ for him. If it’s the latter, she herself is not mature enough to marry ANYONE.

    For me, Allison’s need to know the future right now shows me that she has a problem with her own boundaries and respecting those of her boyfriend. Her neediness will come off to him as a disrespect of his boundaries – no man will be attracted to marry a woman who comes off like that. She probably got caught unawares by love, but she needed to manage that risk of falling to hard too fast and then risking it all by not having moved in with him in the first place. If she has a low N, then she might be seen as an attractive prospect for marriage despite neediness because thus far, she has remained choosy about with whom she has sex. I would hate for the guy to do the calculus of, “She’s got a low N, she won’t cheat on me, her neediness doesn’t make her attractive, but I don’t have better options, I’m not sure that I love her, but she seems to want to get married, so maybe it’s a good idea.” Weak way to start out a relationship.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo “Now that that’s cleared up, are you still unable to think of any women that fall into the kind of women I’ve had sex with? Because the ones that did become my gf I certainly didn’t say that I didn’t want a reln with them.”

    I’m confused. Do you mean that some of the women that you did have a relationship with, you might not have if they asked for a relationship before sex?

    Anyway, I haven’t heard of a single “pump and dump” sob story from any of my female friends. They are the types of girls who form book clubs instead of going clubbing. All of them met their past boyfriends/spouses via school, social networks, or workplaces. They do tell stories of terrible ex’s, but not any guy who straight up left them after sex.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    There are some of them that I would have said yes to about a reln if they’d asked for one before sex. Definitely my favorite gf of all time. I even told her that I wanted to date her before we had sex.

    I’m simply saying that of all the lower 1/2 of women (in terms of looks) the vast majority of them wanted an LTR with me. With some of them I made it explicitly clear I did NOT want an LTR with them. They wanted to have sex anyway and continued to attempt to achieve an LTR with me. Is that clearer?

    As to the pump and dump, that was not the only kind of casual or short-term or man-of-higher-value sex I was talking about. I also mentioned STR, fling, [mutual] ONS, and could have included a relationship where the guy was only in it for sex but didn’t mention that and the girl thought it was more than just sex. (See Table 3 of the study where overall 31% of men said it was sex only and 19% of women said the same thing–that’s 12% of the women thinking it was more than sex.)

    So, I’m glad your friends haven’t been P&Ded.

    Have they had any of the other experiences I just mentioned?

    And for that matter, if it was a guy that concealed his sex-only intentions for having a relationship how would she know for sure? Regardless of whatever others might think about such a couple’s value, the man is valuing her insufficient for an LTR and the woman is valuing him high enough for one.

    The last point is that many women tend to overrate their own and other women’s S/MMV (with some exceptions, like if they have bad self esteem or hate the woman they’re rating) and so they would rarely even think the guy was out of their league.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Also, book club women that don’t go clubbing can have any one of the shorter-term types of sex I mentioned. Even restricted behavior Mormon girls can fall into the passion of the moment. Been there, done that on both types.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    The other thing about your friends. Do you really know every N they’ve had? If your group is a more restricted one then they aren’t as likely to just announce that they had a fling.

  • Hope

    Han solo, ok I see what you’re getting at now. In that case, maybe some of their ex’s were just in the relationship for sex as opposed to being in love. But then is that necessarily because the man is higher value, or could it be because the guy is just not that emotional? I don’t believe that any relationship where the girl is more into the guy automatically means he’s better than her.

    And, well, there is a case where a girl had an ex-husband who turned out to be gay. I don’t know the details, but not every case of the guy not being into the girl is the girl being too hypergamous. The guy could be a lying jerk, too. It’s good that you’ve been honest, but a lot of guys aren’t.

  • Gin Martini

    QI: “Susan, can you provide specifics about the relationships in which the woman said I love you first and she eventually was able to get commitment?”

    I think I posted earlier, but this is exactly what my wife did. Age 18.

    QI: “It happened in my case, but I had to display zero neediness and I don’t think most women can do this. Not tooting my own horn, but I had to learn to ‘sit on it’ for a while and act cool before he said ILU back. It was not a good feeling and it took every shred of emotional strength I could summon to keep it together while I was imploding.”

    My wife had no such problem. Maybe the fact that my n was 2, and not 250, explains the difference in insecurity? Not tooting her horn, but wouldn’t it be better to not have those feelings at all?

    QI: “My position is that a guy who’s giving all the signs of commitment is a commitment tease if he doesn’t intend to ‘give it up’ as it were.”

    Define commitment. Serial Monogamy? ILU? Marriage?

  • Gin Martini

    Han, good point.

    Women who have flings and other unrestricted stuff fear judgement from women AND men. It’s much harder for a restricted person to truly pull off that sort of nonjudgemental vibe. While I’m sure Hope keeps excellent company, I’m sure a few of her friends have some sexy skeletons in the closet.

    There’s sort of a mutual dropping of hints that happens until both parties feel comfortable in talking about such things. Just like the mating dance, so is the truth dance.

    I’ve heard enough stories that are qualified with “nobody else knows this except you… not even my best friend”.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    I certainly don’t mean that all cases where the guy’s not into her enough or just wants sex is because she is of lower value. I have also often talked about guys who are ONLY looking for sex (which implicitly raises the value of woman that could get him for a reln to infinity or very high). So, in the eyes of others, say, get 100 people to vote, you could definitely have cases where the man was perceived to have lower value than the women by outsiders but in the only market that really matters, that between her and him, she is valuing him higher for a reln than he is valuing her.

    I agree that not all bad relns are where the woman is being hypergamous. Some guys are good liars, some women are gullible, some have low self-esteem, etc. But some bad relns are where the woman is being hypergamous.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo “in the only market that really matters, that between her and him, she is valuing him higher for a reln than he is valuing her.”

    Aha. Now we get to the “game” part of it. So both parties can play a game where they either pretend or actually are doing what Susan would call “Principle of Least Interest,” in order to get the upper hand in the relationship, and to show the other person “I care about you less than you care about me, therefore I am higher value than you.”

    So would it be the case that “market” as you speak, one party can artificially inflate his or her value by pretending not to care, because in that particular market, it’s all that matters?

  • J

    @Fish

    My guess is she was in his SMV sweet spot, but he saw something while they dated that made him think “no long term potential.” I have done this myself. Frequently.

    Thanks for the input. That also occured to me (and to my husband), but it’s helpful to hear it confirmed.

    JP, I have Aspergers

    That makes sense.

    There’s no such condition, per the DSM-V.

    There’s no more Narcissism according to the DSM-V either. They’ve elminated all the individual Cluster B disorders and now call them all “Cluster B Disorder.” But the symptoms still exist in patients. The same with Asperger’s. You can call it Asperger’s or High Functioning Autism, but it still is an identifiable problem.

    Seriously, one note, over and over and over and over. Nails on a chalkboard.

    Aw, c’mon. I think of her as our GBFM. Yeah, things get weird sometimes, but it gives the place character.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    Yes, one can attempt to charge more and more, so to speak, but at some point the other person will then realize, okay, this isn’t such a great deal, I can find other options that give the same value for a lower price. Of course, there are things similar to contract-cancellation fees (like the woman or man feels really attached and doesn’t want to feel the pain of paying that contract cancellation fee).

    So, at some point the other options of each person’s market come into play, or were always there if he/she was never too committed to the other.

    Kind of like McD telling its favorite customers that only eat there, we’re going to charge more and more and the customers put up with it for a while because they really like McD but eventually once they’re charging 2x as much as BK then the people finally say, F it, I’m gettin’ a Whopper instead.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Or perhaps a better analogy would be that the less-interested person keeps offering less and less value but charging the same price or input from the more interested person.

    That would then be McD making their burger smaller and smaller while charging the same amount.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @queeninjun

    Just remember ladies, you are being told what you want to hear by the media, chick lit, and the rest because you are unwilling to hear and accept the truth. People probably make more money off telling women what they want to hear than what they need to hear.

    +1

    But I guess no one would be surprised at me agreeing with that comment.

    I suppose the escapism for men would be porn but it’s harder to think that will come in reality since hot women aren’t coming up to most men and either fucking them or emotionally escalating whereas women can get attention from dreamy guys…at least for a night or a month or two if sex is on the table.

    WTH, I’ll +1 the first part of the paragraph too! :)

    Actually, it’s not so much brainwashing as it is the media playing to women’s most simple immature desires and fears (they’re just telling women what women desperately want to hear and what they would really like to be true), the desires and fears that keep you from interacting with reality as it is and learning how to deal with it effectively. If women didn’t have rom-com escapism though (I like it, too), reality would harden us, so I understand why you believe what you believe even though it’s not congruent with reality. We all want to be told we’re right and that our fantasies are justified – we feel emotionally vindicated and soothed when we indulge in them. Just because women’s fantasies are on a big screen somewhere doesn’t mean that they’ve been sanctioned as dreams that should come true for women. But believing in that claptrap wholeheartedly will not serve any woman’s success in the current SMP.

    +1

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    HanSolo, it’s funny, I’ve seen cases like that blow up and then the “less-interested party” (usually the guy) realize, “oops I’ve made a mistake. I actually really cared!”

    I’ve told this story before, but before I met my husband, there was a guy I fell for, and I told him I would move to be with him, with permanence, if he wanted it. He didn’t want it.

    I cried and moved on, met my husband, got married and had a baby. During that time, the other guy told me several times he wishes he would have taken me up on my offer. He said he wished I was having his baby (I cringed when I read that, because by that time I felt completely nothing for him). Too late, I said. He had his chance, and he blew it.

    Playing that game has never been fun for me, and I’m glad I don’t have to do it in our marriage.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Hope

    Yep, he blew it.

    Glad you don’t have to play games in your marriage.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Or, to use the McD’s analogy, I got tired of the trashy food and went to a different, little-known gourmet restaurant with amazing service and top-notch yummy food. McD’s tried to get me back, but I was like, “nah, I’m good, thanks but no thanks!”

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    Well, don’t trash on McD too much!!! I wouldn’t want anyone to mistake you for a burger snob.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    Hope, I suspect there are a lot more gourmet restaurants out there than many women are aware of. Tasmin comes to mind with that description.

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

    @HS
    I’m not disputing the findings of the study, though it was a bit dense to sift through. Couldn’t find any N distribution or median data, which would have helped my thought process.

    I have no doubt that more attractive and charismatic men report higher N, but I’ve questioned Susan’s position that the most attractive women (however that’s defined) have the least amount of “casual” sex. From Wikipedia, citing various articles and research:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Social_effects
    Some researchers conclude that little difference exists between men and women in terms of sexual behavior. Symmetrical men and women have a tendency to begin to have sexual intercourse at an earlier age, to have more sexual partners, to engage in a wider variety of sexual activities, and to have more one-night stands. They are also prone to infidelity and are more likely to have open relationships.

    With regard to disprepancies in reported N between men and women, see my comment in #204. I’m not suggesting it’s all due to lying up/down and the use of sex workers. But straight men, even attractive men, account for probably 99% of the latter.

    Leaving aside the escort issue, imagine another small population of relatively attractive women, let’s call them “hot party girls” for want of a better term. They’re highly motivated to sleep with as many attractive men as they can, for whatever reason, perhaps for fun or in the chance they land a hot husband. And they don’t consider less attractive men whatsoever for sex. Would this not also explain the discrepancy to some degree? Another instance of a small subpopulation of women servicing a larger population of men.

    I think there’s a statistical grey area that suggests… we really don’t know who the “top” guys are sleeping with. A clique of really hot girls? Less attractive barflies? The occasional hot escort? Average, restricted, introverted girls looking for husbands? Seems like an awfully uncertain mixed bag.

    I’m dubious of claims of highly accurate “slut tells”, but I may have stumbled across the best correlation a guy could use in assessing GF potential. And it doesn’t involve subjecting young women to the 3rd Degree about their N. Interested?

  • Anacaona

    I think there’s a statistical grey area that suggests… we really don’t know who the “top” guys are sleeping with. A clique of really hot girls? Less attractive barflies? The occasional hot escort? Average, restricted, introverted girls looking for husbands? Seems like an awfully uncertain mixed bag.
    Did the study controlled for sex of the partners? Some bisexual or/and gay men could also be part of the discrepancy,YMMV.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @MM

    The study does give 1st and 3rd quartiles of N (meaning 25th and 75th percentile) so you can kind of get an idea of what the median might be. But, and this might blow your mind, a mean IS the thing you want to see IF you want to know the overall behavior of the WHOLE population (or subpopulation) that is described by the mean. Why? Because the mean takes all of the behavior of the whole population (and simply divides by the number of people in that population).

    It’s when you want to understand something within the population that the mode and median become more interesting.

    The mode is most useful for knowing the most common value that any actual person with the sample would have and the median, well, it is what it is, half report more or equal and half less or equal.

    As to the lying aspect, if the men exaggerate up and the women down then that still leaves the most attractive men with more partners than the other men, unless you want to get into differential lying, where one level of attractiveness lies more. In that case I would assume the ugly guys are lying more because they have a lower N and have more to be embarrassed about, in their minds. If true then that would steepen the curve so the hot guys were having even more than the average and ugly guys.

    As to differential lying by women, I have no idea who if any of them would lie more.

    I guess I need to read more about symmetric faces because I’ve never understood how a symmetric face means beauty. You could have a really fat face that’s symmetric since the fat covers up any asymmetry and that wouldn’t be beautiful. Or throw a big symmetric manjaw on some woman–not attractive! lol Of course, some wild asymmetry can mare beauty but is there correlation btw symmetry (assuming a non-fat face) and beautiful features?

    I think back to high school and it seemed like a lot of the pretty girls were slutting it up but I have no idea really if it was more or less than the other girls.

    We don’t know from the study exactly who’s having sex with who but it is interesting that 31% of the men in relationships are claiming “sex only” while only 19% of women are, and 45% to 54% disparity btw men and women claiming to be in exclusive dating.

    This study had an average age of 21.5 (I think, not sure if that was just women or if that was mean or median age) so I don’t think a lot of those guys are out hiring escorts or prostitutes, unless they were in the military. And the hottest guys don’t really need to hire prostitutes as much so if it were the avg and ugly guys doing it that would once again steepen the slope of hot guys getting more unpaid-for sex.

    Sure, tell me the tell-tale signs, though I’m suspecting it has to do with being in college, with a stable family and some other such variables.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @Anacaona

    It is a good question, whether gay and lesbian sex is included. It’s hard to say for sure so I emailed the author.

