Reflections on Frost’s Analysis of the Sexual Revolution

I promised Frost of Freedom Twenty-Five I would post my thoughts on his brilliant pair of posts on the spoils of the sexual revolution:

Frost’s thesis is the following: “The Sexual Revolution harms attractive women, and unattractive men. It benefits unattractive women, and attractive men.”

Frost was responding to a Bostonian blogress named Lilly with whom he has been trading posts recently, who had posited simply “it seems like the women’s sexual revolution has done more for men than it has for women…it’s kind of a man’s dream come true: easier access to sex. Which then means it’s harder for a girl to find a guy willing to stick around.”

Susan Walsh followed up with an epic thread on the topic (861 comments to date). Since I can’t hope to re-state their judgments in better words, I will instead add my own.

1. You Can Never Over-Emphasize The Apex Fallacy

The Apex Fallacy (which I first heard of at Elusive Wapiti) is a phenomenon in social analysis where a group sees the success of the top of another group (the apex) and assumes that the entire group is leading a life of undue privilege.

The apex fallacy is what is going on in Lilly’s treatise. Most men don’t have anything resembling easy access to sex (more on that below). But because Lilly and millions of young educated women only consort with – that is to say date and sleep with – attractive men, who DO have access to sex essentially on their terms, the women they are seeing can only fathom “it must be great to be a man.” Without realizing the massive selection bias they are operating under.

At some point, the apex fallacy infected feminism and caused the movement to believe that men writ large were collectively responsible for the actions of those few men who killed, beat, raped, and abused corporations and politics for their own self-enrichment. Regular Manosphere readers understand that most men are beta or omega types, and thus almost wholly incapable of the sociopathic sexual, violent and relational crimes feminism sought to pin on the Y chromosome.

(Sidebar: I was not alive for most of this, but it’s clear feminism is deeply confused. We’re at a point where stay-at-home-momism is lauded as feminist, careerism is feminist, divorcing is feminist…instead of a movement with concrete goals, anything that aggrandizes a particular woman’s ego will be spun as a feminist act – which literally defines modern feminism as a movement of narcissism. What we have now in American society is a large number of people, like me, who are generally friendly to reasonable accommodations for women’s issues like reproductive health, workplace access, maternity leave and flex work, and a small number of very loud and obnoxious activists who we’d rather not listen to but they know a lot of lawyers.)

The AF also distorts perceptions in the sexual marketplace, as Lilly so glibly yet unawarely illustrates. Sexual liberation has gotten top men better access and variety than ever before.

Frost and Susan both make this point, so I won’t belabor it.

The AF is closely related to another phenomenon I don’t have a name for that might simply be called grass-is-greener syndrome. It’s the tendency of an ostensibly aggrieved group that if another group doesn’t have their particular problem, then they have life easier.

One example is the cubicle monkey who comes home to a housewife irate and exhausted from childcare. Papa can’t figure out what she’s so unhappy about – he has to deal with petty office politics and the pressure of bringing home the bread. But because he didn’t have to deal with a baby with diarrhea that day, she thinks his life is easier and it’s not fair.

Another example is the frequent complaint among men that women are not expected to approach and thus don’t risk the pain of rejection that men are expected to deal with. Women who are active agents in the dating market (not princesses who expect men to do all the work) experience their own challenges – trying to signal attraction and encourage men to escalate.

2. There Are Two Sexual Marketplaces

There is a dating marketplace, where commitment and relationships are bargained, and a true sexual marketplace where sex itself is bargained without relationships on the table. One’s MMV (marital market value so we don’t have to use the initials DMV) and SMV are not to be confused.

They correspond to Ladder 1 and Ladder 2 in the Male Ladder Theory.

3. Maybe Pretty Girls Do Have It Harder

As I see it, the revolution hurts top women in two ways.

First, the top women no longer have monopoly access to top men and their exponentially advanced power and resources; top men can now seek sexual satisfaction from lower-ranking women and get more variety and quantity in the process (there are more mates in the fatter part of the bell curve). All of this without substantially risking their time and resources in a relationship or a marriage.

Second, and this is a more subtle point, the short-term sexual market normalizes hardcore hypergamy. Women can get their short-term fling fix from a man who would never date them long-term. The result of this normalization is that 7’s and 8’s expect Seven Minutes in Heaven with a guy who’s a 9, and 9’s and 10’s may pine for a guy who literally doesn’t exist. A true 10 man is not going to be as attractive to a 10 as he is to a 7, so a top woman’s possible satisfaction will be lower than a woman in the second tier.

The man himself might be less satisfied with a woman at his rank. To a point, the tradeoff of her being less attractive but more into him is a positive benefit for a man’s relationship (although men do not exhibit such “hypogamy” as a primary mating strategy).

It warps the collective mindset of the sexual marketplace, and efficiency suffers at edge cases.

4. The Revolution Was Not Televised

The title of Susan’s post was a bit funny to me, because for a lot of young men today the sexual revolution never really happened.

The revolution has given less-attractive men marginally improved access to sex. (If you believe premarital sex didn’t exist before the pill, I have a subscription to Life Magazine to sell you.) It hasn’t really given the beta-male pool any real freedom of sexual congress, Haight-Ashbury notwithstanding.

It’s a bit like airport security, with one line for the gold members and airline crews and another line for the riff raff.

So a lot of guys can read this and consider whether the sexual revolution benefited men in general, but looking over their personal histories wonder what the F women like Lilly are talking about since they’ve never been invited to saddle up on her carousel. They are like people who didn’t have cable during Shark Week – they just flat missed out the hotness.

Exacerbating this split outcome is the increasing dichotomy of attractive and unattractive men. The breakwater against expanding sexual access has been the enervation of boys and men, and thus a concentration of virility in a smaller pack of males – natural alphas, guys who from boyhood resisted the kinder, gentler programming of society. This is a complex issue whose causes go way beyond the sexual revolution itself, from the emasculation of fathers in popular culture to the removal of dodgeball from PE class.

The upshot is that those who did what they were told all through the years by and large wound up sex-starved and clueless with regard to women; their mothers and their teachers helped neuter them while Dad stood by trepidatiously saying “if Mom’s not happy nobody’s happy.”

5. Mass Media Culture Globalizes Hypergamy

This is where I give Dalrock his long-promised response as well. During an intense debate at Haley’s Halo about whether it was immoral today for a woman to marry a man she wasn’t in love with (I believe it is), at least one woman made the comment that, hypothetically, a guy she doesn’t love might be her only shot at marriage and motherhood, things she “had to have,” and so he would just have to deal with it. I found this line of argument to be breathtakingly selfish. My opinion was backed up by a commenter who claimed to be stably married to a woman who fit with him but wasn’t really into him and had lived a life of unbearable sexual frustration.

Comments in response argued that because of hypergamy, most women are only attracted to a small subset of top men, and thus most men would just have to accept marrying women who are not really that limerant or turned on by them. I for one invoked Hamster’s Razor, which says to never accept rhetoric that supports one’s naked self-interest as anything other than a rationalization.

For his part, Dalrock responded with a post on the limits of hypergamy, asking if hypergamy really universally means that a large chunk of men won’t be able to mate with women who are into them.

Dalrock expressed skepticism, and I am inclined to agree. We both ascribe this line of argument to an abuse of the concept of hypergamy, and a simple case of unrealistic expectations that prevent someone from feeling an appropriate sense of love because they’ve become habituated to a bunch of silly conviction about “the man I deserve” based on whatever delusions of grandeur she was feeling the day she came up with her date-and-mate checklist.

Dalrock prescribed a deflation of ego. I suppose that’s too much to ask in our increasingly self-absorbed and self-justifying popular culture.

As to where these expectations are coming from, hypergamy is by its nature a localized phenomenon. A man’s status is going to be judged by a woman in the environment in which they both live. There is no collective unconscious repository of sexual status where women can check in and see if they’ve gotten a good deal compared to all the other girls.

At least there didn’t used to be. Now there is movies, TV, gossip rags and YouTwitFace, all of which provide ever-increasing forums for the conspicuous display of sexual value. This mass media explosion has collectivized sexual value by breaching walls between mating communities, such that all classes and ranks now have at least visual access to one another. In particular, the broadcasting of attractive men and of material lifestyles shirley have a dramatic effect on the expectations of women in the dating marketplace.

I must admit I stole this idea from the famous Roger Devlin, the academic muse of the Manosphere as it were. In Sexual Utopia In Power, Devlin noted the constant comparisons of modern women’s lives against unrealistic media-induced standards:

Formerly, most people lived parochial lives in a world where even photography did not exist. Their notions of sexual attractiveness were limited by their experience. Back in my own family tree, for example, there was a family with three daughters who grew up on a farm adjoining three others. As each girl came of age, she married a boy from one of the neighboring farms. They did not expect much in a husband. It is probable all three went through life without ever seeing a man who looked like Cary Grant.

But by the 1930s millions of women were watching Cary Grant two hours a week and silently comparing their husbands with him. For several decades since then the entertainment industry has continued to grow and coarsen. Finally the point has been reached that many women are simply not interested in meeting any man who does not look like a movie star. While it is not possible to make all men look like movie stars, it is possible to encourage women to throw themselves at or hold out for the few who do, i.e., to become sluts or spinsters, respectively. Helen Gurley Brown raked in millions doing precisely this. The brevity of a woman’s youthful bloom, combined with a mind not yet fully formed at that stage of life, always renders her vulnerable to unrealistic expectations. The sexual revolution is in part a large-scale commercial exploitation of this vulnerability.

5b. Cosmo Sells Apex Expectations To Young Women

An interesting follow-up to this point would be Cosmopolitan magazine (Helen Gurley Brown edited the magazine for over thirty years). Last time I checked, this pile of inane dreck was the best-selling periodical among young adults.  Cosmo pairs girl talk with graphic sex talk, although as a learned red pill man I know these are often one and the same.

Cosmo transparently sells the apex fallacy that your guy is going to be really hot and in demand, so you need to be well-versed in beauty, fashion, lifestyle and – most importantly – techniques for sexual variety. It presumes all its readers are going to date men with freakish sexual tastes. This closely ties into a subtle form of intrasexual competition – “These tips will make you better at sex than any woman you know. Meanwhile, everyone else is reading, it so get to work.”

The fact is that most women will never have access to the sort of strapping male model physiques that are idolized on romance novel covers and GQ, let alone access to a true alpha male with his bevy of attraction markers. As a general rule, a woman needs to emulate sexual variety during a long-term relationship, but it’s damaging to women’s self-image to give them the idea that they are never going to be good enough in the sack. I’m no sex pozzie but this idea of standing sexual inadequacy being germinated in the minds of teenage women disturbs me.

I suppose it’s no different from cosmetics, fashion and household products marketing, which all serve to constantly chip away at a woman’s security in her own domestic state.

I was still a teenager when I noticed that Cosmo thought the worst of both men and women – that men were easily-manipulated, sex-obsessed boors and that women’s highest purpose on this Earth was to look hot and serve the needs of a man better than the next girl.

About these ads

272 Comments

Filed under junk culture, original research, primary sources

272 responses to “Reflections on Frost’s Analysis of the Sexual Revolution

  1. 108spirits

    You can perhaps argue in an academic sense that attractive women today don’t have it as good as they had in the past, but they still have it better than anyone except the very top alpha men.

    The ones worst off are the unattractive and average women. Sure they had it tough in the past too, but they didn’t expect much anyway. However, today they all have it in their heads that they are attractive and expect the same things as attractive women. That’s a recipe for unhappiness.

  2. “They are like people who didn’t have cable during Shark Week – they just flat missed out the hotness.”

    That is the best simile I’ve read in years.

    Please consider it stolen from this point forth.

  3. johnnymilfquest

    Epic post.

    Of course these “how to please your man” articles in Cosmo can be better understood by replacing “man” with “alpha male”.

    Then average guys don’t have to scratch their heads thinking “well, I’m real easy to please…”

  4. susanawalsh

    Great post Badger. I think the notion of two sexual marketplaces – which correspond to short- and long-term mating strategies – is critical. I didn’t give it enough attention, so I’m glad you’ve done so here. The biggest problem with hypergamy is that it results in decisions that maximize the return in the immediate-term, i.e. tonight. That’s the one point I find that feminists have no rebuttal for – they see one sexual marketplace, and are stymied by talk of the dating marketplace. For the hardcore radfems this probably reflects a lack of interest in long-term mating. For the young sex-positive types who do want to marry, though, it’s just bad strategy. Not that they’re open to hearing that.

    I can’t think about that right now. If I do, I’ll go crazy. I’ll think about that tomorrow.

    Scarlett O’Hara

  5. As a man on the front lines of Dating 2.0 (Combat Dating), I see the “I deserve…” phenomenon all the time. It’s part of the emotional pornography that has flooded our culture and has infected women with its terrible and utterly false romantic expectations. Women actually believe the Hollywood romantic comedy fantasy. For women, “Eat, Pray, Love” and “Sex and the City” are not works of fiction, they are instruction manuals.

    Combine this with instinctual hypergamy and it’s fairly easy to predict that an entire generation of women – the plankton generation – will be fat, unhappy spinsters who will ultimately face loneliness and financial destitution.

    The flip side of this will be a generation of beta men living the life of a modest wage ape and still trying to please women by being “nice”, just like their mothers (and most women) taught them to be.

    I have hope for the younger generation of men because they seem to have a better understand of the gender conflict and how Game is a natural response to the wildly mismatched dating and relationship expectations. A man under 30 years old is far more likely to take the Red Pill of wisdom. Men my age (over 45) simply don’t get it and it’s frustrating for me to explain Dating 2.0 and how the rules have been re-written by women.

  6. Stephenie Rowling

    The Devlin article is very good. I disagree with some points, but I think that is a wonderful assessment of how think works, his solutions..? I don’t see anyone applying them at any given moment.

    Great post Badger :)

  7. Women can get their short-term fling fix from a man who would never date them long-term. The result of this normalization is that 7′s and 8′s expect Seven Minutes in Heaven with a guy who’s a 9…

    I have a post scheduled for tomorrow that covers this.
    Basically, MMV << SMV, for any one woman.

    The man himself might be less satisfied with a woman at his rank. To a point, the tradeoff of her being less attractive but more into him is a positive benefit for a man’s relationship

    I think the quantity and variety you wrote about earlier is more important.

    …top men can now seek sexual satisfaction from lower-ranking women and get more variety and quantity in the process…

    A top girl’s main competition is not some other top girl, it’s a dozen other cute girls. Because variety is something men value, a top man is making the decision between one top woman or many cute ones.

  8. Very true, the sex revolution has harmed everyone.

    “Regular Manosphere readers understand that most men are beta or omega types, and thus almost wholly incapable of the sociopathic sexual, violent and relational crimes feminism sought to pin on the Y chromosome”

    I doubt that, that most men are so limited; I hate those labels.

    “First, the top women no longer have monopoly access to top men and their exponentially advanced power and resources; top men can now seek sexual satisfaction from lower-ranking women and get more variety and quantity in the process (there are more mates in the fatter part of the bell curve)”

    Good Lord, Badger; I hope by top women, you don’t just mean gorgeous women. This struggle and the truth of relationships goes far deeper than looks; I’m so sick of the obsession that EVERYONE apparently has over them and the boxes human lines of thinking can put us in.

