Spike linked in the comments to a podcast of Independent Man chatting with Bettina Arndt:
Audio issues and accents aside, this is an interesting conversation. Arndt is a dating coach who has taken observations she originally came across in the early Manosphere and applies them to help her female clients.
Long time readers will recall that Arndt wrote a column by the same name in the Sydney Morning Herald back in 2012: Why women lose the dating game. Arndt was evidently at one time a reader of this very blog, as she not only mentioned it in the piece, but she quoted me as well:
But there is another conversation going on – a fascinating exchange about what is happening from the male point of view. Much of it thrives on the internet, in the so-called ”manosphere”. Here you will find men cheerfully, even triumphantly, blogging about their experience. They have cause for celebration, you see. They’ve discovered a profound change has taken place in the mating game and, to their surprise, they are the winners.
Dalrock (dalrock.wordpress.com) is typical: ”Today’s unmarried twentysomething women have given men an ultimatum: I’ll marry when I’m ready, take it or leave it. This is, of course, their right. But ultimatums are a risky thing, because there is always a possibility the other side will decide to leave it. In the next decade we will witness the end result of this game of marriage chicken.”
The endgame Dalrock warns about is already in play for hordes of unmarried professional women – the well-coiffed lawyers, bankers and other success stories. Many thought they could put off marriage and families until their 30s, having devoted their 20s to education, establishing careers and playing the field. But was their decade of dating a strategic mistake?
The post she quoted is Supply and demand in the marriage market. She also quoted a comment by Greenlander:
That’s when some men start behaving very badly – as the manosphere clearly shows. These internet sites are not for the faint-hearted. The voices are often crude and misogynist. But they tell it as they see it. There is Greenlander, an apparently successful engineer in his late 30s. In his early adult life, he was unable to ”get the time of day from women”. Now he’s interested only in women under 27.
”The women I know in their early 30s are just delusional,” he says. ”I sometimes seduce them and sleep with them just because I know how to play them so well. It’s just too easy. They’re tired of the cock carousel and they see a guy like me as the perfect beta to settle down with before their eggs dry out … when I get tired of them I just delete their numbers from my cell phone and stop taking their calls … It doesn’t really hurt them that much: at this point they’re used to pump & dump!”
The basic strategy Greenlander describes is one I speculated on in one of my very first posts (July 2010): Next Phase of the Hypergamous Arms Race: Revenge of the Nerds? Soon after I speculated that some men might be employing a beta provider con on the women seeking to con men with “free sample” sex, Marcos confirmed that it worked for him.
Pingback: Why women lose the dating game. | @the_arv
Hypergamy quantified :
“It was determined that the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men.”
The unrealistic expectations women have is certainly leading to their downfall.
I yet again find it unavoidable to mention the cuckservative frauds like Brad Wilcucks and Jim Gay-ratty.
Their whole fraud is built around normalizing this, and telling men to ‘man up’ and settle for the 35 y/o woman when the man is 35. This is astonishing in its dishonesty. Jim Gay-ratty actually says that the attraction patterns of women miraculously change and the beta provider is now considered ‘a stud’. Nevermind that Him Gay-ratty himself married a single mother who might be older than him, and openly admits that he lives under daily threatpoint (which of course he retroactively rationalizes as a good thing).
To be this ignorant is bad enough. To be proud of it is even worse.
Men have finally stopped paying full fare for (very) used (up) women.
They’ve made their bed, now they get to sleep in it.
I know a man who lives in a large American city. He seems to be friends with all the hot, young, professional women in his city. I see on my FB feed photos of his friends partying in various well known party locations around the country, and around the world.
They are mostly, very attractive, thin, intelligent, and successful, and they are spending their 20s and early 30s partying their way around the world, as evidenced by their half-naked drunken photos from boats, beaches, and nightclubs.
They appear to me to be perfect candidates for a short-term fling, or a pump and dump, but a man would have to be straight up crazy to put a ring on one.
How are they going to transition from party whore to faithful wife and mother? How are they going to adjust their expectations of life from jet setting around the world, to changing diapers and cleaning up vomit?
I’ve already got three kids, and I’m starting to get stuff from AARP in the mail, and I wouldn’t put a ring on one.
‘Women’s friends are the bane of my life.’
Agree 100%.
Anon:
Without reading the article, I can be in complete agreement with your assessment and with the thesis promoted there, and I can simultaneously still see why men who want no-strings sex will continue to use these things.
In America’s larger cities, the authentic female population on these sites is numbered with six figures. If only 1/100 women in such a population find brother x attractive, that still amounts to a pool of at least a thousand women who are available for him to screw. There’s also the efficiency aspect of it all. It takes less than a second to “swipe right” (i.e. send a message of interest to any particular woman). It’s even more efficient if brother x simply swipes right on every profile, as quickly as he can. Compare that to going out to the bookstore and first filtering through all the women in the joint, then making small talk with the few that meet his standards, then dealing with all the rejections, then moving on to the coffeeshop, etc.
Boxer
Boxer, congrats on the coronation, ha.
Herein lies the conundrum in the very fabric of humanity.
On one hand, a humanitarian could argue that if the average women is really not attracted to the average man, then Marriage 1.0, having served society well, should be retired. The average woman being paired up with the average man is just as unappealing to her as if a man was paired up with a woman rated a 2.5 or 3 in looks. By this argument, it is time for Marriage 1.0 to end.
However, unrestrained female hypergamy has another problem. If women were attracted to men in proportion to how much the man contributed to civilization (such as curing a horrible disease or inventing some amazingly productive new technology), it would all be good. Women would be the mechanism driving men towards the right incentives. Stupid cuckservative think women actually are like this..
But in reality, women are the opposite. They are precisely attracted to anti-civilizational behavior in men, and outright repulsed by pro-civilizational behavior in men. The inverse correlation is quite exact.
For this reason, one can justifiably claim that many women are obsolete. The only women who are not obsolete are the rare few who a) can be a wife and mother with legitimate happiness and commitment to those roles, and b) the 5-10% of women who are capable of doing useful work in the economy without any affirmative action or other special treatment.
Women who fail to meet either of the above criteria, are obsolete. They stand athwart the progress of civilization itself. Many new technologies will further hasten their obsolescence. Political systems that give too much power to such obsolete entities (such as Democracy) will decline in tandem with the resource misallocation such systems have forced.
I wish PM/AFT and Ray Manta were still around, as they were the two most well versed in this ‘big picture’ assessment of where the fabric of humanity is going to tear, and how it is women, not men, who are much closer to outright obsolescence.
Even though it’s not the technical definition Hypergamy is probably the best term to describe the unrealistic expectations.
Thanks, and great blog you’ve got. Enjoyed the stories of the mission home.
An observation: as men age, they become increasingly comfortable with being alone. Women, when alone, remain lonely.
Women lose the Dating Game because, ultimately, they want a companion. Anybody. She has one single decade in her life to prepare for all of her remaining years. Presently, she’s been taught to waste that decade. We know the stories of female desperation in her 30’s. The problem for her is exacerbated by the fact that men of her own age do not feel that same desperation. Maybe he wants kids. Maybe he doesn’t. Either way, he doesn’t need to get married.
So, leaving sex outside of the conversation, simple companionship becomes an increasingly important goal as a woman ages. For a man, it’s significantly less so. A 40 year old man probably has a few good friends he’s known for decades. A 40 year old woman may find it increasingly difficult to meet her newest best friend.
And to paraphrase Al Bundy, women know women and they hate each other. That companion she seeks is a man, because men are kinder and less prone to petty backstabbing.
So why do women lose the Dating Game? Because the Dating Game itself is a failed social experiment. Getting married while young and having children together is a proven method to bring success to a long life. Men and women are fundamentally different. So long as women choose Option 2: NOT getting married while young and having children together, they’ll continue to lose.
It’s that simple. Get married while young and have children together or she’s a loser. The experiment has been tried, the data is in, and the proof is now available. Believe it or be lonely.
Feminism is about training women to be as disposable as men.
Why anyone would pay full price for a used car is beyond me. I never could pretend to think it was a ‘good’ deal.
Tons of women now for the tradcons to enjoy. They come with money, debt, faded looks, experience and a career; and oh do they do love those ‘manly’ working studs.
Anon
Hypergamy quantified :
Confirming in a sort of fractal way what the founder of OKCupid Chris Rudder laid out in Dataclysm: the 80-20 rule of attraction. From time to time I show that little piece to men who are leaders in campus church groups for students. Every time there’s disbelief, surprise, etc. plus the old standby, “Well, not all women are like that. Church girls are not like that” which shows an inability to see what is right around them. If men with college degrees, often married men, can be that clueless then it’s not difficult to believe that women can be even more clueless.
FWIW I believe that Greenlander left the US entirely, possibly for Eastern Europe.
I was having a conversation about this topic with my fellow bachelor friend the other day. We observed that many married men we knew were incredibly subservient to their wives. I mentioned that this wasn’t by accident, as many women especially in their late 20s and early 30s intentionally seek out quiet, passive men whom they can control in the relationship.
One thing to consider is that women may (I use the word “may” here, as in it could or could not pan out this way) react to the beta-provider game con you refer to above by seeking out only the most thoroughly beta men and heavily restricting sex in order to assure a marriage proposal rather than allow uncertainty during a phase in her life when time is of the essence.
Since sex is the only thing men using beta game want from these women, insisting on chastity at least during the initial part of dating provides the women with two things; one, the appearance of virtue to a beta looking for his “quality woman,” and confirmation that the man she is seeing is as he appears to be.
The revenge of the nerds works until women wise up to the act and adjust their husband-hunting tactics accordingly, and it seems Bettina Arndt is trying to warn women about this.
Well they wanted equality. Nevermind the fact that meant the had to give up the things that a man can’t do.
Interesting observation…and I bet there’s a lot of truth to it. I often wondered why ‘alpha’ female often ended up choosing a weak and often effeminate man to marry. My guess was that was the only one they could get, but perhaps she intentionally went after them after recognizing how they act.
And let’s face it…even if she does marry the guy, I’d put her risk of having an affair at very high…because she still wants those alpha thrills while her controlled husband supports her at home.
@earlthomas786
I think it’s exactly backwards. if the top 80% of women are competing for the top 20% of men, then it makes more sense for a man to attempt to get into the top 20% bracket of men, rather than compete with the other 80% of men for the bottom 20% of women.
The actual mistake here is neither in the direction of the women or the men, but in the game itself. The bottom 80% of men recognized that their lives will be a living hell as long as they allowed the top 20% of men to monopolize all the women. Their critical error was in thinking that by sanctioning the top 20% of men, they would fix that.
However, as we all know, by sanctioning the top 20% of men, all they achieve is to make it harder for any man to remain in that category. by definition there will always be a top 20% of males. The sanctions simply change the tests used to determine who that top 20% is.
The equivalent stupidity would be if the bottom 20% of women forced the other 80% not to use makeup in the hopes of downgrading their beauty. (or convincing them to have skrillex haircuts, tattoos, basically what these idiots are doing in real life). They think that by downgrading the beauty of the other 80%, they will get a chance. What they don’t realize is that while the beauty of women as a whole has been degraded, the individual beauty of the lowest 20% also went down.
What is needed, is what dalrock has repeatedly said. Not to sanction the men, but to shame the women. There is also a second step, directed at the cads, which is to impose shotgun marriages on cad’s who sleep with virgins. This historical one-two combo was an extremely effective method of controlling cad and slut behavior to keep them from ruining the potential brides for the betas. If a cad managed to despoil a “virgin” (I use that in quotes for a reason) his “conquest” would be given the option of permanently remaining with said cad or with paying a hefty fine to the father (thus even in those cases where our little vixen decides to throw in with the cad, there is still a penalty.)
I think one of the places we all got it wrong is that we didn’t realize why we did these things. We thought it was to protect the women. In a way it was, but it was as much to protect ourselves.
@The Question
The women who are most self consciously gold digging could employ the sort of con and counter-con defense you are describing. But they are extreme outliers. 90% of the women in this situation started the whole con a decade or more ago by first conning themselves. The dream is not to ride the carousel for a decade and then find the most repulsive Beta and then marry him. The dream is to ride the carousel for a decade and then land Mr. Big. This gives them the status they desperately crave while also providing the tingles they desire. The problem is when Mr. Big doesn’t appear on cue, some level of compromise becomes required as time is an issue. For the women in your circle, the tradeoff they are forced to make is give up the tingles to get the (beta) status attributes they want.
@Anon – “Manning up” and marrying a fallen woman to make her chaste may be a feature not a bug of Christianity for at least a 1000 years. During the later medieval period, the Christian notion of the ‘reformed prostitute’ took hold, fueled by the cults of Saint Mary of Egypt and Mary Magdalene, and public opinion softened towards whores. These women were now the subject of charity, and public funds were set up to assist women trying to escape a life of sex work. This movement also included praising men who married and “saved” these women.
That was socially/personally beneficial, and much less risky back in the day before AIDS and lifetime alimony. I would be careful promoting it now.
This idea makes me think that they put in the idea that somehow marriage is a savior for bad women. Jesus is the one who saved those women.
I think of a reformed prosititute who got out of the life and gave her life to the Lord. That doesn’t mean she gets married…from some examples I read they went into a convent.
Dalrock mentioned he had a post in the works about how women desire to be looked at/lusted after (and dress in such a way to attract this attention); if this is the case (which I agree it is for many women), then they are already committing affairs “in their heart” by formally cooperating with men committing “adultery in their heart.” If it’s in your heart, it’ll probably bubble up to the surface sooner or later unless you are actively working against it.
I still say that marrying young, in many cases, causes women to view their husband as the World’s Foremost Alpha, assuming that he isn’t a complete loser. That was kind of the point of the whole system of keeping women virgins, if possible, until they married; it greatly raised the likelihood of them viewing WHOEVER they ended up with as Mr. Big, and short-circuited the hypergamy urge.
Of course, once that ship has sailed, there’s no returning to that point.
Soon after I speculated that some men might be employing a beta provider con on the women seeking to con men with “free sample” sex, Marcos confirmed that it worked for him.
Guys who do this MUST wrap it up every time, with their own condom, and dispose of it carefully. For guys who strongly prefer going bare it’s a very dangerous game.
I think over time we’re going to see guys refuse marriage altogether. If or when they want kids, they’ll offer kids but no marriage. That still puts a lot of power in the woman’s hands (she can sue for “child” support and win) but for guys who still want children but without the many downsides of marriage, it’s at least a viable option.
I think over time we’re going to see guys refuse marriage altogether. If or when they want kids, they’ll offer kids but no marriage. That still puts a lot of power in the woman’s hands (she can sue for “child” support and win) but for guys who still want children but without the many downsides of marriage, it’s at least a viable option.
Agreed .. except one big point .. they will use a surrogate. Therefore, no child-support.
Much as I would like to believe that women (of any age after their prime) have difficulty finding a man to marry my observation of females past their prime and of single men ditto is that there is never any shortage of men available for matrimony (or indeed any arrangement short of marriage if that is what the woman desires) but that there are many single men who would prefer or have preferred to embark on wedlock who remain celibate and alone. What women cannot always get – though a few succeed against all odds* – is Mr Big but really that is like a very fat woman claiming that she is starving because she cannot find any cream eclairs. Women will not marry down. With their endless knitting-circles they are never short of company.
* The second Mrs Clooney
Dear Honeycomb:
In other words, they’ll be raising up motherless children, with all the same potentialities for mental and behavioral problems as those fatherless kids raised by skank-ho single moms.
This is not a solution to the present problems.
Boxer
@earlthomas786 – Well, I have an uncle who married a Thai bar girl while in the army. They’ve been married for over 40 years.
But yes, reformed prostitutes were encouraged to join a convent. “Get thee to a nunnery!” Still, I recall reading about the church praising men in the Middle Ages who did make honest women by marriage. I’ll have to find some sources.
A few years ago a 30ish woman who had been thrown from the carousel (and who bragged about her carousel riding days to me) lamented to me about “Where have all the good men gone?”
Silly old me thought that she meant where were all the yucky, however employed betas. After some dialogue that misunderstanding was swept away and I understood that she wanted a Mr. Big, nevermind that she was past her prime and the wall had been very unkind to her.
Our dialogue continued and she actually admitted the truth that most men refuse to believe. She said that she would rather be sexually desired than loved. All I could tell her was that she would never marry.
In other words, they’ll be raising up motherless children, with all the same potentialities for mental and behavioral problems as those fatherless kids raised by skank-ho single moms.
This is not a solution to the present problems.
Oh, I don’t recommend it .. but .. this is the path, in future, of men who want children without the wife. They exist .. it’s the logical progression as I see it.
Pingback: Why women lose the dating game. | Reaction Times
Sadly, I can’t really argue with you on this point.
That’s probably more of the truth of a woman who goes down the carousel path. After all that’s what she chose…she didn’t choose the marriage-husband-children path.
@ Red Quest:
“I think over time we’re going to see guys refuse marriage altogether. If or when they want kids, they’ll offer kids but no marriage. That still puts a lot of power in the woman’s hands (she can sue for “child” support and win) but for guys who still want children but without the many downsides of marriage, it’s at least a viable option.”
Eh. State courts will just circumvent this by bringing back common law marriage, possibly even less stringent than the requirements were when common law marriage was a thing. It’ll be something like this: You live with her for a year or two, she’s your common law wife. You knocked her up and you raise the kid together and you provide for support and you acknowledge paternity, then your baby mama is your common law wife. You’re having sex with her regularly and she’s been your longtime girlfriend for 4 or 5 years, she’s your common law wife.
Women and the PTB will always find a way to make men pay. If women are giving up sex, men gotta be made to “pay” for that in one way or another. Women commonly have a gut feeling that if they are having sex, then they should get something in return for the sex they’re giving them. Those men they’re having sex with owe them something for the sex. Commitment. Marriage. Status of being the “girlfriend” or wife. A father for my kids. Ongoing financial support. The attitude is “I had sex with him, so he’s gotta give me something in return for that.”
Dear Deti:
At first glance, this seems plausible, but a conflict erupts with the forced introduction of fag marriage by the U.S. Supreme Court, a few years ago. Two bull dykers who finally part after living the bed death dream will now have to navigate the divorce courts.
This isn’t justice! Neither one is a straight man!
These are such entertaining times to live in, I sweartagawd.
Pingback: Porque é que as mulheres perdem o jogo do engate? - Távola Redonda
It is unprecedented in modern times that there are so many single, unattached, mostly divorced, women between ages 35 and 55. All of them vying for the attention of a small number of attractive single men, most of whom are attractive burned-once-never-again divorced men and a small number of whom are very attractive never married confirmed bachelors. And most of these women fail, over and over again, to get what they want.
It’s literally driving women crazy. It’s something we have not seen in our lifetimes. And it’s still shaking out. Some of these women are getting remarried, I’m sure of that. Some are getting into more or less stable LTRs. But a big number aren’t going to get remarried at all.
As a society, we’re not ready for the health care costs of millions of over-70 women with no husbands, no husband survivor benefits, small ex husband pension shares, and no to virtually no family structure for support, oversight, or to handle end of life issues for these mostly career cat ladies now starting to age out of the SMP.
As a society, we’re not ready for the health care costs of millions of over-70 women with no husbands, no husband survivor benefits, small ex husband pension shares, and no to virtually no family structure for support, oversight, or to handle end of life issues for these mostly career cat ladies now starting to age out of the SMP.
Cue the world’s smallest violin…
They wanted the ‘Eat, *Prey, Love’ lifestyle, the career, the party-going trip taking 20s, and saying they didn’t need the bicycle because they are fish….over a marriage and a family. They reap their reward.
*not a typo
Cue the world’s smallest violin…
I had kind of the same initial reaction. I am taking steps to make sure there is a cultural continuity between generations with my parents, me and my kids by simplifying my life and taking a stand on things have been long considered “just the way things are.” Mychael and I are doing so at great personal cost to ourselves in social capital (all of our friends think we are freaks).
What concern are the career cat ladies of mine?
It’s one thing for guys like me to be poolside, laughing at these ho’s, but you have kids, right? Don’t you worry for them?
Even if you succeed in building and defending an island of sanity, your kids will inherit the world, with all its problems. We all owe them a decent life, high culture, and civilization. To live in a world full of nice stuff… that means patriarchy.
Best,
Boxer
David, SCott and Earl:
Agreed. The main point I was making was that we have a huge glut of 35-55 year old divorced women flooding back out onto the SMP. They’re delusional because their self-images of their own SMPs were locked at age 23. They’re delusional because they believe there are still many attractive men who are available and who want them for relationships. They have more baggage than an airport claim carousel. And it’s unprecedented. These are women who, 50 years ago, would be getting their kids to college, working a part time job, and preparing for impending grandmotherhood and taking respected positions as family matriarchs. Instead they’re swiping right and burnishing their OKCupid and Match profiles while hoping to hell This One Is Going To Be The One And It’s Going To Work Out This Time I Swear and I Will Not Give Up Sex Until The Sixth Date No Way.
Boxer-
Yes, this keeps me up nights.
I believe however that what we are offering our kids, and the connections we have made with other like minded parents–as few and far between as they are– will be so unique, so strakly contrasted against the backdrop of a collapsing wortless culture that they will find each other and build something glorious
Fiscally, culturally, and even sexually – we offer our children up to Moloch.
@Scott
Unfortunately, my parents are well down the path of the fruits of their labor. Used up, bitter, and wanting to share the pain. I’m far away from them and trying to build something new with my family. I don’t want that pattern perpetuated. Our family relationships, my parents, me and my siblings, is a mess. I’m just hoping the lack of those relationships doesn’t cause my children to wander off into adulthood alone.
There was an end blockquote in there somewhere…
Definitely true, but now that she’s … well … very unattractive, she has the baby rabies and wants a man with a steady income. But what was interesting is that she expressed no regrets over riding the carousel. Now granted, she was ugly and couldn’t even boast of a high powered career as she was just a $15/hr cubicle dweller.
She also moaned that all her friends were married and had kids.
“They have klds … how old were they when they married?”
“Uh, in their twenties.”
“That’s when you were ‘having your fun’, right?”
“Well, yeah, but why couldn’t I? Guys have their fun, and they get married afterwards”
“One: you’re not a man, Two: Only a minority of men get to play the field.”
“That’s not fair!”
“Life isn’t fair. Plus it doesn’t help that you’re a single mother.”
Oh, did I forget to mention that she’s a single, never wed mother? The baby daddy was of course, one of her bad boy thugs. She really can’t understand why awesome, handsome and of course rich men aren’t kicking her door down with a 5 Ct ring in hand. Anyway, my final words to her were.
“Were any ‘nice guys’ asking you out on dates when you were young?”
“Uh … yeah … I guess.”
“Did you date any of them?”
“Ummm … no.”
“Why?”
“Ummm … I don’t know.”
“Well, all I can say is, you should have married one of those ‘nice guys’ when you were in your early 20’s. Sorry, I have no advice for you.”
@Dalrock
Great post Mister “D”. I remember that article very well in the Sydney Herald.I was very happy for you that you got mentioned.I remember a prior thread where that was discussed. Women lose big time at the dating game.But,will they take action and do something about it? Of course not.It is much easier to complain and blame the problem on men!
@deti
“”It is unprecedented in modern times that there are so many single, unattached, mostly divorced, women between ages 35 and 55. All of them vying for the attention of a small number of attractive single men, most of whom are attractive burned-once-never-again divorced men and a small number of whom are very attractive never married confirmed bachelors.””
There are SOOOOO many women here in Toronto between the ages of 35 and 55 it is unbelievable! Couple that with Toronto being the “MGTOW Capital” of North America and you have a recipe for disaster! Actually,it is a hedonists paradise.Looks,money and game go a long way in this town!
“”As a society, we’re not ready for the health care costs of millions of over-70 women with no husbands, no husband survivor benefits, small ex husband pension shares, and no to virtually no family structure for support, “”
Agreed! I was at a meeting last year(or so) and it was with government housing officials and other major landlords and developers. The meat of the meeting was “build or convert apartment buildings to retirement homes”.The stats that they gave us was that they are expecting 7 to 10 women for every man to be in a retirement home.The joke about it was the “gov’t officials” were all women.Of course,I could not resist and let them know why these stats are like this and that I could not give a damn about these spinsters.They made their own beds and they can they can deal with it.I made no feminazi friends that day….no big loss! But,as a businessman I see things differently.We are going to get into the market.In fact,we have targeted apartment buildings that are going to converted to retirement homes.Work on the first one begins in the Spring of 2018.The joke is they(or the gov’t) are going to be paying us HUGE bucks to keep them.We have to hire nurses,dietitians etc.I plan on making a killing from these useless cunts.
Saying she doesn’t know is easier than saying she chose to pursue her feels and fornicate with bad boys who were never going to marry her in the first place.
I mean is it any secret anymore as to why some women just can’t seem to ever get married or stay married. They reject the men who want marriage and give it up to the men who don’t want marriage.
@Earl
They are all like that. The only question is how they channel that desire.
Whether it’s 2010 or 2017, the shock that men might ever interpret women’s open and triumphant crowing about Hypergamy as the terms of engagement in the sexual marketplace never changes. Even when women use a bullhorn to announce to the world that Hypergamy is the game a man must play, they still take great offense when a man pragmatically says “okay” and uses that information to his ultimate advantage and her ultimate disadvantage. And even in 2017 women are shocked and dismayed that men would refuse to cooperate with what works best for her sexual strategy?