    In another paper using the same underlying data I did find this:

    The key independent variable of interest is Number of Sex Partners. This variable is constructed using respondents’ answers to the following question asked of Wave III participants: “With how many partners have you ever had vaginal intercourse, even if only once?”

    Assuming the paper we’ve been discussing also used this same question, which makes sense based on the purpose of the paper, then it would exclude same-sex intercourse and partners.

    We’ll see if the author responds.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    This is the link for the quote above: http://paa2010.princeton.edu/papers/101680

  • JP

    @J:

    “There’s no such condition, per the DSM-V.

    There’s no more Narcissism according to the DSM-V either. They’ve elminated all the individual Cluster B disorders and now call them all “Cluster B Disorder.” But the symptoms still exist in patients. The same with Asperger’s. You can call it Asperger’s or High Functioning Autism, but it still is an identifiable problem.”

    I honestly couldn’t tell if she was being sarcastic or not.

    Psychology/psychiatry is a mess at the moment and I have no idea what’s going on in psych-world.

    Aspergers and bipolar are probably over-diagnosed right now. They seem to be popular conditions.

  • JP

    @Hope:

    “I cried and moved on, met my husband, got married and had a baby. During that time, the other guy told me several times he wishes he would have taken me up on my offer. He said he wished I was having his baby (I cringed when I read that, because by that time I felt completely nothing for him). Too late, I said. He had his chance, and he blew it.”

    I’ve always wondered about this.

    It seems to be something that a certain percentage of guys do and some women apparently give advice that “he will come back”.

    It’s certainly not my approach.

  • Fish

    @HS
    “The vast majority of my N comes from women who were trying to get a reln with me, even when I told them I didn’t want one with them. But they did the hope for relationship thing anyway. With the upper half, I was serious about considering an LTR with them or had an LTR with them so they weren’t being delusional in thinking they could get one with me.”

    my experience as well. Although my definition of LTR may be a little different than others’.

    @QI 347 & 348
    Mind blown. I totally agree with you. My most recent ex completely misinterpreted my interest because I didn’t want to know about her childhood or talk about her kids. i liked her a lot, sex was great, she was fun to be with and super smart. I think she was looking for more emotional “gushiness” than I can offer in the early stages of a relationship.

  • Sassy6519

    Ugggh!

    I can’t even shop for toothpaste without being accosted by some guy. For the love of god, why do they do it?

    I went shopping for toiletries yesterday, and some guy chased me down in the aisle to ask if I was single or not. I told him that I was, but that I wasn’t interested. Despite this, he continued to track me down/talk to me for probably 10 minutes. I repeatedly told him that I was not interested, and I repeatedly rejected his request for my phone number. Eventually, he insisted on giving me his phone number instead. After he finally walked away, I deleted it.

    Persistence is not always endearing gentlemen.

  • JP

    @Sassy:

    “I can’t even shop for toothpaste without being accosted by some guy. For the love of god, why do they do it?”

    Intermittent Reinforcement.

    Meaning that it works with enough women that the behavior is reinforced.

    “Pigeons experimented on in a scientific study were more responsive to intermittent reinforcements, than positive reinforcements.[18] In other words, pigeons were more prone to act when they only sometimes could get what they wanted. This effect was such that behavioral responses were maximized when the reward rate was at 50% (in other words, when the uncertainty was maximized), and would gradually decline toward values on either side of 50%.[19] R.B Sparkman, a journalist specialized on what motivates human behavior, claims this is also true for humans, and may in part explain human tendencies such as gambling addiction.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_reinforcements

    Next question?

  • Vitor

    Persistence is not always endearing gentlemen.

    Sassy, as far as women are concerned, I wonder when persistence could be endearing… :)

  • Sassy6519

    @ Vitor

    Sassy, as far as women are concerned, I wonder when persistence could be endearing…

    During sex, at least it is for me… :D

  • Fish

    @Sassy
    “Persistence is not always endearing gentlemen.”
    LOL you’d think after 1 “not interested” he’d leave you alone. . . I’ve never hit on a girl buying toothpaste, maybe I’m doing it wrong?

    “During sex, at least it is for me… :D”
    Thats not persistance, that’s stamina, I’m guessing once you get them to sex, you want to keep going ;-)

  • JP

    Don’t you two have your own private thread?

  • Fish

    @JP

    We like like to do it in public every now and then to spice things up. . .

  • Sassy6519

    @ Fish

    Thats not persistance, that’s stamina, I’m guessing once you get them to sex, you want to keep going ;-)

    What I meant is a guy who is persistent in trying to give me pleasure during sex. A guy who is persistent in working to help me achieve the big O always wins bonus points, in my book. Not to have too much of a TMI moment, but sex can be highly variable for me. Sometimes I reach my peak quickly, while it can take an hour or more on other occasions. A guy who doesn’t throw in the towel quickly because it may take me awhile to reach the O point is a godsend. In that case, persistence is highly valued. :D

    LOL you’d think after 1 “not interested” he’d leave you alone. . . I’ve never hit on a girl buying toothpaste, maybe I’m doing it wrong?

    Hahahaha!! You totally are. ;)

    All joking aside though, I told that guy that I wasn’t interested probably 5-7 times. He also approached me out of the blue. I wasn’t aware of his existence beforehand, and I hadn’t offered him a single IOI. He swooped in like a hawk though, and it caught me off guard. I don’t like those types of approaches.

  • Sassy6519

    We like like to do it in public every now and then to spice things up. . .

    OH YEAH! :D

  • SayWhaat

    @ JP:

    Seriously, one note, over and over and over and over. Nails on a chalkboard.

    I wonder, do you feel similarly about Abbott?

  • Gin Martini

    SW: “I wonder, do you feel similarly about Abbott?”

    I do, but… Abbott keeps his handle the same, doesn’t post hundreds of messages when on a bender, occasionally points out interesting topical articles once in a while, and doesn’t really engage anyone directly, and derail entire threads.

    So, much easier to skip over.

    1 PJ = 500 Abbots

  • Liz

    @MM

    I’m not sure what such hypothetical speculation accomplishes. Unless the goal here is to enlarge the % of women who meet the new definition of promiscuous (N = 1 with the wrong type of guy, under the wrong circumstances)…

    I was just thinking the other day how to define ‘promiscuous’ – I finally gave up and decided “I know it when I see it.” But for me, the impression is definitely of someone who publicly / visibly seeks out casual / short-term partners. Where it’s more mutual, or the person is sought-after or discreet, I wouldn’t quite call that promiscuous. (I don’t know what I’d call it.) Just part of my warped dictionary that my BF dubbed “Lizipedia.”

  • Anacaona

    I do, but… Abbott keeps his handle the same, doesn’t post hundreds of messages when on a bender, occasionally points out interesting topical articles once in a while, and doesn’t really engage anyone directly, and derail entire threads.

    So, much easier to skip over.
    I will add that Susan has deleted some of his comments and he stops pressing the matter that got him deleted, and he takes a voluntary breaks when there is a lot of complain. PJ is attention whoring and spamming and she doesn’t care who gets offended at all.
    To use Susan’s dinner party metaphor:
    Abbot is the slightly annoying guest that you need to excuse yourself to the bathroom to avoid and then resume the conversation with more interesting guests. PJ is the guest that gets drunk, climbs a table and starts dancing and singing with a lampshade in her head. And she not only refuses to get down when asked she gets louder and gets the police called to remove her from the scene. Then she finds out when there is a party and invites herself again to do the same thing.
    Abbot>>>>>>>>>PJ

  • Liz

    Calling all women “sluts” accomplishes something, all right. It downgrades their value and (theoretically) lowers their price. Market manipulation.

  • Gin Martini

    Nailed it, Ana. Heh. I’m cracking up.

  • Gin Martini

    Promisucous is your partner changing and accural rate. Here’s my gut instinct.

    Measure your longest mongamous/celibate streak (what I call R) in years. Divide by lifetime N, including anal and oral and handjobs and finger bangs.

    Is it greater than one?

    PJ’s example 20 year old “good” woman who started having statutory rape at 14 (!!) and has one boyfriend per year: 1/6.
    The same who had two boyfriends, one for 5 years, one for one: 5/2.
    The same who had all six in a monthly rotation: (1/12) / 6

    [This post is not entirely serious. Hammer away.]

  • Vitor

    @MM:

    I think there’s a statistical grey area that suggests… we really don’t know who the “top” guys are sleeping with. A clique of really hot girls? Less attractive barflies? The occasional hot escort? Average, restricted, introverted girls looking for husbands? Seems like an awfully uncertain mixed bag.

    I’m dubious of claims of highly accurate “slut tells”, but I may have stumbled across the best correlation a guy could use in assessing GF potential. And it doesn’t involve subjecting young women to the 3rd Degree about their N. Interested?

    Just out of interest, do you have any studies of the porn industry? How many hot guys are making out with which types of girls and who are serving each other? :D

    Kidding aside, I am interested in your best correlation a guy could use in assessing a GF potential.

  • MARY

    Apple Martini:
    “Peej’s example 20 year old “good” woman who started having statutory rape at 14 (!!) ”

    Where did I say anything about “statutory rape”?

  • BuenaVista

    I remain disturbed by Alison’s original description of her friendship with her reticent boyfriend, and I use the term ‘friendship’ because that is all it resembles to me — a casual liason, falling short even of what I would term “an affair”, and only elevated by her expectation that a few months of regular bouncy-bounce should, must or might lead to her desired permanent relationship.

    I recall Joyce’s phrase “ineluctable modality of the visible” and that is the best frame I can put on Alison’s comfort-based relationship: she sees something far more in their relations than we have any business expecting, based on what we actually see. This is fine, yet she describes none of the qualities I would assign to love: a desperation of desire, a sense of loss whenever intimacy ends or is interrupted, the sense that the object of affection is a deep pool in which one dives with no care or concern, an abandonment of reserve that leads one to find fulfillment in small and large acts of giving.

    Perhaps I merely define love incorrectly, but when I read such stories I scratch my head, as I do when confronted with a few hundred discussions of “N” or the give-and-take of Official ILU Declarations. To me, it’s so much sales strategy instruction, with sex and declarations being deployed in some mundane “How to Close” protocol. I’m just unclear as to why one would even *want* to close on such tepid doings. It’s all just the converse of PUA love-by-numbers that we all disdain. Her situation is that of the rookie salesman who spills all of his candy in the lobby. He’s not going to be a partner, he’s a service provider.

    ***

    Thursday I had a date at “21” with a woman I have loved since I first saw her face, and I breathlessly ran the last few blocks, my little blue box in my jacket pocket, hoping against hope that I would arrive on time and not smelling like a man fresh off a basketball court or worse, wrestling mat. I began to panic when, in the sticky air, it began to rain: now I would be damp from both sides of jacket. She was there early, sipping her kir alone at the bar, too poised to be bothered by anyone, and we soon were seated side-by-side at Nixon’s habitual table, and the circulating, fluid staff brought our wine, foie gras, cream of nettle soup, her steak tartar, and their signature hamburger for me. The room swam for me, and it was as each word, each glance and brief moment of eye contact, the gentle kiss on my cheek when she opened her gift, made of this moment something I cannot possibly live without — though I know I must. Love presents glimpses of infinity — before, that it is, life’s logic takes it away from us.

    She’s a few decades younger than I, and it has always been delicate when we are out for an evening in a place like that; the men (and these are the New York powerful) stare at me, curious and, one thinks, envious; the women (most of a certain age) are nearly comical in their rage. I say “nearly” because their rudeness to me and my date is so unpleasant. On this evening one actually *elbowed* me, and thence set her shopping bag on the banquet we shared against the west wall, and refused to hear me when at one moment I needed to slide out to take a phone call on the street; finally a waiter snapped her out of her churlishness. When I returned my date said to me, “These women are always so vicious when we are out together.” Where they are tired and flaccid and angry, she was just back from Paris and wearing her new Chanel, and offers the legs of a woman who ran the half-marathon Friday night through the city streets, beginning at 11.

    I am intoxicated by her and I cannot imagine a life in which I do not receive the small favors of her company and conversation. Soon, much too soon, hours had passed and we were closing the restaurant, and there was only one other couple still seated, off to our right. They were a bit older than I, not much, and the wife smiled genially to me, and I (besotted with my date and life’s occasional favors) said something moronic like, “Isn’t it just wonderful here?” Her husband, who was one of the starers, then said,

    “Yes. You’re the best looking couple here tonight. How did you meet?”

    My date looked down at the table, a half-smile drifting across her face. I disliked the due diligence, it is flattering I guess but not for the right reasons. Still his question was offered in good faith, I supposed. So I should answer kindly, I reasoned. In truth, I was jealous of the two of them, the idea that a man and a woman in their fifties or sixties might sit for hours in pleasant conversation, before retiring to the Waldorf or the St. Regis, or the like. I will never have that, and certainly not with my date of this evening, of course. Our moments are now fleeting, and our life together is in the past. So I answered. Our entire history, our entire life, now seemed as brief as this concluding evening.

    “She’s my daughter.”

    “Surely not.”

    “My daughter.”

    “You can’t possibly be her … ”

    “Really. She’s my daughter, G. My name is BV. How are you this evening.” And my date, my oldest child, looked at the couple and nodded. “It’s true. This always happens to us. At least you are smiling at us.” They invited us to join them over coffee and we chatted and said goodnight, far too soon.

    There was so much, evidently, in our long evening of confidences glances as to mean something more that what was visible, and that, to me defines love, and a love to be defended at any cost. I have only felt this infinitude of emotion three other times in my life, and I can’t imagine discussing its effects in the context of any material, or visible, or rhetorical construction. If love is realizable in a carefully deployed three-word device, that is something I know nothing about. Rather it is apparent, powerful beyond reason, and has the capacity to fill an entire dining room. I will be heartbroken if my daughter settles for anything less.

  • BuenaVista

    Sorry. “… confidences and glances …”

  • J

    These symptoms point to only one diagnosis: pheminist.

    I’m LMAO at the irony that you are our other one-note commenter.

    @JP

    I honestly couldn’t tell if she was being sarcastic or not.

    It’s the Asperger’s. They have trouble with tone. ;-)

    Psychology/psychiatry is a mess at the moment and I have no idea what’s going on in psych-world.

    In a certain sense it doesn’t really matter. Shrinks will diagnose whatever the insurance companies pay for. Of course, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t treating real symptoms.

    Aspergers and bipolar are probably over-diagnosed right now. They seem to be popular conditions.