    “During an intense debate at Haley’s Halo about whether it was immoral today for a woman to marry a man she wasn’t in love with (I believe it is), at least one woman made the comment that, hypothetically, a guy she doesn’t love might be her only shot at marriage and motherhood, things she “had to have,” and so he would just have to deal with it. I found this line of argument to be breathtakingly selfish”

    It is indeed. “Settling” is cruel to both parties.

  9. “The AF is closely related to another phenomenon I don’t have a name for that might simply be called grass-is-greener syndrome. It’s the tendency of an ostensibly aggrieved group that if another group doesn’t have their particular problem, then they have life easier.

    One example is the cubicle monkey who comes home to a housewife irate and exhausted from childcare. Papa can’t figure out what she’s so unhappy about – he has to deal with petty office politics and the pressure of bringing home the bread. But because he didn’t have to deal with a baby with diarrhea that day, she thinks his life is easier and it’s not fair.

    Another example is the frequent complaint among men that women are not expected to approach and thus don’t risk the pain of rejection that men are expected to deal with. Women who are active agents in the dating market (not princesses who expect men to do all the work) experience their own challenges – trying to signal attraction and encourage men to escalate”

    Excellent examples. Your points about “Eat Pray Love” and “Cosmo” are especially great. Sadly, privateman, the former is NOT a work of fiction..

  10. Jennifer,

    “Good Lord, Badger; I hope by top women, you don’t just mean gorgeous women. This struggle and the truth of relationships goes far deeper than looks; I’m so sick of the obsession that EVERYONE apparently has over them and the boxes human lines of thinking can put us in.”

    We are talking about the sexual marketplace. So top women = gorgeous women.

  11. True. But I don’t respect or regard the sexual marketplace at all; it hurts everybody in it on some level, so I really couldn’t care less whether the “hottest” women are getting jipped. They’re no more deserving of “fairness” in an area devoted entirely to sex than anyone else.

  12. It’s an interesting truth though: men who just want vaginal action won’t give a damn, ultimately, about how attractive the owner of that female sex organ is.

  13. private man,

    “Combine this with instinctual hypergamy and it’s fairly easy to predict that an entire generation of women – the plankton generation – will be fat, unhappy spinsters who will ultimately face loneliness and financial destitution.”

    It is truly scary to think about this. It’s hard to believe we aren’t heading into a generation where marriage rates will be at an all-time low, with lifestyle sections and bookstores flooded with involuntary-spinsterhood sob stories. They could tell the young women watching to get a better attitude if they want to avoid this fate, but they’ll probably just blame men for not “manning up.”

    Game isn’t going to solve everybody’s problems. As you’ve seen personally, even a guy with pretty good game is up against the odds if there just aren’t that many quality women in his pool. The reverse is also true – the reason Stephenie Rowling got out of her home country.

    This is why any kind of power imbalance in the SMP is bad for everyone – when you get away from balance, a large number of people go without a decent partner. You see it in engineering schools where many frustrated men compete for few women and the women are subject to nonstop advances (often not very good ones), and in 60-40 female:male colleges like North Carolina where women fight over the thin slice of top men and become harem courtesans in the process, while most men go without.

    one thing I hadn’t yet considered about the UNC situation is when there is a guy shortage, the women spend even more time with each other instead of with guys, which enhances cattiness and groupthink, and probably makes women chase certain narrow archetypes and not be open to male variety (they want to beat their friends by chasing the same guys).

    Jennifer,

    “I doubt that, that most men are so limited; I hate those labels.”

    You believe that a majority of men in polite society are capable of cold-blooded violent crimes?

  14. “It’s an interesting truth though: men who just want vaginal action won’t give a damn, ultimately, about how attractive the owner of that female sex organ is.”

    This is manifestly not true. What in the post gave you this idea?

  15. “What in the post gave you this idea?”

    I knew this before this post, at least in regards to some men. But the post confirms it with the words about hot men getting sex from less attractive sluts, instead of sticking with the hot women alone. If they want it badly enough, they won’t care that much about looks anyway; vaginas and how good they feel are not dependent on how good-looking their owners are.

  16. “You believe that a majority of men in polite society are capable of cold-blooded violent crimes?”

    No, I believe that the majority of men in polite society are not what the manosphere describes as “betas” and “omegas”; what gross simplification. Nor do I see most rapists as “alpha”.

  17. OffTheCuff

    Stellar post, dude.

    As I read the stuff about overinflated female expectations, I got to thinking it’s slightly overblown. Maybe I just have too many normal women in my life married to regular guys at a pretty reasonable SMV level. And I’m on the Northeast coast, the supposed “worst” area of this. But perhaps my circles are be quite different than most. Maybe I’m the outlier.

    At the same time, I was thinking of the typical feminist response to that section, which would be “well, men have over-inflated expectations due to porn, too!” to which I say “yeah, but not as much”:

    1. Porn for men is almost exclusively consumed in private. Whereas Cosmo is on your coffee table. Leave a Hustler and a romance novel in your work kitchen, see which one gets you in deep shit. One is acceptable and the other is not.

    2. Porn is mostly women acting like they are totally transfixed by a man sexually. Actress are PAID to PRETEND they are totally hot for the guy, or the camera. Same for strippers, or prostitutes. Paid to pretend. When women say “he wants me to act like a whore!” she has it totally backwards (unless her guy want her to run tricks for cash). The whore is the one *acting* like a naturally enthralled woman. It’s funny that most women can’t see that this is the mirror image of the alpha male who ravishes the woman in romance novels. True, men probably can’t expect enthrallment with no effort on their part, but on the flip side, comparing wanting a BJ or lingerie to prostitution is outright false.

    3. We ain’t hypergamous. Guys generally won’t turn down a real live 8 for a porn 8, all else being equal. But things aren’t equal, an 8 won’t jump into his lap for free. So where I think porn does affect male behavior is the lowest end of the market. That means some guys will decide the cost (and I mean generalized economic cost, not “current”) of attracting a real live 2, even if he is a 2 himself, just isn’t worth it compared to a free virtual 9. Of course, the women at that end generally don’t want him anyway. That’s why the cost is so high to him. So it’s no great loss.

  18. OffTheCuff

    No, I believe that the majority of men in polite society are not what the manosphere describes as “betas” and “omegas”; what gross simplification.

    Forget the labels, the majority of men can’t pull new chicks effortlessly, anywhere near the level that an average woman can pull a new man.

  19. “Forget the labels, the majority of men can’t pull new chicks effortlessly, anywhere near the level that an average woman can pull a new man”

    LOL That surprises me, since it seems like an ugly loser can get women with game, while a woman who’s below a 7 and worthy in every other way can get easily passed up.

  20. OffTheCuff

    LOL That surprises me, since it seems like an ugly loser can get women with game, while a woman who’s below a 7 and worthy in every other way can get easily passed up.

    Most ugly losers don’t *have* game and still can’t get them easily.

    The second part is irrelevant, but still wrong. A 6 can get sex any time she wants, trivially. One post on craiglist and there will a full inbox to choose from.

    Keep trying…

  21. Very interesting points about porn. I think porn damages men more directly, letting them see women as objects and sex with no commitment. But Cosmo affects women in ultimately a way that’s even more insidious and also very harmful; they see men as poster boys and movie stars, and often even learn how to TREAT them and see them as shallow beings, instead of encouraging them to be more. Or trying to find guys who are more to begin with.

  22. “A 6 can get sex any time she wants, trivially”

    I wasn’t speaking of trivial sex.

  23. “I knew this before this post, at least in regards to some men. But the post confirms it with the words about hot men getting sex from less attractive sluts, instead of sticking with the hot women alone. If they want it badly enough, they won’t care that much about looks anyway; vaginas and how good they feel are not dependent on how good-looking their owners are.”

    That is not at all what’s going on in the post; this debate is getting very daft. You act as if a man can’t find a woman lower than his “rank” attractive at all. That’s female hypergamous thinking projected onto men. Men have much wider attraction filters than men, and so even top men find many women attractive, not just the so-called 10’s. When we talk about top men seeking variety and quantity instead of a single singular beauty, we’re really talking about 7’s and 8’s – still very pretty women by objective standards.

    I disagree that all these women are “sluts;” while some are riding the carousel, many are simply executing a strategy – they offer sex in return for the validation of being with a top male, and if they win the lottery, his relationship commitment. It’s a very poor strategy, but it is a different animal than low-impulse-control sluttitude.

  24. Pingback: Why Girls Aren’t as Pretty as They Think « Kane

  25. Anonymous Reader

    Jennifer
    Very interesting points about porn. I think porn damages men more directly, letting them see women as objects and sex with no commitment.

    Why is that damaging, given men’s ability to disassociate? More than one married man in the modern world spends a couple of months after his wife gives birth masturbating to porn — because (a) he’s horny (b) his wife cannot and/or will not & likely should not have intercourse and (c) he’s devoted to her and refuses to consider an affair or a prostitute. Now, when that time period is over, and his wife is ready to consent to sex again, will he suddenly view her as a sex object only, due to his exposure to Demon Porn? Or will he simply put the porn away and get back to rogering his wife?

    But Cosmo affects women in ultimately a way that’s even more insidious and also very harmful; they see men as poster boys and movie stars, and often even learn how to TREAT them and see them as shallow beings, instead of encouraging them to be more. Or trying to find guys who are more to begin with.

    No, that’s not quite correct. Cosmo et al, including the shelves of emo-porn in the book stores, affect women by leading them to regard men as success objects. Women do not compartmentalize as men do, therefore ideas tend to bleed into each other, and a woman who spends a lot of her day watching Oxygen/Lifetime, reading emo porn, reading Cosmo, is likely to develop an ever more unrealistic view of what Her Man Should Be. This is, in my opinion, one of the sources for 400 point bullet lists of non-negotiable demands that can be seen on dating sites.

    To sum up: men objectify women as sex objects, women objectify men as success objects, and there are people ready & willling to make money on both sides.

  26. “this debate is getting very daft”

    It’s not daft in the least; I described lower-level women in looks, and I certainly didn’t mean 7’s and 8’s. In fact, I don’t buy the idea that men obsess over ranks that much at all, even if they do stick to attractive women, so your claim that I seem to think they can’t find women lower than their rank attractive is not true.

    “It’s a very poor strategy, but it is a different animal than low-impulse-control sluttitude”

    Oh yes, loose women usually have more in mind than sex. But those I consider sluts are called such by their sexual actions, not necessarily their motives

  27. “If they want it badly enough, they won’t care that much about looks anyway; vaginas and how good they feel are not dependent on how good-looking their owners are”

    I did not get that point, btw, primarily from this post; it just reminded me of it, of what some men will do at the most severe levels.

  28. 108spirits

    “When we talk about top men seeking variety and quantity instead of a single singular beauty, we’re really talking about 7′s and 8′s – still very pretty women by objective standards.”

    Still too high. Think lower, even down to 4. e.g Arnie and his maid, Hugh Grant (while dating Liz Hurley) and the cheap whore.

  29. “Cosmo et al, including the shelves of emo-porn in the book stores, affect women by leading them to regard men as success objects”

    Yes, and this encourages them to treat men in a shallow fashion. You’re certainly right about thoughts bleeding into each other; one of the few things I severely envy men for is their thought-separation abilities.

    “Why is that damaging, given men’s ability to disassociate?”

    It’s a typical myth that men can watch loads of porn and then just put it aside. Granted, a guy who comes across porn repeatedly after he’s married is less likely to be as damaged as a guy who immersed himself in porn BEFORE ever having a real relationship, but sex has power and it does affect us, compartmentalization or no. Besides, I don’t consider the ability to separate sex entirely from any emotional meaning a good thing anyway.

  30. 108spirits

    What is it with Western women who can’t stop whinging about porn? You can’t compete with digital women? Women in other countries have to compete with widely available prostitution AND porn and they do just fine.

    If you have nothing to offer a man other than sex, then yeah you should be worried about porn, but that’s your damn fault.

  31. LOL Sure, it’s women’s fault. What on earth makes you think women in even more secular countries than this one do just fine? Prostitution and rampant porn, and they’re really doing ok? It’s good that they don’t complain? If people here complain about porn and those in other countries DON’T, that tells me that luckily we still hold people to a higher standard. Plus I don’t know if you noticed, but porn just encourages men, and women, all the more to seek sex and nothing else.

    “You can’t compete with digital women?”

    Of course not, that’s the point; porn presents an unrealistic and deeply flawed view of sex, men and women.

  32. detinennui32

    Jennifer: I disagree that men just want the vaj, they don’t care about the looks of who owns it. That is just not true. Sure, the lowest level men could maybe snag a 1 or a 2. But they want higher level women too. Just about every man I know or have known has standards below which they won’t go. I think Devlin has articulated this somewhere.

    Though many more women are attractive to men than the reverse, we men still won’t settle for women who hold no attraction for us whatsoever just to get laid.

  33. detinennui32

    OTC: “A 6 can get sex any time she wants, trivially”
    Jennifer: “I wasn’t speaking of trivial sex.”

    deti: OK Jen, but the OP is about the operation of the SMP, not the MMP.

    I think it’s established beyond a reasonable doubt that in general, a female 6 can walk into any bar or public place and announce she is down for sex, and she’ll have a line of willing male partners inside of a minute. If she really wants sex, she can get it anytime she wants. And she can probably get a male 7 or 8 without breaking a sweat. A male 6 is lucky these days to get a 5 for an LTR or a 4 for a ONS.

  34. detinennui32

    Jennifer: “LOL That surprises me, since it seems like an ugly loser can get women with game, while a woman who’s below a 7 and worthy in every other way can get easily passed up”

    cosign what OTC said at 11:51 pm. Let me add: An ugly loswer with game can get some women but probably not higher than a notch above his own SMP.

    Jen, in the MMP a female 6 still wants to marry at least a 7. That’s basic hypergamy, Game 101. What you’re really saying is that a female 6 is being passed over BY THE MEN ABOVE HER in MMV. A male 6 is her natural mate under former assortative mating principles. But today, the men at or below her MMP are invisible to her; she won’t even consider them as dating material, much less marriage material.

  35. “Jennifer: I disagree that men just want the vaj, they don’t care about the looks of who owns it. That is just not true”

    I never said ALL men detinn; I don’t know where that impression came from.

    “An ugly loswer with game can get some women but probably not higher than a notch above his own SMP”

    Susan Walsh mentioned a guy like that in passing and said he got many women.

    “What you’re really saying is that a female 6 is being passed over BY THE MEN ABOVE HER in MMV. A male 6 is her natural mate under former assortative mating principles. But today, the men at or below her MMP are invisible to her; she won’t even consider them as dating material, much less marriage material”

    I’m glad I don’t ascribe to all game’s definitions; it makes things way too simple, at least with in-depth human beings. I don’t know anyone who obsesses over each different number in a SMP or a MMV, especially since we individually have different tastes and tolerances for what makes a desirable mate or a “ten” from an “eight”. And yes, to speak in that language, sometimes “six” women with every possible trait for being good wive are ignored for women who are “ten” in looks; other times, not as much. I certainly agree that women are becoming pickier.