That, that gentlemen, is one of the most glaring, long-term illustrations and evidentiary proof of women’s solipsistic natures; and raising awareness to it, even in light of women blaring it through every imaginable media, makes a man doing so a “misogynist”.
Great observation Deti, especially when you contrast this presumption of transaction in reverse. Women, even the most trad-con, absolutely lose their minds when they believe that a man might expect sex in return for niceties, services rendered or just a casual date. The outrage come from women’s misplaced belief that men feel as if they are ‘owed sex’ for the value added benefits they may represent to women. But put that in a woman’s context and the sense that they are entitled to or ‘owed’ a man’s extrinsic benefits (commitment, parental investment, status, marriage, etc.) because they had sex with them and the entire paradigm shifts. The presumption is that a woman is in fact owed something for sleeping with a guy and there is no question that is how it should be. The female context is always the ‘correct’ context.
Cue (Sinead O’connor) meltdown of th wimminz as the men pull-up lawn chair’s & marshmellows.
Rebellion against God’s design has consequences. Glad to see Dalrock receiving credit. He’s done Christian men a great service with his website.
I’m intrigued…so why would all women preferred to be desired instead of loved? I don’t doubt some and maybe even most of them prefer the desire…but all of them?
They are mostly, very attractive, thin, intelligent, and successful, and they are spending their 20s and early 30s partying their way around the world, as evidenced by their half-naked drunken photos from boats, beaches, and nightclubs.
They appear to me to be perfect candidates for a short-term fling, or a pump and dump, but a man would have to be straight up crazy to put a ring on one.
How are they going to transition from party whore to faithful wife and mother? How are they going to adjust their expectations of life from jet setting around the world, to changing diapers and cleaning up vomit?
Yep, the big cities of the US, especially the coastal ones, are literally bursting at the seams with women like this.
The thing is … most of them land. Why? Beta thirst. And, as you say, they’re hot girls. What happens is some mid to upper beta who has never been with a girl who is very attractive like that is finally getting a lot of attention from one of them, and due to the thirst, he literally cannot resist. Cannot. So he gets roped in, gets married, and then after a year or two best case it’s a dead bedroom marriage, worst case divorce eventually. She gets the kids she wants and she either stays in a low sex marriage (because she has that out of her system and just focuses on kids and competing with her peer group in that area) or she gets unhappy and scoops up the kids, the house and child support if/when the other girls in her peer group do so in the late 30s/early 40s. Either way, the guy is screwed.
This is why it’s important for men to improve their attractiveness, even Christian men. Even if they are not going to use it immorally, which of course a Christian man should not, becoming more attractive and getting many more IOIs from women in regular life, from attractive women, means that when one of these comes after him he can resist her because she doesn’t meet his criteria, and he knows he’s attractive enough to find another attractive woman who does. The guy who has *not* done this is leaving himself extremely vulnerable to this, because he will not be able to resist a woman like this simply because he has never had an attractive woman option open to him before (as attractive as this woman).
thedeti says:
September 7, 2017 at 3:02 pm
…They have more baggage than an airport claim carousel.”
The used-up slags and trollops of the Western world passed up the term “baggage” (WRT “emotional baggage”) back in the early 2000’s, when the term was replaced with “freight”; since approximately 2010, it has become “cargo”.
Well the beta is more focused on the fact some hot girl is showing him attention and how that makes him feel rather than being more objective and seeing what type of behaviors she’s displaying or has displayed and if that would make good marriage/mother material. I’ve seen plenty of those type of men who will take the rebellious abuse of the woman and make her boss because he’s so afraid to lose out on the feels…and she’ll manipulate that thirst until she’s ready to discard him.
The ones who can really play those beta’s like a fiddle are single mothers who still have some attractiveness to them. They would be tops on my list as far as master manipulators when it comes to women.
I think it comes down to procreation instincts (AKA: baby rabies). They want the “best genes” for their kids, and by “best genes” I am talking about Dark Triad type of men, and not “responsible and reliable nice guys with steady incomes, who also happen to be short, non muscular and very ordinary looking”.
Some women are taught to ignore those instincts, and to avoid the Dark Triad types, the tingles be damned. But that is now considered “oppressive” and some now argue that married women do not owe their husbands their fidelity, and that hubbies should just accept that the wifey can get pregnant by whomever she desires and that he should be a good cuck and help her raise the kid.
I think that the only difference today is that it’s out in the open. My late mother once told me about the neighborhood I grew up in during the 1960’s. It was very respectable and most neighbors voted Republican. What I learned was that about a third of the housewives in the neighborhood had cheated at least once on their husbands. Maybe she was exaggerating, but the point is that even then, when most neighbors would head dutifully to church on Sunday, the tingles were there.
Your mileage may vary, probably depending on geography and social-economic level. It is worth remembering that we are at the point where half of all children are born to unwed mothers, who not only did not stick the landing, but many have children from multiple men. And that percentage is steadily growing.
“As a society, we’re not ready for the health care costs of millions of over-70 women with no husbands, no husband survivor benefits, small ex husband pension shares, and no to virtually no family structure for support, oversight, or to handle end of life issues for these mostly career cat ladies now starting to age out of the SMP.”
So you didn’t buy the claim in the video that older single women are doing well financially, and older single men are poor?
It’s really amusing to refer to single moms having baggage, and then listen to the screams of “how dare you refer to a CHILD as baggage, you heartless monster!”
Your mileage may vary, probably depending on geography and social-economic level.
Sure, but he was talking about women like this:
I know a man who lives in a large American city. He seems to be friends with all the hot, young, professional women in his city. I see on my FB feed photos of his friends partying in various well known party locations around the country, and around the world.
They are mostly, very attractive, thin, intelligent, and successful, and they are spending their 20s and early 30s partying their way around the world, as evidenced by their half-naked drunken photos from boats, beaches, and nightclubs.
So, not middle America, and not working class America, but the highly educated, highly attractive women in the big cities in their 20s and early 30s. I know that demographic well, but I agree that it varies a lot by SES and location.
Yeah I can see that, because women can certainly be tempted to go astray. Back then though women were certainly more discrete about it because there was still a sense of shame getting caught…today it’s flat out in the open and argued that a woman has a right to be an adulterer for ‘self-awakening’ or some other nonsense.
But I don’t know if that means all women want to be desired over being loved. I think there’s probably a sizable percentage in both camps…and women choose which path they are going to take.
They’re still viewing this entirely through a female-centric prism, when they say women are “losing” at this game. It seems as though it’s only a problem because some number of women are unhappy because they are unable to find what they consider to be suitable mates. It doesn’t trouble them in the slightest that there are, by definition, a roughly equal number of men who are being left out and deemed not worthy.
Society was never ready for welfare of any kind. That has never stopped women voting themselves more welfare. Women chose the state as their husband, whilst also using the state to get benefits from husbands through marriage and divorce. It’s out there for everyone to see. Not only do women gain control over men and their resources through marriage via the state and legal laws, but women willingly waste their most finite resources – youth and fertility. Why is anyone surprised that marriage is becoming irrelevant?
The very essence and purpose of marriage is just not there for majority of people. The state now controls marriage and will involve itself in your bedroom and life if you get married. It’s a form of state coercion now, that and a fleecing institution for the wedding and divorce industry.
LOL…yeah it’s not the child that is the baggage.
“So, not middle America, and not working class America, but the highly educated, highly attractive women in the big cities in their 20s and early 30s. I know that demographic well, but I agree that it varies a lot by SES and location.”
Can confirm. In Middle America, “highly educated, highly attractive women in their 20s and early 30s” can do pretty well and “stick the landing”. Sometimes. But she must, MUST:
–be college educated
–be employed
–be white
–have her own job, car and money
–be very physically attractive, at least an 8
If she doesn’t meet every single one of those criteria, it might not go well.
The above described woman can stick the landing even with a double digit N. But ONLY if she meets ALL of these criteria.
@ Rollo Tomassi
“Women, even the most trad-con, absolutely lose their minds when they believe that a man might expect sex in return for niceties, services rendered or just a casual date. The outrage come from women’s misplaced belief that men feel as if they are ‘owed sex’ for the value added benefits they may represent to women. But put that in a woman’s context and the sense that they are entitled to or ‘owed’ a man’s extrinsic benefits (commitment, parental investment, status, marriage, etc.) because they had sex with them and the entire paradigm shifts. The presumption is that a woman is in fact owed something for sleeping with a guy and there is no question that is how it should be. The female context is always the ‘correct’ context.”
Note that the term “take advantage” in a sexual sense only applies to men toward women, never women toward men. Women cannot “take advantage” of men sexually in our society or culture anymore than they can “woman up.”
To women, to be desired is to be ‘loved’. The difference is small in the practical sense and the emotion experienced by her is of far more importance than long term stability that men often think ‘love’ to be.
Anon above wrote “But in reality, women are the opposite. They are precisely attracted to anti-civilizational behavior in men,”
This reminds me of the book “Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes — the Yanomamo and the Anthropologists” by Napoleon A. Chagnon. Chagnon’s findings confirmed a lot of Red Pill truths, which is why Chagnon fell out of favor with SJW-influenced Anthropological community. I didn’t read it very closely, but I do remember an interesting thing about the how leadership was determined.
The village groups were too small to support formal traditions governing leadership, so the headman had to win the support of the people. But it often wasn’t the strongest or the smartest. Usually it was the most ruthless, craziest, charismatic bastard who managed to essentially bluff his way into authority. i.e. the classic dark triad alpha male. So perhaps the female preference for alpha bad boys made more sense when humans lived in fairly small sufficient bands.
On the plight of elderly cat ladies:
I work as a certified nursing assistant, providing care in client’s homes. For the divorced or single women, especially for the ones that are childless or estranged from their children, it is a bad situation for them. All of these women that I have encountered are poor, usually living in very substandard homes. They are, without exception, very lonely, depressed, and bitter. Most are fearful of people breaking in or getting raped. A cautionary tale, for sure.
But what about the unmarried elderly men? The ones I have taken care of are usually a little more stable financially, but not well off by any means. Elderly men are just as lonely as their female counterparts, and are more likely to fall prey to dating site scams or being robbed by female acquaintances for their pills or money. Many speak with great regret and sadness of the wives that divorced them 30 years ago and of children they loved and sacrificed for that don’t come around. It’s really, really sad.
If a person doesn’t want to end up alone in a nursing home or empty apartment, the best thing to do is to get married, stay married, have children, and keep good relationships with family members. Whether male or female. I am from a rural area in the South, perhaps it is different in other areas but I doubt it.
Hmmm …. that’s what … 5% of women? Or maybe not even that many?
But yeah, any woman who is an 8 will have a rolodex of guys who will be happy to put a ring on her finger. But in this day of supersized women, just how many are 8’s? Even if a girl stays slim is no guarantee of being an 8.
I think it was P.J. O’Rourke who joked that most people would rather be treated politely than loved, if they really thought about it. Maybe women who stay on the carousel for too long will start to prefer that too.
It’s probably one of the biggest reasons why many people have a screwed up idea about what love is. It’s too focused in emotional experiences and not enough about what it really is….for starters it’s God.
feministhater: Why anyone would pay full price for a used car is beyond me.
If the only used cars were available, then yeah, men would pay full price for a used car. Supply and demand.
In a society of virgins, the few sluts would have to offer discounts. But in a society of sluts, the sluts could hold out for full price. It’s not like marriage-minded men had an option, other than stay single.
Feminist Hater, Red Pill Latecomer, et. al.:
I don’t know that this is true. You’re assuming that there’s a linear progression from the patriarchy world to the matriarchy world, and that the sluts have the ability to ride that flat curve down. That’s their theory, too. Most of the sluts who think about such things are so deluded, that they believe that the slut-party has the collective will and foresight to stop before things get ugly, and remain stationary at some sort of happy medium, where they’ll get benefits while still giving nothing in return.
In reality, complex systems (like our civilization) rarely follow this model. At a .01 slut ratio, everything was perfect. At a .1 slut ratio, everything was still OK. We’re now probably at a .35 slut ratio. That doesn’t mean social health or productivity will remain at some corresponding level (.65?). In reality, what happens is that individuals start reaching their individual breaking points at different times. If .35 women are sluts, and .35 men check out, then society will probably grind to a halt at some point; because that .35 of men made it possible for the other .65 of men to get to work on time, keep maintaining our infrastructure, and keep drawing a paycheck. We may be able to offset their productivity for a while, with cheap petroleum and the surplus value created by our grandfathers, but these resources are finite.
An analogy would be your work truck. When it breaks down, you don’t usually get a lot of warning. The vast majority of damage to that complex system happens stochastically, and almost instantaneously, so one minute it’s chugging along, and the next it’s dead.
In a society of sluts, they can try holding out for full price, but none of the men will be able to pay it. Civilization is built by disciplined people, and without them, there’s nothing left.
Boxer
greginaurora,
You are somewhat correct, but it is not true that all women want companionship from a man. My ex-wife left me to not have companionship with me, even though life was going along reasonable well overall. She didn’t want to have to focus her life on someone else, other than her own mother.
Some of that may be because she married me near the end of the prep decade you noted, so she had that itch scratched (even though she didn’t really want it at the time, I was fairly aggressive and some outside factors were supportive).
I can’t say exactly what the future will bring, but I know my own mother was quite fine with no man in her life in her late 60s and 70s, though it was tougher (she wouldn’t admit it later) in her up to that point.
All men do not necessarily have the close friendships you note. I have not kept in contact with anyone for that period and have few that are close now. Various things cause that, but men are not some content block, they are mix of things as well.
Boxer (Secret King of All Gamma Males) says:
September 7, 2017 at 1:43 pm
“In other words, they’ll be raising up motherless children, with all the same potentialities for mental and behavioral problems as those fatherless kids raised by skank-ho single moms.
Incorrect. Father-only single parent households have child-rearing average lifetime outcomes nearly as good as do two bio parents married to each other households. The skank-ho single mothers of bastards are the households whose children are 7x as likely to end up in jail, etc.
deti
“”It is unprecedented in modern times that there are so many single, unattached, mostly divorced, women between ages 35 and 55. All of them vying for the attention of a small number of attractive single men, most of whom are attractive burned-once-never-again divorced men and a small number of whom are very attractive never married confirmed bachelors.””
@ Rollo Tomassi
“Women, even the most trad-con, absolutely lose their minds when they believe that a man might expect sex in return for niceties, services rendered or just a casual date. The outrage come from women’s misplaced belief that men feel as if they are ‘owed sex’ for the value added benefits they may represent to women.”
The weak link here is the reliance of these post wall women on sex as a resource.
1. At 40+ men’s sex drive drops significantly so he can easily control it. By 50 its easy to go a week or more and not need sex.
2. Even if sex is a driving resource. 35 maybe, 40 likely not, 50 just no.
And Mark is right about Toronto. I live a 100k east and have a business strictly maintaining the houses of the divorcees, especially the over 50 crowd. Its strong enough I quit my corporate job. September, October I will make a killing just winterizing these ladies houses i.e. put lawn furniture away, close the outdoor taps, service the garden equipment. All the stuff hubby did for free I charge 50+\ hour.
Now imagine when they are 70 needing help grocery shopping, going to the doctor, etc. All the things the lil ole grampas used to do with them. And the kids these single moms raised? Not likely.
Deti is right. A demographic of 60 year olds living alone. Too healthy for LTC but to weak or unskilled to maintain a basic home. A drain on society or a fortune to be had??
Luke sez:
Which population are you sampling to make that conclusion? You speak as though there were plenty of societies where this is the norm. I can’t think of even one society where father-only single parent households are anything more than a tiny outlier. Can you?
And before this latest social experiment, which provided our society with all these wonderful benefits, there were experts, publishing poppycock precisely similar to yours, above. They assured us that skank-ho single moms could “do it all” and that the children wouldn’t be any worse off without their fathers. We can all see where that led.
We don’t need any more social experiments at the expense of little kids. We’ve got a working model now. It’s called patriarchy, where kids are raised by a mother and a father. Time to get back to it.
Best,
Boxer
Earl,
Of course, but you are over spiritualizing it. Men can help transform a woman in this life as well. Note Peter’s discussion of how Sarah called Abraham “Lord” as a good thing., Some would say we only have one Lord, which is true, but the meaning is more than just that. Woman who truly serve their husbands in a godly manner will also be serving their Lord.
honeycomb,
Intentionally bringing a child into an environment where they have no active mother in their life is just as evil as doing the same with no active father. It may be less detrimental, but it remains evil. God made the pattern, one father and one mother. Any effort to work otherwise will fail in the long run and produce much ruin along the way.
Exactly Boxer. That is something missing on a few here in their zeal against the current flawed system.
Back to honeycomb,
Only to a point. God built some things into the system and I don’t expect this is going to be anywhere near as widespread as single motherhood is. Some will certainly try it, but men don’t generally get as much of their personal meaning out of their children as women do.
@Earl
so why would all women preferred to be desired instead of loved?
It may not be all, but it’s a lot. And the reason is…….tingles. It’s instant gratification. And it’s recognizable. “Love” is pretty ambiguous and there are many differnt types. “Love” Is muddy. Desire is easy to Identify and while the reason for desire can vary from shallow (looks, etc) to deep (actual love) it still FEELS the same in the moment.z
Boxer- you always have interesting things to say and love the new tag line.
it is not true that all women want companionship from a man.
She only wants it from a man she finds attractive. She’d rather have a dog for companionship than a man she’s not attracted to.
I think all women want companionship…some choose a man, some choose cats.
Didn’t read thru all the comments so someone may have already brought this up. I’m always amazed at the boldness and actual stupidity of women and this dating coach is no different. I didn’t make it thru the whole video … the quality was intolerable. But only a short way in … maybe 7-9 minutes in … she gives it all away … why women lose at the dating game. She is talking about women not wanting a man who makes the same as her or less. Because SHE wants to decide after having a kid … TO STAY HOME … SO SHE DOESN”T HAVE TO WORK ANYMORE … and SHE WANTS TO KEEP HER SAME LIFESTYLE … so the man has to make more than her. So got a question for the guys here … WHERE DOES THE GUY FIT INTO THE SCHEME HERE ??? What does he get to decide ???
And this is how the scheme works. SHE picks a man with an income more than hers and manipulates him into marrying her. Then SHE decides to have a kid. And after the kid is born SHE DECIDES she now wants to be a stay at home mom and refuses to support herself or the marriage anymore. Next SHE decides she no longer wants to have sex with hubby … if SHE is done having kids anyway. If SHE wants more kids … the scheme continues until SHE decides its over. After SHE decides she no longer wants more kids she cuts off sex … and HE gets to suffer for years and years until HE discovers she’s a lying cunt who’s cheating with some other dude. Or because he isn’t get any from his own wife, HE cheats. Or SHE completely loses respect for him and divorces his ass. All of these 3 options result in HER divorcing him and STEALING HIS INCOME FOR YEARS TO COME.
So it becomes obvious why women refuse to marry anyone who makes less than them. And this dating coach let the cat out of the bag … these women are deliberately setting up men with the intention to RUIN THEIR LIVES.
And since more and more men have figured out what women are doing … it becomes obvious WHY WOMEN ARE LOSING AT THE DATING GAME.
Thanks Brother Kevin. I learn a lot here from you guys.
@ BillyS ..
Intentionally bringing a child into an environment where they have no active mother in their life is just as evil as doing the same with no active father. It may be less detrimental, but it remains evil.
We disagree .. unless you can show me with scripture that it’s evil.
Though I don’t wish to find fulfillment by having children .. doesn’t mean that other men don’t .. and at current .. marrying a woman to have children is a bad investment .. I can see men taking this option .. in fact .. it’s on the up-tick with the wealthier men already.
I don’t think surrogacy and single fatherhood will remain a legal option for single men.
* As others have noted, the courts won’t allow men to opt out of subsidizing women. If men avoid marriage because it’s easy to become a single father, then the courts will make it harder for men to become a single fathers. Surrogacy will be limited to couples (gay and straight) and single women.
* Single straight men are already suspected of being creeps, stalkers, rapists, porn addicts, and child molesters. A single man wanting to raise a baby alone will be regarded as especially creepy and suspect.
The real conundrum will be, how to curtail the surrogacy rights of single straight men, while protecting the surrogacy rights of single gay men. Because, of course, while single straight men are creeps, single gay men are fabulous.
Novaseeker said :
The thing is … most of them land. Why? Beta thirst.
I agree. I have seen some never-married 38 y/o women with Ns that rival their age still land a man the same age as her with a good job. This contradicts the ‘sphere narrative.
But, I have not seem single mothers remarry, even if they are hot. Sure, there are plenty of betas who want to marry her, but she is living high on ‘CS’ (none of which is actually spent on the child), so perhaps she doesn’t need a provider, so no marriage occurs.
thedeti,
–be college educated
–be employed
–be white
–have her own job, car and money
–be very physically attractive, at least an 8
If she doesn’t meet every single one of those criteria, it might not go well.
The bar is not that high. She merely needs to be a 6. Plus, she does not need to be white either.
Beta thirst is high. The only dealbreakers are if she is either a) below a 6, or b) a single mother (and that too not due to lack of beta interest, but due to lack of need for a provider by the woman).
Greenlander is very pleased by Greenlander’s notierty!
I’m kind of amazed that this quote from so many years ago got so much attention.
I now have a location-indepdendent income and have escaped the dating hell of Silicon Valley. I’m living in Eastern Europe and dating a young woman who is twenty-four… not a pump & dump. So, Ms. Arndt clients don’t need to fear being pump & dumped by me.
<<<>>>>
I’m temping at a warehouse right now, making 12$ an hour. Job is fun and I’m stuck at home while a family member recovers from a stroke. Three of my close co-workers are women with 3, 3, and 2 children. They all make minimum wage and due to their constant illnesses and children’s illnesses they average about 30-33 hours a week. One is a great worker, the other two act like middle-school hooligans; sneaking out, scamming long breaks and basically not working. Two are divorced and third’s husband is a heroin addict on the streets. These women make almost nothing but two of the three enjoy daily 6$ lattes, sometimes 2, and at least a pack a day (10$). They drink on the weekends, drive decent cars, go to concerts, buy braces for their kids. One has a daughter just about to start college. They go out for lunch and generally have fun lives. They have pets, one has a pool and they do fun stuff in general. Take trips etc. Their children get to do all kinds of fun stuff. They act as if they are under absolutely no threat at all and they truly aren’t. These are not women in need of a beta provider at all. The amount of resources granted to them automatically outside of their wage looks to be quite staggering. Feminine primacy is a very real thing. The single mothers in our society are not in need of a beta savior at all.
Also I got a good laugh at how our cities are ‘bursting at the seams with thin, attractive women’ or however it was phrased. Good one.
Another amusing thing is how the unmarried, single women being talked about in these kinds of articles always seem to be heavyweight lawyers, bankers, and business titans. They kicked so much butt in life that they have simply outpaced males in general. Watch out on that one ladies. You might just spin a narrative that disallows those invigorating wage gap tantrums.
Oops,
I meant to start off with a quote from Anon;
“(and that too not due to lack of beta interest, but due to lack of need for a provider by the woman).”
The beta supply is dwindling, gen x was peak beta.
Now, underemployment, awkwardness, foreign marriages mgtow , foreign relocation, drug use, hardcore gaming, tinder, puas and virtual entertainment is chipping away at the beta supply.
honeycomb,
We disagree .. unless you can show me with scripture that it’s evil.
Where does it explicitly say in the Scriptures that single motherhood is wrong?
You are as dense as AT if you think a child is just fine without a mother. As Jesus said when talking about marriage, God made them male and female, that is the basic family unit. Not male only.
How much (numerically) an increase has it been? It could go from 10 men to 20 men and be “on the uptick.”
And you make the mistake of equating men with women. Men value other things, such as hard work, accomplishments at work, scientific breakthroughs, etc. more than women do, in general at least. Noting a few edge cases is no more accurate than claiming beta schlubs mean a trend as well.
Tarl,
You don’t know my ex-wife well. I suspect she is fine without any man. Sure, she would love the rich guy who looks hot, has the lake house and can take her travelling the world, or she might. But she is very selfish and wants to live for herself. She was and is a taker and that makes a man very unlikely.
I ironically wish she would find someone and hook up, it would save me alimony, since she is completely non-repentant.
melmoth,
It woudl be like claiming the business world was full of successful achievers and no one lost money. Those are the ones that get the publicity, not the ones who tried repeatedly and failed, or who never tried at all. That is why so many thin attractive women seem to be around. The guy who was mentioned earlier wouldn’t invite fat ugly women on his boat!
… Messed up the formating for my above ^ comment. Sorry. The top paragraph was meant to be a block quote, not the bottom paragraph and sentence.
Few women admit to being sluts, ergo: there are few sluts. Women with high Ns are victims of deceitful men who loved and then abandoned them (after a one night stand): men lie and deceive and women in their innocence belief the lies that they asked the men to tell. Most men (who do not get to sleep with a woman after more than a few minutes) play Beta provider game; for money or the assertion thereof is male perfume.
One should apply The Secretary Rule to single women: women should thus marry no later than their mid-twenties. What is amazing is that even though so many women leave finding a husband until the end of their fertility and some beyond that, few, even the unattractive or fat women seem to have any problem finding a dutiful male to man-up and marry should that be their desire. The woman who says that she cannot find a man is shedding crocodile tears and is surely seeking to manipulate.