    Yeah, I think that over the years the Asperger’s diagnosis has expanded to include a certain group of poor social skills that really just used to be labelled “odd” or “eccentric.” I do see a continuum that starts at STEMy/spergy (with an inability to read body language, monomanical devotion to certain areas of interest and conversation, lack of empathy, etc) and ends with full blown autism. OTOH, I’m not so sure that having that sort of mind is necssarily a disabilty.

  • SayWhaat

    For fuck’s sake, don’t send her to shaadi.com!

  • J

    It seems to be something that a certain percentage of guys do and some women apparently give advice that “he will come back”.

    Indeed there is. I had a few even attempt to come back after I got engaged to my husband. I attributed that to my charm, of course. ;-)

    PJ is the guest that gets drunk, climbs a table and starts dancing and singing with a lampshade in her head. And she not only refuses to get down when asked she gets louder and gets the police called to remove her from the scene. Then she finds out when there is a party and invites herself again to do the same thing.

    But that’s all part of what makes her so amusing! Abbott is boring in comparison.

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

    BV #391….excellent writing, and important points.

    If we are going to use marketing analogies for romantic relationships, they should at least involve somewhat appropriate kinds of markets…one-of-a-kind artworks, custom-built boats, houses with unique views…rather than commodity or mass-production markets with large numbers of interchangeable units.

    The *uniqueness* of the other individual is key here.

  • JP

    “@ JP:

    Seriously, one note, over and over and over and over. Nails on a chalkboard.

    I wonder, do you feel similarly about Abbott?”

    Abbot is annoying, too, but keeps his name the same, so it’s easier to mentally block out.

  • Atlas Shagged

    J –

    “It’s the Asperger’s. They have trouble with tone. ;-)

    – How to convey tone through internet comments? Not only can we not see each other’s faces (video) but we can’t even hear (audio) each other’s voices.

    J –
    “Yeah, I think that over the years the Asperger’s diagnosis has expanded to include a certain group of poor social skills that really just used to be labelled “odd” or “eccentric.”

    I probably come off as odd from time to time IRL but I have a strong ability to socialize when I want to. I’m not shy.

    “I do see a continuum that starts at STEMy/spergy (with an inability to read body language, monomanical devotion to certain areas of interest and conversation, lack of empathy, etc)”


    I can read body language.
    I admittedly have monomanical devotion to certain areas of interest and conversation.
    I have a lot of empathy for not just humans but all sentient beings.

    You know there are actual practices you can do to increase empathy, such as meditations on compassion? I do these so my empathy is always expanding.

    SawWhaat –

    Why shouldn’t I recommend shaadi dot com to Alison? Have you had bad experiences on it?

  • Anacaona

    But that’s all part of what makes her so amusing! Abbott is boring in comparison.
    I had seriously though of stopping visiting HUS just to avoid PJ. NOT.AMUSED.AT.ALL.
    Seriously J I’m the type that turns the other way when I see there is a traffic accident in the street. I take boring any day and twice today,YMMV.

  • JP

    “If we are going to use marketing analogies for romantic relationships, they should at least involve somewhat appropriate kinds of markets…one-of-a-kind artworks, custom-built boats, houses with unique views…rather than commodity or mass-production markets with large numbers of interchangeable units.

    The *uniqueness* of the other individual is key here.”

    This is pretty much my point as to why the SMV/MMV analysis is wrong.

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

    J…”I’m not so sure that having that sort of mind (spergy to autistic) is necssarily a disabilty”

    Depends where in the continuum, I guess. More generally, it’s probably impossible for a mind to be equally good across *all* dimensions of ability…say, to have superlative social skills, great abstract thinker, cool in a crisis, very fast reactions in sports or warfare, strong aesthetic sense, etc etc. But eventually, the keepers of the DSM will probably define deficiency in ANY of these areas as a “disease” requiring “treatment”…and, very importantly, insurance/government reimbursement.

    Sort of like defining airplanes as deficient because they don’t have the characteristics of submarines, and vice versa, and trains as deficient because they can’t fly.

    “Many beautiful things are possible, but not all at once”
    –St-Exupery

  • Abbot

    Digest this:

    “…in a patriarchal society where women’s agency is circumscribed by male supremacy, how meaningful is consent? These issues are purposefully obscured by sex-positive feminists who believe that sex is an inherent good and that to feel otherwise is somehow aberrant, abnormal, a position that should be remedied.”

    In summary, where the blazes does this twisted bucket of shit come from and what the FUCK is going on? Its like a gaggle of feminists sitting in a sandbox each with a little plastic shovel all chucking sand in each others faces. Men are nowhere in sight, unless its time for sex of course.

    http://www.thefrisky.com/2013-06-27/radical-feminist-interview-on-thought-catalog-takes-potshot-at-sex-positive-feminism-kink-questions-consent/

    .

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

    Re BV #391 again, I don’t think we know enough to conclude that Alison’s relationship is only a friendship, without the psychological passion elements that BV described so well…it may be simply that she didn’t *describe* these because she believed they were automatically encompassed in the word “love.”

  • Anacaona

    “Many beautiful things are possible, but not all at once”
    –St-Exupery

    Beautiful quote. :)
    You knew they are making a new animated version? I hope they keep the beauty of the messages.

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

    Ana, I didn’t get the St-Ex quote from The Little Prince (maybe he used it there, too) but from his strange unfinished novel of ideas Citadelle (which was published in English with the awful title Wisdom of the Sands)

    It’s a book that deserves to be better read, the musings of a fictional desert prince about life, love, work, government, and happiness. The context of the quoted passage is that he (the ruler) is visiting a man who has been condemned to death and is thinking about pardoning him, after all the man does have his merits. But…

  • http://Bastiatblogger@blogspot.com Bastiat Blogger

    Personally, I enjoy the posts from both Abbot and PJ. They are both very intelligent, personable, and funny.

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

    @HS

    Sure, tell me the tell-tale signs, though I’m suspecting it has to do with being in college, with a stable family and some other such variables.

    Heh, no, not this time. Whenever possible, I prefer to bring new and constructive info. to the party…

    Long story short, the wife and I recently returned from visiting a large city popular with singles in their 20s and tourists. We both noted the numerous young, attractive women visiting at the same time. Lots of physical talent on display, much of it wasted though. I’d have actually found many of them *pretty* had they been wearing less makeup and more clothing in public. We also noticed other obvious characteristics on display.

    Anyway, this got me thinking and I continued fiddling around over at the GSS. Hypothetically-speaking, let’s assume the higher a woman’s N, the less attractive she becomes for a potential relationship, all others things remaining equal. I don’t think that’s a totally accurate way of looking at the SMP (hello Tom), but it’ll do for this thought experiment.

    Here’s the picture we’re dealing with: I ran the N distribution for women ages 18-38 (in 2012), which covers Susan’s target demographic and part of mine (tail end of Gen X). Total random sample size was 5,935. For ease of presentation, I limited the scope to only those who reported N = 0 to 30; that accounted for 97.5% of all women who responded:

    http://imageshack.us/a/img14/8770/54cf.png

    I then controlled for one simple variable. This should be quite easy to identify in people you know, or complete strangers for that matter:

    http://imageshack.us/a/img17/249/5t9.png

    Boom… no other variable had as big of an impact. Of those women who responded to both questions, about 30% of women reported being a smoker. If only all statistical surveys controlled for that doozy.

    I suspect that the presence of one or more visible tattoos would yield a similar N correlation, but unfortunately the GSS didn’t ask respondents about that one.

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

      @MM

      Great work on the smoking variable, that is fascinating!

  • SayWhaat

    Why shouldn’t I recommend shaadi dot com to Alison? Have you had bad experiences on it?

    LMAO. No, never been on it, and hopefully will never have to. I actually deactivated my OKC account again because I was besieged. I can’t even imagine the levels of creepery on shaadi.com, especially towards a non-Indian woman. That’s just begging to be fucked with.

    But I realize you are trolling so I will bow out on this matter.

  • SayWhaat

    Boom… no other variable had as big of an impact. Of those women who responded to both questions, about 30% of women reported being a smoker. If only all statistical surveys controlled for that doozy.

    I suspect that the presence of one or more visible tattoos would yield a similar N correlation, but unfortunately the GSS didn’t ask respondents about that one.

    That is highly interesting, Megaman. Do the results hold for men as well?

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares HanSolo

    @MM

    That is fascinating. Thanks for sharing.

    I imagine that if one examined the root causes of smoking that some of those would be similar to the root causes that lead to higher N in women.

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

      I imagine that if one examined the root causes of smoking that some of those would be similar to the root causes that lead to higher N in women.

      SES explains it.

      ses

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3169799/table/T1/

      This is why there is very little value in discussing the SMP without segmenting by SES/education.

  • Atlas Shagged

    SayWhaat, actually I was not “trolling” when I recommended shaadi dot com for Alison. I have stated here before why I think (some) Indian guys might be good matches for American women. Of course with any match making site there is a high probability of getting “trolled” by insincere creeps, but there are ways to filter against that.

    Susan, since you and others advocated for Gardasil and other HPV vaccines here before, even thought this is OT (but VERY relevant to the topic of relationships and sexuality) I wish to inform that the LEAD DEVELOPER for Gardasil and Cervarix has come out against them.

    http://www.sott.net/article/263139-Lead-vaccine-developer-comes-clean-so-she-can-sleep-at-night

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    No. He put up a photo of a woman, and proceeded to criticize/ridicule her. She wrote and asked him to take it down. He refused. Her lawyer went to WordPress and they nuked his blog permanently.

    This sounds so pathetically quaint in le modern age.

  • Atlas Shagged

    Is smoking correlated with higher N in men too?

    There was a time when the advertising agencies promoted smoking as a “sexy, masculine” habit. The Marlboro Man comes to mind. That wasn’t too long ago and those funny have been archived on youtube for comedic posterity.

    What about in American films? Are smokers portrayed as somehow more sexy and alluring than non-smokers?

    A long time ago in American culture supposedly smoking cigarettes was seen as more of a masculine habit than a feminine one. Cigarette companies approached the leading Mad Man (Edward Bernays) of the time asking him to create a media propaganda/advertisements that would get American women to purchase cigarettes.

    Bernays then approached his uncle, the infamous psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, to ask him how to crack the American female psyche in order to get them to shell out hard earned bucks for ciggies.

    Freud told Bernays that the cigarette is a phallic symbol of masculine power and that his ads should convey to women that if they smoke them they too can be seen as powerful, independent, rugged individualists in this land of the free and home of the brave.

    So then a media campaign was launched in the form of cigarette ads that conveyed this very message to American women.

    IT WORKED!

    To the tune of billions of dollars.

  • Atlas Shagged

    “This is why there is very little value in discussing the SMP without segmenting by SES/education.”

    And also era. Back in the day when smoking was much more common, amongst both men and women, smokers were virgins til marriage or otherwise low N peeps, which reflected the socio-sexual ethos of the era.

  • Anacaona

    @David Foster
    I might be mistaken I read the prince in HS. I heard before about the novel but knowing I won’t know how it ends, no matter how beautiful, will drive me insane.

  • Atlas Shagged

    Susan, previously you said we need to introducing “shame” into American culture. Here’s what a psychiatrist says about shame.

    “Guilt implies an internal sense of right and wrong. Whether it originates from your religion or your parents or the penal code or Star Wars isn’t relevant, only that external rules are then internalized, and you then build an identity around them. So that when you violate them and there is no way anyone noticed, it still gnaws at you because it conflicts with your ego, who you are. Id exists from birth, so superego has to precede ego.

    Shame comes not from the action but from the exposure. You wouldn’t say you were ashamed unless you have been observed, caught. Shame is a conflict with reality: I think I’m this kind of a person, but now this other guy has external evidence that I’m not.

    A narcissist can’t feel guilt because, while he admits to external rules (religion, ethics, etc) those rules are always secondary to his identity. As long as the identity is intact, you didn’t do anything really wrong. There’s no internal conflict with your sense of self because your identity has one superseding rule: self preservation. You will sacrifice anything, including your life, to preserve that identity. That’s why your boyfriend killed himself to get (back at) you.”

    Any thoughts?

  • JP

    “Why do you think most LTRs end? And they should end – we do not want people marrying who are not 100% in love in invulnerable to falling for someone else.”

    The way LTR’s end is that you aren’t actually interested in having a relationship with the other person or the other person isn’t actually interested in having a relationship with you. So I’m not sure how LTR’s build “relationship skills”.

    Take my college LTR for example. I had no interest in being in a romantic relationship with her, so the only “skills” I developed were skills such as how to not care if other people hit on your girlfriend and how not to be emotionally responsive to your girlfriend. I would have been quite happy if she found someone else because then it would have saved me the painful exercise of ending the relationship. In another relationship, I learned how to break off the relationship because she wasn’t into me (physically or emotionally). So, there I learned the “relationship skill” of recognizing that the other person is not really interested in you (I kind of assumed that she was because it was *her* idea in the first place.)

    The “skills” I developed in these relationships had nothing to do whatsoever in terms of having a good marriage.

    I’m still trying to figure out how would you even know if you are “invunerable for falling for someone else” in the first place.

    It seems rather experienced based to me, in the sense that you’ve never been married before (the first time you get married, of course), so how are you going to know you won’t “fall for someone else”?

    There would have to be some way of figuring out whether you are actually compatible with the other person with respect to marriage. It’s not like there’s a way to measure actual compatibility.

    Most people are 100% in love at the beginning. It’s several years in that apparently causes the problem.

    See J’s example of “who is this person I married?” five years later or whatnot.

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

      So I’m not sure how LTR’s build “relationship skills”.

      I think that one needs to learn the best way to communicate, compromise and give in relationships. Speaking for myself, dating several people taught me what reasonable expectations were around how much time to spend together, what level of jealousy is normal vs. pathological, what falling in love feels like, compared with “ILYBINILWY.” I learned to calibrate my emotions as well as how and when to share them. I learned what works best when interacting with a boyfriend’s family and friends, and what doesn’t go over so well. I learned what men like during sex, and what I like during sex. I learned that I was sexually compatible with some men and not at all with others.

      I am 100% certain that if I had married any of my boyfriends previous to Mr. HUS, I’d be divorced by now, at my initiative. When I met him, I knew exactly what I was looking for in a partner, and I knew it when I saw it.

  • JP

    “Shame is a conflict with reality: I think I’m this kind of a person, but now this other guy has external evidence that I’m not.”