  36. I think porn damages men more directly, letting them see women as objects and sex with no commitment.

    I think you’re projecting a female way of thinking on to men. Even without porn, men would be pretty good at seeing women as sex objects with no commitment. What porn does is raise the standard of beauty. Compound that with the fact that the current SMP makes it hard for a 4 man to bang a girl at his level, and you have the perfect storm.
    For the first time in history, a 4 man can see what it’s like to have sex with a 9 woman. Given girls’ inflated view of their own beauty, that 4 man only has a good shot at picking up a 2 woman. Jerking off to a female 9 getting banged by another man is better than having sex with a 2. He may not even be able to get it up for a 2.

    The female equivalent to porn is emotional porn. “Sex And The City”, “Eat, Pray, Love” etc. They depict women of low marriage quality actually getting commitment from high quality men. Girls see this fantasy and assume they can live the same twisted fairytale. They go on to inflate their standards, getting pumped and dumped by men who won’t commit, while men at their level are jacking it to porn.

  37. There’s also a very fine line now between considering yourself a prize (which game recommends) and thinking TOO highly of yourself, to the point where you think there’s no room for improvement and are blind to your own flaws (wise gamers advise against this). Women seem to have a particularly hard time with this, since the sex revolution.

  38. “They depict women of low marriage quality actually getting commitment from high quality men”

    Those men were just as sexually experienced as they were. I see the picture of older, mid-30’s people who have known each other for years getting together more likely than a lot of other stuff on TV. I might also mention that in “Eat pray Love”, incidentally, she fell for an older divorcee.

    “Even without porn, men would be pretty good at seeing women as sex objects with no commitment”

    But porn, as you said (though in a different way than I would) just exacerbates the problem. It gives unrealistic expectations all around; hell, a lot of the “10” women in porn have few natural body parts to even offer, and that definition of beauty is very relative to me. In every way, men start to lust for something fake, while women reach for something unrealistic and inflated.

  39. Those men were just as sexually experienced as they were.

    Only very desirable men are able to gain that level of sexual experience without paying for it. A woman just has to be at least a 4. Standards are different, accept that. It’s not going to change.

    The woman in “Eat, Pray, Love” abandoned her first husband, then managed to find herself a rich businessman to take care of her. Even if he was previously divorced, he was far better than she was. A woman who abandons her husband doesn’t deserve to find another one.

  40. On Sex and the City Carrie met Mr Big when she was 30 and he was about 40. He was divorced from his first wife. They were on and off again (I was never an avid fan but the women I know always wanted her and Aidan to be together which is quite interesting as Mr Big was the stereotypical alpha) and he married someone else. Someone younger than Carrie. It took quite a lot of faff before they finally got married over 10 years later. She got her man in the end but it was at the expense of lots of other things (and in the meantime Aidan married and had 3 kids with someone else), maybe it was her choice but it was quite clear that choices have consequences.

    Miranda the lawyer had problems right at the beginning with men to go out with/marry. She ended up with a beta barman Steve.

    Actually I’ll give up now before covering Steve’s cheating or Charlotte’s or Samantha’s lovelives as I’ve bored myself. But I think the way SATC is used as shorthand for certain things is often wrong.

  41. “The woman in “Eat, Pray, Love” abandoned her first husband, then managed to find herself a rich businessman to take care of her. Even if he was previously divorced, he was far better than she was”

    Just saying, he was far from the culture’s view of a 10. He was divorced, a LOT older, a good deal of baggage in every way. I would have half expected our self-deserving Liz to have picked up a naive young hottie, in some misguided attempt to make him her special lovey-soulmate-cosmos-partner or whatever.

    “Only very desirable men are able to gain that level of sexual experience
    without paying for it. A woman just has to be at least a 4.”

    By “paying for it”, you mean monetarily? Seems like, in the long run though, women can get away with sex a lot less; they lose their value in the MM after multiple partners. Anyway, I have to say, as awesome as the S&TC’s hubbies were, they were not all what our culture would call 10’s.

    Agreed, Lily. The show has many unrealistic aspects, but it surprisingly deals pretty sharply sometimes with regrets, mistakes and esp. infidelity.

  42. Dalrock’s posts on the SMP and divorce stats were awesome; very helpful.

  43. susanawalsh

    @OffTheCuff

    As I read the stuff about overinflated female expectations, I got to thinking it’s slightly overblown. Maybe I just have too many normal women in my life married to regular guys at a pretty reasonable SMV level. And I’m on the Northeast coast, the supposed “worst” area of this. But perhaps my circles are be quite different than most. Maybe I’m the outlier.

    This has also been my experience. Mostly, though, I know established marrieds 40+ and young unmarrieds. It’s possible that things have shifted that dramatically in one generation, but I think it’s more likely that we tend to focus on the negative. Female narcissism is up dramatically as a percentage of all narcissists, but that’s still probably only around 10% of the population.

    When I walk through my neighborhood park on a Saturday morning, it is chock full of average-looking men and women with their babies and toddlers. One doesn’t get the sense that there’s been any “settling.”

    So we’ve got data on one hand, anecdotal evidence on the other, and a huge no man’s land in between.

  44. Anonymous Reader

    Jennifer
    “Why is that damaging, given men’s ability to disassociate?”

    It’s a typical myth that men can watch loads of porn and then just put it aside.

    Two thoughts:
    First, we do it every day. Any man who watches prime time TV sees things that would have been classified as porn back in the ’50’s. I’ve met immigrants from less advanced countries who asked my why Americans watch so much porn — and he wasn’t referring to stuff on the internet, he was referring to prime time. Advertising is often saturated with porny images. And if we don’t “just put it aside” then various kinds of trouble will ensue. So basically every adult man has to deal with being exposed to sexual images, all the time, and has to put it aside.

    Imagine if every time you walked down the street of a city, handsome men who just ooze success, command of resources, and caring niceness were walking around with boxes full of Prada handbags and expensive shoes, but talking to them, or even approaching them, was potentially a crime. Do you think that you would find that a bit frustrating, and that you would have to learn to compartmentalize just a bit? That’s the analogy that comes off the top of my head. Perhaps Badger or others can refine it.

    Second, you are both moving the goalposts and sweeping a whole lot of different situations into one bin. Lumping the married man who resorts to porn when his wife is not available with the college man who spends a lot of free time in the dorm room downloading porn with the unmarried 20-something who obsesses over porn, etc. etc. is a gross oversimplification. It smacks of the usual “male sexuality is disgusting” trope.

    Granted, a guy who comes across porn repeatedly after he’s married is less likely to be as damaged as a guy who immersed himself in porn BEFORE ever having a real relationship, but sex has power and it does affect us, compartmentalization or no.

    Ok, define the “damage” that a man who resorts to porn while his wife is recovering from childbirth is certain to suffer. Bear in mind that it’s quite likely he’s looking at images of sex acts that he and his wife have already done, so the usual “unrealistic expectations” argument does not even start.

    Besides, I don’t consider the ability to separate sex entirely from any emotional meaning a good thing anyway.

    It’s a known aspect of male sexuality, probably related to our ability to focus exclusively on sexual activity, ignoring everything else around us. Are there any other aspects of male sexuality you don’t like? What do you plan to do about your dislike?

  45. Rich Cook

    I ran into this “I deserve” attitude before I met my current girlfriend. It got me kind of aggravated because I had been hearing it constantly. My response: “You don’t deserve shit. You don’t even deserve your life.”

  46. Anonymous Reader

    When I walk through my neighborhood park on a Saturday morning, it is chock full of average-looking men and women with their babies and toddlers. One doesn’t get the sense that there’s been any “settling.”

    When you walk through your upper-middle class to upper class neighborhood, are you seeing a cross section of Boston in financial terms, or are you seeing a slice of one particular socio-economic strata? Perhaps my question answers itself?

    And how would one get any sense of “settling” just from seeing people walking by? Don’t women tend to hide that from others as a rule?

    So we’ve got data on one hand, anecdotal evidence on the other, and a huge no man’s land in between.

    Looks more like anecdote than data overall.

  47. “So basically every adult man has to deal with being exposed to sexual images, all the time, and has to put it aside”

    Yes, this culture has indeed messed a lot of things up. But there’s a big difference between seeing sensual images and seeing actual SEX. Look at our culture now; you think we have indeed completely”put it aside”?

    “Bear in mind that it’s quite likely he’s looking at images of sex acts that he and his wife have already done, so the usual “unrealistic expectations” argument does not even start”

    Oh yes it does. Say his wife hasn’t lost all the pregnancy weight yet, and he’s watching a thin and implanted woman groan at being impaled by a foreign object, which incidentally is something his wife would never do. You’re not going to convince me that porn, or any such thing, doesn’t affect people negatively on some level.

    “Lumping the married man who resorts to porn when his wife is not available with the college man who spends a lot of free time in the dorm room downloading porn with the unmarried 20-something who obsesses over porn, etc. etc. is a gross oversimplification”

    I very specifically said there’d be a difference.

    “What do you plan to do about your dislike?”

    What I said was that there are few areas of masculine traits that I ENVY, not that I like; as in, there are few things about men that would make me want to be one and trade being a woman for that. I think the sexes are pretty equal in faults and virtues, so I’d have no reason to want to switch from one set to another.

    “Imagine if every time you walked down the street of a city, handsome men who just ooze success, command of resources, and caring niceness were walking around with boxes full of Prada handbags and expensive shoes, but talking to them, or even approaching them, was potentially a crime”

    LOL Well, if they were carrying Prada bags and expensive shoes, I’d get the impression they were feminine and be turned off. But you see? Men haven’t completely put it aside; men still approach women, and some are desperate enough to resort to online advice about how to do so.

  48. Matt

    This has also been my experience. Mostly, though, I know established marrieds 40+ and young unmarrieds. It’s possible that things have shifted that dramatically in one generation, but I think it’s more likely that we tend to focus on the negative. Female narcissism is up dramatically as a percentage of all narcissists, but that’s still probably only around 10% of the population.

    When I walk through my neighborhood park on a Saturday morning, it is chock full of average-looking men and women with their babies and toddlers. One doesn’t get the sense that there’s been any “settling.”

    So we’ve got data on one hand, anecdotal evidence on the other, and a huge no man’s land in between.

    You’d have to go to my college to see the other side. I go to a state university with 40,000+ students.

    A HUGE portion of the women at my college are promiscuous. I’d say at least 20%. Some sororities have a rule, “Don’t have sex with more than one man per week.” From my own experiences, you don’t even have to have any level of social status to get laid. The basic requirements for a guy to get laid on the weekends is: be tall, goodlooking and somewhat of an asshole. It’s unbelievable. Almost NO ONE is in a relationship. Practically everyone is single and the attractive people party together on the weekends and hook up.

    My cousin is experiencing the same thing. He’s a kicker at another state university and from the stories we shared, he adds about 10-30 women to his notch count per semester.

  49. Random Angeleno

    At least half of all men are introverted (like myself). For many of us, that doesn’t do very much for our game when it comes to meeting and attracting closely ranked women in today’s SMP or MMP. So we’re often told to pursue women ranking much lower than us in looks. And I see a lot of settling going on out there: decent looking guys married to very overweight women. Funny thing I almost never see fat guys with slender women around here…

    Jennifer, you need to watch how you word things. You sometimes word things in absolutes and then pull back when you get called on it.

    About that EPL woman, her new husband may not have been a 10. But he was still far better than she deserved. Think rich businessman with some game who can afford to indulge her expensive tastes.

  50. Never intended to word things as absolutes (with the exception that porn’s harmful), but thanks for letting me know how I sound; I’ll watch out for that.

  51. Anonymous Reader

    “So basically every adult man has to deal with being exposed to sexual images, all the time, and has to put it aside”

    Yes, this culture has indeed messed a lot of things up. But there’s a big difference between seeing sensual images and seeing actual SEX.

    You do not understand how visual men are, nor do you understand the effect of a short skirt, plunging neckline, etc. Plus I believe you are glossing over the popular culture quite a bit.

    Look at our culture now; you think we have indeed completely”put it aside”?

    Taking a quote out of context in order to score a point does not impress me. Your rejoinder has nothing to do with what I wrote. I’ll write it more bluntly.

    Men see images and people pretty much continuously that are specificallly intended to cause him to become sexually aroused. Young women in short skirts and plunging necklines no doubt don’t intend to arouse me per se, but they are dressing to arouse someone sexually. Advertisers use women to sell stuff, the not very subtle message often being buy this stuff and you can have sex with this woman. This stuff is around me a lot, women dressed to arouse male attention are around in varying degrees depending on cultural/geographical variations. Yet I am prohibited, by law, by custom, by my own self respect, from acting on the arousal that is deliberately induced in me. Every man in the west has to indeed put aside the arousal that women and the media seek to deliberately induce in him and we have to do it every day, all day, year in and year out.

    Now, is that clear enough for you? Do you understand that regardless of whether a man looks at overt, sexual-intercourse type porn, he is still being bombarded with images / clothing / etc. that is deliberately intended to arouse him sexually, and he is prohibited from doing anything but suppressing the arousal?

    Given that, please explain how exposure to porn is so horribly more damaging than what we men have to live with all the time?

  52. Anonymous Reader

    “Bear in mind that it’s quite likely he’s looking at images of sex acts that he and his wife have already done, so the usual “unrealistic expectations” argument does not even start”

    Oh yes it does. Say his wife hasn’t lost all the pregnancy weight yet, and he’s watching a thin and implanted woman groan at being impaled by a foreign object, which incidentally is something his wife would never do.

    Shifting the goalposts yet again, I see. I specifically stated that it is quite likely he’s going to look at images of sex acts he and his wife have already done. (If there was ever a reason for couples to make their own, private sex recordings, this would be one of them). You dragged in a red herring, deliberately changing the subject away from what I wrote. That is not an honest debate tactic.

    Now as for the issue of weight: you again display ignorance of male sexuality. A married man is going to have memories of his wife going back for some time. The weight isn’t going to bother him, it’s lack of sexual access to his wife that is the frustrating factor. Again, he’s very likely to stop viewing porn once his wife can safely have intercourse again.

    So once again, without the red herrings, tell me how this “damages” him. Bear in mind that even without porn, when a man cannot have sex with his wife, he’ll masturbate to fantasy. That fantasy likely will be of his wife, but it might not be after a long enough period of time — and men with good powers of visualization can do almost as good a job in their mind as most porn vids.

    So how do you plan to police men’s minds, in order to prevent them from having a sexual fantasy about any woman other than their wife, please?

    You’re not going to convince me that porn, or any such thing, doesn’t affect people negatively on some level.

    I understand that your mind is made up and you do not wish to be troubled by any contrary opinion. I also understand that you do not like male sexuality at all.

  53. susanawalsh

    When you walk through your upper-middle class to upper class neighborhood, are you seeing a cross section of Boston in financial terms, or are you seeing a slice of one particular socio-economic strata? Perhaps my question answers itself?

    Actually, I live in a very mixed neighborhood. There are large, lavish homes, and two projects within half a dozen blocks. There are large apartment buildings and lots of triple deckers. There is a large immigrant community, many students and plenty of families of all ages. The park I refer to is in the part of town with many tall apartment buildings, so it tends to draw a “just starting out” crowd. My guess is that the education level is quite high, FWIW. Lots of professionals, graduate students, interns, etc.

    And how would one get any sense of “settling” just from seeing people walking by? Don’t women tend to hide that from others as a rule?