Women with high Ns are victims of deceitful men who loved and then abandoned them (after a one night stand):
Yes, of course these women know full well these men aren’t going to commit to them, yet they keep having casual sex with them. All the protestations about how they have been used and abused by them is a charade. They enjoy the sex. And then afterwards they enjoy all the feelz and drama when the men won’t commit, and they this also lets them claim some kind of victim status.
@ BillyS ..
You are as dense as AT if you think a child is just fine without a mother. As Jesus said when talking about marriage, God made them male and female, that is the basic family unit. Not male only.
Ah yes the ole personal attack & no supporting documentation bit.
How much (numerically) an increase has it been? It could go from 10 men to 20 men and be “on the uptick.”
And you make the mistake of equating men with women. Men value other things, such as hard work, accomplishments at work, scientific breakthroughs, etc. more than women do, in general at least. Noting a few edge cases is no more accurate than claiming beta schlubs mean a trend as well.
I’ve made no mistake .. there are more and more articles and businesses popping up to service a growing demand.
How many .. who cares .. it’s an option that a lot of beta men now find fruitful vs marriage and children.
No such thing as free sex. If you think otherwise then, either, you have cheated the woman, or, she has overlooked posting the invoice.
The sexual revolution far from increasing the amount of sexual intercourse reduced the amount even in a strange example of the inverse rule as it increased the number of women needed to achieve that reduction. Show me a man who confidently boasts that he has slept with N women and even without making allowance downwards for gross exaggeration one can successfully predict that the number of times he has indulged in sexual intercourse is not likely to be more or much more than N. The inverse rule is that the more sexual partners you have over 1 the lower your overall sexual activity. (This of course does not apply to Homosexuals). Early marriage when ones Testosterone and novelty is high facilitates the likelihood of much sex. It is also the age at which – as at that time none have any achievements or status to their name but only prospects – that women who are equally young and inexperienced are more likely to commit. Career women are members of a death-cult, trans-sexual death cult as only men need to advertise achievement to acquire a wife – formerly known unflatteringly as The Rat Race.
Three comments on the meta.
1. I agree with Ironsides that women who marry young often see the man they married as the ultimate alpha. Happened with me (wife was 24), happened with my daughter (she was 19 when she married). I also see this among the young families in our church, many of which are headed by male grad students (we are near a popular university) and have 2-4 children in their late 20’s. Seems like the “build-an-alpha” workshop. We do our part by training these young men in church leadership (to be deacons).
2. On the early and medieval church honoring men who married ex-prostitutes. In that time, marriage, the monastery, or living with parents were really the only non-sinful ways a woman could support herself, which was why the first step in rehabilitation was providing her with shelter and food. Prostitution for a widow or unmarried woman without a family was often the only way to stave off destitution, unless there was a patron or shop owner who would buy her handiwork. Even becoming a nun usually required a payment of some sort (equivalent to a dowry) to the monastery.
Much of the modern “honoring” of single moms by the church is a form of anti-abortion work: If you “find yourself pregnant”, we will provide a way for you to choose the honorable path of keeping your baby. Although there is plenty of outside support available, the church still considers her to be incomplete without a husband. Hence the “man up and marry her”.
3. On being desired rather than loved. Desire gives the woman power without any responsibility. Love is still thought to require some return on the woman’s part; unrequited love used to be thought of as romantic, even attractive, but now it is merely pathetic.
Take it from one who knows. Never ever marry a girl over 30. (Unless maybe you happen to be over 60.)
Yeah you’d think they’d wise up after it happened once or twice. If it keeps happening it’s probably because they want the casual sex.
Thanks! I had the idea that desire was an easier path than love…but I didn’t know how to explaine it. It would make sense that an irresponsible woman would say something like that.
Ah ha! That’s funny right there. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me thirty times in ten years, and I probably like it dirty.
Depends on the guy who impregnated her. If the guy is a deadbeat without a job she isn’t going to get much support so she’s still on the lookout for the beta. The system might throw the deadbeat in jail but it can’t get blood out of a turnip.
Once hormonal contraception came onto the scene combining with the sexual revoultion…it started the brainwashing that sex could be free (free love) by divorcing sex from procreation. Well we’ve seen why that is still not the case…because out of wedlock children are continuing to be born at record rates and that doesn’t take into account the emotional baggage women have by thinking it’s free.
I saw this new Mark Regnerus piece in the Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/09/05/christians-are-part-of-the-same-dating-pool-as-everyone-else-thats-bad-for-the-church/?utm_term=.caaed2c3e6cf
And he has a new book out:
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/sociologist-mark-regnerus-takes-on-the-economics-of-cheap-sex
It seems like Regnerus’ work suffers from the lack of an alpha/beta distinction among males.
[D: FYI, I did a post on a Washington Times article he wrote back in 2011.]
If women were attracted to men in proportion to how much the man contributed to civilization (such as curing a horrible disease or inventing some amazingly productive new technology), it would all be good.
Really? Seems like you you dropped women chasing the top 20% to women chasing the top 0.00002%. When was the last time you heard of a disease being cured or a radical new technology being invented. The smart phone was really the last game-changer and that was 10 years ago.
Women prefer desire over love because that’s what they’re familiar with; they know desire very well. Love, not so much. At least not what men think of as love.
JohnnyComeLately,
Yeah more guys are being made aware of betatude and no guy ever would want to take that role once they are aware of what it’s about. No one. Guys might have been brainwashed into it and later deny the reality of it, but the young guys today are becoming aware of the terms. ‘Alpha’ and ‘Beta,’ whether misused or not, are being thrown around all the time. “Friend Zone” memes are everywhere and the very, very common knowledge that one must be a badboy are all mainstream cultural things now. A lot of would-be-betas are likely very bitter that culture has chosen that role for them and the same culture has told them to fight tooth and nail to avoid that role if you ever want anything out of life. 25 years ago, it was just the very beginning of the mutterings about how women don’t like nice men. Now it’s bullhorned at you several times a day. So for a lot of would-be-betas (WBB) it’s all “Welcome Aboard. We hope you enjoy your flight on Thai Air.”
Billy S,
Yeah there is an optical illusion in terms of how many attractive women are around. You could wander around Seattle for a weekend and get about 300 shots of decent eye candy. What you’re not realizing is that’s out of ten thousand women. Another thing guys need to understand is that you can wander around Rio for a day and see about 5000-8000 shots of eye candy in a comparable day, not a measly 300. Even here, deep in the soul of the manosphere, there are still guys who don’t know these things. It’s all “American cities are bursting at the seams with very attractive, thin women.” Not just attractive, but very attractive, lol. Kinda hopeless. The gender war is pretty much over when the soldier next to you still can’t powder his gun correctly after decades of battle.
Dear Fellas:
honeycomb sez to Billy…
(Rather than cite a specific source, Billy made a general statement, then alluded to honeycomb being an idiot)
honeycomb retorts…
While I don’t share Billy’s personal sentiments (i.e. I don’t think either you or AT are idiots), you’re asking for something that no reasonable person would expect to find in the New Testament. The bible is a product of its age, and the thinkers who produced it had no reason to denounce men masturbating into a sex robot, then producing a motherless kid via an artificial placenta.
Lots of things aren’t listed in the bible that would be, if someone was writing it today. (Weird trannies being allowed in the girls’ public toilet, the prevalence of S&M sex play, nose piercings, etc.)
Either you’ve adopted AT’s fallacy, that everything not specifically prohibited in the text is explicitly permitted (thoroughly debunked by a guy named Lyn87, over a year ago) or you know some part of the bible which allows for motherless kids to become a societal norm. I’ve never seen this allowance myself.
So is bringing a motherless child into the world sinful? I don’t personally have an opinion on that. I think it’s for you religious bros to try and work out what qualifies as sin. Is it socially destructive? I think it certainly is. Any kid brought into the world in these circumstances will desperately want the love and example that a decent mother provides her children. S/he will look around at other kids who seem to take this situation for granted, and will feel deeply hurt by the lack of it in his/her own life. That wounding will not go away. It will likely result in deviant behavior. This is almost understandable to me. Why should such a child grow up feeling invested in a society which s/he doesn’t identify with?
Now, guys who promote this have a couple of choices. They can be inverted feminists, and demand that every child be stripped of his/her mother (the way kooky feminists do now, demanding that father’s day be abolished, &c.) They might also try to start a separate society made up only of single fathers (women don’t have the strength or foresight to do this, but I think men might try it). Either way, their kids will ultimately pay the price for their narcissism.
Best,
Boxer
Pingback: Single Fatherhood as Ideal – v5k2c2
honeycomb,
I didn’t identify the Scripture, I just referred to it. That is evidence.
[Mar 10:6-8 NKJV] 6 “But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 ‘and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.
This was talking about marriage, but marriage was the context of family formation.
Believe what idiocy you will of course. You failed to comment on explicit prohibitions to single motherhood.
Anything written is true, right? No fake or overhyped news….
You should avoid working in tech if you believe that. Just because something is in a news story doesn’t make it the full picture. Though you know that, you just don’t want to face it.
melmoth,
I believe the original reply on “many thin attractive women” was talking about Facebook posts by a player. That would not require walking around anywhere taking pictures, just pictures taken in selected situations where only such women would be invited.
BillyS ..
You should avoid working in tech if you believe that. Just because something is in a news story doesn’t make it the full picture. Though you know that, you just don’t want to face it.
That’s funny .. that’s how I make a living.
This was talking about marriage, but marriage was the context of family formation.
Believe what idiocy you will of course. You failed to comment on explicit prohibitions to single motherhood.
Where is the PROHIBITION to single with children? WHERE did scripture say you can not be a single parent? Where does it say it is EVIL (your words) to be a single parent / raise a child as a single parent?
I am not married .. AM I disobeying GOD?
Take your personal interpretations to yourself .. there is specific warning for such regarding scripture. That you is the only thing we can agree on I am sure.
theDeti,
Mine ‘stuck the landing’.
She hit all your points, sucked me right in…Blue pill me didn’t stand a chance.
Now she’s about to fall off the platform, she’s added 80lbs to her butt and constantly bitches and moans about how hard life is and how she can’t take the lack of ’emotional connection’ to her ‘woke’ husband.
correction .. whoops .. KEEP your personal interpretations to yourself .. lol
test
[D: Not sure why the spam filter ate your previous comment. I found it and fished it out, along with a few comments by others.]
Billy & honeycomb:
I think this is a really interesting conversation (re technology and single fatherhood). You guys are sorta talking past one another, though.
Earlier this morning, I tried to post a comment here, which didn’t show up. Rather than kook out like Artisanal Toad, and denounce our host for whatever software/network problem ate my comment, I posted a response on my own blog.
https://v5k2c2.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/single-fatherhood-as-ideal/
Best,
Boxer
melmoth: 25 years ago, it was just the very beginning of the mutterings about how women don’t like nice men.
An indie romcom, Nice Guys Sleep Alone, was released in 1999. It supports that notion, but with a caveat: Not All Women Are Like That.
In the film, a Nice Guy is tired of always being Friend Zoned. So on his next date, he tries to be a Bad Boy Jerk. The twist is that this date was with a Nice Girl who’d appreciate a Nice Guy.
So the Nice Guy finally met a Nice Girl, but blew it because he was acting like a Bad Boy Jerk.
In the end, he begs, pleads, apologizes, and convinces the Nice Girl that he’s really a Nice Guy, not the Jerk he was pretending to be. They marry and live happily ever after.
Meanwhile, the Sexy but Manipulative Bad Girl gets her comeuppance when when all guys she’s been playing decide they’d had enough of her games, and refuse to have sex with her (sic), leaving her alone and sad, and settling for an Omega (because she’d rather scrape the bottom of the barrel than have nothing).
Dear White Guy:
You didn’t mention children, and in context, it doesn’t seem like you have any. I’m assuming that’s the case. I’m also assuming that she is just as bad as you claim here, and you’re not exaggerating.
Are you religious? If not, or if your particular religion allows it (Mormonism, Judaism, etc.) then you need to divorce her NOW.
See an attorney to get the idea as to how much it’s going to cost to cut yourself loose. Note that the longer you wait, the costlier the courts will make it. If you qualify for a “long term marriage” then in many places, you can expect lifetime alimony. It makes sense to divorce ASAP if you aren’t prohibited by religion or kids from doing so. It can only get worse from here, and there are too many stories on Dalrock from guys like you, to count.
You can be sure that she has the dates all mapped out. You can also bet that she’s planning to get pregnant, with or without your consent.
Good Luck,
Boxer
BillyS says:
September 8, 2017 at 9:44 am
melmoth,
I believe the original reply on “many thin attractive women” was talking about Facebook posts by a player. That would not require walking around anywhere taking pictures, just pictures taken in selected situations where only such women would be invited.
I think that I started this sub-topic. Indeed, my friend’s social circle includes few unattractive women. As they all are getting older, some aren’t nearly as attractive as they were in their 20s, but most would still get a second look on the street.
My original point is that there is this group of women, definitely in the top 5%-10% of the most attractive women in his city(they almost have to be as there are no cities with a significant population of hot women), who are thin, attractive, and economically successful, and not a one of them is a good risk for marriage, but the odds approach certainty that they will marry despite them all likely having an N count in the double digits, and having spent their youth partying every weekend.
Now, imagine how much less worth a ring are the less attractive, less fit, less successful women who’ve spent their 20s doing the same thing.
Incidentally, I was in Northern Europe a year ago, and it was incredibly eye opening how fat we Americans are. I wouldn’t say that the women were particularly attractive in comparison, but few were fat. Earlier this Summer, I took a road trip through the midWest and it was shocking once I got outside my very fit, liberal neighborhood, just how porcine average Americans have become.
I saw so many guys in reasonable shape walking around with Suzy Butterball it was like a cruel joke.
And, most of them are going to end up divorced. The ones that don’t end up divorced are probably going to be existing on sex a couple of times a year, whatever is the minimum amount she has to put out to keep him from cheating, or divorcing her.
It’s a sad world out there with a dearth of options.
Content warning on the video posted by Red Pill Latecomer: explicit sexual content.
In my experience I have yet to meet an overweight woman or a woman going overweight who didn’t also have a bad attitude and displayed promiscuity tells. Along with not being physically appealing it’s a good indicator she won’t be pleasant either.
I agree with Ironsides that women who marry young often see the man they married as the ultimate alpha. I agree with Ironsides that women who marry young often see the man they married as the ultimate alpha.
Yes. This is why some societies went overboard and did arranged marriages. In the past, almost all societies were like this. This is also why a young man had to get approval from the girl’s father, for HE was the decision-maker.
But this carries many downsides. Such societies are ones where both men and women put no effort into their looks, because they don’t need to. Hence, the whole thing can be disrupted from the outside from relatively small perturbations.
Having everyone be married easily by keeping expectations very low to begin with, is not such a great thing either.
Anon-
That’s a pretty decent sized truth bomb (regarding arranged marriages and looks, etc) and I think it argues for mate selection types to be seen on a spectrum with tinder f&%@ buddies/hookups on one end and arranged marriages on the other.
Something in the middle is more sustainable and reasonable.
Boxer, yeah I know, if I could tell the old me to listen to my gut (instead of my dick), I wouldn’t have 2 kids 11&13, married for 14yrs to a former carousel rider, who has major medical issues. Plus I made a promise to God, and still haven’t ‘unscrewed’ – (un-bluepilled?) myself completely.
It wouldn’t be wise to pull ejection handle, at this moment. Working on my Plan, making sure that it looks the same whether I ‘stay’ or she ‘goes’.
I just view this like high altitude training, it will make me stronger…as long as I don’t asphyxiate.
greginaurora,
An observation: as men age, they become increasingly comfortable with being alone. Women, when alone, remain lonely.
We would like to think this in the ‘sphere, but I am not so sure.
Plenty of 50 y/o men start to get worried about their loneliness. By contrast, a lot of older women who missed their window are somewhat bitter, but don’t appear to be fully desperate, and could still get a man, just not the one they want.
…continuing a little on a response to Anon.
Mychael and I have met some very traditionalist Orthodox folks who seem to think we are being too worldly because we work hard at looking good for each other. Coincidentally, those very same friends are overweight and look pretty unkempt most of the time.
It is an off-limits topic.
Don’t forget an additional factor why Beta men are shying off of LTR’s and marriage: they’re spooked out of making an approach, given their collegiate training that all approaches are “unwanted communications” that equal harassment which equal sex abuse and end in expulsion, and/or their corporate training forbidding in-firm fraternization due to HR and insurance concerns about “harassment,” do it and get fired.
I chime in to mention this yet again because I see this reticence a lot right now from my vantage point among younger folk. If these shadows remain unaltered by the future, and if any of these Beta men are going to be snagged someday, the women will have to do the snagging. For all the noise about “sex positivity” (and really it’s just noise, don’t let the Buzzfeed pieces fool you), most women cannot and will not do it.
In a famous experiment done by Dr. Warren Farrell, the women were compelled to do the approaching to men they fancied. They couldn’t do it, some got physically ill from the heebie jeebies.
Scott,
That’s a pretty decent sized truth bomb (regarding arranged marriages and looks, etc) and I think it argues for mate selection types to be seen on a spectrum with tinder f&%@ buddies/hookups on one end and arranged marriages on the other.
Oh, there are some major ethnicities in the world that have very strict ‘marry as virgins while young’ models (not quite ‘arranged’, though, despite use of that term). Everyone is married off with little effort (really just a job interview), and all children grow up with 2 parents and 4 grandparents. But attractiveness-wise, the entire ethnicity is usually very substandard from this lack of pressure. The men have zero game, and the women are plain 4s and 5s (that are nonetheless told their whole lives how ‘pretty’ they are). This was true a century ago in America as well.
It is not genetic, of course, as members of the ethnicity that are in the West int he 2nd or 3rd generation are much better looking, and don’t even look like the same ethnicity.
Something in the middle is more sustainable and reasonable.
In theory, yes. In practice, the pendulum can never quite stop at the ideal point for long. It is extremely rare for both members of a marriage to commit to their attractiveness for the other, for long (as you have). You can take pride in the standards of personal excellence you and your wife set for yourselves.
It doesn’t have to be…we all have a cross to bear in this life. I’m finding fulfillment by helping serve in the church (don’t worry it’s not helping single mothers) and strengthening my relationship with God. Rather than lament the fact I’m single and the fact most women aren’t marriage material…I’m taking advantage of it with the Paul approach and using being single to be more concerned with the Lord.
The size of the Free Stuff Army is indeed staggering. And as the late Margaret Thatcher once said: “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money”
Though, to be honest, I don’t think they have it quite that grand. My kids had friends on welfare. From what I heard most of them lived in trailers, their parents drove beaters and they lived off of diets of spaghetti, bologna sandwiches, free school lunches, etc.
Yup…funny how biology always seems to overcome feminist pipe dreams theories. Basically the thought that any man could reject them is pretty terrifying.
For all their talk about strong empowered nonsense…something like fear of rejection puts them back into their place.
Chateau Heartiste – https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/what-produces-female-beauty/
Nope. This is the big one. As I’ve argued here before, female economic self-sufficiency like we have now in the West creates massive negative feedback loops in the Male Commitment-Female Commitment Worthiness relationship. And as williamK notes, female independence (in which women can feed, house, and clothe themselves) not only pushes women to emphasize fulfillment of their desire for sexy cads, but it pushes men to DE-EMPHASIZE their beta provider skills. Men don’t feel inspired to wife up self-sufficient women; men DO feel inspired to provide for and protect vulnerable women. And in an environment of female dependence, men will be careful to choose the prettiest women they can get, because they will be investing a lot in her. In contrast, an environment of female independence encourages men to spread their seed indiscriminately, because the pressure to provide for careergirl yaass queen shrikes has diminished.
Executive summary: The West is currently selecting against the efflorescence of female Beauty and selecting FOR the effluvia of female Ugliness.
Frank K,
And as the late Margaret Thatcher once said: “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money”
Aha! Even a red pill man can often lapse into blue-pill habits without realizing it.
Are we really to believe that no man said such a thing about socialism before the 1980s? Despite the 100 million who died from Communism before then?
Or is it more likely that when a sole woman of importance finally said something negative about socialism, that cuckservatives fell over themselves to attribute this grand wisdom to her, ignoring all the men who said the same thing long before? If anything, she might just be repeating verbatim what she heard Reagan say in private.
I think the cuckservative zeal to attribute that quote to Margaret Thatcher as if she was the first to say it is very analogous to the zeal that pedestalizers bestow upon the Amelia Earhardt narrative, or the Theranos/Elizabeth Holmes narrative.
@ Greenlander:
I now have a location-indepdendent income and have escaped the dating hell of Silicon Valley. I’m living in Eastern Europe and dating a young woman who is twenty-four… not a pump & dump. So, Ms. Arndt clients don’t need to fear being pump & dumped by me.
Your girlfriend has at least 15 years to go before she shows up on Bettina Arndt’s doorstep.
O/T, my latest.
https://americandadweb.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/take-the-daughter-hunting/
Carry on.
Hey! My first attempt at using wordpress tags worked!
It’s the little things, people.
Scott, you could remind those Orthodox folks to consider the words of the church Fathers regarding gluttony.
It is just as shameful for lovers of the flesh and the belly to search out spiritual things as it is for a harlot to discourse on chastity. St Isaac of Syria
I now have a location-indepdendent income and have escaped the dating hell of Silicon Valley.
I disagree that Silicon Valley is a dating hell. Take any dating website, and check out the looks of 50 randomly selected women within a certain age filter, and compare that to most other large cities. There is no real difference.
One could say the ratio sucks, but most men are so beta that they aren’t really competition. Game works really well in Silicon Valley, since women have been bombarded with more betatude than elsewhere. The ratio is not really a factor. Don’t forget the tons of Russian women who have flooded into the Bay Area to be golddiggers.
Very true. It’s not like young men can go to a “virgin dealership” (bypassing the used slut lots) and take home a virgin bride.
But given the current legal landscape, where men often get reamed in divorce court, handing over the house, the savings, half to two thirds of his income and possibly half his pension, it isn’t surprising that the percentage of men who are married has dropped so low.
I recall reading that half of all adults are unmarried and that 70% of men under the age of 35 are single. Granted, a portion of those are divorced, but those numbers are simply staggering. Add to that the fact that half of all children are born out of wedlock says that a lot of women are not sticking the landing,
Sure, UMC sluts who are thin and have good looks have a better chance of bagging a fat wallet, but they are the minority, and even they are having a harder time, judging by articles like this one:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704409004576146321725889448
Of course, the blame is being laid at the feet of men (as it always is)
September, October I will make a killing just winterizing these ladies houses i.e. put lawn furniture away, close the outdoor taps, service the garden equipment. All the stuff hubby did for free I charge 50+\ hour.
Are you kidding me? Women PAY you to do this? Around here, they’d just prevail on the omegas and gammas at the churches to do it for free. Half are guilted into it to help the widdle old hewpwess damsel in distwess; the other half think they’ll sexually attract her by being such manly he-men, moving lawn furniture and garden hose boxes. Heh.
I do this stuff at my house, and more. It’s just part of home ownership.
anonymous_ng-
Trust me, we’ve been around that block. There is, unfortunately a brand of Orthodoxy that is a weird mix of anti-abortion, traditional aesthetic, and social justice (no FAT SHAMING!!!) that drives me crazy.
Mychael and I are in our 40s. Neither of us look like super models, but we try to stay healthy, good looking and strong for each other and our kids.
It bears repeating…a woman who is a virgin that gets married has the lowest divorce risk. It’s not 0 but the risk is much less than women who weren’t virgins when they got married. If we are to believe more women than not aren’t virgins on their wedding night…that right there is a big divorce risk.
Plus we have a good idea how women don’t get cause and effect…did they really think they could keep on this path of screwing over men whenever their feelings dictated it and men would just keep signing up to get married? The dropping marriage rates is proof enough that more men have wised up to this.
@Scott, that is weird, and I should have realized that you would have. I suppose my comment is more a reflection of the situation I see at our parish.
There are a handful of morbidly obese women in our parish, and I just don’t understand how they reconcile that with the ascetic nature of the practice of Orthodoxy.
I just try and focus on my life, and my issues, and let God do His work on them.
There are a handful of morbidly obese women in our parish, and I just don’t understand how they reconcile that with the ascetic nature of the practice of Orthodoxy.
Yes! I keep saying this and I feel like I am taking crazy pills. The entire practice of Orthodoxy is aesthetic. Every swing of the censer, every word of the liturgy, the icons, the tones, the, well, you know.
I have posted pictures of my childrens baptisms because an Orthodox baptism is beautiful to look at and this is true even when its not my kid!
I just don’t get it.
I was marriage minded not too long ago and it became blatantly apparent to me that marriage is a sham. Staying marriage minded in such a climate is, sorry to say, stupid. I liken it to a man, so thirsty, that he is willing to drink contaminated water just to stop the thirst of the moment, long term consequences damned.
Stupid is as stupid does. The women who waste their most prime years and the men who eventually marry them both deserve each other and the consequences. The beta idiot who marries a career slut deserves the divorce reaming he gets, there is ample evidence out there proving the landscape, only those who are either blind or deluded fail to see it.