    Uh, if there’s evidence that you’re not this kind of person, then you already knew that you weren’t that kind of person since you performed the actions. It’s a matter of the truth being revealed.

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

    @sw

    Do the results hold for men as well?

    Holy smokes! In a couple very obvious ways, yep. Elsewhere, not so much. Kind of surprising, in its own way:

    All Men (18-38):
    http://imageshack.us/a/img191/5350/f7ew.png

    Smoker? (18-38):
    http://imageshack.us/a/img708/9820/xrfo.png

    I suppose this is a potential red flag for all you restricted ladies looking for a good man, though I suspect a large chunk of that giant N = 1 club are already married. In hindsight, kind of common sense in my book, not due to the N correlation, but just the unattractive idea of a woman who puffs away on cigarettes (exceptions include a youthful Sigourney Weaver).

    Yet another irony, considering “N = success, period” around here, for men only of course. Given these results, I suppose success is also correlated with poor long-term health, epidermal damage, and possibly erectile disfunction, as medical science has proven that prolonged smoking takes a toll on sexual performance…

  • Fish

    re: smoking. . .
    It can’t be a perfect correlation, I’m a high N, non-smoker. No drug use either. Actually, my only vices are caffeine and sex. . .

  • JP

    @Susan:

    One of the problems with the muti-LTR approach is that you are going to end up with a long of broken hearts/emotional trauma.

    So, you have people who have “fallen in love” with multiple people, and presumably a lot of broken hearts, which doesn’t seem like a good idea since one of the goals in life is to *avoid* hurting other people.

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

      One of the problems with the muti-LTR approach is that you are going to end up with a long of broken hearts/emotional trauma.

      Perhaps, but marriages after 25 stick at a much higher rate. So clearly, the LTRs experienced in the 15-17 years between puberty and marriage, which are inevitable in any case, do not appear to do long-term damage to people’s emotional health.

  • J

    @BB #404

    You are so sauve and diplomatic.

    @PJ

    Like the new moniker! Funny!

    How to convey tone through internet comments? Not only can we not see each other’s faces (video) but we can’t even hear (audio) each other’s voices.

    It’s difficult. There is such a thing as literary tone . See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_(literature) I think tone on the net is harder to write and read than tone in books.

    I probably come off as odd from time to time IRL but I have a strong ability to socialize when I want to. I’m not shy….. I can read body language…. I have a lot of empathy for not just humans but all sentient beings.

    That’s good and also contraindicative of AS as far as I know.

    I admittedly have monomanical devotion to certain areas of interest and conversation.

    Not picking up on how people react to that can be ‘spergy.

    You know there are actual practices you can do to increase empathy, such as meditations on compassion? I do these so my empathy is always expanding.

    I tried TM as a stress reliever when I was in college. It made me nervous. No joke.

    @ Anacaona

    I had seriously though of stopping visiting HUS just to avoid PJ. NOT.AMUSED.AT.ALL.

    We’d have all missed you. :-(

    Seriously J I’m the type that turns the other way when I see there is a traffic accident in the street. I take boring any day and twice today,YMMV.

    I turn away from accidents, but I am a hugh people watcher. People do such weird and fascinating stuff. But I realize that I’m odd that way.

  • J

    More generally, it’s probably impossible for a mind to be equally good across *all* dimensions of ability…say, to have superlative social skills, great abstract thinker, cool in a crisis, very fast reactions in sports or warfare, strong aesthetic sense, etc etc.

    Yep. Most of things are contradictory.

    @david foster

    But eventually, the keepers of the DSM will probably define deficiency in ANY of these areas as a “disease” requiring “treatment”…and, very importantly, insurance/government reimbursement.

    Quite possible. And that will be a huge problem as eliminating “deficiencies” will also eliminate the diversity necessary for society to run. What would life be like if we were all physicists or all soldiers?

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

    Ana….”Citadelle” (the unfinished St-Ex book) is in the form of a novel, but it’s really a meditation. So there’s really no great build-up of suspense, the unfinished state won’t leave you hanging too badly.

  • JP

    “More generally, it’s probably impossible for a mind to be equally good across *all* dimensions of ability…say, to have superlative social skills, great abstract thinker, cool in a crisis, very fast reactions in sports or warfare, strong aesthetic sense, etc etc.

    Yep. Most of things are contradictory.”

    I don’t think that weakness in one area necessarily means strength in another, though.

  • JP

    “But eventually, the keepers of the DSM will probably define deficiency in ANY of these areas as a “disease” requiring “treatment”…and, very importantly, insurance/government reimbursement.

    Quite possible. And that will be a huge problem as eliminating “deficiencies” will also eliminate the diversity necessary for society to run. What would life be like if we were all physicists or all soldiers?”

    Psychological and psychiatric care is woefully underfunded in the United States.

    There really isn’t reimbursement and it’s getting worse because it’s something people don’t want to pay for.

    I deal with it every day.

  • Jackie

    @PJ, JP
    Re: Narcissism

    Just when I thought I was out, you keep pulling me back in! ;)

    You guys sure know how to get a girl right in her wheelhouse! I am actually working on an essay on my grandmother, self-hagiography on the internet and that work by the great cinematic auteur Tommy Wiseau, THE ROOM; all tied together by the bonds of narcissism.

    A couple of clarifications with examples (one in this very thread!), and the recommendation to read up on malignant narcissism.

    (Sam Vaknin is pretty extensive, but SO incredibly depressing. The guy is a narcissist himself, so pontificating about his own malignancy becomes a series of mirrors endlessly reflecting back to each other. Small doses recommended.)

    PJ, the identity constructed is a false self; and it is borne out of shame. It is not who they really are.

    There is almost always a narcissistic injury (neglect, abuse) by a primary caregiver at a young age. The N’s injury creates such shame that the N will construct the false self — weaving a self-mythology out of delusions of grandeur, endless obsession with (and allusion to) status and some hardcore Galatea/Pygmalion fantasies of “love” — to escape the shame they experience from this core injury.

    The false self is who they want the world to believe they are. Objective reality is a pretty unwelcome intruder to the narcissist. They will do whatever they can to keep the truth (and the shame) at bay.

    Narcissists feed on what Vaknin calls NS, Narcissistic Supply. It is attention and it is their lifeblood. The best metaphor I can think of, off the top of my head, is that an N’s audience is like a magic mirror, reflecting back the picture of their false, idealized self in all its glory, while they preen before it.

  • Atlas Shagged

    J,
    I’m not very familiar with TM. Are there meditations on compassion involved?

    Hand Solo,
    “So why are the non-sluts or occasionally promiscuous buying this music (either through direct purchase or via the advertisement-supported youtube and radio) from women that dress provocatively and speak of casual sex?”

    – Why are non-racists buying music with the n-word in it?

    Susan to Solo Hand,
    “In discussing promiscuous or unrestricted behavior, you often include women who have had even one casual experience with an “unsuitable” man. I focus on N without regard for the “type” of male, mostly because that information is not available.”

    – What does the “type” of male have to do with anything? Me thinks this is pure projection on his part.

    Susan said,
    “1. The study was conducted in the UK, the most promiscuous country in the world.”

    – Yep. The same country that just came out with a “study” that “proved” drinking a lot of alcohol is an indicator of superior intelligence.

    Smoking
    Drinking
    Promiscuity

    Classy as ever, Britain!

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    I suspect that the presence of one or more visible tattoos would yield a similar N correlation, but unfortunately the GSS didn’t ask respondents about that one.

    Could be. The term “tramp stamp” (lower back tattoo) most likely originated because of the correlation between having the tattoo and behavior.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower-back_tattoo

    I’ve dated a few girls with tattoos and fwiw most of them were not promiscuous but overall the desire to get a tattoo is probably somewhat correlated with an “unrestricted” mindset.

  • http://Bastiatblogger@blogspot.com Bastiat Blogger

    I suppose that if a low N woman has a casual sex encounter or two with a similarly configured man, then her future LTR/husband candidate—assuming he is himself restricted—would find her sexual history more palatable than he would if her past included LTRs with one type and casual sex with another, more ominous and “unsuitable” player type.

    The second case might look like systematic price discrimination took place despite the woman’s relatively low overall N, and as we know this is the deep trauma scenario for many restricted men.

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

      I suppose that if a low N woman has a casual sex encounter or two with a similarly configured man, then her future LTR/husband candidate—assuming he is himself restricted—would find her sexual history more palatable than he would if her past included LTRs with one type and casual sex with another, more ominous and “unsuitable” player type.

      We’ve been over this territory before, as I recall. Unless her sexual history is a matter of public record, he’ll never know. In fact, there’s a strong likelihood she doesn’t even know if her casual sexual partner was restricted or not. Escoffier described being freaked out when women tried to jump his bones in college, but I’ve witnessed several cases of women coming on strong to handsome, shy boys. Most didn’t freak out.

  • http://www.justfourguys.com/ Morpheus

    After such confessions, everything that they say is viewed as suspicious to me. Typically, the confessions occur within 2 months of meeting the men. I respect them for that, at least. I’d rather know that a guy is interested in me within 1-2 months of knowing him than for him to waste several months or years pining after me when I don’t feel the same way.

    That seems like a very misguided form of masochism.

    Sassy, you would be right. The problem here is that a lot of guys still receive the blue pill misinformation that a “friends first” strategy can win the girl over to a romantic/sexual relationship down the road. As a matter of fact, I just read an article the other day by a woman arguing FOR this. It is no wonder guys could would get confused.

    So your hypothetical misinformed guy thinks I’ll get to know her as a person and become friends and then “convert” the relationship down the road. They don’t understand that *most* women immediately throw guys into or out of that *potential* lover box, and once you are out getting in is likely to be futile. Like many other bad strategies in the SMP, it works just enough times to provide a few anecdotes of success and keep hope alive.

  • Atlas Shagged

    Sat Shri Akal!

    “The problem here is that a lot of guys still receive the blue pill misinformation that a “friends first” strategy can win the girl over to a romantic/sexual relationship down the road. ”

    If he’s hot it most definitely can.

  • Anacaona

    We’d have all missed you.
    Nah I’m sure it will be fine. I’m actually thinking I don’t really have much left to say or to add to the site at this point and now that I learned that I’m in the extreme of the restricted scale I don’t think any of my advice is of much use. I’m pretty sure I would had ended up being the last virgin of Sodom no matter what. If Susan releases me of my promise of staying here forever I might hang out for a while and slowly fade away, let the useful advice shine through.

    I turn away from accidents, but I am a hugh people watcher. People do such weird and fascinating stuff. But I realize that I’m odd that way.
    I had been studying people since I can remember. PJ is not that special and you wouldn’t learn much. But your call of course.

    Ana….”Citadelle” (the unfinished St-Ex book) is in the form of a novel, but it’s really a meditation. So there’s really no great build-up of suspense, the unfinished state won’t leave you hanging too bad.

    So this is an odd place to mention this anecdote, but when I was a teenager I got so freaking depressed that life loss meaning completely so naturally I planned my own suicide. The only thing I was waiting for in the middle of my deep desperation was for my favorite soap opera at the time “Alcanzar una estrella” to end. Fucking soap opera was so successful that got a sequel so I had to hold out for another year because no matter how bad I felt I needed to know how it was going to end. Lucky me, I got over that part of the my depression (It lasted a few years where I wasn’t feeling not even the desire to die, before I got into ‘recovery mode’ dark times indeed) Death seemed not to want me I was going to live and be happy goddamn it! So I’ll pass.

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

      @Ana

      If Susan releases me of my promise of staying here forever I might hang out for a while and slowly fade away, let the useful advice shine through.

      Never!

      J/K

      I hope you will stick around, but I understand the nature of blog readership and commenting. Nothing lasts forever.

  • Anacaona

    Could be. The term “tramp stamp” (lower back tattoo) most likely originated because of the correlation between having the tattoo and behavior.
    IME all the sluts I knew had poor impulse control, everything else (tattoos, big mouth and so on varied). So I think that is probably a big tell. If she really can’t wait it out specially for something she really wants. Getting in debt to buy those Manolo Blanikcs she can’t wait to use. She is probably not going to miss in Mr Hottie McAlpha making any sign of interest no matter what, YMMV.

  • Liz

    @BuenaVista

    Perhaps I merely define love incorrectly, but when I read such stories I scratch my head, as I do when confronted with a few hundred discussions of “N” or the give-and-take of Official ILU Declarations. To me, it’s so much sales strategy instruction, with sex and declarations being deployed in some mundane “How to Close” protocol.

    I love your stuff BV. You’re right, all this strategy isn’t what love is about. Not to fault Allison, but it’s all concerned with what *she* wants. ILU should be a gift, not some trial balloon. She has every right to assert her wants and needs, but she’s focusing on the symbol and not the substance.

  • Lokland

    “So I’m not sure how LTR’s build “relationship skills”.”

    +1 to whoever said this.

    It might be a tad unfair but I suspect most ‘relationship’ skills are learned from ages 0 to 11-12.

    If one considers; agreeableness, ability to compromise, secure in expressing ones emotions, honesty etc. Most of the core stuff is learned while quite young.

    Sucks to be the people from broken homes as kids but its an undeniable fact that in marrying someone like that their partners taking on an increased risk level.

  • Maggie

    “Not to fault Allison, but it’s all concerned with what *she* wants. ILU should be a gift, not some trial balloon. ”

    In defense of Alison, I don’t think this is just about what “she wants”. She’s been dating this man for five months now, they spend the night together five nights out of the week and they’re viewed as a couple by her friends and her family. It’s perfectly natural that she would feel she loves him and want to say it. Few woman would be this intimate with a man for five months that they didn’t love.

    His response of “wanting to think about it” is the concern. After five months he doesn’t know? Maybe someday he’ll magically fall in love? This is a huge red flag and Alison is wise to question his feelings.

  • Vitor

    I suppose that if a low N woman has a casual sex encounter or two with a similarly configured man, then her future LTR/husband candidate—assuming he is himself restricted—would find her sexual history more palatable than he would if her past included LTRs with one type and casual sex with another, more ominous and “unsuitable” player type.

    We’ve been over this territory before, as I recall. Unless her sexual history is a matter of public record, he’ll never know.

    Actually it’s very easy. If she complains about how all men are jerks, only think about sex, etc. then we can know for sure who she was hanging around with. :)

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

    @SW

    So clearly, the LTRs experienced in the 15-17 years between puberty and marriage, which are inevitable in any case, do not appear to do long-term damage to people’s emotional health.