    What I meant was that people seem highly engaged with one another and their children. Of course, we can’t know what goes on behind closed doors, but in general I take it as a positive sign when couples are laughing together, spending time with their children, sharing family time in a highly pleasurable and functional way. We interact with quite a few of the families because their children want to pet our dog. The women are not spoiled and entitled princesses, as far as I can tell. Most of them are quite ordinary looking, married to ordinary looking men.

    I’ve estimated that only 20% of women are promiscuous as a result of strong hypergamous impulses. That leaves most women declining to ride the alpha carousel, either because of values or opportunity.

  54. SayWhaat

    What porn does is raise the standard of beauty.

    You’ve gotta be kidding me. Raises it? Raises the standard? Silicone boobs, unnaturally bare groins, etc.? If you are calling this a high standard I’m just going to assume you’ve never seen a real woman in your life.

  55. SayWhaat

    Leave a Hustler and a romance novel in your work kitchen, see which one gets you in deep shit. One is acceptable and the other is not.

    Men get to have casual sex without the resulting stigma, women do not. Women get to publicly enjoy their version of porn, men do not.

    Double-standards for both sexes. Deal with it.

  56. “You do not understand how visual men are”

    Yes I do, which is one of the reasons why I’m against porn, far more severe than low necklines.

    “Plus I believe you are glossing over the popular culture quite a bit”

    Certainly not my intention, since I think our culture is pretty damn trashy.

    “Taking a quote out of context in order to score a point does not impress me”

    It’s not out of context at all, nor do I take the mass immodesty in our culture lightly; it’s very clearly messing up a lot of things, and it shows, which is why I don’t think men can completely put it aside all the time. That was my point, in fact: you say that you, and therefore men in general, put aside any and all mass sexual images that they’re subjected to. I don’t believe this; sex affects everyone on some level, even a subconscious one, and if there’s one issue that men seem to have the most trouble separating from different issues, it’s sex.

    Let me better sum up my feelings: our culture is indeed a huge Venus unzipped-fly trap for men. I never intended to sound like I take this lightly, though sometimes I do forget how hard it must be for them. I think the foolish women who bare their essentials need to grow up and stop offering the goods for visual consumption only; such low fare is for strippers and Hefner bunnies. And this DOES affect men; it frusterates and inflames them, and naturally lowers their views of women a good deal of the time. So why would I be ok with them being further frusterated and lowered in their views of women by porn?

    “Given that, please explain how exposure to porn is so horribly more damaging than what we men have to live with all the time?”

    Are you kidding me? You don’t think seeing a naked woman in various sexual positions is different from women wearing short skirts? It enflames the male mind, once again with things they can’t access (like the half-bared buttcheeks on the street), all the more. If nothing else, that’s ridiculous pragmatism; sexual images are everywhere, so porn can’t be that much worse. I’m very aware of the sexualism in our culture and it’s gotten pretty bad, which is why I’m certainly not going to shrug off porn.

    “You dragged in a red herring”

    Pointing out the fact that porn presents unrealistic images is not in the least a red herring. No matter what married couples have done, pornography and its activities of virtual strangers having sex with no commitment and often no foreplay in front of a camera does not reflect a marriage at all. A married man may happily return to his wife, but by flipping on that stuff, he’s playing with fire.

    “Now as for the issue of weight: you again display ignorance of male sexuality”

    Really? Then please explain that to the men who have bitched about female weight gain to me. The point is, there are a myriad of possibilities that porn can awaken in a person’s mind.

    “I specifically stated that it is quite likely he’s going to look at images of sex acts he and his wife have already done”

    That’s a HUGE guess on your part; it might even be true for you, but it’s also quite likely that a guy may very well try some porn that explores sexual areas he’s never tried before.

    “This stuff is around me a lot, women dressed to arouse male attention are around in varying degrees depending on cultural/geographical variations. Yet I am prohibited, by law, by custom, by my own self respect, from acting on the arousal that is deliberately induced in me. Every man in the west has to indeed put aside the arousal that women and the media seek to deliberately induce in him and we have to do it every day, all day, year in and year out”

    That’s because the media and the American secular female population is full of Class A morons. People who dress or act in a way to arouse men and then expect men to not react are fools, which is another reason porn is harmful.

    “That fantasy likely will be of his wife, but it might not be after a long enough period of time — and men with good powers of visualization can do almost as good a job in their mind as most porn vids”

    So why not enflame the matter further by watching porn, right? How about reversing that: if men have such great minds, might as well just use those instead of buying or dirtying the computer with porn.

    “So how do you plan to police men’s minds, in order to prevent them from having a sexual fantasy about any woman other than their wife, please?”

    I’ve been accused of wanting to police men’s minds before because, God forbid, I hate porn. I don’t give a damn about policing anyone’s mind; I can’t control them and I don’t want to, nor can men control everything in the street that comes across their line of sight or even every thought themselves, but they sure can control what they watch on their computer or television. Porn is, primarily, something men must take action against by simply not watching it, but lack of modesty in females in general is something that I, and many other Christian women, are trying to wake women up to (I just love ths signs in those stupid slutwalks saying, “My clothes have nothing to do with you!” Of course they do, sweetheart; who the hell are you kidding? Unless you’re a dyke who hopes to attract other women?)

    “I also understand that you do not like male sexuality at all”

    Another typical accusation: if I don’t like men, or ANYONE, watching cheap and dirty sex or doing it themselves for others to watch, I must have a problem with make sexuality. What’s the insinuation there? That male sexuality is not complete or satisfied without porn? You’re right about the comment previous to that, however; everything I know about male visual stimulation, I know from men. And everything I know about porn’s affect on men I know from men primarily too; before I listened to a man, and some others about it, I too thought it wasn’t THAT big of a deal.

    “If there was ever a reason for couples to make their own, private sex recordings, this would be one of them”

    That’s a good idea.

  57. “I’ve estimated that only 20% of women are promiscuous as a result of strong hypergamous impulses. That leaves most women declining to ride the alpha carousel, either because of values or opportunity”

    Really? Thanks Susan, that’s encouraging to me.

  58. OffTheCuff

    I totally disagree with Jen’s rant against porn.

    Porn is like alcohol, most people can handle it, and a few people can’t that really ruing it for the rest of us.

    Personally, I’ve learned lots of tricks from … PORN that both Mrs. C & I enjoy very much. But my wife is already enthralled with me, so I don’t have to fantasize about a woman at my beck and call. There really is nothing unrealistic about the porn we choose to watch. Sometimes we watch stuff that pushes the boundaries a bit, for ideas, and then decide if it’s for us. Or not. No big deal. It’s just fun.

    BTW, porn that has foreplay and the actors actually talking about who they are (rather than acting) is far hotter than the old-style no-context stuff. Reality porn wins.

    I am an ex-Christian which may explain my stance here. Church nearly ruined me and I’m glad to be rid of it…

  59. “I am an ex-Christian which may explain my stance here”

    It does. I on the other hand am a present-day Christian, and what I offered was far more than a rant. Lots of people defend porn and even say it helps their sex lives, but I don’t see that as justification for watching other people screw around.

  60. Study after study shows porn reduces sex crime rates. It’s by no means perfectly safe, but I believe it plays a role in keeping a lot of very angry undersexed young men from being quite so angry and sexually aggressive against women.

  61. It’s ironic you say that, Athol, because many kinds of porn promote violent and degrading acts with women. I read that if every kind of porn involving nasty insults or treatment of women was taken off the market, most of the industry would out and out disappear. Even w/out *inflaming any sadistic desires in men, it can’t be said to give them a good feeling about women (other than a physical one, I mean). For many, it creates a hunger for more and more wild stuff, and if the man in particular has any psychological issues, it can spiral them severely. So it may sate some men by allowing them to let off steam, but for most it’s temporary relief, and can be a double-edged sword.

    The fact that so many undersexed men are so angry, I think, again leads back to the culture’s sexual taunting of males. Our insanely inflated images and visual ideas taunt men and women: to one they say, “Look what you can’t have!” To another, “Look what you can’t be!”

    *Can’t believe I misspelled “inflaming” for so darn long.

  62. Anonymous Reader

    “Lumping the married man who resorts to porn when his wife is not available with the college man who spends a lot of free time in the dorm room downloading porn with the unmarried 20-something who obsesses over porn, etc. etc. is a gross oversimplification”

    I very specifically said there’d be a difference.

    No, you said “less likely”, that isn’t much of a difference.

    “What do you plan to do about your dislike?”

    What I said was that there are few areas of masculine traits that I ENVY, not that I like; as in, there are few things about men that would make me want to be one and trade being a woman for that. I think the sexes are pretty equal in faults and virtues, so I’d have no reason to want to switch from one set to another.

    That is not at all the impression you have given me. You clearly do not like certain aspects of the male human – such as our visual nature. Again I ask what you plan to do about this obvious dislike. This is a rhetorical question, obviously.

    “Imagine if every time you walked down the street of a city, handsome men who just ooze success, command of resources, and caring niceness were walking around with boxes full of Prada handbags and expensive shoes, but talking to them, or even approaching them, was potentially a crime”

    LOL Well, if they were carrying Prada bags and expensive shoes, I’d get the impression they were feminine and be turned off.

    Carrying them in boxes labeled “Free to any Special Woman”, not carried over the arm. Carrying stacks of whatever consumer good you like, want and yearn for, in plain sight, clearly ready to give those goods away — but not to you, and if you even speak to them you could be arrested. I hope the analogy is more clear to you now?

    But you see? Men haven’t completely put it aside; men still approach women, and some are desperate enough to resort to online advice about how to do so.

    No, you really should read more carefullly. I am spelling out a scenario in which men that you would desire are walking around clearly displaying the kind of material goods that most women lust for, all the while making it clear that it’s all only for “Special Women” and you ain’t one — and if you dare to say one word to them, you could be arrested for harassment.

    is it clear now? Or are you just yanking my chain to see how many times I’ll hop for your amusement?

  63. Anonymous Reader

    The park I refer to is in the part of town with many tall apartment buildings, so it tends to draw a “just starting out” crowd. My guess is that the education level is quite high, FWIW. Lots of professionals, graduate students, interns, etc.

    Do you regard that as an accurate cross section of Boston? I’m sure you are aware that marriage rates are higher in the professional class than middle or lower classes. So what you are saying is “I’m all right, and all the upper income people I know are all right, so I guess that everyone is all right”. Do you see any possible logic flaw there?

  64. Anonymous Reader

    Oh, and Jennifer, does your dislike of porn also extend to pornographic scenes in books? Even books that feature strong, manly men who are brooding widowers that no woman can seem to fathom, or who are independently wealthy but choose a secret life as a gardener, or who are brooding pirate captains with a secret, sorrowful memory they dare not share with any man? Or TV shows with the same plot, i.e. pretty much the entire programming of Lifetime, and Oxygen, not to mention other shows?

    You know, emotional pornography for women?

    Somehow, I doubt it. Because I’ve known too many good, church going ladies – single and married – who march right down to the shelves at Barnes & Noble on a regular basis to pick up their romance-porn. Please do not try to tell me I don’t know what is in those books. I’ve read some, specifically to see what women like — and Athol’s posting on this topic was spot on. The explicit sex scenes every so many pages are, of course, just as pornographic as anything that is sold in an “adult book store”. But women’s romance-porn is sold right out in the open. Because it satisfies women’s sexual fantasies, it’s a good, acceptable form of fiction, not like that nasty stuff men like.

    Right, Jennifer?

  65. Anonymous Reader

    It’s ironic you say that, Athol, because many kinds of porn promote violent and degrading acts with women. I read that if every kind of porn involving nasty insults or treatment of women was taken off the market, most of the industry would out and out disappear.

    Where did you read that? I really want a cite. Because so far as I know, the vast majority of porn is one man, one woman, intercourse. There’s all kinds of niches and I’m sure somewhere on the net any bizarre act can be found. But what I wager sells the most is a man, having intercourse with a woman who is acting enthused and willing. Oh, the horror; men are willing to pay money to buy a DVD, or download from the web, a video of a woman willingly and with enthusiasm having sex with a man. What’s more, the porn industry isn’t making as much money as it used to. The internet has
    created competition, in the form of web sites where amateur couples post their own home videos. I have no idea how many such sites exist, no idea if they make money or not, but do know from reading various business sources that the porn business is taking a hit from them.

    Now, why do you suppose that men are willing to go to the trouble to see images of women who are both willing and enthusiastic, engaging in intercourse, if they are so jaded and sadistic as you claim?

    Even w/out *inflaming any sadistic desires in men, it can’t be said to give them a good feeling about women (other than a physical one, I mean).

    How do you know that? Is it from your many years of living as a man?

    For many, it creates a hunger for more and more wild stuff, and if the man in particular has any psychological issues, it can spiral them severely.

    How do you know that to be true?

    So it may sate some men by allowing them to let off steam, but for most it’s temporary relief, and can be a double-edged sword.

    How do you know that to be true?

    The fact that so many undersexed men are so angry, I think, again leads back to the culture’s sexual taunting of males. Our insanely inflated images and visual ideas taunt men and women: to one they say, “Look what you can’t have!” To another, “Look what you can’t be!”

    Why, I’ll actually agree with this statement. But it is incomplete.

  66. “You clearly do not like certain aspects of the male human – such as our visual nature”

    You are misreading my own words now. It does sometimes irritate me that men pop up after just a view of a girl’s shoulders, for ex, but other than this I certainly don’t hate their natural sexuality. Only when it’s exploited.

    “Or are you just yanking my chain to see how many times I’ll hop for your amusement?”

    I’m sorry you seem to think that that’s what this entire exchange is. I think I’ve made it perfectly plain by now what I think of women who dress loosely; only by ignoring my words could you come to the conclusion that I have no opinion on the matter.

    To answer your other question, I despise emo-porn and am very critical about romances, or those so-called shitty books with half-naked couples on the front and “powerful”, in fact pathetic “alpha” males. I don’t mind certain descriptions of sex, meaningful sex between two people since the Bible even waxes poetically about it a few times, but I prefer less than more. And over the years I’ve dumped many books I liked as a teen; I despise the swaggering male and giggly female horsesh** and drippy female fantasies that so many women buy into. I’d far rather read a book on the human condition in general than a “romance”.

    “Now, why do you suppose that men are willing to go to the trouble to see images of women who are both willing and enthusiastic, engaging in intercourse, if they are so jaded and sadistic as you claim?”

    I did not once say that most men are jaded and sadistic; I do believe that human beings are uniformly weak and easily influenced, men and women both. Even with regular porn, Anon, as a Christian I believe what God says about guiding our eyes and hearts; sex is the most powerful physical force and not to be seen or viewed cheaply.