In a famous experiment done by Dr. Warren Farrell, the women were compelled to do the approaching to men they fancied. They couldn’t do it, some got physically ill from the heebie jeebies.
Because the two things women are most afraid of are judgment and rejection, and approaching men they like opens them up and makes them incredibly vulnerable to both.
If you’re a half-way decent handy man, you can make a nice sideline business installing, repairing and maintaining items on the property of single old ladies. Sometimes they even give you a hot meals and drink for your time.
Just make sure she pays cash upfront.
‘Because the two things women are most afraid of are judgment and rejection, and approaching men they like opens them up and makes them incredibly vulnerable to both.’
Lol…they are afraid of judgment. You can see it just about anytime a group of men is judging bad behavior. ‘Dont judge you bunch of Pharisees’.
It seems like Regnerus’ work suffers from the lack of an alpha/beta distinction among males.
Regnerus suffers from poor vision. He needs a good pair of The Glasses.
He’s also conflating “masturbating to porn” with “easy sex with women” in order to create his idea of “cheap sex”. This is dishonest, and does damage to his reputation as a serious researcher.
If I obtain a copy of that book it will be second hand, because I do not wish to reward a dishonest author.
@Anonymous Reader
FWIW I believe that Greenlander left the US entirely, possibly for Eastern Europe.
It’s kind of a compliment to be remembered so long after I used to regularly compliment here.
@thedeti
Well, under the present regime she has no chance to get a visa to come to the United States. In 15 years, perhaps things will have changed.
@Dalrock
The comment I’ve quoted wasn’t directed at me, but I was one of the “few comments by others”. I realize that it wasn’t your personal decision to put my comment in moderation hell. But I’m pining for the days when I was active enough on this blog that my comments weren’t moderated. Actually, I take that back: I was dating career girrrrrrlllzzzzzz during those days. I’m much happer dating attractive younger girls and having my comments here moderated! But if you’d whitelist my email address or IP address, I’d be appreciative.
@Anon
I haven’t spent much time in Silicon Valley since 2012, but it’s hard for me to believe that it’s overrun with golddiggers. Sure, they’re there, but there are SO MANY NERDS, and the success of Silicon Valley has only increased since 2012. In 2017, I’m sure that it’s even more overrun with nerds than before. Of course, there are more golddiggers.
You’re right, that you can really go far with some game in Silicon Valley, because so few guys have some. But the game you run only catches career girlzzzzzzzzz that are in their late twenties or thirties. Do you want to wife that up? Or perhaps you’ve found some source of single, twenty-something girls that can afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment for $3500 a month on a salary of a twentysomething girl with a liberal arts degree who works in an HR department or an elementary school?
New York City is much less of a dating hell. Very few guys with real income (like more than $300K a year) and lots of cute girls thinking that NYC is the place to make it.
Scott
Mychael and I have met some very traditionalist Orthodox folks who seem to think we are being too worldly because we work hard at looking good for each other. Coincidentally, those very same friends are overweight and look pretty unkempt most of the time.
Likely it’s a form of laziness. In an era when grossly overweight women and men wear Spandex pants in public places, there’s a tendency to descend to the lowest denominator. There could also be issues between the couple – I’ve known men who became more and more slovenly as their wives became colder and colder, a sort of “arms race” of obnoxiousness. Every one of those ended in divorce, by the way.
There’s also a lot of really bad advice on diet out there still, with the unscientific “heart healthy food pyramid” tops on my list. Sugar makes fat. High fructose corn syrup is everywhere, in so many things, that the true US sugar consumption is huge, far greater than 40 years ago or even 20 years ago. Simple carbs (pasta, potatoes) make sugar so they make fat also. Sitting all day also makes fat. I could go on but that’s even further off topic. I’m just saying that it can be a challenge to avoid the sugars that make for fat. But that’s still no excuse for gross obesity, which in 99% of cases results from bad diet habits.
Back to Scott’s point:
There used to be an idea that the physical being was also a “temple of God”. That was one of the lines preachers in the 19th and early 20th century used to push prohibition of alcohol. But it also used to apply to gluttony. That’s gone, and I’ve had fat Protestant preachers tell me flat out that nowhere in the Bible is gluttony listed as a sin. I don’t know enough to challenge that, and frankly that sort of preacher doesn’t listen to anyone else anyway.
Since Orthodoxy actually has fast days still built into the calendar, it seems to me that it would be relatively easy to keep a normal, healthy weight if one wanted to.
Fred Flange On DVD
Don’t forget an additional factor why Beta men are shying off of LTR’s and marriage: they’re spooked out of making an approach,
Yes, another victory for Feminism and the Female Imperative.
I chime in to mention this yet again because I see this reticence a lot right now from my vantage point among younger folk.
It is easy for me to see among college aged men, too. It’s everywhere, if you know what to look for. Yet I keep running across churchgoing tradcons who can’t see it. They literally can not see this, even when it’s right in front of them at the potluck. Their only solution is “manUP”, totally ignoring everything else that is done to young male humans from preschool to K-12 to college. It’s starting to look that tradcons cannot be taught anything.
If these shadows remain unaltered by the future, and if any of these Beta men are going to be snagged someday, the women will have to do the snagging. For all the noise about “sex positivity” (and really it’s just noise, don’t let the Buzzfeed pieces fool you), most women cannot and will not do it.
We both know that ain’t happening. This is why so many 20-something women who are carousel watchers are not having any interactions with young men outside of groups.
In a famous experiment done by Dr. Warren Farrell, the women were compelled to do the approaching to men they fancied. They couldn’t do it, some got physically ill from the heebie jeebies.
One of Farrell’s good pieces of work. I must admit that the first time I read of that work, I laughed out loud with zero sympathy for the women. Now that I have Glasses, I have some sympathy, because to women “standing next to a man perfectly still saying nothing” is a rather obvious approach. Actually walking across a room and opening with words is like hiring a Jumbotron during the NBA playoffs.
Fred Flange (September 8, 2017 at 11:55 am) mentioned Dr. Warren Farrell, whom I had never heard of before. [thedeti replied, here.]
Here’s some stuff about him (Wikipedia). Perhaps more usefully, here is an article about the very same role-reversal experiments that Fred Flange mentions.
Interesting stuff. Thanks, Fred. 🙂
Pax Christi Vobiscum
“That’s when some men start behaving very badly….”
The irony is pretty thick.
Men finally decide to respond according to a precarious field of play (immense risks, questionable to non-existent benefits) and according their own male interests, and this is considered “bad behavior”. Look, sleeping with an adult woman (29+) who happens to be desperate for a husband is not equivalent to an adult stealing candy from a child. Women are not innocently agreeing to sleep with these men. They have their own motives. They are opportunistically doing the minimum they must in order to secure commitment. The fact that some men would have the gall to opportunistically invest a similar minimum of their own with these same women in order to secure sex does not constitute evil. During shortages, prices (costs) rise.
And what about the other side? Shall we once again collectively “never mind” the epic feminist akimbo triumphalism – and all of the attitude baggage that comes right along with their flippant ultimatums? And does doing such polite niceties make women feel any less sad about a predicament that they themselves created and for which they are accountable?
Gee, who would’ve thought? A woman’s decisions earlier in her life would have consequences. And OMG, that those consequences, it turns out, are not happy time, rainbows, lollipops, and wagging puppy dog tails of triumphalist victory.
Are bachelors today to apologize for the fact that what they really want matters?
How devastating to discover in the end how life altering decisions don’t orbit around your needs, interests and imperatives!
The shear gall of men! That they might not endeavor, slave and sacrifice for the shortest of straws anymore.
@Greenlander
I just checked both the moderation list and the blacklist, and neither your email address nor your IP are listed in either. I don’t know why WordPress keeps putting your comments in moderation, since you are using the same email address as past approved comments. I don’t have a way to whitelist you, but your comments should come through automatically. The only thing I can think of is maybe WordPress treats IP addresses from your location differently. However, I have only had this with one other commenter, and he is posting from the US.
greenlander @ 1:30 pm:
“I haven’t spent much time in Silicon Valley since 2012, but it’s hard for me to believe that it’s overrun with golddiggers”
It’s overrun with androgynes now. The boy/girlfriend behavior gets paired with “gender fluid” and marital threatpoint to make marriage just not a thing anymore. People wander around having sex with whoever is feeling sex-positive today. As for golddigging, everybody in urban California knows how to be a victim and work the welfare system. Marrying for money is, like, so Dark Ages now.
I swear there’s a “professional househusband” type of Tradcon running around who raises the babies while a succession of Powergirls focus on their cubicle careers. “Cheyenne is the second kid from my fourth marriage. I love my kids!”
…
“I’ve had fat Protestant preachers tell me flat out that nowhere in the Bible is gluttony listed as a sin. I don’t know enough to challenge that”
Christ’s example is to simply mock this type of guy. There’s also quite a few verses on the general topic of self-control, not to mention how Christian pastors are supposed to set good examples. But hey, I guess if you meant to be fat and lazy then you’re controlling yourself just fine. Why stockpile food in the nuclear bunker when you can stockpile food in your manboobs instead? Y2K ready!
Greenlander and American, both of your comments are being held in moderation for reason’s I can’t determine. Do you mind if I email you at the address you use to comment so we can try some troubleshooting?
Anonymous ng,
I don’t think it was you, based on what you just said there about fat Americans. Someone else chimed in. Doesn’t matter anyway. Seafair in Seattle has hundreds of bikini bombshells all gathered in on eplace. Overwhelming, yet Seattle in general has a horrid population of women. So the illusion can be there at times. It has to be common knowledge that obesity has left us with the world’s slimmest pickings by far. So “bursting at the seams” describes clothing of American women long before it describes the supply of thin, attractive women in cities
earlthomas786: It bears repeating…a woman who is a virgin that gets married has the lowest divorce risk.
I believe you. Although I’ve read the opposite from female pop psychologists and therapists.
They say that virgins are more likely to be unhappily married, and more likely to cheat or divorce, because as they age they feel they’ve “missed out” in their youth. Whereas a women with broad sexual experience before marriage is “more emotionally mature” and “knows what she really wants” when picking a husband.
Thus, according to female pop psychologists, “emotionally mature men who are secure in their manhood”, will seek out “sexually experienced and emotionally mature women” for marriage. (Implied shaming intended.)
Women like these actually make a case for polygamy.
A single man would be a fool to marry one, but an older married man with a barren wife might care to take a risk on one if he really wants to have children.
For the woman, that probably beats marrying a broke divorced guy making child support payments.
I’m 43, (and married) but were I single, I’d never consider a woman of even 35. I’d shoot for under thirty, even if I had to move to another country to do so.
This is most certainly true of milfy women. But I think he was talking about old crones, especially ones whose children have moved away.
earlthomas786: I have yet to meet an overweight woman or a woman going overweight who didn’t also have a bad attitude and displayed promiscuity tells. Along with not being physically appealing it’s a good indicator she won’t be pleasant either.
As in the exploitation film, Crazy Fat Ethel. The trailer includes sex, violence, and grossness, but it’s also an increasingly accurate portrayal of the Modern American Woman. Another generation, and all American women will be Crazy Fat Ethel.
Dailymail had an article this week about men getting vasectomies and dating while refusing to get married. They specify it is to eliminate the whoops pregnancy and 20 year child support payment from 30 year old women. Chickens meet roost.
Sure…their theory is much like Communism, it sounds good in theory…and is nothing like that in reality.
It’s just another way they try to justify promiscuity. As if having many d’s in her is the secret to emotional maturity…when in fact the emotional toll on a woman after being pumped and dumped is tremendous.
@MgtowHorseman
“”And Mark is right about Toronto. I live a 100k east and have a business strictly maintaining the houses of the divorcees, especially the over 50 crowd.””
100KM East of Toronto puts you around the Belleville area.These are the communities that we are looking at.West of Toronto….Hamilton,Guelph,Kitchener-Waterloo,Niagara Falls,Brantford etc.They can sell their million dollar homes in Toronto and move to a much cheaper area.Also,the prices in these areas are much lower for us to buy and convert as compared to Toronto.Congrats on your business.I always love to hear business success stories.You only have one way to go with your enterprise…and that way is UP! Our initial plan is to have 3000 tenants within the next 5 years.A 50 unit apartment building can be converted to a 100 room(for seniors).Of course,this also supplies all the extras that they require.Nurses,cooks,dietitians,security etc are all provided…..at a cost of approximately $5000 per month.The great thing about this project is we are putting the Wynn government’s “feet to the fire”.We have no problem in financing this project via family money and banks.I have been holding out for “grants”.If the Wynn gov’t needs these places built so badly(they are broke and they cannot do it)…….I want grant money! We initially requested $12M…..We are now up to $30M. We will settle for $20M….But,they are going to pay.I hate Kathleen Wynn with a passion.She is going to pay!!!….and pay BIG!
@Greenlander
I always have to say “Hello” to you every time you post here.You were one of the first people that I met at Dalrock’s Blog. I hope that things are going well for you.I know that you still read this blog.I really miss your posts and hope that you will be back here someday.^5’s my friend!
melmoth
Seafair in Seattle has hundreds of bikini bombshells all gathered in on eplace. Overwhelming, yet Seattle in general has a horrid population of women.
It’s just sample error. Seafair is a subset of a subset, and not a cross sectional subset either. It’s the same as walking around in an upscale store like Neiman Marcus vs. walking around in WalMart – you see a different socioeconomic group in one vs. the other. I was in an East Coast city this summer and pleasantly surprised by the trim and pretty women. But that was in downtown near the financial district. In other parts of town, I saw a different group of people.
The same sample issue applies in lots of ways, but it all boils down to “some” vs. “all”.
@Carlotta
Would you happen to have a link? I don’t see it on their main page.
greenlander
It’s kind of a compliment to be remembered so long after I used to regularly compliment here.
Thoughtful commenters are always memorable, in a good way.
Carlotta: Dailymail had an article this week about men getting vasectomies and dating while refusing to get married. They specify it is to eliminate the whoops pregnancy and 20 year child support payment from 30 year old women.
Which is why feminists are pushing to ban DNA tests. It’ll likely progress in these stages:
1. If a man was living with her, it’s his baby.
2. If a man was dating her, it’s his baby.
3. Every man who was dating her, it’s their baby. They all pay child support to her.
This might be the story Carlotta is talking about. It’s from earlier this summer.
https://www.the-pool.com/news-views/opinion/2017/36/zoe-beaty-on-daily-mail-vasectomy-men
I think this is the article.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4859098/confessions-reveal-troubling-battle-sexes.html
earlthomas786: It bears repeating…a woman who is a virgin that gets married has the lowest divorce risk.
The Social Pathologist aka Slumlord did an analysis of GISS data a few years back that showed this. I think there’s been another analysis since then by someone else demonstrating the same thing.
One could argue from a Game perspective thus: she would be an Alpha Widow to the man who was “her first”. Even when children and other issues Betaized him and she found herself no longer as attracted & yearning for “her first”, that “man of her past” would be the man right there. So if he adopts the MMSL MAP or something similar, restoring himself to a better version of himself, that would be most likely to restore her attraction, greatly reducing the chances of a female frivorce.
RedPillLatecomer
I believe you. Although I’ve read the opposite from female pop psychologists and therapists.
In the investment / trading world this is called “talking your book”. It’s also an example of female ingroup preference AKA “Team Woman”. C’mon, what else are they going to say? This is like asking a used car salesman “Are used cars a good, safe investment?”.
They say that virgins are more likely to be unhappily married, and more likely to cheat or divorce, because as they age they feel they’ve “missed out” in their youth.
That’s a real risk, thanks in large part to female pop psychologists and therapists plus the slutstream media. It is why every married man now needs some degree of Game.
Whereas a women with broad sexual experience before marriage is “more emotionally mature” and “knows what she really wants” when picking a husband.
Snicker. What any woman “really wants” is fried ice. This is pure rationalization hamsterese.
Thus, according to female pop psychologists, “emotionally mature men who are secure in their manhood”, will seek out “sexually experienced and emotionally mature women” for marriage. (Implied shaming intended.)
Beta shaming, to be specific. Plus, they’re hoping that the man living in the cottage at the back of the garden, that hunky handyman, is a secret millionaire who wants an aging carousel rider to accompany him on his world travels. In reality he’s a blue collar tradesman with a set of skils that keeps him in a fairly comfortable setting, who would be quite loyal to a woman that was loyal to him. In other words, he’s boring. Too boring…
“Every man who was dating her, it’s their baby. They all pay child support to her.”
In the law, there is a theoretical approach to toxic tort liability called “market share liability”. This has commonly been used in asbestos sickness cases, in which a worker comes down with an asbestos related disease. The worker had worked around products from numerous suppliers and manufacturers, and it was impossible to tell which one, or any of them or all of them, finally gave him the disease. So enterprising lawyers came up with market share liability in which each asbestos supplier/manufacturer bore that proportion of liability corresponding to its share of the asbestos market at the time. So if Supplier A had 3% of the market share, it had to pay 3% of the worker’s damages. Supplier B had 35% of the share so it pays 35% of the damages.
So are we going to have Frank Fratboywho had sex with her once, which is 2% of sex with the woman. So he pays 2% of the support. Chad Thunderc*ck had 26% of the sex so he pays 26% of the support; Harley McBadboy had 45% of the sex so he pays 45% support…..
There’s also “joint and several liability”, where all of the liable parties are liable to pay their proportionate share of the damages; but if one or more liable parties cannot pay, then the other remaining parties who are able to pay, must pay.
So Frank Fratboy, Chad Thunderc*ck, F*ckbuddy Rockbanddrummer, and Paul Plumber all had sex with her and might have fathered her child. But, alas! Chad and F*ckbuddy can’t pay! Frank and Paul are on the hook for all the child support.
That’s why we need the DNA tests, and the ability of a putative father to test a child and avoid paternity obligations if in fact, as Maury would say, “You are NOT the father!”
I tell you at the rate this is going we’ll be going from a casual sex/hookup type society back to self-imposed Puritan repression if only because men don’t want to be screwed over by the increasing demands of single, childless women.
Heck there is also the story of that NFL football player who is having his 14th kid but the big headline was his 3rd after a vasectomy. It’s certainly not foolproof…but if I was him I’d wonder if those were his kids.
A fifty year old British man and divorced father of two deciding to get a vasectomy might be a lot of things. “Drastic action” is not one of them.
Feminists must conflate common sense and prudence into drama.
From the Daily Mail article on older dudes getting the snip:
“I said it to him again and again that I didn’t want any more children. Even so, I was met with disbelief. My doctor somehow managed to talk me out of getting the procedure done, saying I was too young and I might change my mind.’”
This is a common thing I’m hearing about vasectomies in the US as well. Physicians are extremely reluctant to perform vasectomies on single men unless those men already have children or are well into their 40s. If they will do the procedure on an unmarried man, the releases those guys have to sign are ridiculous. Most physicians will not snip single men under 40. They absolutely will not snip married men unless the wives consent in writing. (I have no idea if physicians will sterilize married women without a husband’s consent.) The rationale for not snipping men under 40 is that these men will regret having the procedure, they want to be dads, and so they have to have the procedure reversed and it’s a difficult procedure that doesn’t always work.
The issue is: If a man, single, under 40, wants to get a vasectomy, there is no reason why he should not be able to get one, and there is no reason the procedure shouldn’t be widely available. (Leave aside objections to contraception- talking practically and politically here, not about religious prohibitions). It shouldn’t be dependent on a woman’s permission and it shouldn’t be driven by concerns that he doesn’t really know what he wants, and that he’ll end up wanting to be a father.
It’s all feminine imperative to me.
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/05/27/hamptons-bachelors-are-getting-vasectomies-so-golddiggers-cant-trap-them/amp/
They’ve had the reproductive control ever since the pill came out…and many have used it to manipulate men. If men level that playing field it’s one less thing they have. Besides almost every woman has ‘baby rabies’…some just brainwash themselves into thinking they are the career type until they go into a panic in their 30s and try to manipulate any man into making them a mother.
If you make vasectomies widely available (especially to young males), you will only get more of the same we have now, in addition to having a problem with generations being smaller than the one’s that came before. If you want to encourage men to sleep with as many women as they can without much material consequence, then make vasectomies widely available. All it will do is exacerbate the problem we have now. There are plenty of practical reasons that vasectomies should not be available, in addition to the already sufficient moral reasons that they should not be available.
Regarding sterilization (vasectomy, tubal ligation), there have been numerous federal court rulings against spousal consent laws.
Some hospitals still have policies against performing the procedure without the signed consent of both spouses. Publicly owned hospitals are NOT legally allowed to maintain such a policy.
But private hospitals are.
Despite the ILLEGALITY of spousal consent policies at public hospitals, doctors may still refuse to perform the procedure, especially if the woman or man requesting it is young or has not yet had children.
In one of the most communist states in the union, California, state law requires that you be at least 18 years old and have a mandatory waiting period of 72 hours after you sign your consent form for sterilization (vasectomy). Then the procedure is scheduled. No spousal consent required.
This is fair it seems to me since there is spousal consent required for tubal ligation nor for abortions for that matter. I think a vasectomy and tubal ligation is infinitely better than abortion.
TimFinnegan:
OK, then we will need to eradicate or limit the availability of all other forms of contraception as well, not just condoms and vasectomies.
How we’re going to do that in light of Griswold v Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird, I don’t know.
If you want to encourage men to sleep with as many women as they can without much material consequence
Men don’t need to be encouraged to sleep with as many women as possible. It’s in their very nature to want that anyway, snipped or not.
What you’re ignoring is that it is very difficult for most men to get even ONE woman to sleep with them, snipped or not, because most men are not attractive enough to attract multiple women to sleep with them. most men are lucky to get a wife to sleep with them.
Agreed that it would make the problem worse…women have had a 50 year head start directly trying to divorce sex from procreation with contraception. I’d propose the reverse option…ban contraceptives to women.
constrained:
Yes, it’s basically illegal to require spousal consent for sterilization. But physicians usually require spousal consent for vasectomies because (1) they don’t want to get sued by a pissed off wife because her husband got snipped without her OK; and (2) they want wives to understand there’s a small failure rate and there’s a chance she could still get pregnant and they want that fully and completely disclosed so wife can’t come back later and say “you didn’t tell me about that small risk so you screwed up now pay me millions of dollars in damages”.
Yes, we should. Do you think that this being something beneficial is an argument that making these things even more widely available to and widely used by young men will help the problem? Or are you just despairing?
If this is true, then why do vasectomies need to be widely available? If most men aren’t having sex anyways then why would they need a vasectomy?
@Earl
You don’t need to add “to women.” Men should be prohibited from obtaining and using contraceptives and sterilization procedures as well.
Do you think that this being something beneficial is an argument that making these things even more widely available to and widely used by young men will help the problem? Or are you just despairing?
I don’t think making contraception widely available helps the problem. I think if we really want to get a hold on the problem we need to outlaw contraception and abortion. At the very least, we need to return to pre-Griswold and let the states regulate contraception, and not make what people do with their genitals a matter of constitutional dimension. The lawyer in me often reverts to legal concepts, which often cause me to ignore or downplay the moral ones.
If this is true, then why do vasectomies need to be widely available? If most men aren’t having sex anyways then why would they need a vasectomy?
Because under our current constitutional framework, restricting male sterilization while not restricting female sterilization is unfair and is sex discrimination which is all kinds of illegal.
But outlawing contraception and abortion would go a long, long way toward getting a handle on the problem. Kind of like how Trump wanted to institute the travel ban right away. To help get a hold of the problem, and at least stanch the flow. To get the problem under control and stop the hemorrhaging.
It’s not just a moral problem though; it’s a practical one. All wide spread use of vasectomies would do is make contraception be one less thing women have to worry about when being promiscuous. No longer do women have to take the pill, since the guy they will be sleeping with is snipped. Almost nothing will change except that the burden of contraception will move from the women to the men, and the men will have done so voluntarily.
I would be really surprised if hysterectomies were widely available to young women while vasectomies are not.
I do agree some of the reason why these guys are doing it is because women lie about being on the pill and are trying to get their meal ticket. Now the reasonable course of action should be to not fornicate with these women…but some guys will take drastic measure to continue their casual-sexathon.
We should just ban contraception and abortion outright. Takes the manipulation factor out of it because we go back to the way things really are, sex and procreation are tied together.
@thedeti
You are correct. Urologists are the doctors performing vasectomies in 90% of all cases.
There is an entire legal industry of “injury lawyers” focused on suing the crap out of urologists for both failed and successful urologists and a laundry list of other mishaps. Hence the incredible number of consent forms or outright refusals to perform the procedure. Added to the problem is that there are only 12,000 licensed urologists in the United States, for example, and not all of them will perform such surgeries.
Also, for those who haven’t seen the vasectomy consent form, note this example where wife’s approval is required (Mother may I?): http://www.ironwoodfp.com/pdfs/Vasectomy%20Consent%20Form.pdf
You will never see this for an abortion, hysterectomy or tubal ligation procedure.
Anecdotally: an acquaintance of mine had a friend with limited benefits (which did not include as you will see sexual intercourse). She lived with another guy, and although only aged about thirty and childless had had her ovaries removed. She must have been crazy (their being no risk of pregnancy should she have engaged in sexual intercourse) as she subsequently accused my acquaintance of attempted Rape when he tried to improve on his eunuch-like position of warm-blooded digital dildo.
Can it be said that my acquaintance was effectively being friend zoned?