    There are at least 3 methods being employed: 1) hooking up, and hoping for the best; 2) serial monogamy, until someone highly comes along; 3) abstinence, until someone highly compatible comes along.

    The first 2 methods are disparaged quite regularly around here, and in the case of method #1 rightly so. And I’ve no doubt method #3 works wonderfully for the introverted/highly restricted crowd (~20% of folks), but would someone like to try packaging and marketing that idea to the youth of America? Methinks a religious-based appeal would fall mostly on deaf ears.

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

    Susan, good point. I think the “alpha tells” will be if the guy ever called her again, if he was hot, if he was known to have been with a lot of women, if the sex included some porn elements, etc.

    If a girl has had 5 sexual partners and all were LTR boyfriends of 1 year duration or more, I don’t think that *most* Restricted guys are going to have their feathers ruffled. If she had 5 and 2 were same-day lays, the Restricted guy is going to immediately go after the 2 casual sex encounters. It’s just how men are wired. He’s going to try to find out if those two guys were hot.

    The male SMP pattern-recognition software appears to be configured for trying to identify price discrimination in a woman’s N history. A lot of guys won’t ask about N stuff because they don’t care, but Restricted guys probably will prior to making a serious investment in the relationship.

    The girl can always lie about it and avoid the whole drama, but if the “that one doesn’t count” deception practice becomes widespread we could have even Restricted guys assuming that most women have had casual sex and that they will lie about it. Those guys will in turn want their relationships to have an accelerated sexual component in the beginning in order to reduce the price discrimination effect.

    So a Restricted guy may still want sex within 3 dates because he feels that the price discrimination between a same-day lay and a 3-dates-lay is manageable, while a same-day-lay vs. a 15-dates-lay makes the guy who waits look like a chump. Even if he is psychologically capable of waiting, he may not want to because of the competitive dynamics he feels.

    I suppose that the overall pace of sex is basically being set by the Unrestricted participants in the SMP.

    Would love to hear what the Restricted guys think…

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

      @BB

      So a Restricted guy may still want sex within 3 dates because he feels that the price discrimination between a same-day lay and a 3-dates-lay is manageable, while a same-day-lay vs. a 15-dates-lay makes the guy who waits look like a chump. Even if he is psychologically capable of waiting, he may not want to because of the competitive dynamics he feels.

      That attitude is certainly prevalent at HUS. I have heard some stories of guys bailing if no sex on the third date, but I believe they were unrestricted types not really looking for a relationship. Which is, of course, the exact reason why women should delay sex.

      It seems clear that there will be an increasing number of SMP standoffs – the only advice I can give is for people to put their cards on the table re their expectations and explain why. If you don’t like the explanation, “I want to wait because you are special compared to those other guys,” or “Why even hang out together if you’re not going to put out?” they can bail.

      I suppose that the overall pace of sex is basically being set by the Unrestricted participants in the SMP.

      That is very much the case, and it explains hookup culture.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Perhaps, but marriages after 25 stick at a much higher rate. So clearly, the LTRs experienced in the 15-17 years between puberty and marriage, which are inevitable in any case, do not appear to do long-term damage to people’s emotional health.”

    I’m thinking about the months of emotional mess you deal with if somebody gets squished.

    It’s definitely very emotionally destabilizing for a significant period of time for the person at the receiving end (months to years).

    My point has nothing to do with long term emotional health or long term stability of marriage.

    For example, I’ve been in a number of major automobile accidents, which were generally my fault. They did no long-term damage to me whatsoever, but resulted in property damage and a random amount of emotional trauma to the other party.

    The net value of these encounters were clearly negative. They had no business happening in the first place and were absolutely unnecessary, resulting in lost time/resources for everybody involved.

    I’m talking about how to avoid the errors that lead to the months to years of emotional mess (which is basically lost time for the person being squished).

    Meaning that the emotional trauma *itself* has no redeeming value.

    Once I figured out that I had *caused* trauma, my reaction was to *avoid causing future trauma*, not because I cared about “long term psychological damage” or “marriage stability” but because causing the trauma was just plain mean, considering that I could have absolutely avoided it (twice).

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

      Once I figured out that I had *caused* trauma, my reaction was to *avoid causing future trauma*, not because I cared about “long term psychological damage” or “marriage stability” but because causing the trauma was just plain mean, considering that I could have absolutely avoided it (twice).

      Sex and love are a risky business. The reproduction imperative doesn’t care who gets hurt. Anyone who does not wish to risk LTRs is under no obligation to do so. Both parties entering an LTR accept both the risk of experiencing trauma, and the risk of causing it to someone else.

  • JP

    “Escoffier described being freaked out when women tried to jump his bones in college, but I’ve witnessed several cases of women coming on strong to handsome, shy boys. Most didn’t freak out.”

    I thought Escoffier had this problem when he was younger, not in college

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

      I thought Escoffier had this problem when he was younger, not in college

      I may be mistaken. I know he had a girl kiss him at 13, but I also understood that he found sexual assertiveness in females alarming later as well. Perhaps he can clarify.

  • JP

    @MM:

    “There are at least 3 methods being employed: 1) hooking up, and hoping for the best; 2) serial monogamy, until someone highly comes along; 3) abstinence, until someone highly compatible comes along.”

    I suspect that what is happening is that #2 is employed, then when the man decides that he wants to get married and have kids, he simply picks the #2 he is with at the moment, meaning that any of the #2’s would have worked just fine in the first place from the guy’s perspective.

    (I’m not basing this on my experience (since I didn’t have any functional #2’s in the first place and it’s clearly not Susan’s experience, but shouldn’t we find out whether this is happening?)

  • Vitor

    @Bastiat Blogger: It seems that you have a very good understanding of the male SMP pattern-recognition software. :-D

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

    @JP
    Who ends most LTRs? I have no idea.

    In my personal circle of friends, it’s been the ladies for the most part. I know Susan’s observed that guys tend to dump their college GF more often than not upon graduation and/or relocation.

    But if you’re hoping for a RMP (romantic market place) where nobody ever gets his or her heart broken, please don’t get the gov’t involved! :shock:

  • Fish

    @Atlas Shrugged
    “If he’s hot it most definitely can.”

    If he’s “hot” he is probably RMV higher than hers in which case he is the one doing the friend zoning. Thats just the same situation in reverse. Trying to break the friend zone is a bad strategy in general (and I have done it, its still a bad strategy).

  • JP

    “In my personal circle of friends, it’s been the ladies for the most part. I know Susan’s observed that guys tend to dump their college GF more often than not upon graduation and/or relocation.”

    Which causes severe emotional trauma when just as you are in the middle of a major transition, such as starting med school, for example.

    So, now you are having a major meltdown just as your life stress is beginning to significantly rise.

    (I do have an example of this that I’ve seen. Not good at all.)

  • Anacaona

    @JP
    I actually agree with you that there is a negative added value from having too many relationships. But there is also the important aspect that many people need to pick up relationship skills by dating because the lack will only increases the chances of them screwing themselves up and others. There is also some people that are relationships hazards that will destroy everyone in their wake just because they can.
    We might need to add another aspect RQ Relationship Quotient to be successful at the SMP.
    I was lucky enough to learn my relationship skills from my intact household and from my peers since I was the youngest and the last one in the whole school to go through puberty so I could see which girls were happy and who ended up miserable and pregnant.
    But I think for some others they need theory and some practice before achieving a RQ high enough to effectively find a suitable mate.
    I also think that the less resilient are more likely to need more practice than theory to avoid the negative effect of too many failed relationships. So as with everything we probably need advice on mate selection, conflict resolution and so on to help many people that don’t have functional household and don’t have the right advice around, YMMV.

  • Fish

    @Ana
    ” But there is also the important aspect that many people need to pick up relationship skills by dating because the lack will only increases the chances of them screwing themselves up and others. ”

    i agree 100% My dad says there are two types of people: those who can learn from others and those who have to screw up for themselves. For the latter (which includes myself), failures make us better for the future (I should be really freaking knowledgeable at this point). . .

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Anacaona, stay so we can talk about our little boys and annoy other people! :p By the way Aidan has been sick basically this whole entire month, so my husband and I have been sick alongside with him because family shares. Aidan is also not growing much in weight because of the illnesses, but he’s not lost much weight.

    Then two nights ago my husband and I got food poisoning, which luckily Aidan didn’t get. That was so miserable. I hadn’t thrown up like that in years, and I was seriously like “I feel like death… someone put me out of my misery…” Anyway, the mind is very illogical sometimes. I had to think about how I need to stay alive and strong for the people I love, like my husband and our little boy. I guess I’m kind of pathetic when it comes to illnesses!

    It did get me thinking about the marriage vows and “in sickness and in health.” That’s how you know you really love somebody, I think, is when one or both of you are violently ill, and you still want to be with that person, take care of that person, and give that person your all. Even cuddling while we were both feeling miserable, feverish and in pain felt good. Physical pain is a lot easier to deal with when you have psychological comforts.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Lokland “It might be a tad unfair but I suspect most ‘relationship’ skills are learned from ages 0 to 11-12. If one considers; agreeableness, ability to compromise, secure in expressing ones emotions, honesty etc. Most of the core stuff is learned while quite young.”

    You’re sure about that? I had a good upbringing up until around 10 when I moved to the US. I had wonderful relationships with my grandparents who were warm and loving to me. They basically raised me and who stayed married for life, and I had a lot of agreeableness, ability to delay gratification, express emotions, etc.

    But I didn’t learn real relationship skills because I was not taught certain boundaries, and I would act out in tantrums like a little kid because that was fine as a kid. Adult relationships are different from parent-child relationships, and many familial role-model relationships are not totally correct either. For example I remember my grandmother snapping and yelling at my grandfather, and he would just back off, nod and smile.

    I learned more about what I didn’t want and shouldn’t do in a LTR from the 8-year ex than anything else. It was good to get that out of the way when I was younger.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Re: smoking and tattoos. I never smoked and don’t have any tattoos or piercings, but my husband did smoke (cigs and others) and has a tattoo on his upper arm (which can be hidden with a t-shirt). He is definitely on the restricted side, although apparently he also has a wild side? It’s hard to really pin him in a box, because he is kind of a chameleon and can do a little bit of everything.

    David Foster “More generally, it’s probably impossible for a mind to be equally good across *all* dimensions of ability…say, to have superlative social skills, great abstract thinker, cool in a crisis, very fast reactions in sports or warfare, strong aesthetic sense, etc etc.”

    Equally good, probably not. But there is g factor, which is correlated with excellence across different academic fields, performance and cognitive tasks.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ BB

    I suppose that the overall pace of sex is basically being set by the Unrestricted participants in the SMP.

    Would love to hear what the Restricted guys think…

    Your insights seem more or less an accurate description. In terms of R vs U, I very much fall on the “R” side of things. N=1, uncomfortable with the idea of too much early intimacy, “U” type behavior disgusts me (even this talk of serial monoamy is disgusting TBH), etc.

    A slow-burn and slow escalation is more ideal in my viewpoint, and I certainly would not begrudge a girl who wanted to wait. In theory, anyways. It’s an excellent way to filter out men who are not interested in her, and it is the right of people to only have sex when they are deeply connected on an emotional level.

    However, this culture is not my culture. These people are not my people. Modern Americans have nothing in common with me when it comes to dating norms. They have also constructed gargantuan pit-falls, not only emotional, but legal, that I do not even fully understand. They are also extremely narcissistic, with outright sociopaths that they worship and put into positions of power.

    Not only that, but in my personal history I was a social outcast largely because I committed atrocities such as wearing sweat-pants and liking science too much. Plus, you know, employment and psychological problems. Despite being a white hetero-sexual college-educated male, my self-perception has mostly been of a person who is at the fringes of society, and my personal history has been one of having the Social Ostracism Sword of Damocles hanging over my head for reasons I did not understand and did not consider morally just.

    Because of both my restricted nature and my historic social position, it is extremely diffficult to put a great deal of trust in the standard American woman if she comes up to me suggesting she wants a ‘relationship,” especially LTR is a term that means nothing: there is no legal relationship, there is no term, there is no defintion of long, it is a commitment that is less meaningful than the United Nations commitment to stop genocide (sorry Rwanda!)
    If modern dating is combat dating, then I am Denmark prior to WWII. I have no stake at all in any European gambles, yet I border a power-hungry monster that heads a nation that has assaulted me in the past. Everyone is yelling at each other for various reasons and there is a hulking feminist beast in the background threatening to devour everything (USSR). I have substantial “possessions,” but they are of no relevance at all to local affairs, and in the end I am in a highly vulnerable position and be blitzkrieged in less time than it takes to watch Man of Steel, and my only “defense” option is to launch my air force at my own fleet so at least the Nazis can’t use it.

    To me, that people in the Mushy Middle suggest that they need to “delay sex” with me is moronic. It is like Hitler asking to station soldiers on Danish territory so the evil Danish cannot attack him: a transparent ploy to subdue my sovereignty and place me in a position of utter mercy, exactly like the feminist beast has done to previous males in a bad position, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia.

    I wasn’t even IN the last Great War, how in the world could you possibly perceive me as a threat?

    Not only that, most of the women in the Mushy Middle are hardly idle victims of the wars: they were active participants who got burned because they were marching into the last war with ridiculously under-trained and under-equipped armies agaisnt the Hot German Cads who had enough ammunition stockpiled to obliterate entire cities WITHOUT nuclear weapons. They should have known better, but the temptation of easy territorial gains and war booty made them take risks no rational person would have ever taken.
    Their own goddam fault.

    Not only that, but I don’t see THEM trying to restrain the culture, for the most part. I just see price discrimination, excuses, etc. In my perception, if the median person wanted the culture to change, then it would change, and the fact that it is not changing, means that they are content with the system, and most likely are only bitching to try to extract some more gains at someone else’s expense.
    Obviously they will make ridiculous moral appeals. Oh Versailles was so unfair! Fuck you. You lost the war because you were morons. You dumped Bismarck, your best LTR ever, because you thought he was holding you back, and then embarked on a crusade of “serially monogamous” “relationships” that ruined you, while treating everyone else like a dick. Britain literally did nothing to anyone for centuries, but you built a giant fleet so you could feel like a man and intimidate the only guy in the bar who literally did not give a shit what happened in the continent.
    You tried to start another bar fight over Morocco with France. Morocco?! NO ONE backed you up, that’s how wild and out of control you were.
    Oh god. Let’s not forget the One Night Stand you had with the Ottoman Empire. I have no idea why you did that, all it did was piss of the Russians and set them in a permanent alliance with France.