    I read about that harsh type of porn from a man who used to be an addict and has done a lot of research on the industry (his name is Luke Reynolds and his book is called, “A New Man”). He came across a porn mag first when he was nine, and the cover image was that of a woman being penetrated and appearing to be in great pain. He’s seen that kind of thing repeatedly over the years, and often with the advertisement that women “want it” and “want it PAINFULLY” (the physical pain, that is, not sex in general). I’ve also seen another kind of sadistic porn, Anon; can you guess what it is? It’s applying sadistic pain to CHRISTIAN marriages. That’s right: there’s a market for wife-discipline among twisted religious freaks who prefer to bring their own shaded fantasies into the public. And a lot of sick women who say their husbands have the right to spank them to tears (when they fail to be good wives) write stories involving similar fantasies. Do you know what’s in those fantasies? Husbands hitting their wives, hard, nonconsensually, until they cried; sometimes they were hit with objects, sometimes anally raped by their husbands afterward. And the husbands liked it, and the women eventually sniveled into submission and thought it for the best. These sick women authors also share real stories of being spanked by their husbands, forcefully and as punishment for failing as wives, with the same reactions. This evil is more predominant than you may know, certainly more than I knew; women are infected with this disease sometimes more than men and feed it with sick, lunatic writing. Oh yes, I know female weaknesses and the part they play. Women are definitely as screwed up as men when it comes to porn, but the porn video industry is still mostly directed at men; this is why I speak against men supporting it. But I’ve also, more than once, written against female porn that’s found between the covers of those sick books, rather than behind video screens; women are very powerful in how they present themselves to men, as our culture shows so well.

    “Is it from your many years of living as a man?”

    I know that from listening to men and seeing some of what porn consists of myself. It shouldn’t take more than being a mere human to know the empty and temporary sating that videos or porno reading material would offer. You think men are the only ones who have experienced that emptiness, that pathetic substitute, firsthand? Guess again. And again, as I said above, women can have and feed sick fantasies as well as men.

    “How do you know that to be true?”

    Because it’s common logic. Or IS porn actually as emotionally and physically fulfilling as a relationship with a real human being?

    “For many, it creates a hunger for more and more wild stuff, and if the man in particular has any psychological issues, it can spiral them severely.
    How do you know that to be true?”

    Because I’ve studied this matter and I’ve seen how both visual and written ideas feed on people’s weaknesses and negative inclinations. Or don’t you think a person with sadistic tendencies would go even deeper into them after seeing them played out?

  67. That stuff about hitting wives in certain Christian circles probably seemed to come out of nowhere, but i wanted to acknowledge that I know many women are sick too, and that I’ve seen more sadistic stuff than I ever expected in various areas. Our culture, while loving to tell us to pamper our sensitive flesh and feelings, ironically also showers us with freakish stuff and horror movies alone that are climbing the charts in torture, sadism and bloodiness.

  68. “Even books that feature strong, manly men who are brooding widowers that no woman can seem to fathom, or who are independently wealthy but choose a secret life as a gardener”

    You’re not describing “Jane Eyre” and “The Constant Gardener”, are you? Not all stories with love are emo-porn.

  69. Matt

    Hey Jennifer, since you are so anti-porn, what about romance novels? Romance novels are essentially the female version of porn. Many include rape and other gratuitous actions. Should we get rid of romance novels too?

    Also, since this is related: http://healthland.time.com/2011/05/19/mind-reading-the-researchers-who-analyzed-all-the-porn-on-the-internet/

    Here is a quote:

    What do women prefer?

    Women prefer stories to visual porn by a long shot. The most popular erotica for women is the romance novel. That has more punch than any other kind of erotica. The second most popular would be fan fiction. This is something that has really exploded on the Internet. These are stories written by amateurs, mostly women, about characters from pop culture, movies, books, etc.

    If porn gets banned and shamed, so should romance novels and fan fiction. It’s only “fair”.

  70. susanawalsh

    @Anonymous Reader
    Please don’t tell me what I’m saying. You’ve twisted my words into some sort of fatuous elitism. I am not saying “everyone is all right because I’m all right.” I am merely making an observation from real life – last I heard that was a good way of acquiring information and forming opinions.

    We all know that marriage is less common in some socioeconomic groups than others. I tend for focus on the SMP as it relates to college students, and it’s hardly surprising that I live among educated people.

    My point is that if you walk out into the world, in any city, there are plenty of locales where you’ll see functional families spending time together. The notion that all women have overinflated expectations is extreme, and not borne out if you open your eyes and have a look around.

    Like OffTheCuff, I know many normal women married to guys at a reasonable SMV level, and I observe many more. To claim this is meaningless because I run with an intelligent crowd is not valid.

  71. I just answered questions about that, Matt; scroll up. And btw, including something in a book like rape doesn’t mean that the book prommotes it; I hope you realize that.

  72. If porn gets banned and shamed, so should romance novels and fan fiction. It’s only “fair”.

    100% agree. Neither should be banned, but they are essentially equivalent. Both give the gender that consumes them unrealistic expectations of the thing they value most. Both contribute to a dysfunctional sex and marriage market. To romance and fan fiction, I would add emotional porn of the “Eat, Pray, Love” variety. It features a horrible woman as a hero.

    My point is that if you walk out into the world, in any city, there are plenty of locales where you’ll see functional families spending time together. The notion that all women have overinflated expectations is extreme, and not borne out if you open your eyes and have a look around.

    And what of the locales where you find women with inflated expectations? Here on the ground at a major university, the girls I see on the market are overpriced.

  73. Agreed, Kane; I’m glad you see what they can do.

  74. Jennifer – it’s ironic that you think it’s ironic. Because study after study shows porn availablity reduces actual violent and degrading acts against women.

    I’m not mindlessly pro-porn, I do think it has potential risks to it, but the major effect it has in reducing the number of rapes isn’t to be discounted lightly either.

  75. It’s ironic, Athol, when forced sex is a theme in porn.

  76. SayWhaat

    Hey Badger, can you take my comments under my “new” handle out of moderation? Thanks.

  77. OK, I think the discussion of porn on this thread is long since over.

  78. OffTheCuff

    Really? I was thinking of trying to get Ozy to comment. Bad idea?

  79. Anonymous Reader

    Please don’t tell me what I’m saying. You’ve twisted my words into some sort of fatuous elitism. I am not saying “everyone is all right because I’m all right.” I am merely making an observation from real life – last I heard that was a good way of acquiring information and forming opinions.

    Yet for years men have been told that making any observation from their own, real, life is simply off limits. Out of bounds. We are supposed to listen to “experts” who tell us what to believe, no matter how much their claims may conflict with what we see. So are you saying that your observations from real life are automatically valid because they come from a woman? And those men who see a different slice of the world than you should just STFU?

    We all know that marriage is less common in some socioeconomic groups than others. I tend for focus on the SMP as it relates to college students, and it’s hardly surprising that I live among educated people.

    Then you are basically making generalize observations from a skewed set of data, aren’t you?

    My point is that if you walk out into the world, in any city, there are plenty of locales where you’ll see functional families spending time together.

    And you, of course, automatically know just by looking that none of the women will go EatBetrayLove, that none of the men are deeply unhappy for various reasons, that none of the women are being cheated on, that all is just wonderful, is that right?

    The notion that all women have overinflated expectations is extreme, and not borne out if you open your eyes and have a look around.

    What do you think a woman with overinflated expectations looks like? Does she wear a warning sign? Some sort of stigmata? Tattoo on the forehead?

    Look, I know men who married what they thought were normal women. The entitlement didn’t set in until 3 to 4 years later. The expectations didn’t change until after the first child. The notion that their wives might wind up in a “marriage” to their jobs outside the house and to children, effectively divorcing whats-his-name, the guy who works extra hours, wasn’t obvious for some time. If you’d seen them in public, likely you’d have categorized them as “functional families” and I”m sure that you would not have regarded any of the women as entitled. But if you’d talked to the men – one of whom would up in Chapter 7 because his wife’s spending could not be stopped – in private you might get a different picture. Or you might not. Because these were normal people, with normal jobs, and so perhaps they would not intrude upon your field of vision.

    Even when you can’t see something, it still may exist for the rest of us.

  80. Anonymous Reader

    I do not wish to be unduly harsh here. Nor do I wish to start fights without reason. If I have responded too hotly or intensely, it is likely because I’ve seen these issues over and over for years, and certain positions are annoying to me.

    Badger, sorry to start yet another argument about porn. Just not inclined to let some tired, one sided shaming go by anymore. But it’s your blog, your rules.

    Jennifer, while I disagree with you to some extent on men and porn, the fact that you seem to condemn women’s porn equally is commendable. In my experience, any time anyone from a church starts talking about porn, man or woman, it’s the warmup to yet another avalanche of shaming language directed only at men. So if I’ve misjudged you on that, I apologize.

    Susan, you seem to have a following of people who find you reasonable, so I should give you some slack as well. You do seem to be coming across as insular and a bit arrogant, rather like Kay Hymowitz, but maybe that is just my reading. It has become wearying to read defenses of marriage by tradcons and others that basically lay all the blame for failure on men, absolving women of any wrongdoing. The facts of marriage 2.0 and the feminized culture & legal system are much too glaringly obvious to me to find happy-talk convincing unless there are a lot of caveats along for the ride.

  81. @Anonymous Reader
    Thanks for your comment. All I can say is that I do not lay the blame at the feet of men. I guess I’ll have to demonstrate that over time, which is fair enough.

    I don’t disagree with your analysis of marriage 2.0 or the legal system. I just think that for whatever reasons, that hasn’t produced a real marriage strike. The numbers are going down, and that decline will continue. But there will be successful marriages, of course. I don’t believe the institution is doomed, though I do believe it’s endangered.

  82. Thank you Anon, I appreciate that. Believe me, neither I nor Susan (from what I know of her writing) give women carte blanche; I’m too familiar with the female sex and especially the problems of feminism to do so. “Twilight” is a shining example of women getting fixated on something strange and fake, and even Elizabeth Gilbert expressed shock at the numerous foolish women who, of all things, wrote to her saying that “Eat Pray Love” inspired them to get divorced. Even she didn’t get what the big deal about her book was, or why Oprah gave it two specials; many don’t realize how their own mistakes, or society’s glorification of them, can influence others’ behavior. I try to avoid shaming language whenever I can, though sometimes my indignation comes out that way regardless. This discussion was beneficial though, because you reminded me how men must feel having so many visions of loosely clad women around them; incidentally, a Christian blog I know of had just brought up the topic of immodesty again.

  83. Anonymous Reader

    I don’t disagree with your analysis of marriage 2.0 or the legal system. I just think that for whatever reasons, that hasn’t produced a real marriage strike.

    In what age group? Dalrock has shown pretty clearly that remarriage rate for women isn’t what the divorce industry claims it is. Here’s just one article that suggests women over 40 are not remarrying nearly as much as it is claimed.

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/divorcee-retirement/

    I assume you read the article by Hymowitz in the WSJ, and the comments that flowed from it? She, apparently like you, is worried that men in their 20’s and 30’s won’t “commit” to the absolutely fabulous modern young women that she’s raised, and so she naturally casts blame on — men. If you really understand what marriage 2.0 is, then you are ahead of Hymowitz. But if there is no marriage strike, why the anguished articles such as Hymowitz’s? I predict more such articles, not fewer, because a man of 25 was born the year of the Bradley amendment. He’s grown up in a feminized world, under marriage 2.0. Maybe he doesn’t find marriage to be such a good idea as he is supposed to.

    The numbers are going down, and that decline will continue.

    Ok, suppose there was a marriage strike. Would it not first show up as declining numbers of first marriages?

    But there will be successful marriages, of course.

    Sure, among upper class and rich families. Most people are neither, by definition.

    I don’t believe the institution is doomed, though I do believe it’s endangered.

    You know, I care about marriage only as part of the civilization that I live in. Married parents tend to turn out more useful children than single mothers, for example. The utility of marriage is pretty obvious.

    But given what feminists and whiteknight tradcons have done to make it a one-sided contract that is enforced only on men, an institution that can saddle men with more and more duties while awarding more and more choice to women, as a stand alone institution I’m not so interested in worrying about it. Some of the most miserable men I know are “happily married”. They live lives of quiet desperation..

  84. Happy marriages will only occur when both spouses are focused on serving each other and working for it. Finances don’t determine that.

  85. i don’t care about the acedemics. i just wanna get in. and i can…most ladies make it easy.

  86. Appreciate this classic summation… Thank You

  87. Anonymous Reader

    Happy marriages will only occur when both spouses are focused on serving each other and working for it. Finances don’t determine that.

    I know a man whose wife spent them into Chapter 7 bankruptcy. I’m sure she had some rationalization for doing so; maybe she would have said she was “serving the family” or some such. But the fact remains, she spent money faster than he could earn it, and he could not get her to stop. If you do not think that affected their marriage, you should reconsider.

    Because in the larger picture, she held all the cards. She could do all manner of things within the marriage that he was helpless to stop, because at any time she could push the eject button and kick him out of the house, and out of any contact with their children. She can have access to his paycheck, while refusing him any access to her or the children. And there’s nothing, but nothing, to stop her except maybe conscience (which is in shorter and shorter supply today).

    When I point this out, women often chant NAWALT, and as true as that it, the fact remains that any woman at any time can file for divorce for no reason at all. It’s not expensive, and it’s not difficult to do. I find it hard to believe that any woman under 60 is not aware of this, and it affects women’s thinking IMO.

    So no matter how much a man “serves” his wife, it could one fine day turn out to have not been quite enough. Game is the only approach I know of to defend against this.

  88. “If you do not think that affected their marriage, you should reconsider”

    Well of course it did, but I meant the simple fact of them having less finances than some; that’s different from a spouse who knowingly ABUSES the money or any such thing in the marriage.

    “So no matter how much a man “serves” his wife, it could one fine day turn out to have not been quite enough. Game is the only approach I know of to defend against this”

    Like I said, BOTH spouses must serve the other for the marriage to work. Game’s truth is that men need to be assertive and not doormats; it’s important for every person to know the difference between loving someone and letting themselves be used and abused.

  89. Höllenhund

    “Men get to have casual sex without the resulting stigma, women do not.”

    Yes, they do, at least in the West. The stigma is practically non-existent.

  90. Höllenhund

    “You’ve gotta be kidding me. Raises it? Raises the standard? Silicone boobs, unnaturally bare groins, etc.? If you are calling this a high standard I’m just going to assume you’ve never seen a real woman in your life.”

    Porn actresses are of higher-than-average attractiveness. Neatly trimmed pubic hair is hot (I agree that complete removal of pubic hair isn’t); breast implants, when done well, are also hot. In contrast, the attractiveness of the averabe woman is decreasing due to the obesity epidemic, the masculinization of women, accelerated aging due to unhealthy lifestyle etc. So yes, porn does raise the standards.

  91. 1lettuce

    Great post, badger. But Christ, the feces-storm of a discussion in your comments is crazy.

  92. SayWhaat

    In contrast, the attractiveness of the averabe woman is decreasing due to the obesity epidemic, the masculinization of women, accelerated aging due to unhealthy lifestyle etc. So yes, porn does raise the standards.

    The obesity epidemic is endemic to Middle America; I only knew one girl I would classify as “fat” in college. You have no idea how feminine or masculine the porn actress is, given that her main role is just getting rammed. Oh, and you have no idea how old she is either — saying that porn actresses lead a healthier lifestyle than most women is ridiculous (plenty of people involved in porn get drug habits).

    You aren’t raising the standards, you’re creating unrealistic expectations.

  93. SayWhaat

    Yes, they do, at least in the West. The stigma is practically non-existent.

    If the stigma was non-existent we would never have even heard of Slut Walks.

  94. SayWhaat

    For the record, I am not against porn. I think that it does have a damaging effect with respect to creating unrealistic expectations (as does “emotional” porn), but if it keeps sexual violence down then I’m okay with that.