Women have complete control over reproductive rights at the moment. Barring some act of banning all forms of contraceptives, this is the only way that restores the balance in men’s favour, whilst also reducing the out of wedlock birthrates to boot, a positive. It also stops ‘oops I’m pregnant’ traps. Once again, family planning is done according to the man’s schedule and not the woman’s.
You’re arguing over dead meat here, the cat is already out the bag. Worrying about trying to fix the mess that Western Civ is in, is just applying pressure to single wound when the patient has several others spewing blood every which way. It’s done, now all you can do is stem the flow as best you can and rebuild later. Restoring male control does much to stem the flow.
Increased sterilization doesn’t “restore male control.” It’s not like contraception is unavailable to men. All wide-spread vasectomies will do is make the problem we have worse; more licentiousness, more promiscuity, more broken families, etc. More contraception and sterilization will not lower out of wedlock birthrates; its the same lie we were told when the pill came on the scene. There is no practical upside to widespread availability of vasectomies, it will just encourage the same problems we have now.
@feministhater
If and once high-efficacy male contraceptives are released to the market (e.g. Vasalgel, est. 2018 or 2019), we will be living in very interesting times indeed. The proverbial reproductive control shoe would be on the other foot.
It would be entirely possible for a bachelor to acquire such contraceptive protection and control at an early age of his life (18?), before he is most sexual active with highly fertile female mates. Further, for the first time he would be bestowed with the personal prerogative and power to never disclose his “protected status” to his future sexual partners….or *gasp* even to his eventual spouse.
The financial, legal and social blackmail associated with “oops, I forgot” pregnancy “accidents” would become a thing of the past.
So how would women then respond?
Not too differently I suspect.
Under such a new and comparatively warped field of play I would expect women to invest less and less of their precious time and effort with “unproductive” male suitors (men with whom they cannot conceive regardless of his consent), and to rather invest emotionally and sexually in quick bursts and then to divest just as quickly in order to move on.
I don’t know.
Today women age 18 to 28 effectively rule out marriage and childbearing for the most part.
It’s not until 29 that she wakes up, gets scared and agrees to dismount.
Women enjoy a massive cultural safety net when it all goes south (sisterhood, state funds, divorce, custody laws, child support, alimony).
If you take those possibilities and eventualities away from women and place all of the control of reproduction over to men, and the attitudes of women toward men, long-term relationships, sex and family would almost certainly change. Might women come to distrust and resent men even more then they obviously do now? I think the answer is a categorical yes, and with a long train of scorn and retributive behavior to boot.
One thing is for sure. Her evolutionary sexual opportunism would ever change. It would probably be enhanced under that environment and uncertainty.
Via Instapundit:
https://www.thecut.com/2017/09/what-happens-to-ambition-in-your-30s.html
Now, “there’s no vision,” one woman said to me. “Nothing solid,” said another. Limp, desperate, they fantasize about quitting their good jobs and moving home to Michigan. They murmur about purpose, about the concrete satisfactions of baking a loaf of bread or watching a garden grow. One young woman I know dreams about leaving her consulting job, which takes her to Dubai and Prague, to move back home and raise a bunch of kids.
P.S. It’s still basically men’s fault.
They’ve done everything to try and be like a man and are still mad they aren’t men because they are women. So it must be men’s fault.
It’s really not that hard to figure out…why be unhappy that you can’t have the fried ice. It doesn’t exist.
Bettina Arndt began her working life as, from what I can tell (and correct me if I’m wrong), a legitimate sex therapist (that’s distinct from a prostitute!). She then began writing for Australia’s Fairfax Press. She was an ardent feminist throughout the 1990s. Toward the turn of the millennium, she wrote a series of articles whose underlying theme was, ”when do women’s problems stop being men’s fault and start being their own?” It was a red-pill transition for her.
She then reinvented herself as a men’s advocate, and received the full wrath of the Feminist establishment.
I hated Arndt the feminist. Now, she gives me hope.
Mark
Yup just east of the base. Lots of horse country here.
Started by helping few people from my trail club doing hay this year between the rains.
Then a few horse women had trees fall on their fences after all the storms. Helped a few friends out but when ones I didnt know called I said pay me what its worth.
Lots of country houses out here. Big house on 1-10 acres ten to twenty klicks from town. Big trees dropping limbs, lots of fences, old wells, old septics. Hubby worked in town, wifey played with antiques or horse, got bored, got the house in frivorce. Service firms dont like coming out this far, farmers hate the “fancy bitches” and the city boyfriends couldn’t prime as well or check the ground on an electric fence to save their lives.
Its too easy. But I always take precautions. No work inside the house. Mrs H usually drops buy or picks me up just to maked it clear. Most of these are 40-55 year olds.
Best part is they all say to Mrs H variations of “He is so handy, must be nice to have him.” And she says “yup, got him 30 years ago at 23 and held on to him.”
The fuming nails of hatred and regret they shoot silently is hilarious.
And then I give them the bill.
Hi Dalrock, I hope I did the hyperlink correctly. The article is from 2 days ago.
<a href=”http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4859098/confessions-reveal-troubling-battle-sexes.html
Here it is again. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4859098/confessions-reveal-troubling-battle-sexes.html
Have fun 😂
Provider Game has always been easy. Divorced and dropped on my head into Bill Clinton’s Washington in 1992 as a phone/tech guy, I was single/divorced with two motorcycles, a condo, cars, lots of money to spend and I could play the “provider” easily with Washington’s over-educated single career women. Many of them Jeeee-Ewwws. They were all channeling their inner Monica Lewinski back then. Signaling provider made these women, every one a Mary Jane Rotten-Crotch, drop their pretty pink panties in time for the second date. So, I’d pretend-provider for a week or two or a month, get tired of them (mostly because I’d met another one at this or that think tank or Jewish lobby I was fixing phones for back then) and quit answering, quit calling. It went on for twenty years and it only gets better. I’m 60 now. If you think the late-20’s and 30’s chicks are desperate to blow-job a man into marital bliss, you should meet the women in their 40’s and 50’s.
And still, I play make-believe, I do with them what I will, get tired of their technique, quit calling, quit answering and all because I met new ones. There is always another right around the corner. I know, I know, I’m going to burn in hell, but dammit, these women write the rules. Nice guys finish last, especially in the ways of pussy. Would I like to go roses, dinner out and romantic “love-making”? Of course, but if I did, they’d cheat on me. Women are crunts. And they go full-on crunt with nice guys and de vote themselves for life, to cads like me. Forgive me Lord, but YOU made them that way: you made ME to handle them.
It’s not a battle of the sexes, BTW, we all know what it is: convenience. Women might complain, but THEY make the rules. Maybe what they’re bitching about is not enough men understand what the rules are. Screw the women, go away, give them something to complain about later. It’s the only way I can figure it. Anyone have a better explanation?
Barring a catastrophe to current technologies, we may end up with a future of socially promoted and protected executives taking out their frustrations on men trying to make livings while being unable to move up the ladder. Self sufficiency being the only escape from that hell.
Sure.
After already having a couple of approved comments in this very thread, my comment to negotiate about moderation is awaiting moderation.
There must be a feminist at WordPress that added some code that says “if (poster==greenlander) ThisMessage.SendToModeration();”
Women control the pill and they’re the ones who use it to control when they have children. That’s the funny thing, there is no ‘oops pregnancy’ without the woman knowing of it. Thus by giving men control of their reproduction will indeed decrease out of wedlock births. It doesn’t work for women because women use children as a means to force child support and other welfare benefits out of the husband and the state. Simply put, it doesn’t work for women because women don’t want it to work, duh. Men don’t have these luxuries and thus have no benefit for using them to further increase the welfare state. The only benefit men get from their own forms of birth control is control over their own reproduction. It might increase family formation as women will now have to negotiate with men and never know whether a man is on birth control or not. Their power….. pffffffht gone…!
The only contraceptives available to men are vasectomies, condoms and abstinence. That’s it. Condoms have a failure rate, they can be messed with, punctured and stolen. Abstinence works though, I’ll give you that. However, most men are not going to be abstinent in the now or in the future. As I said, the cats out the bag already. You cannot stop the decline. You can only prepare for the future and stem the tide so that the decline is manageable. It decreases the power women hold over men in society and that alone stems the tide and gives men back some control and ability to manage their own life affairs.
You’re worried about men having more control over their lives, you’re worried that we’ll just get more promiscuity. I get it but it doesn’t matter. If society will not control and restrict women, men will find another way. If society crumbles, don’t care.
Anon,
I would agree with that.
Fred,
I think I messed up a close blockquote there. Hopefully it still makes sense.
I didn’t see this posted here, so I thought I’d share it:
BillyS: It is called the curse on Eve. Read the first part of Genesis, around the time of The Fall. The curse was that she would want to rule over her husband.
Is that the correct interpretation? It seems to me that “in pain you shall bear your children” yet “your desire shall be for your husband” means that Eve will still want sex, though it leads to a painful childbirth.
The same phrase for desire is used when Cain was told that sin desired him. Sin wanted to rule him, just as a wife has a sinful tendency to want to rule over her husband.
There’s a translation that says ‘desire to control’. It makes sense because the next sentence is the husband will rule her.
I always took that as she’ll have authority over her children (which is also addressed later in Scripture)…which will be painful for her (starting with childbirth), yet her desire will be to have authority over her husband. But keep in mind I’m a 10 cent theologian.
Ah the old Adam excuse. Blaming God for your sins.
Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.
https://www.reddit.com/live/zkadef2ttzql
The pill also has a failure rate. No method of contraception is one-hundred percent effective and even vasectomies have a failure rate. It’s also not like women can’t legitimately forget to take the pill either (yes I know that it can and is also done on purpose). Ever forgotten to take your antibiotics?
This isn’t the case; vasectomies have a failure rate. All it means is that both the men and the women will be playing dice with their reproduction. They’ll have no control whatsoever unless they can control themselves.
No it doesn’t. The fact that a vasectomy is even needed shows that women have something that men can’t live without, and men are willing to mutilate themselves through surgery in order to obtain it.
Contraception and sterilization got us in this mess. Contraception and sterilization will not get us out. It’s not a solution, it won’t make things better, it doesn’t actually give men control that they couldn’t otherwise have, it just gives us more of the same.
BillyS:
I’m not blaming men for women’s failures. I’m saying that encouraging men to indulge in those same failures is a bad idea. It won’t help the problem, it will just make things worse.
Of course not, but her quote is the best known by far, which is why I used it. The fact that she said it does not make it untrue. And she was talking about the welfare state and not Stalinist/Maoist/etc. communism.
I also noticed that you didn’t offer a comparable quote from someone else.
It disturbs me when people say things like: “I’m probably going to hell”. I think the best response is: Then why aren’t you doing something about that? It reminds me of the morbidly obese who claim that they can’t help it. It takes willpower and commitment, but you can do something about it.
As we are told by our Lord Himself, the gate is wide and road to destruction is broad and many enter through it.
Nope, quite the opposite actually:
http://time.com/3584827/pew-marriage-divorce-remarriage/
Here’s something you don’t see every day: http://time.com/4934812/woman-chose-baby-instead-chemotherapy-dies/
A Michigan woman who sacrificed the chance to prolong her life in order to give birth to her sixth child has died. …
Doctors removed Carrie DeKlyen’s feeding and breathing tubes on Thursday, a day after she gave birth to her daughter Life Lynn DeKlyen. The mother chose to forgo chemotherapy to treat her brain cancer, since it would have meant ending her pregnancy.
A month ago was at a house party of a friend of a friend type of thing……..the crowd was a “forties / late thirties” bunch of folks. Men and women. A few married couples. Everyone else was single. Probably around 30 people.
All the guys were in the living room watching TV with sound off, music playing, convos meandering from work, church, hobbies, working on the car / truck…..what we were saving for…..some light razzing.
The women were all in the dining room around the table cackling and clucking about what’s bothering them at the moment…..all hovering around the box of wine……so I come in to get a Pepsi……..and one of the women who probably was once slender, and probably a head-turner ten years ago is now a bit heavy set steps in front of me, introduces herself. I just smile, polite exchange……..and she immediately asks what I do. I tell her, she says “wow, a guy who actually helps people” and then she asks if I went to college. I tell her I did, back in New England…she gets all snide “educated too, what are the odds of that.”
I just replied “odds are that you wouldn’t have noticed ten years ago” and I cracked open my Pepsi, took a gulp and went back to the living room. I heard her say to her clatch of friends as I was leaving “Guys don’t pay attention to me anymore…..they all want a stupid young girl”
and the chorus of all the equally past their prime women were in agreement with her…..
BillyS:Addressed the entire crew. My analysis of your reply is that you’re a guy that if you ever got a piece of ass, you married the first one because there would never be another. Convenient to be so pious, so NOBLE about single females of the feminist, promiscuous persuasion when you can’t get one. They prefer you defile them, they hate pedestals, they want what they want. Until they’re thirty-five, THEN they get noble about their own situation and along comes a sap like you to marry them up after 300 sexual encounters. By then, she’s had a couple of abortions, logged 20 years on hormonal birth control, had a dozen or more STD’s treated, from chlamydia to warts removed from her cervix. She’s experimented with Blacks, anal sex, drugs and likely is a drinker. From all this, her womb is a toxic stew, yet we’re supposed to marry THAT? I’ll wade in it, wouldn’t suggest you drink from it or marry it. But you certainly are a noble fellow, defending these damsels. Do tell, did you marry one of these?
Personally I would think marrying or fornicating in a toxic stew are both bad options that eventually cut down a man. Why would you want to attract one?
Jim C – Billy isn’t suggesting any of what you said. My understanding of what he said that that just because they are willing, it doesn’t mean you should defile yourself.
You make a good point for steering clear of toxic and diseased women, yet by your own claim, you pump and dump them. Also, I wouldn’t joke about going to Hell. Over lunch a few months ago a coworker made a positive remark about the old Billy Joel song, the one where he says that he “would rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints”. My reply was “no one is laughing in Hell”
Dear Jim Christian:
Billy is a generation or two older than I am (and, I’m assuming, you too). He’s not a friend of mine; and, like you, I think he’s wrong about many things, but he’s a genuinely decent fellow who tries to live an ethical life.
He married a woman who was probably not a ho’. She was probably a virginal young girl who turned into a typical spoiled and entitled American woman after a few years. She just took him to the divorce court, after he busted ass for her his entire adult life. In the interim, he raised up several kids, some of them adopted.
Whether we agree with these men or not, we should respect them, as they pay the bills and keep the society running, for us, who sit poolside.
Regards,
Boxer
She was so sad that you weren’t the thirsty controlled man of her dreams.
Enjoy:
https://americandadweb.wordpress.com/2017/09/09/day-with-the-boys/
one of the women who probably was once slender … now a bit heavy … gets all snide “educated too, what are the odds of that.”
At least her fading looks are compensated by a pleasant personality.
The title is “What women lose the dating Game.”
They don’t lose. They ride the carousel in their 20s, get a beta schlub after that, and then divorce him and get lifetime free income without having to do anything for him. The women that don’t marry after 30, unless ugly, always had this option but didn’t want the free money badly enough.
On the contrast, the bottom 80% of men lose the dating Game. Invisible in their 20s, they either get put through the divorce court grinder, or live under daily threatpoint after that.
Overall, the bottom 80% of men have it worse than women. Hence, if we are to say that women lose the dating game, the premise has to be, like everywhere else, that the bottom 80% of men are invisible.
Women only lose relative to the top men.
Dear Jason & Earl:
Truly hilarious.
On a few different occasions, I’ve seen the penny drop, and wimminz get the panicked look, and I’ve had them ask me “But… but… what about us girls who are over 30? What are we supposed to do?”
I’ve answered these bitches in different ways:
“There are a lot of guys in their 60s and 70s who are single. Some of them are loaded. I’m sure they’ll date you.”
“Not really my problem, bitch.”
“I don’t know. All I know is that you’re too old for me.”
(I’ve enjoyed saying this one to women who are actually younger than I am the most.)
Jason quoted a past-wall twat :
“Guys don’t pay attention to me anymore…..they all want a stupid young girl”
As opposed to an even stupider older female?
The premise that female intelligence increases with age is another great fallacy. Very few women are smart, and this is not indexed to age. The fact that so many post-55 women lumber over here and write page-length comments as one paragraph is evidence of this.
Anon sez:
Another easily visible piece of evidence can be seen in the attitudes that young men have toward women. I take pride in my casual misogyny, but even I am shocked by the attitudes prevalent among the younger brothers (who I’m paid to interact with daily). Young men hate women, with the strongest and most white-hot hatred — beginning with their empowered ho’ mothers, and extending to the big sisters that beat them up since childhood with impunity, and out to the female teachers who raped and molested them all through school, with no fear of prosecution.
If women had an ounce of sense, they would never have set themselves up with a whole generation of deadly, bitter enemies. These whores actually think that this cohort will take care of them in their old age. What a laugh!
Regards,
Boxer
It sounds more like they lose the marriage game once they finally become visible to the 30 year old desperates…either by not getting what’s going on, or giving in too much to their thirst.
If the majority of American women are as horrible as the consensus says they are…perhaps it’s a good thing to be invisible to them.
earl:
Now. Let’s suppose she introduced herself. Let’s suppose she didn’t turn a friendly introduction into into an ” job interview” and let’s suppose she didn’t assume that I was automatically interested in her.
I probably would have chatted with her for a bit. Who knows, we might have exchanged numbers by the end of the evening and decided to meet up in the future. The problem still lies in the fact that women are convinced after they hit the wall….and now are downshifting towards or at forty….that all the guys they rejected, made fun of, ignored, laughed at, and just-wanted-to-be-friends-with are just desperately still “waiting” for the chance to have a date with them. Women over the age of 35 to my age (47) still somehow *think* they are *it* and can compete directly with a 24 year old in the looks department. TV, reality shows, movies, and media have perpetrated this to most women over 35.
The fact is (myself included here) that many of us men did move on. Many of us did indeed see our own faults when we were younger (desperation / pedestal behavior, etc). Many of us did find fulfillment in Christ, and quietly worked on ourselves socially, physically and mentally without expecting applause, gold-stars or an ugly entitlement. Most of us found out that life is indeed short and has zero guarantees. Life went on, and for the better I might add for a good many of us.
I am not painting myself as some “in demand” and “studly” but I have been noticed more, approached more, flirted with more now at my age by women in the 35-45 age bracket in the past few years than in the period from the age of 19-40. All the women who have done this are desperate, and they look now like I probably did in my college years and most of my twenties when I was behaving this way.
I’m 35 closing in on 36…and I can tell you I’m approaching that point too. Women also have the nutty idea that men stay in the 20 year old desperate I need a woman phase their whole life…that when they are finally ready at 35 they’ll have plenty of options available to them. I’d say the majority of men once they hit some point in their 30s without getting married or having a divorce under their belt and facing pretty much nothing but rejection do eventually shift their priorities…be it Christ, hobbies, or sitting poolside. Women overplayed their hand by waiting too long.
On the contrast, the bottom 80% of men lose the dating Game. Invisible in their 20s, they either get put through the divorce court grinder, or live under daily threatpoint after that.
No. Some of us are invisible in our 20s, and remain unmarried throughout our lives. In my case, I had very high (unrealistic) blue pill standards for a wife. I wanted a wife who was pedestal worthy. I was never thirsty enough to pedestalize women who were fat, tattooed, foul-mouthed, angry, heavy drinkers, deceitful, whiny, etc.
Well dehumanizing the ones who make your lives better for the most part does have consequences.
And I’d add single mothers….Yeah that’s a another level of delusion I just can’t understand.
The premise that female intelligence increases with age is another great fallacy. Very few women are smart, and this is not indexed to age.
Women claim that that witch derives from wise woman. And that the pagan symbol of the Crone is a symbol of the Elderly Wise Woman.
Women university “scholars” claim that the wise women of medieval villages were called witches. These witches were healers and advisors. They had great wisdom as to herbal cures, etc., and would advise people on who to marry, etc.
The Christian patriarchs, the bishops and priests, were jealous of these pagan wise women, so the Christian patriarchs condemned these wise women of witchcraft and burned them.
This myth (which is actually thought as history in universities) has seeped into popular culture. Hollywood is always featuring wise women/witches who are persecuted by jealous patriarchs. The TV series Penny Dreadful featured a witch burning in the English countryside, altough the series is set in the late 1800s. The X-Files had Mulder lecturing Scully on how Wicca is a peaceful form of nature worship. Buffy the Vampire Slayer had a young Wiccan lesbian couple.
Lots of feminist/witchcraft/Goddess worship propaganda in the media.
Always funny!
Boxer,
Another easily visible piece of evidence can be seen in the attitudes that young men have toward women. I take pride in my casual misogyny, but even I am shocked by the attitudes prevalent among the younger brothers (who I’m paid to interact with daily). Young men hate women, with the strongest and most white-hot hatred —
I sincerely hope this is true. I am not seeing it myself, and continue to be frustrated at how few men are red pill. Most will remain blue pill until the bitter end. As evidence : even the over-the-top blue pill Jim Gay-ratty ‘Ward Cleaver is a Stud’ video has 4 times as many upvotes as downvotes.
If younger men really are red pill (which is quite different from hating women – I don’t hate women, but I refuse to respect/overvalue them), then that is great.
Is your sample size pre-selected in some way (I don’t know what you do for a living)? How broad is this among the general population of young men?
That is the old narrative.
Younger men are more red pill than ever. I see it with my son and his circle of friends. They might occasionally date, but don’t have girlfriends, don’t cohabitate and instead are focusing on themselves both career wise and personally My son works out and I am envious of him as I never looked that good, of course I married young and didn’t hit the gym. They fully understand the carousel and the perils of marriage and having children.
Would I be happier if my son found a worthy women to marry? Of course I would be. But judging from the marketplace, just about any woman he would marry would have a high N count and be a terrible wife, and he knows it.
Are there still chumps who will marry the carousel riders? Of course there are. But with every day that passes, it gets harder and harder for the women to stick the landing. Jason’s anecdote clearly illustrates that. Unless she is a looker, most women in their mid thirties are done. I have seen this in my own family. A female relative, who in my opinion was a looker until her mid thirties, was unable to stick the landing. She said that there were some guys who were interested, but that they were all some combination of older than her, too short, too fat, too bald, too etc. She is now a cat lady.
Keep in mind that many of his viewers are Churchian betas, who are in process of becoming an endangered species. And I’ll bet that a lot of those upvotes are from women. I wouldn’t put too much stock in that video.
70%+ on men under 35 are unmarried. That, in my opinion, is far more significant.
Hardly surprising, given that the media is at war with Christendom and white men in general.
Some weeks ago I wanted to watch Wimbledon, but I needed some form of cable to watch it, so I signed up with Sling. After Wimbledon was done I still had some time left on the subscription, which is monthly. So I decided to try to see if there was anything else worth watching. I quickly concluded in the negative and cancelled my subscription.
You can practically smell the desperation, as she now understands that no one “acceptable” is even mildly interested in her, and that sticking the landing probably isn’t going to happen. Also interesting that the party was well stocked of clones of herself, who no doubt told her that she’s awesome and that she’ll find the right guy, she just needs to be patient.
What I have told women in that situation is “I hope that having had ‘your fun’ was worth it.”
Yup.
There’s a reason why Churchian “pastors” like Driscoll and his ilk are thundering at the few betas left in their churches to man up and marry the sluts. Even those losers are figuring out that it’s a raw deal.
Witch invited to deliver invocation in Iowa state house.
Goddess worship is spreading throughout the U.S. All non-Christian religions are uniting against the evil white Christian patriarchy.
Most Wiccans I’ve come across are obese, full of piercings and tattoos, have fluorescent, day-glo colored hair, and are often single mothers.
They are economically and politically weak. But as with gays and trannies, Wiccans are being used as yet another club to beat down Christian influence in America.
Also interesting that the party was well stocked of clones of herself, who no doubt told her that she’s awesome and that she’ll find the right guy, she just needs to be patient.
They tell each other they’re awesome. Yet the ones without men are secretly happy their sisters are also without men. If any one of them did land a great guy (rich, handsome, alpha), the others would be livid with jealousy, and set about sabotaging her relationship.
Frank K,
Even those losers are figuring out that it’s a raw deal.
I hope so. Like I said, the cartoonishly blue pill ‘Ward Cleaver is a Stud’ video has 4 times as many upvotes as downvotes. Even if the upvoters are Churchian betas and a few women, the entire androsphere went there to downvote it, but just didn’t have the numbers.
70%+ on men under 35 are unmarried. That, in my opinion, is far more significant.
Well, since ‘men’ are all males above 18, I think that the number was 40% even in the 1950s. So it has risen from 40% to 70%. Plus, this is probably driven by women. The men want to marry, but are in limbo until the sluts are done with the carousel..
Alas, I still think there is too little red-pill diffusion. Some men have a partial clue, but still. Just above, someone said that any decent-looking single mother still gets all sorts of home maintenance and free rides to the airport from church cuckservatives.
There was an article that pointed this fact out when it came to the dating landscape…women control sexual access, but men control marital access. Sure it can be very easy for them to rack up the N’s with cads or studs…however their pool of men who want to marry them continues to dry up and their chances of marriage continue to go down the longer they wait. That’s pretty much the thing we still have…and why they need all the shaming and blaming articles/pastors continue hoping men are browbeaten into getting married to woman who aren’t marriage material. And some women still think they can just reject men…and even good men…they aren’t interested in all through their 20s thinking their dreamboat will come to marry them when they are tired of partying and traveling at 35.