    And then you gave your boyfriend Austria a free hand in the Balkans because you wanted him to like you.
    So, yeah, appeal to my moral sentiments all you want. Versailles wasn’t unfair. The reason you got beat down and burned by cads is because YOU screwed up, and it is up to YOU to prove to ME that you are no longer a screw-up. The moral onus is NOT on ME to prove to YOU that you are not going to raise another army and attack Czechlovokia and Poland and anyone in their right mind would dump you and invade you the second you did anything that looked like your past bad behavior.
    Appeal to my “moral sentiments” all you like, YOU screwed this up, and YOU are a danger to ME. Even after two world wars and Soviet occupation, you are still one of the world’s most influential nations and back to your old selfish antics of screwing other nations over. You’ve definitely hit the wall, yeah, you aren’t as pretty as you were in 1914, not with all those sexy Asian girls in the bar now, but you’re still fill fine. DO NOT BITCH TO ME ABOUT HOW UNFAIRLY YOU ARE TREATED.
    The only guys in the bar I can trust are those that have similar outlooks on life and have had similar experiences to me. Norway? Sweden? Finland? Okay, I can trust those guys and girls. Probably Belgium, too. Very visible and well-known experiences and a track record of good behavior in the Marketplace of Europe. Other than that, intrinsically trusting anyone is stupid.
    Obviously, in the real dating marketplace this may not be pragmatic. Women have the ability to price-discriminate, a substantial number (and I would suspect a majority) probably will. I did even tolerate this myself for a brief period of time. However, because this is a hostile environment with unknown actors, I will attempt to press whatever leverage I have and refuse deep commitment until my expectations are met.
    Now obviously this will vary by the girl. I would never ask Poland to withdraw from Danzig and I am absolutely okay with threatening intervention after the USSR approached Warsaw, even though Poland technically started the war. However, the Rhineland should not be occupied. Appealing to sentiments about double standards? Again, do not attempt to appeal to my moral sentiments, as far as I am concerned your ethics are dubious and your hand is strong and you are only bitching to improve your already strong hand even further.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Also, relating two tangents in this thread together:
    The GF has often commented that she is surprised that I have very good “relationship skills” and have since the get-go, despite having had no prior relationship “experience.”

    The one exception is that, earlier on in the relationship, I would often get angry and, as she put it, would “twist her words.”

    I don’t deny it.

    However, as I told her, the reason I acted like a dick was because I was skeptical and not fully committed, and the reason for that was her price discrimination. To me it demonstrated a lack of seriousness and a lack of commitment and even for a while afterwards I was skeptical.

    She stepped up her game and the issue was settled.

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

      The GF has often commented that she is surprised that I have very good “relationship skills” and have since the get-go, despite having had no prior relationship “experience.”

      It makes sense that EQ, or Emotional Intelligence, would have a large effect right out of the box.

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona, stay so we can talk about our little boys and annoy other people! :p
    LOL! Maybe we can ask Exnewyorker wife to join in a few weeks :p
    I’m sorry to hear your family health issues. Think he is building an strong immune system ;)

  • Anacaona

    I hope you will stick around, but I understand the nature of blog readership and commenting. Nothing lasts forever.
    Good to know you wouldn’t be offended. :D

  • Fish

    @Beta guy
    ” In my perception, if the median person wanted the culture to change, then it would change, and the fact that it is not changing, means that they are content with the system, and most likely are only bitching to try to extract some more gains at someone else’s expense.”

    Another dadism (which I’m sure he got from somewhere) – “We’re all whores, we only haggle about the price.”

    To most, the SMP is a zero sum game – so if someone is engaging in price discrimination, it “hurts” the other party. As you said, if the majority were against this practice, the SMP would change and it isn’t really. It is not an efficient market (which is not really up for debate), I personally have taken the stance that while idealism is all well and good, it is not functional and it must be mostly set aside for what is practical. That is probably why ideally my N would be < 5, its not and it only continues to grow.

  • Anacaona

    In my perception, if the median person wanted the culture to change, then it would change, and the fact that it is not changing, means that they are content with the system, and most likely are only bitching to try to extract some more gains at someone else’s expense
    The median person works with the idea of “the lesser of two evils’ You need to remember that the media sells extremes. The dysfunctional SMP is preferable to go back to wait for marriage to have sex again. Is not true but is perceived as the truth hence the lack of change. Moderation doesn’t sell newspapers or TV series, YMMV.

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    I have no real idea what this price discrimination thingy is.

    “In my perception, if the median person wanted the culture to change, then it would change, and the fact that it is not changing, means that they are content with the system, and most likely are only bitching to try to extract some more gains at someone else’s expense.”

    That’s not how social change works.

    First, they aren’t “content” with the system, rather the system is intertwined with their life, so the system simply *is*.

    Social change has to be directed *toward* something, otherwise it is simply change for the sake of change.

    You need some metaphysical framework or you can’t possibly have a direction in which to change.

    With respect to humanity, there are two major destinations.

    I have more of a problem understanding the *good* destination to tell you the truth because I cannot really articulate it. I know that it is there, but I do not *understand* it.

    With respect to the *evil* destination, that is simply the war against all against all. Violence, madness, and depravity run amok, the final outcome of devastation and death. We see this in the most brutal of wars.

    The evil destination is actually a relatively easy destination to reach, if it was your goal.

  • Hope

    ADBG, do you think you would have cared as much about the past if she was only ever with guys who were also “Denmark,” academically inclined, nerdy, not popular with women, outcasts, etc.? Or would you still think that you’d take issue with the fact that she has more of a past?

    Also, do you think that the idea women don’t have to graduate college to find a good man is true? Given that your girlfriend is a doctor, obviously there is a socioeconomic status factor here. Do you think that has no impact on her rmv?

  • Fish

    @JP
    “I have no real idea what this price discrimination thingy is.”

    It is women whose “cost” to have sex is not static. I.E. if a woman requires 6 dates to sleep with guy A, but 2 dates to sleep with guy B, guy A has paid a higher price to get sex, there for she has engaged in price discrimination against him.

    Its the opposite of “you’re more special so you should wait longer.” Its the same as being pissed off when you bought something for full price and someone else got the same thing on clearance, you’re ticked off cuz you had to pay extra for the same good or service.

  • Fish

    @Hope
    Not beta guy, but I think not graduating college would be a serious blow if the woman was looking for marriage. A) people tend to pair with their equals more or less, a non-college graduate shouldn’t expect to marry a guy with a graduate degree (its a horrible prospect for the one with the graduate degree as if there is a divorce, he will get raped), B) While she may have a high SMV, she is going to be more of a target for unrestricted males who will see her lesser earning power and think she will be impressed by money (whether true or not).

    Bottom line, I think it is possible, but not probable that a woman can snag a quality husband without college. There are probably dominant uber-religious sorts who would be ok with that. However, its like lower SMV, I don’t see lack of finishing college ever adding value (except in he above case, which is an extreme minority). In this SMP, why would a woman not want to maximize value?

  • JP

    @Fish

    “It is women whose “cost” to have sex is not static. I.E. if a woman requires 6 dates to sleep with guy A, but 2 dates to sleep with guy B, guy A has paid a higher price to get sex, there for she has engaged in price discrimination against him.”

    That explains why I never ran into it or considered it, since when I was dating I was trying to *avoid* having sex.

    In fact, in hindsight viewed “price discrimination” as a relationship “positive”.

    Meaning that the fact that she *didn’t* want to have sex with me (like she did with her last bf) was definitely a plus for me in terms of my willingness to date her (since our objectives coincided).

  • JP

    That should be “in hindsight, I viewed”.

    I should also note that since I wasn’t having sex, when I got dumped by her because I had a post-death meltdown, I wasn’t particularly bothered at being dumped.

    Her roommates were very worried about the fact that she had dumped me.

    My response was basically “huh? No, I’m not really bothered by this, although I really love the clothing her mother bought for me.”

  • Anacaona

    @ADBG
    OT
    You might want to check Superman vs The Elite animated movie. Really good and it has a very interesting take on the concept that Superman has to be good first.

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    “But I didn’t learn real relationship skills because I was not taught certain boundaries, and I would act out in tantrums like a little kid because that was fine as a kid. Adult relationships are different from parent-child relationships, and many familial role-model relationships are not totally correct either. For example I remember my grandmother snapping and yelling at my grandfather, and he would just back off, nod and smile.”

    Note: Pardon poor quoting, too hard atm.

    I would not call good relationships the same as functional relationships.
    As you said above, acting out in temper tantrums is entirely inappropriate even as a child.

    I would call not learning that a form of dysfunction. Ditto with not learning how to share etc.

    Most relationships are ‘good’ if the bar we place upon them is that they ‘work’ in the sense that people will go through them without failing to achieve a certain goal. That is not good enough to be considered functional under my system of judgment (and yes this is just my judgment).

    As an analogy. The brain is more malleable when young making it far easier for children to pick up languages than adults.

    The same is possibly true of social/relationship skills.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “We’ve been over this territory before, as I recall. Unless her sexual history is a matter of public record, he’ll never know. In fact, there’s a strong likelihood she doesn’t even know if her casual sexual partner was restricted or not. Escoffier described being freaked out when women tried to jump his bones in college, but I’ve witnessed several cases of women coming on strong to handsome, shy boys. Most didn’t freak out.”

    Most men are not handsome, shy boys.
    Therefore in your normal scenario such a history is unlikely for the guy in question. Though I imagine the likelihood of running into such a woman is higher.

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

      @Lokland

      Most men are not handsome, shy boys.

      Most handsome men are not players.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Fish
    LOL on the Dad-ism. Would agree. Pretty much everyone has a price, it’s just a question of how high it is. This is my operating assumption in this market. Not that I necesseraily blame anyone, but this is a marketplace of “flexibility” and that implies a lack of principle, at least to me.
    Therefore, trying to appeal to me on moral grounds, not very succesful. Sort of like a whore lecturing a priest, is what it feels like.

    @ Hope
    Yes, if the GF had only been associating with other Denmarks, it wouldn’t be much of an issue. Actually, her history is full of mostly unremarkable Danish characters that were N=0, somewhat spergy, somewhat unattractive.
    A woman has had several LTRs with a slow-burn with various nerdy, Denmark characters is not a SMPredator but a kindred soul in a nation at war.
    However, as Megaman said, a DQ is not simply by N alone…promiscous can very well be N=1 with the wrong guy under the wrong circumstances, or what BB alludes to constantly with his reference to Fuck Phantoms and how men ferret out price discrimination.
    And the GF does have a shorter history with men who probably fit this bill. It is by no means even close to the majority of her history, but those are the red flags, more so than the LTRs with the Denmark-type characters.
    Again. I am Denmark. I am not afforded the luxury of making poor decisions. I am not even afforded the luxury of allowing other people to make poor decisions. An attack by unseemly foe will end my nation in 2 hours and I will most likely lose all influence in the world, especially my possessions in the East Indies. Making a mistake is something that it is not in my nature to do and potential suitettes must demonstrate their character, their congurency, and their commitment to a mutually beneficial relationship with Denmark.
    This shouldn’t be too difficult to do. My buddy Sweden used to be QUITE the dick, but over the course of a few centuries demonstrated an honest change of character and repudiation of past excesses. America doesn’t hide its past, it makes a public spectacle of it, as an example of what NOT to do. Modern Germany is also a textbook example of how to deal with a dodgy past.
    “I made a mistake, don’t judge me” is like Japan hiding its past excesses after basically a century of destroying all of its neighbors, while still making aggressive territorial claims. Note that Korean fleet planning has no intention of fighting China, it intends to fight Japan. These are guys who should nominally be allies, but Asia as a whole is still a giant tinder-box and none of the problems are resolved, there’s just Daddy America there to make sure nothing gets TOO crazy.

    If I were Denmark, I would not permit Japanese forces on my soil unless I had no other choice. I would be somewhat okay with Germany because they have made some amends, but why take the chance on a slut like Germany when I could rely on Britain or France instead?

    It does Germany no good to whine and protest about how she has changed, and quite frankly that just strikes me as manipulative. Germany knows damn well what’s she done and she knows damn well what kind of position I am in, too. That she throws a temper tantrum about me “judging her” by not allowing her troops on my soil means she either doesn’t understand my perception or doesn’t care.

    Either way, that’s not a “relationship,” that’s an invasion.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Forgot to answer the college question!
    One more thing about the price discrimination.
    My point is that this is a SMP stand-off and gender relations are not exactly healthy. Depending on the girl in question and her attitudes, this issue could get heated quickly.

    As you said, it is best to discuss these issues openly and compassionately. That does include having a concern for your potential partner, of course. If you don’t why even bother dating them?

    I do believe that restricted type males and other low-N type males have special reason to be wary of SMPredators. Hence my analogy about Denmark: in my perception, I do not have luxury of tolerating much ambiguity about female interest. I need a woman who can demonstrate that she is interested, good for my best interests, and not a threa, and without conflicting signals.

    A history of price discrimination is a conflicting signal. Even if it comes up later in the relationship, it is a red flag that requires re-evaluation of the Special Relationship. It would be like finding out that British soldiers had a habit of shooting allied troops in the back in order to secure better field positions, you would never be able to trust a British troop again.

    As for your college question:
    Someone asked me this weekend if I had “love at first sight.” I said second sight. That’s because I thought she was a ditz at first sight.
    I figured she was a college student, but, honestly, that meant nothing to me, becuase I do not have any respect for under-graduate education. When she told me she was in pharmacy school, I started taking her seriously.
    I am not opposed to dating a woman who has not finished college, but she would have to work harder to demonstrate that she is intelligent and diligent. FTR, the majority of my extended family did NOT finish college and my grandfather did not even finish high school so I have limited tolerance for the college-worship of the UMC

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins MM

    @ADBG

    However, as Megaman said, a DQ is not simply by N alone… promiscuous can very well be N=1 with the wrong guy under the wrong circumstances…

    Hey, that’s every adult male’s prerogative. Smart women probably do something similar: “You slept with that embarrassment just because she was willing… AND drunk? Some coincidence…”

    And my anecdotal experience has been that smart men and women both fulfill the role of commitment gatekeeper and periodic police sweep: “You settled for me just because I was above average… and couldn’t land that hot property over there? Adios!”

  • Lokland

    @Sue

    “Most handsome men are not players.”