  95. SayWhaat,

    “Men get to have casual sex without the resulting stigma, women do not.”

    You’ve been around these parts too long to say something like this. You know that most men don’t have any access to casual sex to speak of, and that men only avoid stigma (among both men and women) if they are boffing attractive women. A guy with a harem of homely girls is enjoying himself but not gaining much status from it.

    I find it interesting how women bring up this “double standard” discussion out of some kind of “it’s not faaair!” trump card even when it is not really relevant to their lives. You’ve been very open about not wanting to hook up and wanting a relationship (I empathize with your frustration at not being able to find it). Yet you’re complaining that you’re “not allowed” to have casual sex that you say you don’t want to have.

    “If the stigma was non-existent we would never have even heard of Slut Walks.”

    This is a false connection. The attention-whoring slut walks were not inspired by an anti-slut movement, they were inspired by a police officer’s advice to practice prudence and modesty in wardrobe as risk management. It had nothing to do with actual sexual behavior.

    I’m with Hollenhund, at least in college/young adult culture today, I see very little sexual stigma. Cosmo is the most-read young adult publication, Sex And The City has almost universal penetration (see what I did there) among young women’s consciousness. Outside of religious communities and some of the harder-edged Manosphere writers, where is the stigma?

    The only “stigma” is that guys don’t generally want to marry slutty women or invest in relationships with them (although many do)…the guys are executing the same degree of freedom women have when they choose who they want to have sex with. I don’t think either side is put upon with this dynamic.

  96. SayWhaat

    The only “stigma” is that guys don’t generally want to marry slutty women or invest in relationships with them (although many do)…the guys are executing the same degree of freedom women have when they choose who they want to have sex with.

    Okay, fine. The point I was just trying to make was that double-standards exist for both sexes.

    You know that most men don’t have any access to casual sex to speak of, and that men only avoid stigma (among both men and women) if they are boffing attractive women. A guy with a harem of homely girls is enjoying himself but not gaining much status from it.

    I know that this is an oft-repeated claim of the manosphere, but I don’t 100% buy it. I went to school that was 60% women, I live in a city saturated with women. I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say that none of the men I meet are virgins like I am. Even the most unattractive/omega ones I’ve met have been laid once or twice. Perhaps no access to casual sex was relevant to your generation (and other parts of the country), but it is certainly not relevant to mine.

    I don’t know if I agree with your example of a guy with a harem of homely girls. By definition he has status with girls at that level of attractiveness, and if he’s enjoying himself then surely other men envy his happiness, yes? Particularly since “beauty is only a lightswitch away”?

    Yet you’re complaining that you’re “not allowed” to have casual sex that you say you don’t want to have.

    I am absolutely not complaining that I am not allowed to have casual sex. I’m fine with not having casual sex, what I’m not fine with is my sisters fucking it up for me so that I can’t have relationship sex.

  97. SayWhaat

    The attention-whoring slut walks were not inspired by an anti-slut movement, they were inspired by a police officer’s advice to practice prudence and modesty in wardrobe as risk management. It had nothing to do with actual sexual behavior.

    I know, but the message morphed into something else entirely, didn’t it? Slutwalk girls and sex-positive feminists alike have been haranguing about the sexual double-standard, insisting that they should be free to explore their own sexuality without the confines of a relationship…they would not feel the need to do so if they felt that they were no longer being judged for it.

  98. SayWhaat

    I will say, though…I do know a girl who is completely proud of being a slut. She’s also anti-marriage, so she’s well within her rights to not give a flying fuck about her prospects. I don’t think most girls are anti-marriage so they do feel very keenly about being judged for their sexual histories.

  99. @Anonymous Reader So no matter how much a man “serves” his wife, it could one fine day turn out to have not been quite enough. Game is the only approach I know of to defend against this.

    Co-effin’-Sign

  100. Höllenhund

    “The obesity epidemic is endemic to Middle America”

    Plus the underclass of all races.

    “You have no idea how feminine or masculine the porn actress is”

    I was talking about masculinization in the phsyical sense as well. So I have an idea, thank you very much.

    “you have no idea how old she is either”

    Huh?! Of course I have. I see her on TV naked.

  101. Höllenhund

    “The Devlin article is very good. I disagree with some points, but I think that is a wonderful assessment of how think works, his solutions..?”

    Heh! Funny you should say that. Most women seem to be very hostile to Devlin. Ms. Walsh refuses to read his writings yet calls him a charlatan. That woman who wrote that famous article “The New Mating Game” for the Weekly Standard also bad-mouthed him.

  102. SayWhaat

    “you have no idea how old she is either”

    Huh?! Of course I have. I see her on TV naked.

    If all men had your ability to differentiate between surgically-enhanced 16, 18, and 20yo girls then we would have fewer sex offenders.

  103. detinennui32

    Hollenhund:

    As I am sure you have surmised, if women are hostile to Devlin, it is because his writings clearly demonstrate he has them figured out.

    Badger, indulge me for a minute:

    On another note, I’m really tiring of these constant back and forth volleys on these threads that consist of little more than “man good! women bad!” or “women victim! Man perpetrator!” or “Man up, sniveling beta!” It seems we’re talking at and past each other, not to each other. I’m as guilty of it as anyone.

    Let’s agree on this:

    1. the SMP is messed up.
    2. Betas learned it wrong. We’re recovering and trying to learn how to be attractive. Some of us to some degree were desperate, spineless supplicants who now fully understand what we did wrong and why you girls hate it. We’re trying to get past it. Sometimes we’re not very good at it.
    3. we don’t need virgins. We want chaste women. We don’t expect a woman in this day and age to have “saved herself”. But on the other hand, it is simply a fact that a woman’s LTR potential and MMV decrease as her number of previous partners increases. We would all do well to simply accept this and not try to change it.
    4. Women could help right the SMP ship by doing the following:
    a. say what you mean.and do what you say.
    b. don’t sleep with douchebags just because they make you tingle.
    c. if you do sleep with douchebags because they make you tingle, then don’t be surprised when you don’t get more than sex. Don’t be surprised when it’s “good enough to sex up, not good enough to marry”. .
    d. please stop whining about where all the good men are. WE’RE RIGHT HERE, right where we’ve been tor the last 6,000 years,

  104. @detinennui32

    Men do not realize how bad it is out there….

    I will not commit to a chick with a body count no higher than 3 (if a woman can’t find a husban by her third experience, she is not marriage material)

    [That's a very exacting standard.]

    But part of me feels bad for the men who wife up slores… If men got full disclosure of their women’s extracurricular pasts… (no need to continue)

    My job is to make sure less men get taken

    [A noble and challenging mission.]

  105. detinennui32

    5. We get that women don’t find betas sexually attractive. We have learned that loyalty, fidelity, steadfastness, kindness and dignity are not what tingles women.

  106. Rich Cook

    jennifer sezs

    “Happy marriages will only occur when both spouses are focused on serving each other and working for it. Finances don’t determine that.”

    Finances do determine that. In times of economic turmoil the divorce rate goes up fairly steeply (sp?). I think that “for richer or poorer” part lost some of its cache awhile ago.

  107. Mike C

    I am absolutely not complaining that I am not allowed to have casual sex. I’m fine with not having casual sex, what I’m not fine with is my sisters fucking it up for me so that I can’t have relationship sex.

    Just curious, are you friends with the girl you referenced? Guys have no dog in that fight. If you are not fine with that, then the only solution is for women to go back to informally policing each other like they did long ago.

  108. Mike C

    Even the most unattractive/omega ones I’ve met have been laid once or twice.

    Really? Seriously? There is NO COMPARISON whatsoever between the unattractive omega that gets laid maybe once or twice a year or every few years, and the 5-10% of guys who literally have on tap a rotation of girls on a weekly basis. Badger is right. Only a minority of guys have plentiful abundant access to casual sex.

  109. [That's a very exacting standard.]

    I don’t mind chaste women putting pressure on me to do anything…, I welcome that…

    Its all the other women who feel like they deserve a marriage for whatever reason…

    So, that rules shields me from the BS excuses from serial monogamists, the “doesn’t count-ers” & women with entitlement issues…

    I am hoping this rule will keep me single :-)

  110. “I know, but the message morphed into something else entirely, didn’t it?”

    The only message that’s pervaded the slutwalks is “look at me!” Slutwalks are simply attention-getting protests with little intellectual weight, like most other para-political rallies in this country.

    “Slutwalk girls and sex-positive feminists [B: how are they different?] alike have been haranguing about the sexual double-standard, insisting that they should be free to explore their own sexuality without the confines of a relationship…they would not feel the need to do so if they felt that they were no longer being judged for it.”

    The thing is, the sex pozzies have total freedom to explore…and we have the total freedom to stay away from them or not invest in relationships with them. No one is being oppressed. The idea that actions have consequences is deeply disturbing to the sex pozzies – they just want to do what they want and have no consequences (while men of course are still to be held accountable for their hurt feelings and misadventures).

    “I will say, though…I do know a girl who is completely proud of being a slut. She’s also anti-marriage, so she’s well within her rights to not give a flying fuck about her prospects. I don’t think most girls are anti-marriage so they do feel very keenly about being judged for their sexual histories.”

    Most are not anti-marriage, but the solution is to comport yourself in a reasonable manner, not to demand that men cop to your lifestyle. I have a post in the can about this, it’s clear to me that women are terrified of male judgment and that’s why women across the spectrum work so hard to invalidate male feelings, shame men, etc (honest caveat: NAWALT). Sez pozzies take this to an extreme, male judgment is a form of aggressive psychological violence to them.

    It appears to me that being judged unattractive or unworthy of a relationship by men is an existential threat to a woman’s identity as such – almost literally, because without male investment she can’t bear and raise children which is her biological programming.

    Feminism has taken exactly the wrong lesson from this – they believe that instead of getting their act together, they can train and cajole us men out of judging them. They can’t, the judgments are part of our hindbrains and in many cases are rationally justified as well.

  111. “4. Women could help right the SMP ship by doing the following:
    a. say what you mean.and do what you say.
    b. don’t sleep with douchebags just because they make you tingle.
    c. if you do sleep with douchebags because they make you tingle, then don’t be surprised when you don’t get more than sex. Don’t be surprised when it’s “good enough to sex up, not good enough to marry”. .
    d. please stop whining about where all the good men are. WE’RE RIGHT HERE, right where we’ve been tor the last 6,000 years”

    AMEN!!

  112. OffTheCuff

    Men get to have casual sex without the resulting stigma, women do not. Women get to publicly enjoy their version of porn, men do not. Double-standards for both sexes.

    I agree. So why are you telling me this?

    If you reread my post, you’ll see the point was about overinflated expectations arising from porn. I was saying that since female emo-porn is more pervasive and open, it’s probably has a *worse* than male porn. See the words “Yeah, but not as much”.

    My point was not “waah, it’s a double standard”. You should know me better than that by now. I love double standards, now that I can freely take advantage of those that are due me!

  113. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: You Fill in the Blank Edition

  114. The rules have never really changed. Reputation is everything.. and women must guard theirs with all they have. Don’t all moms teach this? I know mine did! And this is the message I passed on to my girls. Its just NOT that compiicated. Its called keeping yourself under control. Of course we all experience attraction and temptation– always have– being a grown up means not acting on those.— sheesh people!

  115. Stephenie Rowling

    Hollenhund,
    I will say that I already see some of this conclusions in the way the SMP market is working. But at this point I’m married so for me is easier to see this in a detached way. Also since I never sluted up I don’t belong to the same group of women that will make mandatory to have the most attractive man sleep with all of them by turn. I rather take advantage of the fact that all women around me are stupid and find me a nice guy among to sea of men they are too idiotic to pick…pretty much what I did in real life ;)

  116. SayWhaat

    Just curious, are you friends with the girl you referenced? Guys have no dog in that fight. If you are not fine with that, then the only solution is for women to go back to informally policing each other like they did long ago.

    I know guys don’t have a stake in that fight — I really wish that more women would go back to informally policing each other, but I think that system’s gone. :(

    And I’m acquainted with the girl, we met in a class. I wouldn’t really call us “friends”; most of my girlfriends are similar to me wrt values.

  117. SayWhaat

    There is NO COMPARISON whatsoever between the unattractive omega that gets laid maybe once or twice a year or every few years, and the 5-10% of guys who literally have on tap a rotation of girls on a weekly basis.

    Definitely no comparison, but if the ugly omega has gotten lucky once or twice, that should tell you something about the SMP, shouldn’t it?

  118. SayWhaat

    Badger,

    It appears to me that being judged unattractive or unworthy of a relationship by men is an existential threat to a woman’s identity as such – almost literally, because without male investment she can’t bear and raise children which is her biological programming.

    I agree. That’s why having a boyfriend is such a huge deal in junior high, why women don’t realize they’re women until they’ve received some form of sexual attention from men, etc. You can applaud a woman for graduating med school but at the end of the day most are going to value their relationships more than their accomplishments.

  119. “Definitely no comparison, but if the ugly omega has gotten lucky once or twice, that should tell you something about the SMP, shouldn’t it?”

    It tells you that with alcohol all things are possible.

  120. greenlander

    I can’t believe I read this entire comment thread until the end. It’s twenty minutes of my life that I’ll never get back.

    The only thing I can say is this: Jennifer, the hamster is strong in you.

    [Welcome, greenlander.]

  121. @Greenlander

    I read the whole comment thread also… Women have yet to “get it…”

    It is what it is…

  122. Now the longest thread in Badger Hut history.

  123. Kathy

    Congrats, Badge. :D

  124. susanawalsh

    Going off the donkey rails is fun! Good convo here.

  125. If you kept reading inspite of the torture you seem to have felt, greenlander, maybe you like hamsters yourself.

    “they would not feel the need to do so if they felt that they were no longer being judged for it”

    Like you said, saywhaat, the system of women informally policing each other was a good one; when slut behavior was shamed, there was less of it.

  126. “Feminism has taken exactly the wrong lesson from this – they believe that instead of getting their act together, they can train and cajole us men out of judging them. They can’t, the judgments are part of our hindbrains and in many cases are rationally justified as well”

    This is true. Even in the caveman days, a man may have enjoyed sleeping numerous times with a woman who gave it away easily, but he’d realize in the long run that she wouldn’t make a good mother/raiser or even genetic breeder of his children.

  127. Anonymous Reader

    5. We get that women don’t find betas sexually attractive. We have learned that loyalty, fidelity, steadfastness, kindness and dignity are not what tingles women.

    I’m astounded there’s not been a NAWALT in reply to that.

  128. “I’m astounded there’s not been a NAWALT in reply to that”

    It is inaccurate about many women in regards to “betas”. If a woman’s smart, she’ll look deeper than physical attraction and, like her foremothers, find a man of worth and fidelity very attractive indeed. Unfortunately, women waiting for hookups are not that smart; they only care about how they’re being made to feel now.

  129. Stephenie Rowling

    “I’m astounded there’s not been a NAWALT in reply to that.”