Oh, I don’t think so.
Anecdote:
When I was a kid growing up in the 1960’s in Orange County, southern California, one of our neighbors was a single guy. He drove a European convertible and wore a sports coat, at least whenever I saw him come or go.
All of us kids on the street were told by our parents to steer clear of that house. He was considered suspecious simply for being single. And this was in forward looking California. I can only imagine how he would have been received in flyover.
My parents weren’t even 20 when they married, and I believe that was the same in most the neighborhood. Maybe the college grads were a little older when they tied the knot.
Uh … maybe the “androsphere” can’t be bothered to watch that video and downvote it?
We have no idea of the breakdown of upvotes. And to be honest, I don’t care. It’s a microcosm, a cultural ghetto, and is irrelevant. Just as irrelevant as the Seventh Day Adventists, who constantly send me flyers to come and learn about the imminent end times.
@Boxer
Sure it can be very easy for them to rack up the N’s with cads or studs…however their pool of men who want to marry them continues to dry up and their chances of marriage continue to go down the longer they wait.
They conflate SMV with MMV. When they are young and surrounded by suitors, they think every man interested in them is potentially interested in marrying them (if things go well). They don’t realize that 90% of men who approach them only want to have sex and have decided not to marry them beforehand.
(This is projection. A young woman will rarely have sex with a man who has discarded as a husband. If he’s not attractive for marriage, he’s not attractive for sex)
So they approach dating with a mentality of false abundance. They see a lot of potential husbands in all the men that are surrounding them. So how to decide between all these men who want to date them? Logically, they choose the hottest men (the alpha ones with high MMV), which are the least interested in marriage. If you were surrounded by men wanting to marry you, who would you choose?
Then the relationship with alphas don’t work out. They wonder why. They don’t realize that the alphas’ MMV is higher than theirs. “If this is so, why do they have sex with me?” (see projection, above and conflating SMV with MMV). So they try again with other alpha, thinking this time it will work out. This is the cause of the carousel.
In their 30’s, they still have lots of men interested in them so they don’t see the wall and they don’t see their chances of marrying getting smaller and smaller.
This has some stats on it…it compares 1960 to 2010. What you’ll notice the biggest drop of currently married (almost by half) is the 25-34 range…when women start to panic finding a husband. Even as you get older the percentages are dropping. So they can ride the carousel…but I think more men are wising up to not giving the sluts the golden parachute.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-s-adults-are-married-a-record-low/
I think the flipside is they think they can hook/manipulate these type of men into marriage through sex (or even an ‘oops’ pregnancy)….because they have no other discernible marital skills like running a house, cooking, experience with children, feminine, etc. That sexual manipulation might work with the thirsty ones…but it doesn’t work with those who never intend to marry. Men still have the power to initiate, create, propose a marriage.
RE: Is gluttony a sin?
It’s enough of a sin that it’s presented as evidence to stone someone to death in Deuteronomy. Every scripture that mentions gluttony does so negatively. Then there is the emphasis on self control (a fruit of the Spirit), disciplining the flesh, and fasting throughout the Bible. Yeah, I’d say it’s a sin.
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=glutton&qs_version=NIV
OT: This one has “wife and mother material” written all over her! What a catch!
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/09/john-boch/vaginal-concealed-carry-earns-missouri-woman-additional-felony-charge-in-illinois/
Heck sometimes even the ones who have a man try to sabotage their sisters into breaking up or not having a man.
Red Pill Latecomer @ 1:47 pm:
“Witch invited to deliver invocation in Iowa state house.”
I wan’t expecting actual witchcraft to go mainstream until the Collapse hit and women stopped getting resources from the State. Ah, well. All roads were leading in that direction anyway.
…
Frank K @ 2:27 pm:
“Just as irrelevant as the Seventh Day Adventists, who constantly send me flyers to come and learn about the imminent end times.”
I doubt they can handle the truth.
earl:
hence why MGTOW has grown into such a varied movement of sorts. A large swath of men see their last and only “dollar poker chip” left just happens to be and have the power of initiating marriage, pursuing a date, getting to “know” a woman for future potentials….and sure, society at large views it as only “a dollar poker chip” but that chip now tilts the whole game to call the bet, or for the man to “fold” and think “better hold on to that”
The fact that this “passive resistance” doesn’t involve marches. Doesn’t involve legislation, and it doesn’t need other mens approval for it to work is the fact of why the passive-aggressiveness from commentators on the news, women’s groups, and shaming will only intensify. The pastors from the pulpits will continue to see the shrinking pool of men in the pews.
Men don’t go where they are not needed.
They don’t lose. They ride the carousel in their 20s, get a beta schlub after that, and then divorce him and get lifetime free income without having to do anything for him. The women that don’t marry after 30, unless ugly, always had this option but didn’t want the free money badly enough.
Exactly this, in my experience and observation with the higher educated (think professional school degrees) women over the past 25 years. Any one of them that really wanted to be married is married (or was). The ones who never married? Either not marriageable due to looks or personality, or they are the ones who are exceptionally picky, even as they pass 35, and they never adjust that (claiming they prefer to stick to their standards out of self-respect than marry a man who is too old/bald/fat/short/boring/etc.). Singlehood among this set of women is either due to lack of attractiveness (which can be fixed in most cases) or by choice — it isn’t involuntary.
However I think the trend being pointed out is recently the women around 30-35 who do want to be married to the unsuspecting beta schlub are having fewer options because men are starting to wise up and realize the only real chip they have. Certainly 25 years ago they had plenty of options…it was probably the case even up to 10 years ago…but now we are beginning to see the the tide turn when it comes to the never married 30-39 year old women percentages going up.
Nothing new here .. to us anyway.
http://nypost.com/2017/09/02/cheap-sex-is-making-men-give-up-on-marriage/
honeycomb
Nothing new here .. to us anyway.
That’s a stupid article, and Regnarus is really stupid to write a book that conflates “masturbating to porn” with “picking up women in clubs” in the category of ‘easy sex’. If I recall correctly that is a category error.
Junk thought like this sells well with the ignorant, stupid and foolish. It’s not going to help get truth out at all. Exactly the opposite, in fact, we’ll have to argue with tradcons and other conservative feminists who will parrot this stupid, ignorant line.
@Novaseeker +1
and yet women of an age old enough to once have been labelled spinster (that is to say 38) can confidently say or imply that they are merely waiting for Mr Right and with the implied condemnation of those other women who are married or worse married but now divorced that they settled too soon i.e. are hardly better than sluts. Our corporate spinster is neither so gullible or desperate. She thus seeks the moral high-ground backed-up by her corporate-boasting of a high-flying job and travel to distant places, thus living an exciting life where the possibility of meeting Mr Big is just a commuter jet-hop away.
There may also of course be fear for they do not want – at their age – to marry only to quickly file for Divorce. The risk of a massive drop in status by getting it wrong would thus reveal them to be no better than the women she looks down on. It is a risk too far. Even if the marriage goes well she would also be taking a massive status drop in marrying someone ranked professionally lower than her. In short: she prices herself out of the market.
Tim,
How many men who would give into sex outside marriage are not doing so now? You assume a bunch aren’t just because of their inability to have a vasectomy. That is a dubious claim.
Most are locked out of that area because they aren’t attractive enough, not because they don’t have a vasectomy. Keep in mind as well that STDs would still pass even with being snipped, so that deterrent remains. You are worried about very few, if any, men.
Frank,
They don’t really believe in hell and/or they have no concept about how bad it is. They wouldn’t be so flippant if they did.
Jim,
Nice attempt to try and move the goalposts. I proudly note I was a virgin when I married. I probably could have been otherwise if I had more game and a desire to do otherwise, but God kept me. I didn’t marry the type of woman you noted, though she had her own problems.
I am clean before God and can live with that for eternity. Can you?
RPL,
I would almost trade “good looking” for “good attitude” if that were a valid thing to try, but it unfortunately is not. Really sad for our modern society!
@Anonymous Reader
Category Mistake as effortlessly expounded by Gilbert Ryle in The Concept of Mind. Always loved that as it is such a great argument winner as it pulls the ground away from under ones opponent’s feet.
Dear Anon:
That’s a good point. It’s not red pill stuff they talk. They couldn’t be bothered to read Dalrock, Heartiste or Return of Kings. If they were red pill, they would go through the motions, in order to get what they could out of the sexual marketplace.
These kids hate women, casually, openly, and with an unhealthy intensity. It’s in the lyrics of the raps they produce, and in their comments daily.
A couple of days ago I overheard a conversation between a young man and a young woman, in which the latter was told “I don’t love you hoes,” before the young men within earshot started boisterously laughing, as the girl started shouting. This sort of thing is so common as to be totally unremarkable.
I teach at a large public university.
Best,
Boxer
Anonymous Reader on September 9, 2017 at 5:17 pm
honeycomb
Nothing new here .. to us anyway.
That’s a stupid article, and Regnarus is really stupid to write a book that conflates “masturbating to porn” with “picking up women in clubs” in the category of ‘easy sex’. If I recall correctly that is a category error.
Junk thought like this sells well with the ignorant, stupid and foolish. It’s not going to help get truth out at all. Exactly the opposite, in fact, we’ll have to argue with tradcons and other conservative feminists who will parrot this stupid, ignorant line.
What I mean by not news to us is that this how the blue piller / wimminz apologists want to portray us.
I’ll never expect the MSM / surrohates to report accurately or with any true understanding.
They will slander us for not man-ing-up till the cows come home.
Gentlemen, pardon my interruption. The bar is set so low now, that putting a frozen pizza in the oven and turning it on is calling “nailing it.”
These conversations you have here happen in that context and just breaks my heart. Be well.
Dear Mychael:
Thanks for posting this. It entails something quite significant.
In a world with such a profound lack of femininity, it seems that women would adjust their own game accordingly. Note that there is almost no competition for a serious brother who wants a wife and family, so it surprises me that girls who, in the 1950s, would have been considered plain or even unattractive, aren’t scooping up the good earner males in their early 20s, while their shortsighted sisters are carousel hopping.
I think this is happening on the fringes, but it isn’t something that is as common as it ought to be, and I wonder why.
Boxer
Boxer ..
I think this is happening on the fringes, but it isn’t something that is as common as it ought to be, and I wonder why.
We have a couple of family’s at our small church (and networked churches) that have kid’s (both sexes) that meet the traditional category ..
They (parents) home-school and kinda arrange marriages with like minded family’s.
..
..
On another note .. why it doesn’t happen .. because if you aren’t a member of said group you are not thinking about it and your parents aren’t as well. So, by the time you learn the lanscape it’s to late (for children & parents).
And, then you have men like me .. we came about when being a Bachelor no longer had a stigma .. and it has snow-balled.
Plus a lot of men don’t want kids (like me) .. and if you don’t get trapped or married early (which has been a big trend for decades) then you make it to your manhood and better decision making by the time women wise up to trapping you at the end of their window.
I have three younger brothers that had kids .. they wanted them .. their wives were toxic. Two re-married and decided to have no more kids. The other brother that didn’t re-marry wanted more kids but couldn’t find a woman worth it .. no luck.
So .. the arranged (sortta) marriages have all been the best marriages I’ve seen. And, you can thank those parents and kids who knew what worked and made it happen.
Wish someone could get a red-pilled analysis of marriage/divorce/dating trends published as a book, to compete with the stale old socon stuff like that of Regnerus.
Never underestimate their ability to be herd creatures…even to their detriment.
Combine with that…anytime one does try to crawl out of the bucket, she’s going to have a litany of ‘sisters’ and ‘friends’ ridicule her decisions.
Pingback: Desired | Spawny's Space
@Boxer
“”Young men hate women, with the strongest and most white-hot hatred””
Thank you! I have mentioned this SEVERAL times in my comments.Like yourself I talk to a lot of men between the ages of 22 and 30.Usually business advice.But,women advice also comes along in the conversation.The way that these educated,well dressed impressive young men talk about women floors me.They do not refer to them as ladies,women,chics etc. They refer to them as pigs,hos,tramps,holes,whores etc.They literally hate women.They have admitted this to me on several occasions.They treat them worse than garbage.When they “hook-up” with them they are “grudge fucking” them.I can understand them to not like working with them.That is a gimme! I feel the same way and only hire men.But,the things that they tell me on how they treat them just blows my mind.The sad part of it is?….the women let them! They are too stupid to realize that they are being used and abused and treated with utter contempt!
@BiilyS
“”Your business plan will work great until it won’t. Lots of money there for now, but the spigot will eventually run out and income will drop quickly.””
That will never happen! My family and I are Orthodox Jewish.We NEVER lose money and what ever we touch turns to gold!…….Shalom!
@Carlotta
Thanks for the vasectomy article.VERY interesting! The comments were great.I hope everyone reads it.I would like to see a post about this from Mister “D”.
@Jim Christian
“”I could play the “provider” easily with Washington’s over-educated single career women. Many of them Jeeee-Ewwws. They were all channeling their inner Monica Lewinski back then. Signaling provider made these women, every one a Mary Jane Rotten-Crotch, drop their pretty pink panties in time for the second date.””
I love this! You are confirming what I have endlessly posted here about Jewish women………Stay the Hell Away From Them!!!!!……..L*…..I am glad to hear of your experience with them!
settle for the 35 y/o woman when the man is 35
Hahahaha… In whose mind is that EVER going to happen? I’m in my mid-50’s and while I may bed a 30yo on a slow night, they aren’t even in the running for anything longer than a night. Why would any man want to tie himself to any one woman? It’s stupid, there are plenty of women and more coming on-line all the time, so why would any man with a brain want to saddle himself with a woman whose best years were a decade before when he can still nail the sweet young thing that is “out to experience life”?
Unbelievable how strong the denial is with these women… But they will learn eventually, and it’ll be too late… Of course, if the truth be told, it isn’t just about age, it’s about attitude – most American women have an attitude of entitlement, that is a turn off. Sure, I’ll put up with it for a while if they are young, but it gets old fast… Talk about a double whammy… So a 35 yo, is not only 10 years past her prime, she “thinks” she can still command what she did when she was 18… Not happening… But hey, it works in my favor so all in all, I really couldn’t care less…
BillyS: They don’t really believe in hell and/or they have no concept about how bad it is. They wouldn’t be so flippant if they did.
I suppose some people believe in Hell, but can’t believe that God would be so cruel as to put them there. They feel free to sin, because they rely on God’s goodness, mercy, and forgiveness.
They think, yeah, I fornicate, cheat on occasion, petty theft, some other minor stuff. But it’s not like I’m a murderer or a child molester. Nothing serious. Nothing deserving of Hell. God loves me. He’ll forgive.
Yes and that is a turn off no matter what age they are.
That’s a stupid article, and Regnarus is really stupid to write a book that conflates “masturbating to porn” with “picking up women in clubs” in the category of ‘easy sex’. If I recall correctly that is a category error.
I believe there is a point there.
If the ONLY access to food a young man had was to go to a restaurant, then he’d be spending much of his money there (and much of his thinking would be centered around how can he could get money to go to the restaurant). But, easy access to cold cereal and pizza delivery diminish a young man’s desire for a restaurant meal.
Masturbation and one-night-stands provide men with an outlet for their sexual needs. Not an optimal outlet, but enough of one that they are no longer sexually desperate. Which is why women have traditionally ridiculed porn/masturbation and slut-shamed other women. They both lower women’s power over men.
Young men hate women, with the strongest and most white-hot hatred
I suspect the majority of young men will remain blue-pilled, but it doesn’t take a majority to make a change. If only a third of young men become red-pilled (and I think that is a realistic number) then it will have a dramatic impact.
These women cannot be saved from their folly, but they can serve as a warning to younger generations of women of what not to do (the same is true for women who firvorced their husbands, as most end up worse off than they were pre-divorce).
And, it will probably be up to the dads to explain these facts of life to their daughters, as most moms seem to prefer to see their daughters fail in life than to betray the sisterhood.
I used a female relative (who made all the stereotypical mistakes) as a bad example to my daughter, and it seems to have made some impact.
I still see a ‘desperation’ still with younger men. I go dancing to soul / norsoul / Motown music once a month at a small club. It’s a mixed crowd, but I’m probably one of older guys there.
I notice the guys under thirty tend to push hard and fast with the women in a setting like this. Hands all over them. Jokes, and an attitude of “well, if she won’t sleep with me, another one will”
And frankly….I saw this as a young college student myself back in the 1980’s. It seems to work. Plenty of hook-ups going on…and my gentle observations also see fully:
About 20% of the men are hooking up with 80% of the women (or roughly) and these women don’t seem to care one iota. The club scene is a younger guys game, and even when I worked as a bartender in a nightclub it was really silly. The question of what deems an “alpha” crosses my mind too. We hear all the time women want a “leader” and frankly if being able to mack up women in a nightclub makes you an “alpha” or deemed one by women……we’re in bigger trouble than I ever imagined.
If the 80/20 rule is opening beta men’s eyes, a real red pill. I too have talked with some and they are jaded towards women, big time. And it is interesting to see who is getting friend zoned. One younger man of my acquaintance really stands out. He’s 6’2″, white, played American Football in college (tight end, so he isn’t a fatso), is reasonably good looking, but is a little nerdy. He can’t get a date to save his life. He is now in his early 30’s and has pretty much written women off. He says the only attention he gets is from cougars, and not the good looking ones.
Sorry, delete the leading “if” in my previous comment.
Frank K: He’s 6’2″, white, played American Football in college (tight end, so he isn’t a fatso), is reasonably good looking, but is a little nerdy. He can’t get a date to save his life.
That’s pretty shocking. If personal ads are any indication, a youngish, fit, good-looking white guy who’s TALL (not just 6′, but 6’2″) is what every woman, of every race, wants. If he can’t get a date, then modern America women are really picky. What do they want? All that, plus he must be rich, famous, and a thug?
RPL ..
Try this video ..
Tell me what you think of this experiment of a man vs woman on tinder.
Safe for Work .. 2 min long
Or try the direct approach ..
https://www.google.com/amp/elitedaily.com/news/1000-tinder-convos-asking-for-sex/1722398/amp/
ymwv
Not at all unexpected, but interesting to see in action.
I’m 6’4″, go to church, workout frequently, and have a good paying job. I try my best with God’s grace to have a pure heart. I’ve been friendzoned routinely. All that talk women say they want in a man (like height, leadership, stability) is just talk. Thanks to feminism they just want someone they can control…be it sexually or in marriage. Masculine traits for whatever reason are seen as a turnoff…and it’s no wonder the marriage numbers continue to plummet.
I’m tell you guys it’ll get worse before it gets better. Best advice I can give is serve the Lord.
‘Tell me what you think of this experiment of a man vs woman on tinder.’
Not surprising. Despite what Hollywood brainwashing thinks about empowered females….men still mostly initiate…even behind a computer screen.
Earl,
What you need is Game.
Thanks to feminism they just want someone they can control…be it sexually or in marriage. Masculine traits for whatever reason are seen as a turnoff…
Nothing could be further from the truth. Women *resent* men they can control easily..
Boxer said :
These kids hate women, casually, openly, and with an unhealthy intensity. It’s in the lyrics of the raps they produce, and in their comments daily.
This is interesting, even if it among lower-class black kids or equivalent.
BTW, this is why VR sex with demolish female SMV in short order (2020 or so). Men who still think women are angellic goddesses of virtue are somewhat less likely to find the alternative compelling, but men who already are unimpressed with women (let alone hate them) will flock to VR.
Here is a divorced man saying that even 2016-era VR sex is preferable to real women.
And 2016 era VR is still very early, and nothing like 2020 VR.
Anon says:
I wish PM/AFT and Ray Manta were still around, as they were the two most well versed in this ‘big picture’ assessment of where the fabric of humanity is going to tear, and how it is women, not men, who are much closer to outright obsolescence.
There are now quite a lot of people with an awareness of how the sexual landscape is shifting. For an example, Fred Reed recently published an article on Unz dealing with sexbots and their ramifications – “Sally Cone Hits the Dating Scene”.
I also discussed the issue with Julian O’Dea at https://davidcollard.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/the-dolls-are-coming/ . Even though sexbots are now getting a lot of press, we agreed that the simpler, cheaper VR technologies will be more important in the near future.
In Western societies, far too much of the economy and social landscape is driven by the wants and desires of women. For some examples, look at the percentages of consumer purchases by women
(about 85%) or the willingness of most church congregations to throw men under the bus to curry favor with women. Since this favoritism creates such huge inefficiencies, it’s only a matter of time before it self-corrects.
They also desire it…it’s said in Scripture. I never said it makes sense.
*will demolish.
The speed of the change will be swift. The international implications big as well.
The steepest fall will be with women who were 8s at age 28, but 6s by age 33, when in a world of advanced VR sex, 6s will be the new 4s. The cliff will be sharper than it is now.
I agree with Earl Anon. Seen it firsthand for decades now. Too many women want a man they can “bulldoze over, change, and control”
Seen way too many men play this “game” or learn “game” (I went to a David DeAngelo boot-camp in the year 2000, what a freaking joke it was….and a waste of money) and actually are worse off from where they started beforehand. Women today in general want a “thug / rebel / bad boy” who becomes “the nice / good guy”. They will justify all their bad actions because “he” made her do bad things. She escapes blameless. They fully resent men who don’t hit on them, flirt with them, or give them the time. Seen this with some of our “saintly, holy sisters” in the church too I might add. They love attention, and they resent men who don’t give it to them…even the ones they would reject immediately. That’s the game.
My advice to younger guys is: stay away from any woman who says one thing and does another. It’s called lying. If she will lie to another guy, she is gonna lie to you. If she is gonna cheat on her current boyfriend with you. She will cheat on you with some other clown. You are not the exception.
Game in a PUA sense only works if you have something to begin with (usually good looks deemed on a societal ‘above average’ standard) and you have no problems not living a Christ centered life on the broad road to hell. I always found it interesting that “game” advocates say that “attraction in women isn’t a choice” and then these same guys make you change your image immediately so you are not “boring” so that you “build attraction”
In the end, with the modern-secular-woman today. It boils down to what SHE feels and can justify at the moment. If she hooks up with a hot dude, or average dude. It’s HER choice. Not the guy in question.
Ray Manta,
Aha! Good to see you still read this.
Are you contactable offline in any way? Otherwise, you can stop by at you-know-where for some new content you may want to take a look at, and for which I would be interested in your thoughts.
Game in a PUA sense only works if you have something to begin with (usually good looks deemed on a societal ‘above average’ standard)
Both Earl and Frank K’s friend appear to easily meet this criterion. Being above 6’1″, non-obese, in a decent job, and white, etc. already clears a lot of filters. Many men who don’t have these things are doing quite well (including plenty of 5’8″ Hispanic guys). Game matters, and even if not official Game, just the right vibe. I suspect Earl is too polite and hesitant to escalate (or doesn’t know how). Frank K said his friend is ‘a little nerdy’. Both of these things are easily correctable.
Game also assumes that women are the “prize” because monkey dancing, parlor tricks, and crude humor to “build attraction” and “get action” seem to be the only goal. Game advocates claim they don’t worship or “pedestalize” women but they are the ones who rate women by numbers, only think about sex, and seduction. They are the ones who are always “planning” and trying to unlock her feelings. Pretty clear they put women above just about anyone or anything else.
Nah…I’ve done it before. Still got friendzoned…or she got some ‘awkward’ feeling and ended it. Jason is correct that it really does boil down to whatever she feels in any given moment. It’s not the correct way to form any lasting relationship or marriage commitment because there’s going to be times when her feels aren’t happy and that’s why we have the problems we have today.
I live in an are with a sizable Hispanic population. The women in Hispanic culture are still somewhat feminine and are attracted to masculine traits (unless they’ve been in the US for a generation…then they turn into pretty much a western white girl).
It’s pretty much high time to realize the problem with relationships isn’t most men…it’s women following their feels.
Thanks to feminism they just want someone they can control…be it sexually or in marriage.
When they finally ‘settle,’ they subconsciously make that Beta “pay,” forever, for every Alpha she ever had who wouldn’t commit.
Red Pill Latecomer @ 12:26 pm:
“Frank K: He’s 6’2″, white, played American Football in college (tight end, so he isn’t a fatso), is reasonably good looking, but is a little nerdy. He can’t get a date to save his life.
“That’s pretty shocking.”
Shocking but true. I’m also tall, athletic, devout and smart, and I’ve been rejected so hard & fast that some of the women I’ve approached don’t even know I speak English. My fault could not have been bad Game.
“What do [women] want? All that, plus he must be rich, famous, and a thug?”
Per their behavior, women want bartenders, starving guitarists and convicted felons. In other words, violent sex, drugs and rock & roll. It’s all about the drama, baby.
I’ll never forget the day that while walking over a bridge, I looked down and saw a pretty chick making out with a homeless bum in a trash-strewn riverbed. Modern California in a single picture. Also, Omega Rage.
While I don’t agree VR sex is going to solve this man’s problems…it is quite telling how low the majority of women are by following their desires that men are starting to prefer machines/robots to them.
Nor mine. Approaching and asking for a date aren’t hard for me…it’s the fact their emotions turn on a dime despite the fact you haven’t really changed anything you’ve been doing.