    Not the point. Actually irrelevant if we consider players to be the ones who do not care about the sexual pasts of their partners.

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

      Not the point. Actually irrelevant if we consider players to be the ones who do not care about the sexual pasts of their partners.

      I actually don’t know what point you’re trying to make, but am happy to drop it.

  • Fish

    @Beta guy
    “A history of price discrimination is a conflicting signal. Even if it comes up later in the relationship, it is a red flag that requires re-evaluation of the Special Relationship. It would be like finding out that British soldiers had a habit of shooting allied troops in the back in order to secure better field positions, you would never be able to trust a British troop again.”

    LOL that is hilarious. I would never have made that analogy, I guess it is a pretty huge deal breaker for you. it is probably a good filter for you, because someone who has never wavered at all in price is closer to you from a values point of view (I do admire your unwavering resolve, i just can’t be at that level myself).

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Mega

    Hey, that’s every adult male’s prerogative. Smart women probably do something similar: “You slept with that embarrassment just because she was willing… AND drunk? Some coincidence…”

    Adults do get to make their own decisions ;)

    @ Fish
    Well, I thank you for the compliment! On the flip side, though, I really have not adhered to the “no rings for sluts” rule. My GF did practice “price discrimination” and had more partners than I level at I consider easily acceptable.
    It’s not an immediate DQ. She can balance out with other factors. Everyone has their weaknesses and fuck-ups and no one is perfect. The issue is whether she is honestly attracted and committed to me, and I believe she is.

  • Gin Martini

    Sue: “A college LTR is not as you have written here, but is rather, “I love fucking you and spending time with you. I’m willing to do those things with you and only you. If that changes I’ll let you know.” Both parties are free to leave if they find something better, because they are not married, duh.”

    Ah, so we have different terms, then.

    What you call a “LTR” here (with such a cavalier, one-way attitude) is a “fling” or “FWB” to me. I can’t imagine saying such a terrible thing to a girlfriend, or even harboring that attitude. I can see being *unsure*, which is quite a different thing.

    I’m not sure *all* people think this way.

  • Atlas Shagged

    “It might be a tad unfair but I suspect most ‘relationship’ skills are learned from ages 0 to 11-12. ”

    Totally disagree. Here’s why.

    We now know that the human brain is not fully developed until as late as 25ish.

    Besides that, children up to 11 years old are primarily still “me” focused.

    I don’t think a lot of STR or LTRs are needed to know how to function in serious relationship such as marriage, but if all of us were to remember what we were like relationally at 11 compared to how we are now as adults past 25 with much more experience with other human beings, I’m certain ALL of us here would say we are very different.

  • Atlas Shagged

    @Fish

    “It is women whose “cost” to have sex is not static. I.E. if a woman requires 6 dates to sleep with guy A, but 2 dates to sleep with guy B, guy A has paid a higher price to get sex, there for she has engaged in price discrimination against him.”

    – Some people don’t have a set number of dates required or time expired but rather wait to see when sexual chemistry is alchemized, if ever.

    Not A Haiku

    Gathered from the souk
    Seven rare spices
    The alchemist balked
    As she raised her prices

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Gin Martini “What you call a “LTR” here (with such a cavalier, one-way attitude) is a “fling” or “FWB” to me.”

    I can’t imagine getting into a relationship without ILU. But obviously different people differ on this. Didn’t you say that you didn’t say ILU until a few months into the relationship? So before then, you were calling each other boyfriend/girlfriend but without that much more commitment (at least on your side) as Susan’s description.

  • Laurel

    About all this “price discrimination” discussion…when I wait for sex, I don’t really feel like I’m CHARGING the man something. Certainly not money, I don’t mind being a pretty cheap date. Of course, there’s an investment of TIME, but if he doesn’t enjoy being with me (other than at the instants when something sexual is happening) why would I want to have sex with him anyway? Is it really that burdensome to spend a few hours with someone getting to know her? (Maybe for extreme introverts it might be?)

    Also, waiting can be difficult for the girl, too, you know. Not usually as hard as for a guy, I admit, but still at times not easy.

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

      About all this “price discrimination” discussion…when I wait for sex, I don’t really feel like I’m CHARGING the man something. Certainly not money, I don’t mind being a pretty cheap date. Of course, there’s an investment of TIME, but if he doesn’t enjoy being with me (other than at the instants when something sexual is happening) why would I want to have sex with him anyway?

      +1

  • Gin Martini

    Hope, yes. I agree there is no LTR without a statement of love and sex. We may differ on the optimal timing of it and sequence of it (and to be honest I’m fine with your order) but we agree on the elements.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I don’t really feel

    Stop right there.
    What about what HE feels?

  • Bed & Breakfast

    @ADBG, “What about what HE feels?”

    She addressed that here with, “but if he doesn’t enjoy being with me (other than at the instants when something sexual is happening)…”

    If a man doesn’t enjoy being with a woman then he should be with her.

    Simple as that.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    NOT. If he doesn’t enjoy being with her, then he should NOT be with her.

  • Liz

    If this so-called “sliding three date rule” isn’t price discrimination, then what is?

  • JP

    “Hope, yes. I agree there is no LTR without a statement of love and sex. We may differ on the optimal timing of it and sequence of it (and to be honest I’m fine with your order) but we agree on the elements.”

    I’ve officially only had one LTR, then, which resulted in marriage.

    Even though I’ve had meet the parents girlfriends, which to me was just a normal part of having a girlfriend.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    “If a man doesn’t enjoy being with a woman then he should be with her.

    Simple as that.”

    Exactly, I do not enjoy being with a woman who price discriminates, and thus a woman who does it must make up for it in other ways.

    Sorry if you get annoyed by it, thems the breaks.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    Liz,

    “If this so-called “sliding three date rule” isn’t price discrimination, then what is?”

    Sexual chemistry.

    The timing of it various from couple to couple.

  • SayWhaat

    Exactly, I do not enjoy being with a woman who price discriminates, and thus a woman who does it must make up for it in other ways.

    The women who acquiesce to this have low self-esteem.

    They also happen to be the ones who price discriminate.

    Have your cake… ;)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Adjusting for the feelings of your partner does not automatically imply low self-esteem.

  • Bed & Break-fast

    There is no price discrimination.

    There is only sexual chemistry.

  • Abbot

    “There is no price discrimination.

    There is only sexual chemistry.”

    Unless of course the man determines that there is price discrimination. This perception of her is solely up to him. Same goes for her. Thats equality. If she prefers to not be seen as price discriminate, she should adjust her behavior accordingly.

    .

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I don’t care what you call it. It is a traditional SMP-standoff that has a workable resolution. The conversation has now turned to “well, I don’t feel that way when I make him wait.”
    Which is irrelevant. I know you don’t that feel that way. The discussion was about what I feel and what sort of accomodation can be reached.

    You are Germans trying to put troops on my Danish soil, then whining when I say no. Then saying that I won’t be able to make friends with any of the other nations, because I am a meany-pants that won’t let you put troops on my Danish soil and all the other troops will put troops on my soil, too.

    Take a hike. The Americans gave me B-61 dial-a-yield nukes and I am not afraid to use them.

  • Abbot

    “The conversation has now turned to “well, I don’t feel that way when I make him wait.”

    Of course it turns because women HATE any standard men have that puts them in a compromising position.

    If men pick and choose at will which women will be made to wait and which ones will be permitted to get it immediately, then suddenly women would be deeply disturbed by being made to wait. But they don’t have that experience. So they think their discriminatory behavior is perfectly fine for them AND for you. Brick. Wall. Hit.

  • Bed & Break-fast

    I’m at a loss here.

    You are suggesting people have sex when they feel no sexual chemistry? What’s the point, exactly?

  • Abbot

    Um, when does a man NOT have sexual chemistry upon asking a woman out?

  • Lokland

    @SW/ADBG

    “The women who acquiesce to this have low self-esteem.
    They also happen to be the ones who price discriminate.”

    You both have a point.
    There is a significantly large pool of woman whom have never had a ONS (~50%). As such not experiencing price discrimination is not a particularly hard thing to accomplish.

    OTOH, I do not think accomodating to a partners wishes (both sexual and commitment) is a sign of low self esteem.

    Ex, I know my wife is not nearly as horny as I am and that some but not all of the times she is doing it to merely accomodate me. Nothing weak or insecure about such a thing.

    Similarly, there is a lot of commitment related acts that I derive 0 benefit from and do purely for her. Ex. holding a shopping bag, cuddling for no reason.

    ————-

    I think when one starts viewing kindness done to ones partner (that is not reciprocated) as a form of weakness or insecurity that one has become to cynical to be in a relationship.

    Ex. A large part of both feminism and the manosphere.

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

      cuddling for no reason

      LMAO. Oxytocin feels good!

      I think when one starts viewing kindness done to ones partner (that is not reciprocated) as a form of weakness or insecurity that one has become to cynical to be in a relationship.

      Ex. A large part of both feminism and the manosphere.

      +1 This is that adversarial dynamic that kills real intimacy.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Out of curiosity.

    I remember that it was 47% of the population had had a ONS (might have that backwards).

    What was the defintion of what constitued a ONS?

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

      I remember that it was 47% of the population had had a ONS (might have that backwards).

      What was the defintion of what constitued a ONS?

      Not sure – I think match.com came up with that stat. For some reason I want to say sex on the first date?

  • JP

    “Um, when does a man NOT have sexual chemistry upon asking a woman out?”

    In my world.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    “Um, when does a man NOT have sexual chemistry upon asking a woman out?”

    That’s not chemistry. That’s one way attraction.

    Chemistry is something that takes two, and takes time.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Who said anything about sex without sexual chemistry? The point is that you, as a woman, have certain obligations in the courtship and relationship process, that are of a sexual nature.

    If you do not have any sort of chemistry at all with a man, you should not be wasting his time, or yours.

    If you are on a date with a man and feel attraction, you must communicate that, and be receptive, to some extent, with his sexual escalation.

    You must recognize that extended multi-month long courtship processes are a thing of the past.

    If you are in a more extended courtship process, you are not entitled to expensive dates and the obligation is yours to shoulder a large fraction of the cost, to plan, and to make the experience enjoyable. Basically, it isn’t courtship at all. Courtship is dead.

    If you do not want sex with a man, you should not ask him to be your boyfriend.

    Before he is your boyfriend, you have no claim to anything of his and no right to expect anything.

    You should end your casual sex diet, if you have any, immediately.

    This is the agreed upon solution to this SMP standoff. Additional demands will be regarded as an initiation of hostility.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    ADBG, your comment speaks nothing to the issue here of 3 date rule and so-called “price discrimination” which is being used as a euphemism for having sex at different time points in different relationships.

    Some couples have sexual chemistry right off the bat, others develop that chemistry over time.

    There is no universal standard.

  • Abbot

    ” takes two, and takes time”

    She need not be concerned about where he stands. He will go for the sex if she allows it. Its what he did in the past. He is consistent.

    If she made all other men wait, then that is her way. Then he will take comfort in waiting and feel it is justified. She is being consistent. Otherwise, it is not consistent and therefore not justified from his perspective and his perspective is all that matters.

    Why is this so not acceptable? It totally harmless.

    .

  • SayWhaat

    OTOH, I do not think accomodating to a partners wishes (both sexual and commitment) is a sign of low self esteem.

    I don’t believe I implied that.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    “She need not be concerned about where he stands. He will go for the sex if she allows it. Its what he did in the past. He is consistent. ”

    She and he? Who the heck is this she and he you’re talking about?

    “If she made all other men wait, then that is her way. Then he will take comfort in waiting and feel it is justified. She is being consistent. Otherwise, it is not consistent and therefore not justified from his perspective and his perspective is all that matters. ”

    Not all waiting periods are in the same time frame. That’s why the 3 date rule is ridiculous. Again, it depends upon the sexual chemistry between two individuals.

    You are not the boss of them.

  • Abbot

    “Some couples have sexual chemistry right off the bat”

    Some women have sexual chemistry right off the bat.

    Fixed it.

    And that entirely depends on the man right in front of her.

  • Lokland

    “I don’t believe I implied that.”

    I got that.

  • Abbot

    “Not all waiting periods are in the same time frame.”

    For men it always the same. Its called ZERO. Thus, they all get an F for being gatekeepers.

    “You are not the boss of them.”

    No, that would be an unnecessary burden. But men are the evaluators of them. None of this has any negative impact on women whatsoever. Right?

  • Bed & Breakfast

    “For men it always the same. Its called ZERO. Thus, they all get an F for being gatekeepers. ”

    Utter bullshit. All men are not the same nor do they all have the same sexual thresholds, what to speak of with all women they they date.

    Men contain multitudes.

  • Abbot

    “All men are not the same nor do they all have the same sexual thresholds”

    If a woman puts sex on offer, all so-called thresholds are off the table.

    This fact seems to be a major side thorn. That’s surprising.

    .

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    When did I say I adhered to a 3 date rule?

    My impression is that the 3 date rule only has force when men feel that is the norm, and they will push for that even if restricted. A girl who says “no,” will be assumed to be a girl who really isn’t that interested in him.

    As you said, no chemistry. Right?

  • Bed & Breakfast

    “This fact seems to be a major side thorn. That’s surprising. ”

    It is surprising to me.
    But then again, I don’t have much experience with desperate men who have no standards and no internal values system.

    My bad, I guess?

  • JP

    Are we at level 3 yet?

  • Abbot

    “men who have no standards”

    This all about men who have standards, especially those that qualify a woman’s fitness for a relationship. Thus the angst regarding women being evaluated based on sexual history. The angst is palpable, if not amusing.

  • Liz

    Bed & Breakfast understood what my short comment meant. Here’s a concrete summary —

    Male: “I’ll spend more time / money / energy on the hotter woman, in hopes of the possible payoff.”

    Female: “I’ll spend more of my youth / attention / risk tolerance on the hotter man, in hopes of the possible payoff.”

    Where “hotter” and “payoff” and “time” etc. are defined by each person’s preferences, and not the same across all individuals.

    Therefore both can be called “price discrimination” – or maybe a better term that doesn’t involve economic-speak, which seems to have taken over everyone’s vocabulary.

  • Abbot

    This “price discrimination” thing only comes into play for the man if the woman is sizing the guy up for a relationship. If both are just out for a fling, he is not going to really care if she makes him wait a few dates, but beyond that he’s gonna be off for the hills.

  • Gimme Fountain Head

    I don’t see the point of complaining about price-discrimination, honestly.