    I’m not like that….You are welcome :)

  130. What a mess the sexual revolution’s made, and feminism; I think the reason many women default to a creepy shady guy as an “alpha” simply because of his game is because they’re hungering for real alphas; as one article so eloquently put it, the alpha was once considered, for ex, a soldier proud and brave, serving his country; loyalty, dignity, kindness indeed. But feminism said real alphas weren’t good, so men were told to “be nice” and keep their strength in check, and many women in the SMP, who in fact hungered for that strength and confidence, began subconsciously feeding on any appearance of it instead.

  131. *addendum* In fact, it’s not even alpha-ism that women always necessarily crave; it’s just a strong man period (which is one of the reasons I dislike such labels of men). Whether men are “betas” or not, they need to show confidence in themselves; do this well enough and, as we know, many women won’t bother to look for anything else before hititng the sack.

  132. Jennifer, you hit the nail on the head there.

  133. Anonymous Reader

    Actually, all women are like that. When women say they want all the beta qualities listed above, there is an unspoken premise – they want those qualities in a man that they are already attracted to. The alpha qualities, the leadership if you will, is most or even all of the initial attraction.
    Men who have been taught, often by their mothers, that the beta qualities are sufficient to attract a woman thus find the whole SMP to be frustrating, and we’ve all seen that discussed / played out enough that I should not have to write further, surely?

    Thus detinennui32 writes truth here:
    5. We get that women don’t find betas sexually attractive. We have learned that loyalty, fidelity, steadfastness, kindness and dignity are not what tingles women.

    The qualities listed above are important in an LTR, especially marriage, to women. But no man gets into any sort of relationship without the initial attraction, the initial tingle. Thinking of the SMP more like a job search, women’s initial response is like that of a resume screener: typically the first pass through applications is performed on the basis of “maybe” or “no”. Only later does the applicant get to “no” or “yes”. The alpha qualities get a man to “maybe”, and likely later to “yes”, but then in an LTR the requirements expand to include the beta ones listed in (5) above.

    Women who deny this can be annoying, because from some men’s perspective they are basically lying – either to themselves, or to men around them, or both. I think it’s more a case of unawareness most of the time. Women are often pretty unaware of their own psychology, what tingles them, etc. As Roissy has clearly shown…

  134. “When women say they want all the beta qualities listed above, there is an unspoken premise – they want those qualities in a man that they are already attracted to”

    This is correct, and so is your assertion about assertiveness and strong character in a man attracting a woman. My point is, in general, that deep women do find loyalty, kindness and dignity very attractive as well; if a man can somehow show he has these traits before a relationship, so much the better. Like I said, the soldier’s a good example of a true alpha (and we know how many women feel about men in uniform). And incidentally, many “betas” are married.

  135. Jennifer,

    “deep women do find loyalty, kindness and dignity very attractive as well”

    You keep saying this sort of thing, and as much as we all wish it was it’s just not true. One cannot “talk herself into” being attracted to nice-guy beta traits, no matter her commitment to an ethical lifestyle. Roissy and others in the Manosphere have pointed out articles and scientific research showing that one’s attraction markers and forebrain often have nothing to do with each other.

  136. “Going off the donkey rails is fun”

    Chick from Boston stole my line.

  137. But those are not just nice-guy beta traits, Badger; whether they’re “beta” depends on what frame they’re carried in. Game shows that frame is everything, and as I pointed out earlier, expectations of men have been lowered due to feminism and its various factors; in the past a man of good carriage and a proud career might have been enough to have a magnetic reaction from females. A woman can’t talk herself into attraction, but there has been a brain-shift since the sexual revolution of how many things, including alpha-ism, are looked at, and there can be a shift in the opposite direction. Either way, those are the traits that inspire deeper attraction in women worthy enough to care about them, even if they by themselves don’t inspire immediate attraction at first sight (if a guy acts utterly tame and docile, I know that it won’t matter if he shows those traits; he’ll be a turnoff. I was not saying that a submissive man can win attraction with those traits alone; a sergeant with a commanding air and a quiet churchboy, for ex, may both have those deeper traits, but only the first one will attract women on sight).

  138. OffTheCuff

    You two are violently agreeing.

    Beta traits are like salt on your alpha steak.
    The steak by itself is great.
    With a bit of salt, it’s a lot better.
    Eating salt by itself is revolting, so is putting an entire cup of salt on a steak.

  139. Perfectly explained, Cuff.

  140. Off topic, but I’ve been reading more of Susan Walsh’s posts. She is GOLD!

  141. Kathy

    Yes I agree Jen. OTC sums it up very well. :D

  142. detinennui32

    Jennifer said: “My point is, in general, that deep women do find loyalty, kindness and dignity very attractive as well; if a man can somehow show he has these traits before a relationship, so much the better.”

    detinennui32 says: No. There is a difference between attractive traits and desirable traits.

    Loyalty, kindness, dignity, fidelity and steadfastness are desirable traits. They are not attractive. If they were, there would be no such thing as Game as it is currently constituted.

    Confidence, charisma, charm, and displays of power are attractive traits. They may or may not be desirable.

  143. Kathy

    “detinennui32 says: No. There is a difference between attractive traits and desirable traits.

    Loyalty, kindness, dignity, fidelity and steadfastness are desirable traits. They are not attractive. If they were, there would be no such thing as Game as it is currently constituted. ”

    Det, game gets women, I agree. But what type of women? Mostly unsuitable ones( for mariage ) or sluts.
    Good women value the traits that Jen mentions and find them attractive.
    Ya know when I met my second husband(he came around to give me a quote on covering my patio and we talked for two hours.. lol)what really attracted me was his honesty and openess. Though not particularly handsome, he had
    nice blue eyes and a lovely smile. But it wasn’t until I talked to him that something really stirred deep within me. It was the complete package, for me.

    Feckless shallow women will always succomb to game.They are not discerning and are certainly not LTR or marriage material, Game is not a panacea for a man who wants a loving woman and kids in the long run.

  144. Thank you, Kathy; amen. Detin, I’ve said over and over that a submissive man even with those traits can’t pull it off, but as Susan put it so well, if a couple WAITS to have sex and a woman waits to see more of a man, she’ll have the chance and the desire to look for those long-term attractions. On the other hand, women who just want hook-ups and aren’t bothering looking for anything deeper..well, you guys covered that. For sex and nothing else, yeah, you got the shallow-game attraction traits, just as men looking for sex only have the boobs/butt/legs in mind. In that sense you’re correct; a woman wanting to be picked up won’t care for a man’s deep character and kindness, anymore than a guy wanting a hookup will look at a woman’s personality before he beds her! I will say, though, that even women just wanting an alpha bang-buddy want fidelity.

    “Game is not a panacea for a man who wants a loving woman and kids in the long run”

    Shallow game is not, very true, but the core aspects of game like male confidence, steadiness and assertiveness are important for marriage too. These are vital traits that men need and that every woman unilaterally is drawn to.

  145. detinennui32

    Jennifer: I have much respect for you here and on other threads. But your suggestion that these beta traits are attractive just ain’t so. They are DESIRABLE. They are not ATTRACTIVE.

    We’re talking here about initial attraction, that indescribable things that women just tingle at. And study after study shows that they are confidence, poise, presence, charisma and displays of power. Without those, you’ll never see the desirable beta traits.

    Please note the difference. Attractive is what gets us in the door. Desirable is what keeps you coming back for more.

  146. detinennui32

    Jennifer said: “What a mess the sexual revolution’s made, and feminism; I think the reason many women default to a creepy shady guy as an “alpha” simply because of his game is because they’re hungering for real alphas; as one article so eloquently put it, the alpha was once considered, for ex, a soldier proud and brave, serving his country; loyalty, dignity, kindness indeed”

    Agreed with all but the last clause. Your paragraph proves my point, not yours.

    The soldier is first attractive because he is physically strong, fit and powerful; and projects confidence and authority.. Women dig men in uniform just for this very reason — he can kill a man with his bare hands. Woman’s hindbrain screams *tingle” because he is well able to ward off physical threats to her and her offspring; he is less likely to die or be killed because of his superior physical conditioning; and he represents strength and governmental power. She doesn’t even see things like loyalty or dignity, and she could not care less about how kind or nice he is to her or others.

  147. Alright; I agree about the initial attraction, Detinn. My one protestation to certain gamers in that area has been that not all women will go to bed for that alone. It’s an automatic defensive reaction of mine, so I guess I missed some of what you were actually saying. I personally find the sexual pickups and the see-through PUA’s unnattractive, since I know they just want sex and I want more. All I was saying, though, was that if an alpha showed some deeper traits as well, those could also prove attractive. IF a woman cared about them, that is, and I guess many in the SMP don’t. Very sad.

    Thank you very much for your nice comments :) I respect you as well; the women who rejected you for such shallow reasons for fools.

  148. “She doesn’t even see things like loyalty or dignity, and she could not care less about how kind or nice he is to her or others”

    Only in the first flashes of physical attraction will a woman of any depth not care whether he’s a brutal person or a good one; if a woman’s looking for a long-term mate, she will care later on very much for his kindness and loyalty. In any case, though, I think before the sexual revolution, women did a lot more sizing up of both alpha and “beta” traits from the beginning because they were taught to look for husbands from the beginning.

  149. “All I was saying, though, was that if an alpha showed some deeper traits as well, those could also prove attractive.”

    Ah, you have unwittingly gotten to the heart of the matter. When a guy is attractive (due to those hindbrain-trigger traits like strength and social dominance) there’s a halo effect that makes everything else he does cool and interesting and attractive. That doesn’t mean those things are, in and of themselves, attractive. This is how alternative lifestyles become fads – famous, charismatic people evangelize them and the trend rides their personal coattails.

    This is why women, when asked to detail what they find attractive in men, default to the beta traits of alpha men – they’ll say they like it when a guy listens to her, or brings her flowers or whatever, because if a hot guy did that, she’d find it hot…but she’s confusing things an attractive guy does for what is actually triggering the attraction.

    An unattractive guy doing the same thing doesn’t get any attraction points for it. They are not attractive traits.

  150. detinennui32

    Eureka!!
    Badger, you’ve just come up with the name for the phenomenon in which the “nice” things alphas do are cool; but when betas do them they are creepy or pervy.

    :The Halo Effect”. Voila!

  151. “That doesn’t mean those things are, in and of themselves, attractive. This is how alternative lifestyles become fads – famous, charismatic people evangelize them and the trend rides their personal coattails.”

    Ach! Very true, and annoying. Which alpha idiot teen starting wearing his pants down his ass?

    Truly kind gestures are vital in and of themselves, though, for a long relationship; a woman will wither with an alpha who treats her badly, so those things DO count. But with a really beta guy, the kind of “nice” guy that’s like a welcome mat, those things will just be part of his never-ending supplication, and therefore ugly.

  152. @Badger @detinennui32

    :The Halo Effect”. Voila!

    Robert Cialdini in “Influence” commented on the phenomena as well

  153. @Badger @detinennui32

    :The Halo Effect”. Voila!

    Robert Cialdini in “Influence” commented on the phenomena as well…

  154. Lots of interesting points here. Kathy, thanks for your input; you expressed many important points and my own thoughts, though I had been misunderstanding what the fellows were actually describing. Basically, yes, only the alpha traits will instantly physically hook a woman. If she’s a woman of worth, she’ll by no means bed for that surface attraction alone and will later search for depth from the man; if she only wants tingles and to be picked up, on the other hand, that will be more than enough (which why so many PUAs recommend it) and she’ll be just like a PUA himself looking for high-status female beauty. Likewise, Badger brought up the remarkable social phenomena of the halo effect; people will adapt themselves to all kinds of things for the desirable ones they covet. But there’s another deeper factor too, which I noted above, about kind gestures: they are needed by women, but they’re ugly from total betas, because guys who are nice and nothing else are, sad to say, weak. And no woman on earth is drawn to a weak man, no matter what good he does; this is true on both the shallow and the deep end of things.

  155. “If she’s a woman of worth, she’ll by no means bed for that surface attraction alone and will later search for depth from the man; if she only wants tingles and to be picked up, on the other hand, that will be more than enough”

    Well, there are exceptions to that. To whit, even women of worth sometimes bed for attraction alone, just as men of worth can find themselves bedding a hot woman without real care for her personality; everybody’s human. Alpha attraction for women, like physical attraction for men, creates a happy fog that makes everything beautiful and fills the brain with endorphines.

  156. @Jennifer

    A woman is not a bad person for ONLY checking for alpha traits & bedding a man…

    She is an idiot when she expects an attractive man to commit aka “sleeping with men out of your league”

    Halo Effect essentially is this… If I see a beautful woman, I automatically ascribe good traits to her on the account that she is beautiful

    I subconsciously assume that she is more trustworthy, honorable, sweet etc…

    It also works in reverse when a person is unattractive “The Horns Effect?” lol

    It is a faulty system for today’s mating market, but I am sure it served us for thousands of years

  157. Halo Effect: yes, I knew I had heard that somewhere and didn’t make it up. Cialdini is excellent.

  158. @Badger the book is called “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion” by Robert Cialdini… Check for it on Amazon but here is the older version… #Classic

    Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion

  159. MOTR,

    I’ve read it. Awesome stuff and very applicable to what we study here.

  160. Kathy

    ” Basically, yes, only the alpha traits will instantly physically hook a woman. If she’s a woman of worth, she’ll by no means bed for that surface attraction alone and will later search for depth from the man; if she only wants tingles and to be picked up, on the other hand, that will be more than enough (which why so many PUAs recommend it) and she’ll be just like a PUA himself looking for high-status female beauty. ”

    Exactly Jen.. Game can be a useful tool as long as a man does not become something or someone he is not. Like you Jen the PUA types never attracted me. Not in the least. My husband had a very charmimg mate who always had a few girls on the go at the same time. But it was a shallow kind of charm and bravado. As much as he was good looking(better looking than my husband) it turned me off. His marriage failed because he cheated on his wife. He just could not settle into marriage. He’d had too many women.

    Some MGTOW bloggers like Marky Mark, believe game is only about one thing. ie getting pussy. Being dishonest, trying to be someone you are not, in order to hook the girl… A pretence.. In many ways I agree with him.

    Whilst this sort of stuff will secure a shallow slut (like of course attracts like) it will not attract a woman who is looking for depth and marriage.
    Personally I do not really subscribe to the Alpha – Beta definitions. For some reason the so-called Beta is scorned and derided. They are told that if they want a woman then they must change their behaviour.. “Treat ‘em mean and keep ‘em keen” kind of stuff.

    My husband would, I believe be termed a Beta. He’s not a soft touch, though.Honest a straight shooter, what you see is what you get. He is still the same man I married nearly sixteen years ago.
    I guess the message I am trying to get across is, be yourself. Find a woman who loves you for you. Do not try and pretend to be something that you are not… Well, not if you want to find a good and loving woman to settle down with and have a family.
    Just don’t be a doormat! Be assertive.
    The proof of the pudding is in the eating. I have a long and enduring marriage. My husband never gamed me. Never put on an act. None of this stupid neg ging stuff. He was just himself. It was a breath of fresh air and in and of itself had a sort of allure and charm that drew me to him (believe me, I had had enough of the shallow cocky over confident charmers that would try it on me)

  161. Stephenie Rowling

    “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion”

    Arrrgh the manosphere will make me poorer with all this books I will need to buy. Thanks though. :)

  162. Kathy, you’re one of my idols. Perfectly said. I HATE the stupid emphasis put on negging as well; teasing is one thing, it’s playful and healthy, but let each couple decide their own level; don’t put so much damn stress on negging or any either minute detail like it’s the golden rule. This is one of those areas I agree with and respect MarkyMark on, and his observation is right; for many it’s about getting laid. The more core stuff is for all time, but such things also don’t require the line-by-line details for all situations that some alpha-stressers try to apply unilaterally. I’ve said before that I hate the beta label because such things simplify men; the only time men need real re-application is when they’re confusing nice with good. Men who know God’s design for them have a better advantage, because they understand the difference between “nice” and good; Susan Walsh explained it wonderfully. A guy needs assertiveness, confidance, and dominance of his sphere, and he’ll do well in marriage and life without a super-alpha status.