I don’t know how often this has been addressed in these parts…but I think a lot also has to do with the toxic ideas her friends, sisters, or orbiters put in their heads. We already know this is something that happens when a group of women who are friends all decide to divorce around the same time.
Anon says:
Ray Manta,
Aha! Good to see you still read this.
Almost every day.
Are you contactable offline in any way?
Yes. I’ve left some contact information in what I understand to be the approved location.
Let’s define ‘alpha’ because every ‘broke / starving artist’ type or ‘musician’ or ‘nightclub bouncer’ or “crusty turd who revels in sin” isn’t some guy with amazing traits of leadership or skills that “other men naturally want to emulate and follow or be like”
Women will say “confidence” and PUA types will say “game” and pastors will say “leadership”
Women confuse confidence with arrogance. PUA takes zero consideration that in any “game” there are rules and if one sex (cough, women) don’t need to follow play by or even consider rules for a game so to speak……don’t call it game. Call it what it is; a chump that *thinks* he’s something better than he is….and that is granted ONLY by the women in “game”. Not the men. Pastors scream for “men to lead” but dare you step up, you will be deemed “too spiritual / a legalist” and put into line pretty quick with their own arrogance of “well, you can be a leader when I deem you one” or they call “leadership” something it isn’t. Even in my Corps. the Officer called the dude handing out the programs “an amazing leader in this ministry”
No. It’s just a task that needs to be done in the church. There is nothing “leadership” worthy about passing out a church program on Sunday.
Christ said “I have ordained you!”
Yes…confidence is truth in one’s own abilities, arrogance is just a delusion a person plays to exaggerate the abilities they may not even have. And feminism has pretty much done this to most women certainly in the last 50 years. All game does is make men think this way too.
Game is fake-it-til-you-make-it strategies to increase the fluency of your social skills. If a woman is hanging out with you, then there’s a 100% chance she wants something from you. Sex is a distinct probability, but so is free meals and attention. Game won’t make more chicks want to hang out with you. It will give you the confidence to weed out those who want free stuff from those who already want to have sex with you, and it will carry you across to seal the deal with those in the latter category.
Exactly Earl. At that “bootcamp” I went to and paid out the nose for………..one of the lessons was good grooming. Brushing your teeth. Keeping your fingernails trim. BASIC stuff. Guys at this bootcamp actually had questions about this. I was really annoyed that I paid a lot of money to be told “women love men that brush their teeth”
I learned that in 2nd grade. I was signaled out by my good casual style several times during the bootcamp (I have always dressed well, and my style is ‘honed’ perfectly….I worked at ‘Banana Republic’ all through high school and summers home from college). The leader at this lesson tried to tell me I needed a few tats and a piercing to give me a dangerous “edge” with women. I told him to go blow himself. Jerk nervously laughed, and IF he had a response it would have been a flaccid and tepid one…..and he was an “alpha” according to his own assertion.
These men were no different from the men I met a decade later after I became a Christian and now instead of sitting in a “bootcamp” we were sitting in a ‘man up’ class, being ‘bold for Jesus 10000000%’ and being told that women like a man who brushes his teeth, and trims his fingernails. Again. Basic stuff any man should have learned in the first grade.
In ‘Catcher In the Rye’ there is a scene when Holden is visiting his history teacher in his home while he is sick. The teacher tells Holden that “…..in life, it’s a game, a game one plays according to the rules…..”
Holden thinks to himself “yeah, some ‘game’….if you just happen to be on the side where the hot-shots are, then its a game alright…but if you are the side where there are no hot-shots, and leftovers from the other side tossed at you for you to pick apart the rules you are supposed to follow never seem to in your favor.”
Even German sociologist Max Weber mentioned in the 1920’s that “class” and “social status” in modern society seem to be a “chance of the dice” in more than a few occasions.
Example of no game:
… steps in front of me, introduces herself. I just smile, polite exchange……..and she immediately asks what I do. I tell her, she says “wow, a guy who actually helps people” and then she asks if I went to college. I tell her I did, back in New England…she gets all snide “educated too, what are the odds of that.”
I just replied “odds are that you wouldn’t have noticed ten years ago” and I cracked open my Pepsi, took a gulp and went back to the living room.
That just goes to show how much power has shifted over to women. We have ‘bootcamps’ for men telling us to do things they think women like. Hygiene and social skills…along with being tall, rich, and make sure you are also dangerous and take unnecessary risks (or manning up as the flipside). It makes a person go insane because all this stuff in theory usually isn’t reality…it’s all about what some particular woman feels in some particular situation.
Besides are there any bootcamps out there that teaches women what men like? Be pleasant, kind, not obese, submissive to your husband, and know how to run a home and cook. It used to be good mothers and home ec classes but those have been replaced by feminism.
earl: Besides are there any bootcamps out there that teaches women what men like?
Women’s magazines are allegedly full of articles on What Men Want, and How to Please a Man in the Bedroom, and How to Attract a Man, etc.
So much so that I’ve heard female pundits and comics complain, Why are we always asking what men want? Why don’t we ever talk about what women want?
It’s like when someone (finally) blames single mothers. The immediate complaint is Why do we always blame the mother? What about the father? Why do we never talk about the missing father?
Women are under the delusion that all of media, politics, etc. is focused on men, and that women are always being blamed or ignored.
I think his problem is that he’s too nice. Because, yeah, I’ve seen short, ugly guys with women draped over them.
Outside of ‘sexing him up’…do they actually give any other advice? Like the ‘offensive’ stuff I just mentioned.
I mean there’s plenty of women that will sex a guy up but we know that’s not the thing which will keep a guy around unless he’s desperate.
The “bootcamps” are primarily get rich quick schemes by and for marketers like David DeAngelo aka: Eben Pagan, to get rich. And they did! See also “The Syndicate” business group.
These guys did the male population both a service and a disservice about a decade ago. Spreading red pill knowledge like “stop being a nice guy chump” is heroes work. Harnessing the male sex drive as a means of manipulating men out of literally multiplied millions of dollars a year is less noble. Digital marketer Eben Pagan was at one time dragging in a gross of 20 million annually from his various PUA programs. I picked up some used DVD’s years ago on ebay. Some interesting info along with a lot of obvious advice like don’t poke yourself in the eye with a sharp stick..
PUA game can improve a man’s ability to pick-up women for sex. Obviously this shouldn’t be Christian men’s game. Realistically it can only improve a man’s ability with women, depending on his dedication. DeAngelo said his program was NOT relationship advice, I also heard him say never get married. Interestingly he is now married to a female BS artist like himself. Wonder if he got a pre-nup?
Perhaps I am getting stubborn in my old age….your know…..old-man-Jason tellin’ the neighborhood kids to “stay off my porch you drop-outs!!” and with that said…..after all the drugs, the alcohol. The fancy jobby-job in Silicon Valley for over a decade and a half………the overpriced private high school, undergrad and grad school in ‘new england’ of all places….the traveling. The changes………………….and crash landing in Fresno of all places………..and a Christian now for almost a decade……….single my whole life……..it boils down to this:
The only thing you can really change is you. For better or worse. Christ threw sand in the gears of my life and ground it to a halt and at least made me think deeper. Walk slower. Reflect. For that I am grateful and that I could not have done on my own, especially at that time.
Concerning women? I am polite. I treat them the way I like to be treated, and from their own actions….they don’t like being treated well…..as per the above / recent comments on this thread.
I strive to be like Christ and really live “not of this world” and it’s been a good journey since then.
This reminds me of a recent experience. I was attending Denver Comic Con with my adult daughter. She made a very tasteful and feminine she-Joker costume. There was a booth on the merchant level of the convention center where for $25 they would take some glam shots of you and deliver them via email. While I was waiting for her (in my dashing reboot Captain Kirk cosplay) I was approached by a women I estimate to be in her late 20’s. She was dressed in a Game of Thrones costume (or so my daughter told me, I’ve never watched the show). Anyway, she introduces herself to me and compliments me on my off the rack Star Trek costume. As I was shaking her hand the first thought to go through my 57 year old brain is: What does she want from me?
Now I have been told that I look like I’m in my low to mid forties, as I haven’t grayed yet and don’t have any wrinkles. I’m 6’0″, so I’m taller than most men, but not very tall. Still, I’m still having a hard time believing that an average looking (6-7) but very young woman who wasn’t fat and had a decent figure would be genuinely interested in a guy who’s just a decade away from collecting Social Security checks.
So we make small talk and she asks me if I’m going to have some shots taken. “No, I’m just waiting for my daughter to finish with hers”
The look on that woman’s face was priceless when she suddenly realized just how old I really am. I guess it was a deal breaker. My daughter finished up at that moment, I said good bye, and we left.
Same…because that’s really what matters in life. I don’t want to wish evil or inflict evil on women (even if they seem to do it to themselves) because that’s neither loving myself nor Christian. It’s important to point out that you can only change yourself with the help of God’s grace…and point out the current evils we face today.
“The endgame Dalrock warns about is already in play for hordes of unmarried professional women. . .”
I think the women are increasingly wise to Game, they liked it for awhile, some of them. I remember Christian girls on dating sites testing me on my PUA knowledge. Now they’re learning about the red-pill, MGTOW, the carousel… Women, sooner or later, are going to see the consequences of their bed choices and reputation because men are increasingly turning their noses up to marriage, even relationships. All women can do is switch to new tactics like “Women Against Feminism”. Is that going to work? It’s going to be damned interesting the next few years to see how women deal with this as the population becomes more aware. Bad reputations are hard as hell to fix, with or without a hymen. For men the thirst is real but marriage to these women has a dry reputation.
In fact today our second reading once again pointed out what love is about…and it’s not the romantic feels or affection…
‘Be indebted to no one, except to one another in love, for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the Law. The commandments “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and any other commandments, are summed up in this one decree: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the Law.’ Romans 13: 8-10
I’ve never been to a PUA boot camp. But in the 1990s I bought a VHS tape about women. It was more about “finding the right one” than a PUA tape.
It was mostly bad advice, though I didn’t realize it at the time. Much of the tape was pretty women being interviewed, saying what they seek in a man. Also advice from “relationship experts” (i.e., therapists and psychologists). The latter consisted of a married couple in the relationship business.
Some of the advice was Have the confidence to be yourself. Also, women really like nice guys, so don’t be a jerk. Be polite, considerate, romantic. Plan ahead for your date, make it special, not just a lazy dinner and a movie.
The only good advice was to show confidence. But confidence awash in niceness and consideration and overall hyper-romantic White Knighting.
Now I see that a big problem with the tape was that it was women telling the interviewer what they (claimed) they wanted. And feminized “relationship experts” doing the interviewing.
Actual journalist with integrity interviewing Hillary (not a PC liberal lap dog nor mangina):
“Hillary, you claim you lost because of sexism. Wasn’t it sexist to traffic, exploit, manipulate, brainwash and dispose of millions of men’s lives for your rights and privileges over men? Wasn’t that mass disposal of men’s lives for your rights actually kind of monstrous, not so much sexist, considering your claims? Weren’t you in reality a candidate running for the highest position in a country that was entirely built by men? Shouldn’t you leave the running of the country to those that actually built it?”
Too bad professional journalism with integrity is dead. Woulda been fun watching her try to answer those questions, huh?
They want fried ice. They want what their emotions at the time tell them.
The interview was probably done at a time where none of their emotions came into play…so they say what they think is the right or nice thing, but the reality is much different.
RPL,
I more oppose the flippant “I deserve Hell” or “I will go to Hell” attitudes. It is only Jesus sacrifice and our acceptance of that which keeps any of us out. Nothing good in any of us without Him.
=====
Women like confidence until they don’t. One of the major complaints I got was that I was too certain of my own views. (Of course I am, I would think differently if I thought I was wrong!)
Things can turn on a dime. It really boils down to “don’t be unattractive.” Even those who seem attractive likely have some traits that women pick up on. They may not be obvious, but they are almost certainly there. Women do go for what most would consider unattractive at times, so I clearly don’t have it all figured out.
Earl,
Focus groups have the same problem. Merely asking people (male or female) what they want often produces very poor results. Thus asking women what they want is very unproductive.
BillyS, Sorry, you’re a gay man. Your quote, “Jim, Nice attempt to try and move the goalposts. I proudly note I was a virgin when I married. I probably could have been otherwise if I had more game and a desire to do otherwise, but God kept me. I didn’t marry the type of woman you noted, though she had her own problems. I am clean before God and can live with that for eternity. Can you?”
Excellent conformation of my point. You’re an involuntary celibate (no woman will have you). You blame God, claim holiness, and crap on those of us who are dealing with women as God created them in THIS day and age. Like I said, it’s a grand thing to claim chastity and God’s desires for his children when YOU couldn’t get laid if you showed up at the Chicken Ranch with $20,000.
The average, modern feminist slut costs nothing, she’s free and her thighs are spring-loaded to the wide open position. Just because YOU can’t bag the bitch doesn’t make ME evil because I do. You’re actually gay, Billy. You understand that, right? You blame God, you claim chastity and pious intentions, but the fact is, these women won’t sleep with YOU in any case. And so, you might as well go the gay way for the rest of your life. Or build a masturbatorium dedicated to chicks with dicks.
Sorry to Dalrock for my language toward these slobs that have no idea about women of the current age, but these guys that couldn’t get laid in a whorehouse just send me. They’re homosexuals that are dabbling in heterosexuality. BillyS is one of them.
This article points out that modern women are, overall, filthy sluts. THAT is the point of the article. And BillyS defends them. Talk about a gay-assed White Knight virtue-signaling feminist man in women’s pretty pink panties. Find a Pussy March, BillyS. You’re going to fit right in. Shit on your brother men. Actually, you aren’t MY brother. You’re Liberace’s brother. Or his bitch.
Thus asking women what they want is very unproductive.
What women want is whatever their emotions tell them in that moment. However that isn’t usually what they need.
Jim Christian:
Join your brother SirHamster in yonder line, beneath the sign and signifier reading “untreated tourette’s patients”.
Regards,
Boxer
Thus asking women what they want is very unproductive.
OF COURSE. This is Game 101. Never get advice from women how to do well with women.
Sheeesh. You really should be much further along in your learnings. Even if you don’t want to be a PUA or anything close to it. This is basic, basic, basic. It is indeed one of the very first core lessons about male-female romantic interactions.
Jason,
Exactly Earl. At that “bootcamp” I went to and paid out the nose for………..one of the lessons was good grooming.
Mistake #1. Never attend a bootcamp or anything expensive. All of this information is available online for free, or in relatively inexpensive books ($15-$60).
What is needed is a buddy in co-training (a wingman), who will make you do approaches and hold you accountable to your goals. You of course have to do the same for him. Then, you will be good at Game in a few months. Dramatic improvements will be visible in a couple of weeks.
Again, Game is not being a PUA.
Dear Frank K:
I sorta stumbled upon this eternal (and somewhat obvious) truth early. I thought I was friendzoned as a teenager. I hung out with a hot cheerleader girl who was a year older than I was, almost every day. She was cool and fun and beautiful, but completely intimidating. Eventually I got so frustrated that I decided I’d just tell her what I wanted.
“Do you want to have sex?” I asked, one day, when we were both in front of the television….
Less than 5 minutes later we were both taking off clothes.
Later on that day, she gave me a funny look, and asked me why it had taken me so long to ask her. “I thought you didn’t like me at all…” she laughed.
There was another girl I was imagining that I was friendzoned with (I knew the concept before I knew the term or its definition). I asked her the same question, about a week later. Surprise, surprise! She wanted to have sex too!
The reality is that most of the young brothers who think they are friend zoned aren’t. They just need to get up the nerve to make a move or two. If a woman says no, she’s doing you a favor, because you can quit wasting time and energy on her, and move on to the next one, who will say yes.
Regards,
Boxer
Anon: This is Game 101. Never get advice from women how to do well with women. Sheeesh. You really should be much further along in your learnings.
I bought that VHS tape some 20 to 25 years ago. It sounded worthwhile at the time. The ads on TV said, Women reveal in their own words what they really want in a man!
Useless. But at least a useless VHS tape is cheaper than a useless boot camp.
Boxer,
I’ll leave asking the grave sin of fornication aside since you probably already know your Christian bros can’t really go that route unless they want to risk damnation.
What you did was initiate. That’s not our problem (or at least mine anyway). The problem is what happens after you keep initiating and her emotions suddenly turn on a dime without much warning.
I can assume you aren’t with the lady cheerleader or the other girl anymore…something had to have changed.
RPL,
Useless. But at least a useless VHS tape is cheaper than a useless boot camp.
There are bad materials and good materials. It is easy to find which is which (reviews, etc.). There are many blogs too.
That doesn’t mean that the model of attraction/seduction has not been outlined by Game. Those who disagree have to come up with an alternative model of attraction/seduction.
Dear Earl:
In order to answer your question honestly, I have to get a little crass.
Not a chance she was ever my girlfriend. lol. Hot cheerleader girl was a senior at my high school, and she had a boyfriend she was sexing on the regular. I had sex with her a grand total of two times, on the d/l. This leads to the second eternal truth about women, (also illustrated by goony GunnerQ, at September 10, 2017 at 2:54 pm above, who wrote about peeping on hoboes having sex with local women under the overpass. Good lord…)
Women are much more inclined to have one-time sex with men when plausible deniability is available. I was the “kid brother type” friend of this young lady, and neither of us would have been believed, even if we had both admitted the goings on.
Hence women who will signal that they’re receptive, despite having just met the man they’re signaling. It’s not a coincidence if this happens in a scenario when you’re not likely to meet them again. If that hasn’t happened in your life, I can assure you that it actually has, you just didn’t pick up on it. You also read the stories (hushed up by our feminist press, but still available) about female nurses caught banging old dying men at the retirement home, etc. If you’re in a position in which the woman can have sex with you and deny it later to her bitch friends, it really doesn’t matter what you look like. She’ll do it, provided she thinks you’ll keep your mouth shut.
Best,
Boxer
And I’ll also add…she responded. That’s really the reason why any guy has any real success. I just don’t get how one day she responds happily and the next day she decides she doesn’t want to respond anymore and breaks it off…and you haven’t done really anything different.
I retract what I said to Earl earlier, since Earl did not italicize the line in his comment. That was a quote from BillyS, not something Earl said.
It is better to italicize or blockquote something quoted from someone else, lest one thing that the commenter quoting it is the one saying it.
It has…even pretty overtly one time. I got up and left.
I won’t say I was a strong man in that situation…I just happen to be getting to know another lady I thought was more attractive at that time too so it was easy to leave.
But yeah I get the signals, I look for them quite often before I ask.
One of the easiest ways I know of receptivity signalling is eye contact…followed by a smile. If they have the old dead eyes or RBF you might as well walk on.
Honeycomb:
Tinder is a scam. 24% of Match Group shares are short right now! That’s huge. Wall Street knows this is bullshit.
@ Caleb ..
Honeycomb:
Tinder is a scam. 24% of Match Group shares are short right now! That’s huge. Wall Street knows this is bullshit.
Agreed.
90% of what I post is generated by BP outlets / sources .. so .. it’s a lot like listening to a woman .. you know it is slanted by the ham-steer.
But they dance around the fire pretty good these days.
Alcohol seemed to work well from what I saw in college. A scorned woman looking for revenge/rebound seemed to happen quite a bit too. You also have the ones with daddy issues or wanting to prove how much she’s like a man.
There’s a reason why it’s called cheap sex…you don’t need to do much to get it. Most of the battle is finding the women who is in the particular emotional frame you are looking for.
Having a relationship is much harder to attain.
Earl: “Thus asking women what they want is very unproductive. What women want is whatever their emotions tell them in that moment. However that isn’t usually what they need.”
Fair take. My thought is, from feminism, to Blacks, to anyone that’s on line for goodies from others, their demands are endless and unreasonable by any measure. This applies to Blacks, and others, but in particular, if you ask women what they want, what they need, how much is enough, the answer to all is singular. And their answer is always “MORE!” There are no limits, except to your imagination. Nothing is ever enough. And they’re all damned unlikely to ask you what possible pittance YOU might be need of.
@ Earl ..
Having a relationship is much harder to attain.
Brother .. none will measure up to you .. or our other devout brothers.
..
..
Plus .. as you know .. they ain’t worth it to those less devout.
“Join your brother SirHamster in yonder line, beneath the sign and signifier reading “untreated tourette’s patients”. Regards, Boxer”
Sure thing, King Of Gammas. You clearly wrote the book. Just for the record, you overthink women. You overlook their greed, their basic selfishness, their stupidity, their avarice, their false victimhood. There is a reason God demanded men exercise leadership in the church, headship in the family. He knew and created them to be of absolutely of no account and challenged men to lead them. Instead, in this age (and others), we “empowered” them. God much be laughing his ass off at the men that “empower” women. You’re clearly one of them. Just look at the destruction. You give women entirely too much credit for intelligence. Perhaps you think White Knighting and offering your balls to them brings to you nobility? Think again. There are few women today worthy of such high expectations or reflections.
I suppose at times I make the mistake of placing too much importance in having a marriage and family and that’s where the depression sets in…but I do know it’s still a good thing to achieve in life and the few lucky ones I know who actually have a godly wife have for the most part fulfilling lives. However I do know my relationship with Christ is truly the most important thing and that honestly is what keeps me out of despair when I focus on that more.
@anon
This was back in the year 2000. Before Strauss’s book “the game” was published. This was before YouTube. This was before all the “free resources” online. I saw D.DeAngelo speak in SF in late 1999. I signed up for his bootcamp and it was a joke. I was a fool’s fool back then.
As for a wingman. I had one, for years in SF in the clubs, scene, out and about. All over town. The results? Both of us more frustrated. More upset. Myself slowly feeling worse than I did before all this game and “double your dating” nonsense.
A woman likes you or she doesn’t. There is no in between. There is no flow chart, or method that will work at any given time. Being confident doesn’t make one an “alpha” and bedding / dating women doesn’t make you a leader. 99% of the people who claim they are an “alpha” is in word only. Game isn’t “standing up to women” its cowering to what they want. If manhood is now reduced to how many women you date or bed….or negging people….its a poor-chump way to be considered an alpha-guy.
I’m no alpha, but I am very comfortable with who I am now. I learned a very hard lesson from “game” and that is: in games, competition, sport, or leadership. You are going to lose more than win.
The difference is do you get better? Practice? Sure. The false hope of game is that if you fail….you must have done one of the ten trillion things “wrong” from opening a set to not being funny enough. Negging I witnessed used more by thses “alphas” on their fellow men than on women btw.
People are not peg boards. A+B=C works great in quadratics or laying pipe. It doesn’t work with individual people.
If game says that “yeah, you’re going to have to look women in the eye when you speak to them”. I agree. That’s common sense. That’s not game.
Your first mistake is blaming God for the things that happened with the fall of man.
God created us both good…when the serpent started tempting Eve to eat the forbidden fruit by telling her something that contradicted God’s word and she gave some to Adam and he ate that’s where things like ‘women follow their emotions and try to control their husband’ came into the picture.
Yup, men love formulas and logic…because we work well with things. Men love to discuss this type of stuff with other men, what works and what doesn’t, because we often think similar. Women aren’t things…and they aren’t men.
seventiesjason,
A woman likes you or she doesn’t. There is no in between.
So there is no attribute to a man’s attractiveness that he can control? That he can improve?
There is no value to learning how to see IOIs? Many men fail to notice easy opportunities thrown their way.
There is no value to learning how to escalate, and pass last-minute resistance?
Remember, Game is about two things.
1) Increase your attractiveness
2) Learn how to quickly identify, and escalate with, those women who are interested, and not waste time on those who are not.
Both, obviously, are valuable. Both have a component that is learnable and within a man’s control.
Not with false rape accusations being a thing now. I always thought that was funny when advice was given on ‘last-minute resistance’. Funny how they can go from being seduced and ready for sexy time because of your excellent game to…’uh no we better not’ like that. Probably has something to do with her emotions again.
Shoot why bother with the seduction hoopes…Boxer just asked.
Anon: What is needed is a buddy in co-training (a wingman), who will make you do approaches and hold you accountable to your goals. You of course have to do the same for him.
That’s what a wingman is? A co-trainer?
The definition I heard, a wingman is an attractive Alpha male who helps Betas, Gammas, and even Omegas, attract women. He does this mostly by just hanging out with you. Because he’s attractive to women, you’ll appear attractive to women because you’re his friend. And if a woman approaches him, he’ll talk you up, call you his buddy, and gently redirect the woman’s attention from himself to you.
Why would he do this? Two possible motives.
1. Because he’s your friend and wants to help. (Since he has so many women, he can spare some women for you.) Or…
2. For money. Over a decade ago, I came across a website by a “professional wingman.” For pay, he promised to teach you how to talk to women, how to dress, act, etc. Then he’d personally take you to bars and nightclubs, attract the women, then pass them on to you. He guaranteed X number of dates with attractive women, or money back.
I never hired a “professional wingman,” but I assume they still exist. If you Google “professional wingman” you’ll find all sorts of stuff come up.
RPL,
The definition varies, but obviously it is not someone you pay. It is a co-training accountability relationship. He needs you as much as you need him. It works particularly well if different men are good at different aspects of Game.
It is often just about mutual accountability, force each other to practice, etc. Not about ‘talking up the guy to women’.
I am surprised there would be this much confusion about what a ‘study buddy’ or just co-training partner is.