    If it bugs you, withhold monogamy. If you have 10 or 50 prospects all going at once, then waiting 3 dates or 3 months or 3 years matters not at all, because you can pick and choose from the ones that come to fruition.

    People complaining about price discrimination are probably implementing a serial strategy, while the people they meet are executing a parallel one.

    The solution is obvious!

    Of course, people who implement a parallel strategy probably aren’t very good at monogamy… but who cares about that???

  • Abbot

    “this is a particularly American phenomena”

    as is “girls gone wild,” Karen Owen, CraigsListHopper Jaclyn Friedman and all the rants and polemics by Amanda Marcotte and friends. Thats just on the surface and it all points to one big nasty ass national embarrassment. Thank goodness it is uniquely American as only 6% of Earth’s population resides there.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Liz,

    Men do indeed also price discriminate.

    None of us are special snowflakes and are subject to market forces.

    HOWEVER:
    It does not feel good to feel like a second choice or anything close to it. Your task as partner should be to make the other person feel good about themselves and be sensitive to their feelings.

    Why should I feel bad checking out other girls when the girlfriend is around? That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to do it.

  • Gimme Fountain Head

    Nope.

    Some monogamist couples implement entirely serial courting strategies. I’ve gone on record saying this. We only considered a new person, unless the previous was was a definite “no” and entirely out of the picture.

    Parallel is having multiple prospects open at once, even to the point of intermixing them.

    Serial is saying “goodbye” to the prospect before you consider the next one.

  • Bed & Breakfast

    ” Thank goodness it is uniquely American as only 6% of Earth’s population resides there.”

    Precisely my sentiments regarding most, if not all, of mainstream American culture. However this “culture’s” influence extends far beyond its borders.

    But if you think Americans in general are the most promiscuous global demographic, you would be wrong.

    On a pro-active note, I’m doing what I can by teaching my culture’s traditions in the US, knowing fully well that if Americans take to them, as they are in droves, they will influence the rest of the world culturally for good – for once.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Ana

    “LOL! Maybe we can ask Exnewyorker wife to join in a few weeks :p”

    She’s not much on the computer in general (except for baby forum stuff), but I like talking about my little boy as well :-)

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

      She’s not much on the computer in general (except for baby forum stuff), but I like talking about my little boy as well

      Please give us a Nathan Field Report! Does he still have that intense focus? Has he kept that cap of hair? Are the eyes going dark? We want details! And I hope Mrs. ENY is feeling well.

  • Abbot

    “It does not feel good to feel like a second choice or anything close to it”

    In the US, there was a time when a woman did not concern herself with that for obvious reasons. They still don’t, but now they need to. That is, if they really want to be captivating and draw in a man like their grandmother’s did. The reason they usually don’t succeed is because men are still like grandpa and they are going to remain so.

    “Your task as partner should be to make the other person feel good about themselves and be sensitive to their feelings.”

    Well-parented women will do that. But alas, here we are.

  • JP

    “On a pro-active note, I’m doing what I can by teaching my culture’s traditions in the US, knowing fully well that if Americans take to them, as they are in droves, they will influence the rest of the world culturally for good – for once.”

    Americans love fads.

  • Abbot

    “if you think Americans in general are the most promiscuous global demographic, you would be wrong”

    Those other places are small, extremely easy to avoid and don’t even have the the best looking women. The world is a win-win for American men if they want it. Luckily for women in the US, few men take advantage. For now.

  • Abbot

    “Americans love fads.”

    Fads fade. Feminism comes to mind.

  • Jayn Rand

    “Americans love fads.”

    I’m finding that they are sick of them, sick of the shallowness and emptiness of this so-called “civilization” and that’s why they are taking very sincerely and seriously to my culture’s wisdom traditions.

  • ExNewYorker

    “What you call a “LTR” here (with such a cavalier, one-way attitude) is a “fling” or “FWB” to me. I can’t imagine saying such a terrible thing to a girlfriend, or even harboring that attitude. I can see being *unsure*, which is quite a different thing.”

    Gotta agree with Gin here. What’s funny is this exactly what some of my favorite cads do…have an “LTR” until they get bored and then they end the LTR once they’ve hooked the next LTR. There’s no expectation beyond “let’s just see how it goes”.

    Must be my generally restricted nature…

  • ExNewYorker

    “Please give us a Nathan Field Report! ”

    *Laugh*

    He’s doing well. Pediatrician visit today and he had some reflux issues last week, but seems to be getting better. His eyes are dark brown now, and he still has that intense gaze when something attracts his curiosity, and yes, his hair is still all there (getting a little longer) :-) Mrs. ENY is feeling much better and she’s now the main caretaker, and now her parents are in town for a several weeks, until after his baptism the middle of the month.

    What’s funny is my Mom sent me old photos on myself at that age, and it’s spooky how similar he looks to me (though he smiles more than I did and he looks a little bigger than I was). I think that’s part of the reason my Mom took to him so strongly…

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

      @ENY

      I’m glad to hear everything is going so well. I can imagine that seeing a family resemblance in one’s grandchild is a powerful thing. It confirms that your DNA has now gone two generations! And no wonder people are so delighted to become great grandparents.

      I’m so glad your wife is able to assume her full role as caretaker – I’m sure she was very anxious to get to that point. How wonderful that Nathan’s grandparents have been present as well – that boy is getting a lot of early love. There’s nothing more important!

  • Sassy6519

    This thread…..wow.

  • Anacaona

    What’s funny is my Mom sent me old photos on myself at that age, and it’s spooky how similar he looks to me (though he smiles more than I did and he looks a little bigger than I was). I think that’s part of the reason my Mom took to him so strongly…
    What is it with all HUS looking like the dad? :/ Might be a firstborn thing. Making sure daddy trust mummy and stick around and participates in number 2 and beyond?
    Good to know things are going better :D

  • Sims

    Going on 22 years and we dont remember when the I love you’s were said…does he SHOW you he loves you.

    Players are good with words, nice guys are good with actions (just had a naughty thought)

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Of course, there’s an investment of TIME, but if he doesn’t enjoy being with me (other than at the instants when something sexual is happening) why would I want to have sex with him anyway? Is it really that burdensome to spend a few hours with someone getting to know her? (Maybe for extreme introverts it might be?)

    If that’s how you conduct yourself all the time, it isn’t price discrimination at all. In fact, it’s smart and healthy behavior.

    It’s price discrimination when you’re willing relax your standards for certain individuals and not others, implying that the former are more valuable in your eyes than the latter.

    I’ve always thought the famous “newspaper example” of price discrimination didn’t capture the entire situation. So here’s a thought experiment for you (and one Susan should appreciate)…

    You’re applying to colleges… a lot of good colleges with high standards and long extensive processes for admission.

    When it comes time to make a commitment, you learn that some schools have maintained their high standards and requirements throughout the entire process for everyone who has applied… but some of the others have admitted dumb douchebags and bimbos left and right due to their family’s money and status… and even more, they just let them skip several of the time consuming and difficult parts of the admission process (all while still requiring you to go through those long and difficult processes).

    Which schools are you going to have more respect for? Which schools are you going to be proud to have your name and reputation associated with them? Which schools are you going to be more likely to say “get lost” to?

    Pretty easy to answer.

    It’s not the time and work for sex and relationships that guys are balking at… it’s the preferential treatment and favoritism shown to other guys that signifies they have higher value than him.

  • Liz

    Eh. All this talk of the “cost” of sex is so left-brain. Economic theory, like evo-psych, may shed some light on human activity, but has its limitations. In the end, people are driven sexually by their own wants and needs, tempered by values, attraction, and life circumstances.
    Someone who prices their sexual access in tangibles, no matter how high, low, consistent or inconsistent, seems to be missing the point of real human relationships.

  • Liz

    And that applies to women trying to “buy” love with sex, as well.

  • Hope

    ExNY, that is so wonderful to hear! Young babies can be a handful, but the family bond is powerful. My mother-in-law also dug out photos of my husband as a baby, and the resemblance is clear. I think our boy definitely has more of his father in him, too.

    I remember not being able to do much for the first few months and basically dropping off the face of the earth as far as the rest of the world’s concerned. I would read up baby info, and that was about it. Sleep was too precious and little…

    Anyhow, glad to hear everything is going well!

  • Abbot

    “Someone who prices their sexual access in tangibles, no matter how high, low, consistent or inconsistent, seems to be missing the point of real human relationships.”

    Does that mean women have decided for men how men should feel about these matters?

    Well, how convenient. For women.

    .

  • Abbot

    “it’s the preferential treatment and favoritism shown to other guys that signifies they have higher value than him.”

    Its also the feeling that you’re being settled for, that other types of guys stimulate her much more and worst of all – that she may find you equally or better than past guys buts wants you to thinks she is “not that kind of girl” aka the “duper.”

    The root of all these matters is undeniable. Women are the sex access controllers. If they weren’t, and they had to put in the same sort of effort men do, then men would not have these discrimination matters to consider. With power comes responsibility and maybe one day women will accept and embrace that fact.

    .

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Real human relationships deal with real humans who have real emotions that evolved from real life experiences and real evolutionary past.

    People need to find an arrangement that works for them. That sounds a lot like what PJ is saying. Note, PJ is using it to dismiss concerns she doesn’t find valid. There-in lies the difference.

  • Abbot

    “PJ is using it to dismiss concerns she doesn’t find valid”

    PJ is using it to dismiss concerns she doesn’t find CONVENIENT

    .

  • Valentin

    …maybe one day women will accept and embrace that fact.

    “Don’t be so entitled”

  • Abbot

    “Don’t be so entitled”

    That is the cold reality that hits em hard after years of driving the sex bus. Many choose to denigrate men’s way of evaluating women for relationships rather than accept the evaluation. Ego crushed. Power extinguished.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Ana
    “What is it with all HUS looking like the dad? :/ Might be a firstborn thing. Making sure daddy trust mummy and stick around and participates in number 2 and beyond?”

    Could be…he is the firstborn. Though right now, he’s a handful enough…so not thinking of number 2 at the moment :-)

    @Susan and Hope
    I’m glad I have the various grandparents around. Their help has made these first couple of months much easier…we get enough sleep by taking shifts. Plus, with my wife’s surgery (not just the c-section), she wasn’t able to be the main caretaker until after his first month, so the help was invaluable, I also think having people around helped her recovery psychologically as well, avoiding feelings of isolation and frustration. A model with only the nuclear family would not have been possible, frankly.

    I agree about the first few months. My time is not my own. I’m taking a little break with my mother-in-law feeding and playing with him at the moment, and my wife is taking a nap. I’ll take him to the backyard later while I grill…he’s finally accepting being in one of those baby carriers…but only in the backyard…

  • Jayn Rand

    “That is the cold reality that hits em hard after years of driving the sex bus.”

    LOL!
    First it was a carousel now its a whole damn BUS?!?!

  • Liz

    Does that mean women have decided for men how men should feel about these matters?

    Actually my comment wasn’t gender-specific. Entitlement is not attractive in anyone.

    It occurred to me later that if you want to embrace this “pricing” model of relationships, it helps to realize who the “seller” is. A woman pursuing a more-attractive-than-she-is guy is not the seller, she is the buyer. Therefore she’s not “charging” anything; in fact she’s paying for something (attention from the hot male) with sex. Guys are still free to complain about being put in the “buyer” role.

    But maybe the whole “price” paradigm is flawed for one very basic reason: most women just don’t think that way. It seems that when men see behavior they find troubling (which in fact may not be representative of all behavior), they rack their (left) brains for an explanation and as often happens, find one that fits to some extent. In America we worship money and commerce, and there’s a natural male tendency tend to think in terms of hierarchy and quantifiable constructs.

    Meanwhile, us women sit here and see our thoughts and feelings reduced to equations on a blackboard, scratch our heads and go “Huh? It’s not like that at all.”

    Behavioral economics is fraught with difficulty because neither psychology nor economics is an exact science. Then put the two together, and you’re going to find more exceptions (i.e. ADBG’s real people) to your rules than proofs.

  • Angelguy

    ” In America we worship money and commerce, and there’s a natural male tendency tend to think in terms of hierarchy and quantifiable constructs.”

    This is so true. In the SMP, much of this falls on the Male.
    We are judged and evaluated by our status, even before we are considered for a relationship.
    That is one of the major differences. Despite the recent development of Women, Men are still “expected” to fullfill his role as provider.

  • Abbot

    “women sit here and see our thoughts and feelings reduced to equations on a blackboard, scratch our heads and go “Huh? It’s not like that at all.”

    Women are evaluated based on their behaviors. Not on how they think or feel about those behaviors. The man is not going to ask how she felt about that one-nighter two years ago with the hot bartender while she was on vacation. Fact is, she did it and the guy she “has feelings for” (???) is enduring an unjustified courtship. Why do women find this manner of thinking so disturbing? Its actually harmless, no?

  • Abbot

    “First it was a carousel now its a whole damn BUS”

    That is an expression meaning having total control. When no longer the driver, women tend to enter a spitting-made ranting and diatribe-writing phase. Obviously.

  • Jayn Rand

    “In America we worship money and commerce”

    That’s why I’m here. To teach you culture and inner life.

  • Liz

    @Angel Guy

    In the SMP, much of this falls on the Male. We are judged and evaluated by our status, even before we are considered for a relationship.

    I believe that. Personally I’ve always aimed to see past economic / beefcake rankings.

    @Abbhot

    The man is not going to ask how she felt about that one-nighter two years ago.

    No of course not – because it might yield complex information, which is anathema to the flow-chart adherents.

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

    JR…”That’s why I’m here. To teach you culture and inner life.”

    And humility. Don’t forget to teach us humility. I think you would be an excellent instructor in that subject.

  • Jayn Rand

    A false sense of humility never helped anyone. I’m here to help, not hinder, Americans.

  • Abbot

    “No of course not – because it might yield complex information, which is anathema to the flow-chart adherents.”

    Romance is feelings based, not science based. Thus there are no flow charts unless imagining that there are somehow justifies denigrating and disrespecting men. Why such expressions of disrespect are so regular and consistent has never been explained. Perhaps one day someone will be brave enough to do that.

    If certain women prefer that men did not act on these natural feelings, they would modify their behavior accordingly. Until then, there are plenty of other women to consider.

    See how simple and non-scientific that is?

    .

  • Anacaona

    And humility. Don’t forget to teach us humility. I think you would be an excellent instructor in that subject.
    LOL! :D