PT Barnum said it best: There’s a sucker born every minute….
We’re decades on in this “game” thing. Even back in the 1970’s pop band “Supertramp” had a song called “loverboy” and it tells a story about the guy who had no luck with women, but read “this book” and it told him all the secrets to what women need and how to score with them. Done in the whisical pop-Supertramp style of music that many love to this day.
It’s a big business. With all of the information. The “results” and “no fail techniques” we have more and more men frustrated. A woman likes you or she doesn’t. It’s a fact of life. Most women are not worth the trouble trying to “deode” and “discern” because they shift dreams faster than a trout in heat.
The real good relationships / marriages I have seen have happened by this: you are introduced to a woman by a friend. You are setup on a blind date by a mutual friend.
Revolutionary indeed. Women could care less about your negs, your peacocking, your confidence. If she likes you she does. It’s your job then as a man to step it up. If she doesn’t like you…in today’s Christian dating world its more likely her loss more than yours if indeed you have real confidence and real character.
Seriously it is that simple. If I get the tells she likes me…I ask her out and keep initiating. If she decides to do the friendzone thing…I say ‘ok’ and leave. What do I have to lose if she bails? I’m not married to her because she decided to bail, I continue my life, and I don’t have the ticking biological clock of fertility weighing me down.
Boxer,
I agree with you Jim. I am not going to waste my time on someone who merely insults rather than discusses content. Anyone who isn’t just as engaged in sin must be another form of perversion? Not so great logic there.
====
That is a bit simplistic seventiesjason. Attraction is not an either/or switch, at least not over time. It can certainly go off quickly. I am not sure it can turn on easily once it is off, but being on now doesn’t mean it will be on later. Our actions play a major role in it.
seventiesjason said :
The real good relationships / marriages I have seen have happened by this: you are introduced to a woman by a friend. You are setup on a blind date by a mutual friend.
So you spent years in night game, looking for a marriage-worthy woman? That too after going to an expensive seminar that was needless, when the info was online even in 1999?
The reasons you got nowhere are becoming apparent. You made the mistake that women make, which is to conflate the SMP with MMP.
Typical PUA you are Anon 🙂
Out comes the alphabet soup of acronyms and terms like “night game” and then the “neg” by you of why I failed is “apparent”
It’s clear as mud. It’s about as apparent as watching all you “gamers” in action while I was bartending at The Starlight Room atop the Sir Francis Drake Hotel in SF. You all know all there is to know….yet instead of living it you just talk about it. Watched all of you brag about the “9” you nailed to your friends and I was there at the bar watching. She was about a “3” if you consider a large “grunt queen” from Colma City a “9”….but more power to you 🙂
Let’s crack open the ” game” manuals and get solutions to broken hearts, STD’s and rape accusations. Which free online resource covers “fatal attraction” types? What does Roosh say about psycho women???
Nah, your “game” has it all covered. But here you are selling us something that we don’t want or need.
seventiesjason,
Changing the subject into some weird hypothetical is typical of someone who is a Game denialist.
It is obvious you don’t understand many of the basics. Plus, you paid for an expensive seminar, which was completely unnecessary. On top of that, you were seeking a marriage-worthy woman in the nightclubs of San Francisco.
If you dispute Game, and can’t distinguish between Game and PUA (there is such a thing as LTR Game and Married Game, you know), then sorry, you don’t know the basics.
To refute this, you will, at a minimum, have to come up with an alternate model of attraction.
But here you are selling us something that we don’t want or need.
False. I am not selling anything. I am in fact saying that people should not make the mistake you made, which is to get suckered into an expensive seminar.
Pingback: One decade to make your future, ladies. | Dark Brightness
@ Seventiesjason,
You’re right on the money about game and gamers and I’ve got game. Game is real, it’s effects however are wildly exaggerated. Especially by digital PUA’s in this anonymous world. DeAngelo wasn’t a complete huckster, what he sold was just overpriced. You can’t pass off fruit juice as magical fine wine without a lot of hype. Refreshing, healthy, tasty fruit juiced passed off as a miracle elixir.
The healthy life altering nutrition was in the ingredients like: Stop being so damn nice, it comes across as creepy and manipulative to women. Have some confidence, who cares if she doesn’t want to date you (indifference). Don’t be needy. Hold eye contact. Stand, walk like a man etc. The failure to exhibit basic masculinity can kill the attractiveness of an above average alpha to women in his league. This was the primary value that would move a naive young guy up a few notches with women. Techniques only worked on the margins and even then only in your relative league of attractiveness. Mystery can be seen striking frequently on video and he is tall, attractive. Strauss, who is not attractive, could land attractive women primarily for one reason. His money and fame.
I’m tall and apparently reasonably attractive to women. As a much younger man I frequently screwed up dating relationships quickly because I had poor game (thank God I had poor game!). Now I’ve got game and something more important to women, money. I can do ok with attractive Christian women on online dating sites. I do ok with them until they get my full name and google me, see a picture of my expensive home. Then I do fantastic. . . Honestly I’m so suspicious of their motives now I don’t feel like I can ever trust them unless they have money too.
I don’t want to be with someone who has less to lose than I do. Needless to say, I’m probably going to be single indefinitely.
What a jerk you are:
I was not looking for a marriage minded woman back then. I was looking for sex. I got zero. Looking back now….I didn’t realize how lucky I was.
I paid for a boot camp. Like countless guys did back then. I even said I was a “fool’s fool”.
There were no online resources about game or attraction like you are purporting back then. I was there. I was 29. I was online. The stuff that was there were books that you had to order.
No such thing as long term game. Was told this by tons of guys in game over the years
You purport how simple and basic ” game” is yet out come the billion of different types, scenarios, and abbreviations that no one can remember or apply on the fly.
Lastly, I don’t need to come up with a viable solution or alternative to ” game” in order to reply to you. Quit talking toe
like the chumps you ‘sarge’
Nobody here is foolish right now except you 🙂
@ Red Pill Latecomer
[Blockquote]
The Christian patriarchs, the bishops and priests, were jealous of these pagan wise women, so the Christian patriarchs condemned these wise women of witchcraft and burned them.
[/Blockquote]
I was chatting with my sister about this earlier. I half-suspect that the witch hunting of the 17th century in America was a violent (over?)reaction to proto-feminist thought.
If we lived in a world where married men had the rights they had in biblical times how would married men act? Some would probably still try a little too hard to please their wives, some would be cocky as hell. Married game would come far more natural to a husband. ‘Look Lady, I paid your father for you and he said you belong to me, so STFU’ kinda game.
Modern married game is an unfortunate medicine applied to a disease, with varying rates of success, that we shouldn’t have. I guess for some married men it’s all they’ve got to work with.
Herp-a-derp, tags are pro level technology.
Despite any appearance of Game-scepticism that I might previously have given I have to say that the master-class that Anon is giving 70s Jason alone is worth the admission-fee to this blog.
Only last Friday my divorcing friend with an N of 3 (who is attractive to women although he never notices) and who has confessed to me that he likes women to make all the moves (they won’t) assured me that there was no point in seeking out a woman and that he would wait for fate to seek him out.
So what did he do when (it being hot) over the Bank Holiday [the last weekend in August] he spent the day at the nude beach au naturel where he was approached by a clothed woman who offered to rub ointment into his then injured leg – those British beaches are full of pitfalls for the unwary swimmer – too many rocks. Nothing; Absolutely Nothing, Zilch; did not even bother to ask for a number. Why I ask purely rhetorically was she on the nude beach at all and why even so was she clothed. [shaking muh head]. Horse Water and Drink come to mind.
From what I can tell that doesn’t sound like 70s Jason’s case.
He keeps saying if she likes you then go for it. That’s the simple fact in this day and age…it’s basically all based off how she feels about you and it’s easy to blame the man for having ‘no game’ if she never felt that way in the first place. That’s why I sometimes long for the time where it was all based off her father’s decision.
It was basically another version of ‘game’…I think it was called provider game. Doing something you hope would manipulate her emotions into liking you. It’s much like negs or peacocking…doing something to manipulate her emotions. Shoot you’d be more educated to see what a change a woman goes through hormonally and emotionally during a menstrual cycle (a lot of men find this out if/when their wife goes off the pill).
Eventually you do reach a certain stage where you realize trying to manipulate emotions is a lesson in futility…women are a lot better than men doing that. Just focus on your masculine traits. They’ll either like you for you or they won’t.
Earl,
I share your pain. I thought I had a lifelong relationship, but it turned out that even my “faithful wife” could follow her own ways while thinking God is fine with that.
I’ve looked at the latest demographic numbers and they confirm the trends of later or no marriage, but in the small sample size of 20 something females in my and my wife’s family groups, they don’t follow. ALL the females get a practical degree, then soon after start a serious relationship that evolves to living together and travel, then after a year engagement etc.
redlight – it sounds like you are saying that the young women in your social circle don’t ride the carousel for 10+ years after finishing school and that they while still in their twenties. I’m also going to guess that your social circle is upper middle class (100K+ incomes).
He keeps saying if she likes you then go for it. That’s the simple fact in this day and age…it’s basically all based off how she feels about you
The thing is, a lot of men don’t know how to tell if she likes them.
And if they can tell she likes them, a lot of men don’t know the next level, which is how she likes them: as a friend? As a beta bux? As an orbiter? Or sexually?
And if they can tell how she likes them, a lot of men don’t know the next level after that, which is how to tell which women are sincerely sexually attracted, and which women are faking sexual attraction to snag a beta bux. Because a lot of women fake sexual attraction to a beta bux, apply sex liberally and enthusiastically, until after the wedding ceremony. At which time he gets sex ladled out, then spooned out, then eye-droppered out, then IV drip, and in many cases, none at all.
And if they can tell the sincere ones from the fakes, still some men can’t separate out the mentally ill borderlines and other Cluster B personality disordered/PTSD women from women who aren’t so afflicted.
That’s where knowledge of social dynamics comes in.
The way you can usually tell the sincere ones from the fakers is that during the dating phase, sexual conduct is slowly put under ever-increasing conditions, and gets ever-increasingly “expensive”. As time goes on, the hoops get more numerous and more difficult to negotiate.
Embracing Reality:
Thanks for your above replies concerning the non-conversation about “game”
*I think women, like men are pretty varied. Some women just fall for a guy “because they just do” and it doesn’t matter how hot, how amazing, the size of his penis, how much money, or how many cocky-funny jokes he can tell. Sometimes “it” just happens, and one just needs to take it for what it is. Fate? Luck? A toss of the dice? Who knows.
*When “game” is talked about by this cultish group of men….it’s always the same they tell you, “It’s simple. You just do this and this!” and then……..out come the books, podcasts, v-blogs, bootcamps, workshops, the levels of “game”, the acronyms, the types of game, and of course….the testimonies “proving” it works 100% of the time. You know “I was loser with women, and now because I followed you simple steps on attracting women….I am banging nine’s and tens every night! thank you!”
When I hear these kind of testimonies it reminds me of back in the 1980’s / early 1990’s when you would read “Penthouse Forum” stories (I wasn’t a Christian then) and EVERY one opened with the same byline “Dear Penthouse Forum…..I too did not believe the stories you printed but just yesterday a situation happened to me. I came to work and I noticed my secretary wasn’t wearing panties………”
It’s a very complicated thing that they tell us over and over and over “is very simple”
*For a group of men who “don’t care” what women think, they seem to be pandering to everything they want. Make me laugh! Be funny! Behave like the ‘court jester’ and say exactly what I want to hear! Tell me I’m hot / sexy / beautiful! Entertain me!
They forget women can still “justify” all her sleeping around with lines like “I was tricked” and “I was was young” and “I was just horny” with just about all men who practice “game” they do excatly what a woman wants, despite the chest thumping of “I’m an alpha”
*Smearing. You don’t like game, tried it and see it for the fraud it is, or didn’t get the results (no one gets the results it purports). You are smeared. called a chump, razzed and always told “Well, you didn’t do this right on this day when the sun was at 23 degrees from the horizon, and she was probably on her period…that messes up the best game………and the IOI wasn’t legitimate and she probably does that to every guy……”
A trillion other excuses follow……and you obviously are not “man” enough yet, and all the other “gamers” and “players” proceed to “neg” you like a pack of jealous-catty girls.
Saw this at the bootcamp (80 guys at this camp. DeAngelo is prize horses-ass. Comes off all tough, but stand up to him? He crumbles fast…resorts to name calling).
Anyway….I do believe there are real men out there who are good with women. I believe there are naturals. As much as I *hate* saying this…………it plays a big part……you have to be deemed good looking or have a physical feature about you that is intriguing.
Most people are average….and all women think they are pretty “hot” (mental illness, delusion). I t creates a very messed up situation.
Again, thanks for your reply and your encouragement!
redlight @ 9:01 am:
“ALL the females get a practical degree, then soon after start a serious relationship that evolves to living together and travel, then after a year engagement etc..”
Hello, upper class. Of course a woman can both have a career and love her husband, if he still earns more and has more status than her. But that isn’t true, cannot be true for most men. We can’t all be football stars and CEOs.
Nothing a woman learns in college will make her a better wife and mother whereas her accumulated student debt, notch count and feminist indoctrination can easily make her a much worse one. She can succeed despite her college years but rarely because of them.
And to hell with women earning useful degrees then going home to have babies. What a waste of a college seat. How are men supposed to support families when higher education is given to women? Barbie MD, retired at age 30.
Now I’ve got game and something more important to women, money. I can do ok with attractive Christian women on online dating sites. I do ok with them until they get my full name and google me, see a picture of my expensive home. Then I do fantastic. . .
They want to be wives and mothers. You’ll just never be certain if one of them really wants to be YOUR wife and a mother to YOUR children. Or if you’re the supporting actor in the Drama Of Her Life, in which you are required to say your lines on cue, and pay for it all. Oh yes, it will be your job to finance and pay for the Drama Of Her Life, and YOUR money will become OUR money (or HER money).
Well, for any Christian man, a woman who hands out sexual favors (with or without conditions), is not wife material, regardless of what Churchians like Driscoll say about that, Of course, those tactics might work on thirsty chumps, but as the broader stats are showing, that isn’t working as well as it used to.
That said, I have read about and even seen anecdotal incidents of a new trend.
It used to be that a young woman would cohabitate and have sex with a man, in the hope that it would lead to marriage.
Now what I have heard is that the new first stepping stone is to be “friends with benefits”, which hopefully (for her) will lead to becoming the girlfriend, then moving in, then marriage, I not only read about this, but I actually witnessed an acquaintance do this. He is a self proclaimed Christian and a widower in his 30’s. His wife died young, Just months after burying her, a friend of his deceased wife offered him comfort with no strings attached sex. Then several months later he asked her to move in, and now they are engaged. I attempted to talk him out of her, but it was hopeless. Sex is a powerful manipulation tool. I fear that a few years down the road she will frivorce him and take him to the cleaners.
Frank:
Sure. It used to be introduction> date > exclusive date/”go steady” > engaged > marriage > sex.
Then it became introduction > date > exclusive date > engaged > sex > marriage
Then intro > date > exclusive date > sex >break up, meet series of new people, lather rinse repeat, until you get back to sex> engaged > marriage
Now it’s intro > sex > decide if you want to date this person > if no, go back to intro while maybe continuing sex with this person, if yes, > date > exclusive date > back to dating > back to exclusive date > engaged >marriage >cheat or divorce or frivorce > intro > sex>…..
At each stage, sex has many functions. It can be used as bargaining chip, salve, tool, carrot, stick, weapon or shield.
Such a mess.
‘but in the small sample size of 20 something females in my and my wife’s family groups’
It’s a small sample size…I know of groups of women in both camps. That particular wants all the benefits of marriage…but none of the commitment or puts it off until she hits desperation mode.
Dear Fellas:
someone else sez…
then Frank K. sez…
180. There’s two distinct types of female being conflated here. The first is the attention whore, who wants to extract maximum value for the privilege of banging away at her exhausted hole. The second is the genuinely chaste Christian or Muslim chickie, who wants that wedding ring, and just isn’t going to tease with false promises.
It is easy to confuse the two, because the religious girl will (largely unconsciously) throw off massive amounts of IOI if she likes you. She’ll always be honest about the fact that she’s not going to bang you (she generally won’t even kiss you deeply) without a marriage license (or at least a ring, date, approval of parents, and public proclamation).
The manipulative ho’ will kiss you, fondle you, let you do almost anything, but will not allow you any relief from your thirst. She may, at first, be consciously attempting to mimic the religious girl, but she will never follow through with the religious girl’s discipline. She will also generally brag about previous lovers, how devoted she was, and how happy she can make you, if only you do x, y, z, z sub 1, z sub 2, etc. ad infinitum.
Regards,
Boxer
Boxer:
There are very few truly religious girls holding out for the ring and the date before sex. Most Christian women in the US are having sex or have had sex. Yes there are some who won’t have sex before the wedding (or at least the engagement). But most aren’t waiting. So the separation between Christian women and nonChristian women in the US isn’t very great at all.
Dear Deti:
I must be an outlier, because I’ve had several encounters with girls in the religious camp; but, I don’t think they’re as scarce as many in the ‘sphere make out. You are generally right, in that the ones I knew skewed heavily toward being first generation Americans, born to immigrants from Africa and Eastern Europe.
I have a theory that most of these girls fly under the radar. They aren’t flashy or fashionable. They are home studying chemistry while the supa-hot skanky ones (the ones we all notice) are out flashing boobies at the club. They’re also usually married off pretty quickly. The ones I had the chance to marry were all (there were several, and not a single exception) married within a year of them deciding that Brother Boxer was a poor candidate, and moving on to greener pastures.
Best,
Boxer
‘I have a theory that most of these girls fly under the radar. They aren’t flashy or fashionable. They are home…’
I can confirm this. The truly chaste ones you can tell quickly by their actions. And you usually have to be the one to step up and ask them out because they will be much more covert than your typical carousel rider.
@Jason (bartending at) The Starlight Room atop the Sir Francis Drake Hotel in SF.
I ended up here on a Thursday night back in 2008 or 2009. Nice place. A techno dance club in the corner, and beautiful Victorian in the bar area.
Game – It seems to me that 99% of it is giving guys a reason to push past their fear and to actually approach strange women with the intention of trying to get them into bed. Most guys would probably do as well just walking up to random women at a bar and telling them they look nice, and then asking if they want to go get naked somewhere more private.
Deti says
“The way you can usually tell the sincere ones from the fakers is that during the dating phase, sexual conduct is slowly put under ever-increasing conditions, and gets ever-increasingly “expensive”. As time goes on, the hoops get more numerous and more difficult to negotiate.”
So my honest question: given the amount of effort required, the transitory sensory pleasure of sex, and the realization by all here that love as a true emotion does not actually exist,
WHY BOTHER?
With any of it? Why?
Jim Christian-
You should drop the Christian part of your name. It’s more real that way.
Opus,
Despite any appearance of Game-scepticism that I might previously have given I have to say that the master-class that Anon is giving 70s Jason alone is worth the admission-fee to this blog.
Agreed. It is obvious that seventiesjason has no clue about game, and just wants to be one of those ‘there is no such thing as game’ nuts.
You don’t have to bother with it if you don’t want to. However at least for Christians anyway…your options are either to serve the Lord and be celibate, or get married and that’s the only licit way for sexual access, to become one with your spouse, and have the potential of a family.
The secular option isn’t as rewarding as those two…however thanks to the current state of marriage it seems like marriage is the least rewarding. That’s a sad fact for the family and civilization.
Anon NG
Thanks yo! After I left my silly job at IBM….I got hired at “Harry Denton’s Starlight Room” and I worked there from 2006-2008. Lot of fun times at “the Drake” working countless nights at that bar. Harry was such a great boss. A Mercedes Benz if a man.
He ran a professional nightclub. No smoking allowed on breaks. He fired bartenders for even taking a sip of alcohol on the job. Including breaks. He sent me home one night because I arrived at work not clean shaven. The views from atop that hotel were spectacular. Not the biggest club but def a destination.
I was at an all night dance party just after I left IBM and that is where I met Harry Denton. He was gay, told me my striking height (I’m 6’5″) and good style was very subtle but done right. I bartended in grad school. He invited me to a “pouring” and after that he said “you’re okay but you’ll get better with practice. You’re hired!”
The tips were killer. I made 500 bux a night on average. The hourly pay was minimum wage. Harry always gave a generous cash bonus at Christmas. Lots of fun there!
Anyway glad you liked it. I did 🙂
mgtowhorseman (September 11, 2017 at 12:21 pm) first quoted Deti:
… then asked:
Not so fast!
“[…] the realization by all here that love as a true emotion does not actually exist, […]”. Maybe I didn’t get that memo.
Wow. I feel sorry for you. Love is real. Or rather, they are real: Agape, Caritas, Eros, etc.
I draw your attention particularly amongst the “hits” (search results) there, to the Wikipedia article about C.S. Lewis’ book. Notice that there it says:
“[…] Eros (erōs, Greek: ἔρως) for Lewis was love in the sense of ‘being in love’ or ‘loving’ someone, as opposed to the raw sexuality of what he called Venus […]”
Add Lewis’ “storge” and “philia”, and … the list of distinct things is at least five items long: Agape, Caritas, Eros, Venus, Storge, Philia.
And notice I call them “things”, not “emotions”. I don’t really know what to call them, but simply calling them “emotions” won’t do.
Because, they all involve work. Cultivating love for God takes work, giving a damn about other people takes work, chasing pussy (Lewis’ “Venus”, there) takes work, maintaining friendships (“philia”) takes work, …
… and what Lewis was calling Eros — commitment to a particular woman — takes work. (As brothers here will often attest, heh.)
And this, incidentally, gets to the heart of why the idea of a “Soulmate” (not this kind, because “[…] once you get married, the person you married is by definition your bashert […]” — but rather this kind) is such a cancerous, ulcerous, destructive idea: it’s all about trying to find “that special someone” with whom you won’t have to do any work to sustain the relationship. It’s unadulterated (yet often adulterous) laziness.
It is also, incidentally, why the whole PUA thing is a false trail (“game” is all too real, but the PUA lifestyle is BS): it’s about using up women like a box of tissue paper, so that the dumping after the pumping will “save you” from the work of sustaining a loving relationship with any of them, and hence all of them.
… but so much for the Effortless Exciting Feelz™ of ♪♫♪♫♀♥♀♪♫♪♫ Female Love Of Drama ♪♫♪♫♀♥♀♪♫♪♫, and the pointless and ultimately pleasureless PUA pursuit of pussy. Let’s get to your questions:
WHY BOTHER?
With any of it? Why?
Because not all women are gold diggers, @$$holes, landwhales or sluts. That’s the hope, anyway. That is, the hope that we can find ourselves one woman, who would be worth the work, and on whom (e.g. frivorce) it won’t have been wasted.
Because marriage is sacramental (I’m not talking about some piece of paper The State gives you, to keep track of your tax status, etc.). Sacramental: it builds you up. Edifying.
Not “why?” …
The question rather (if you aren’t merely chasing pussy, e.g., because your Christian Faith forbids you to do that), is how to find one woman who isn’t a gold digger, an @$$hole, a pierced & tatted-up landwhale, or a bonding-incapable, high-N, clapped-out slut.
… so, “how?” — which is of course the unifying theme of all the conversations we have here in this forum. 🙂
Pax Christi Vobiscum
@redlight
You claim me at that party, it is an example of “no game”
By “games” own standard I was a boss.
The woman in question was past her prime. Arrogant. Passive-aggressive. A waste of my time. Snide, and had a downright nasty personality. “I” felt zero attraction to her.
I gave her a quick “cocky-funny” reply that was natural and a neg that was not insulting…..but it would take a moment to rub her few brain cells to make a connection, and perhaps would encourage her to change, or at least think.
I confidently left the room with my manhood intact. Not one other woman of that large group dared say anything to me to “defend” the sisterhood because my swaggar was that good. and I got my Pepsi.
Yeah “no game”
However all the “swinging dicks” out there who live “game” and “talk game” like a bad religion would have talked to her. Performed all the canned lines. Did the trained-monkey tricks. Made her giggle. Then bedded her. Claimed that she was a “9” and anyone else who was there would say a “4”.
Dalrock, can you please approve (and perhaps afterwards delete) this post?
Pingback: This Week In Reaction (2017/09/10) - Social Matter
Pingback: Frauen über 30 verlieren bei der Partnersuche – Scheidende Geister
Pingback: Judgement | Spawny's Space
Pingback: Men Owe | Spawny's Space
Pingback: “Celebs Go Dating” shows the wonder of modern romance
It seems to me that the engineer in this article has some serious issues with women! I seriously think he’s overestimating his appeal to younger women. We would soon be able to tell from his entitled attitude that he wouldn’t be a keeper! I know many single women in their mid 30s and they have had a range of interest from men from 28-45, with the majority of their actual dates being with men of the same age or slightly younger. Some of these women aren’t on dating websites because they can attract men in real life! Also, I have many single male friends and none of them date women in their 20s!! So there must be a mismatch here between what men think is happening in reality and what the experiences of women in their 30s is. Also, when I was in my 20s, I didn’t even notice men in their 30s, they just weren’t on my radar! There were so many attractive, intelligent men I knew in their 20s that I didn’t need to look outside this pool. The very few women that did were either unattractive or shallow gold diggers (so they needed to go outside their own pool to attract someone!)!