  163. While we’re recommending books, “The Flipside of Feminism” is brilliant (have I already mentioned that here?) To take a good look at the insidiusness of ultra-political correctness in other areas, I highly recommend “Into the Cannibal’s Pot”, a grave warning about the tyrants in South Africa and how many are ignoring them.

  164. @Jennifer @Kathy

    Negging is absolutely necessary when dealing with hot women who KNOW they are hot… (& a woman esteem is build off of how male attention she has gotten over the years) & need to be brought down a peg…

    And a majority of men want to entertain the hottest women he can get afford

  165. Well, maybe. Not treating them like a goddess and giving them deliberate negs are different things; it’s the calculated aspect of it that I don’t like (“give her a nudge here and a push there, and she’ll react this way..”).

  166. @Jennifer

    It is a necessary evil… I would rather be nice & get the hottest chick, but that is not enough…

  167. Mike C

    Well, maybe. Not treating them like a goddess and giving them deliberate negs are different things; it’s the calculated aspect of it that I don’t like (“give her a nudge here and a push there, and she’ll react this way..”).

    What difference does it make whether it is calculated or not? Explain to me why there is anything immoral, unethical, or distasteful about simply planning and using forethought regarding communication/behavior to achieve an intended outcome?

  168. :P Let’s just say I agree with the need to take her down a notch or two if need be; I just wouldn’t assume she needs it just because she’s pretty, or strain over negs beforehand like some guys who seem to try and write manuals about them. Some pretty girls are treated like dirt. But if she needs some humility, better to receive it than not.

  169. I was about to ask the same thing. What is it that you don’t like? Do you think understand human psychology is akin to mind control or coercion?

  170. @Mike

    Beautiful rebuttal

    @Jennifer

    The fatal flaw within women is this “I want dominance at all costs” mentality (or instinct…)

    You need to take that up with the female ID… It is a mighty beast to reckon with

    Some women need to lower the bar to be treated well, or get pump & dumped if dominance is a must

  171. Because Mike, it’s off-putting to plan every move ahead of time like she’s a business plan. There’s nothing wrong with knowing how to talk to a girl, but you can’t treat a person you don’t even know like a road map; by all means, there’s nothing wrong with communication skills, but if you’re putting on a show and it’s all for the goal of trying to edge her and push her a certain way that only benefits you, it becomes a major turn-off to me.

  172. Mike C

    You didn’t answer my *specific* question, but that is OK. Sounds like it is just a personal preference with really no rational basis whatsoever. If guy A and guy B do exactly the same thing, and guy A planned it out more deliberately while guy B just winged it, there is no substantive difference.

    Thats OK though, I knew the real reason before I even asked the question anyways. Women don’t like it when guys “learn” alpha behaviors/communication because then it isn’t “real”.

  173. Not at all, Badger; sorry if I caused more confusion. I’ve just seen some gamers go to the extremes with negging, advising it for all women or women that they’ve not even met yet, and sometimes doing so on a level that would keep women hungering on an unhealthy level for affection.

    “The fatal flaw within women is this “I want dominance at all costs” mentality (or instinct…)”

    You can say that again. Damn, I’ve seen that ugliness at all levels, and I’ve seen good men (not even just nice men) rebuffed for ugly jerks.

  174. “Women don’t like it when guys “learn” alpha behaviors/communication because then it isn’t “real”.”

    No. Playing games and manipulating isn’t real; some gamers do that, usually the ones who just want sex, but that’s not a universal practice of all gamers. Alphas don’t have to be pretenders or jerks, and I have no problem (as I’ve said repeatedly) with men learning the basics of the strength that game gives them. But if I see guys being advised to treat all women in the same way, trying to pre-plan almost every move, yeah, that is fake and a turn-off. I think I already answered motren pretty clearly on my thoughts with this: I agree with the need to take her down a notch or two if need be; I just wouldn’t assume she needs it just because she’s pretty, or strain over negs beforehand like some guys who seem to try and write manuals about them. Some pretty girls are treated like dirt. But if she needs some humility, better to receive it than not.

  175. @Mike C

    Be careful, always focus on what a person SAID/DID, not speculate on what they are… That is an argument you can’t win

    @Jennifer Game/mind control/coercion is morally Neutral, you cannot stop some evil dude from gaining & misusing it…

    Women are going to have to be aware that dudes like him exist…

    Being calculated & composed is also morally neutral… Can be used for good things & for bad things

  176. Btw, when I spoke of seeing guys trying to pre-plan almost every move, I wasn’t talking about their INITIAL meeting with a woman; that first meeting does require planning a lot of moves. No, I meant in a longer-term relationship.

  177. Well-said Motren.

    “If guy A and guy B do exactly the same thing, and guy A planned it out more deliberately while guy B just winged it, there is no substantive difference”

    The difference is motive; this was something I was wary of when I was first learning about game, and some of the wariness proved justified. As an example, if I was having an emotional breakdown (caused by anxiety or depression) and my BF took the advice of someone to be a tree in my storm and stay calm, that would be a good action to take. But it would make a big difference to me if he did that just to shut me up rather than because he cared about me and wished me to be calm.

    “you cannot stop some evil dude from gaining & misusing it…

    Women are going to have to be aware that dudes like him exist”

    I’m very much so. But I disagree about mind control; that IS evil.

  178. Anyway, I went off the trails a bit there when I expressed debate about negging with Motren; sorry. Obviously in his case, it’s not about some mind control or anything so severe, so it’s moot here; I’m tired and my brain’s wary when it’s worn.

  179. “Anyway, I went off the trails a bit there”

    Are you talking about the past two weeks?

  180. Ho ho. That too, but at least I didn’t bring up porn.

  181. Stephenie Rowling

    @motrenaissance
    Thanks super Saiya-jin (big Dragon Ball fan here, except Dragon Ball GT, that one sucked, IMO, and Majimbu hated that pink bastard),I’m finishing Neuromancer now I will read it as soon as I can.

  182. You sound like a funny spunk, Stephanie.

  183. Don’t have time to count them but I estimate Jennifer has left at least 50% of the comments on this post.

  184. Sorry, it happens sometimes with subjects I feel nervous or seriously about; anxiety has a big mouth.

    51%

  185. Stephenie Rowling

    You sound like a funny spunk, Stephanie.

    Awww Thanks :)
    Let’s say I’m an equal opportunity audience. If I can pass the first page of a book or the pilot or first episode of a series I’m usually committed to life, but then I’m a fan of Dragon Ball and a huge Twihard too, so my worlds tend to clash…a lot. But you can at least can ask me just about everything about pop culture if I don’t know it I know how does, useless info is my anti-drug :)

  186. I am watching Dragon Ball GT (50/64) this second…

    Life is GOOD

  187. Stephenie Rowling

    @motrenaissance
    Heh I only liked the middle of it, the beginning was lame, and the ending disappointing, YMMV.

  188. Well, never played any of those, but I did watch Final Destination 5 with the “Chose Their Fate” feature, allowing me to control parts of the film :S That was often like a fun game.

  189. Whoops, meant Final Destination 3. Goodnight lady and gents.

  190. detinennui32

    Jennifer: When I consider “planning” or “calculating”, to me that means a man is learning a new way of interacting and responding and dealing with his world and surroundings. A beta has learned that when A happens he is to do or say B. But then he repeatedly finds that B does not work.

    He has to unlearn his responses and learn new ones. That takes planning and calculation. So now he knows that when A happens, he does C because B does not work. Doing or saying C requires some forethought at first.

    Game does not come naturally to a beta. He has to learn it.

  191. That’s true, detinn, and certain things are very beneficial to learn for social encounters. I just don’t like it when guys think they can map out every word with a woman they’ve already been having a relationship with, especially for years; there shouldn’t be a need to at that point. Thanks for your good explanations.

  192. OTC

    I guess the message I am trying to get across is, be yourself. Find a woman who loves you for you. Do not try and pretend to be something that you are not… Well, not if you want to find a good and loving woman to settle down with and have a family.
    Just don’t be a doormat! Be assertive.

    Oh heavens, the BNBY speech again. What if a guy is a naturally nice, not assertive and naturally a doormat? Will a woman love him for jsut being him? What would you think of him?

    Let’s see: “because guys who are nice and nothing else are, sad to say, weak. And no woman on earth is drawn to a weak man”

    Nope.

    Some guys have to learn to be assertive, since no woman will love him for being him, as you say . That seems like a huge contradiciton. (The paranoid in me would say that you just want weak mean to stay weak, so they don’t bother you.)

    Self-improvement is not pretending to be something you are not.

    “Be yourself” is the worst advice ever for men. “Be the best possible version of yourself” is more like it.

  193. Anonymous Reader

    Kathy
    Det, game gets women, I agree. But what type of women? Mostly unsuitable ones( for mariage ) or sluts.

    Game gets all kinds of women, because it works on all kinds of women. Is the author of the site “Gaming your Wife” looking for sluts? No, he’s not. Is Athol at “Married Man Sex Life” looking for sluts? No. It appears that you still do not understand what Game is. That’s fine, but if you don’t know much about a topic, the wise thing to do is to refrain from commenting on it.

  194. Anonymous Reader

    Btw, when I spoke of seeing guys trying to pre-plan almost every move, I wasn’t talking about their INITIAL meeting with a woman; that first meeting does require planning a lot of moves. No, I meant in a longer-term relationship.

    So you would object to a married man carefully planning out a romantic evening for his wife, from dinner to bedtime? Are you sure you want to do that?

  195. Anonymous Reader

    That’s true, detinn, and certain things are very beneficial to learn for social encounters. I just don’t like it when guys think they can map out every word with a woman they’ve already been having a relationship with, especially for years; there shouldn’t be a need to at that point.

    What should or should not be true is not relevant, compared to what is true. There are all sorts of reasons why a man who has been in a relationship with a woman, especially for years, might have to map out every word, every gesture, every physical pose. Go read Athol’s site for a while, if you wish to know the “why” of what I just wrote, or you can take my word for it. I’m pretty sure that I have more years as a man in an LTR than you do, so my experience in this area is greater than yours. This is not a sarcastic statement. This is a statement of fact.

    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com

  196. I’ve already read Athol’s site anon, and there are some great things and some things I really don’t like. He, however, seem pretty laid-back with his wife, not at all like he needs to plan every gesture with her in case he turns her off, as if she’s a woman he doesn’t know. Your example of planning a date is not in the least what I’m describing here, so we might be talking past each other; it would be pretty sad if a guy thought he needed to pre-plan every gesture and every word he said in a marriage to a woman for years. I do understand what you’re basically saying; my point is this: it’s great and important to use communication, just don’t assume (guys in general) that you can know every line needed for every situation, especially not in real regular life like marriage.

    “Game gets all kinds of women, because it works on all kinds of women.”

    Anon and OTC, Kathy’s talking about the shallow kind of game that PUAs use to get laid very fast, not the general game frame of simply being your best. The shallow, cocky as*hole is the type she’s describing. OTC, Kathy’s not like that at ALL, wanting a weak man; she simply hates the kind of game that IS used by fake and cocky men. This is why she told them to indeed be assertive, but not fake. And btw, I hope I didn’t give you the impression that niceness alone makes a guy weak; I was describing a man with no other recourse.

  197. Incidentally, Athol made a great post describing the difference between PUA game and marriage game, the former of which describes exactly what Kathy was objecting to and why it just ain’t that good a thing to have in a quality life (Athol also expressed her exact words of what kind of women it attracts). But while neither Kathy nor I like all of his suggestions for married game, the concept in general is not bad, and the proof of lack of fakeness is that his wife is not in the least deceived by it and they’re totally open with each other. That’s definitely the ideal.

  198. Anonymous Reader

    I’ve already read Athol’s site anon, and there are some great things and some things I really don’t like. He, however, seem pretty laid-back with his wife, not at all like he needs to plan every gesture with her in case he turns her off, as if she’s a woman he doesn’t know.

    Completely missing the point. For whom does he write? Who are the men and some women who read his site? Why do they read it?

    Your example of planning a date is not in the least what I’m describing here, so we might be talking past each other; it would be pretty sad if a guy thought he needed to pre-plan every gesture and every word he said in a marriage to a woman for years.

    There are some sad situations in the world. You clearly don’t understand where many of Athol’s readers are living. Do I have to spell it out completely?

    I do understand what you’re basically saying;

    No, I really do not think that you do understand what I am saying.

    my point is this: it’s great and important to use communication, just don’t assume (guys in general) that you can know every line needed for every situation, especially not in real regular life like marriage.

    This is becoming pointless. You do not know what you are talking about.

  199. I know what I’ve seen, anon, and I’ve seen athol give some great advice to people in awful situations and some advice that was wayward to me.

    “it would be pretty sad if a guy thought he needed to pre-plan every gesture and every word he said in a marriage to a woman for years.

    There are some sad situations in the world”

    You think that’s necessary then, it looks like. If that’s the case, I do know what I’m describing on your part. And this is pointless.

  200. Have you been aware that I’m simply saying you can’t kno w everything to do in every situation? I think you’ve been saying that there are many situations you can be prepared for; I don’t disagree with that, or with getting advice from experienced guys on how to talk to an upset wife (though some of those suggestions I might disagree with). I’m just saying you can’t pre-plan what to do in EVERY situation, line by line. But having the openness that Athol generally has with his wife helps smooth the road for such things, I think. I hope this is clearer. If we’re still dodging each other’s meanings, we’ll just have to leave it.

  201. detinennui32

    the thread that will not die.

  202. Yup, the cat keeps batting at it. So I’ll just say this: as far as I know, you guys are good guys who care about your women, so I’m just going to give you the benefit of the doubt and leave it at that. Have a good one.

  203. Anonymous Reader

    I know what I’ve seen, anon, and I’ve seen athol give some great advice to people in awful situations and some advice that was wayward to me.

    So? Then don’t take the advice. Leave it for those who would benefit. Do you have a point, or just a complaint?

    “it would be pretty sad if a guy thought he needed to pre-plan every gesture and every word he said in a marriage to a woman for years.

    There are some sad situations in the world”

    You think that’s necessary then, it looks like.

    I am certain that for some couples, in some situations, a high degree of preparation as part of the man’s Game can be necessary. Examples:

    * Husband with a wife who is still in post partum depression months after childbirth.
    * Husband who has spent months or longer caring for wife with short term health issue. Or the reverse.
    * Husband/wife dealing with death of some immediate family member.
    * Husband who has lost job and hasn’t found a new one yet.

    These are all situations where a man could rather easily become so beta as to shut down any tingle in his wife at all. In order to revive the sexual aspect of marriage / LTR requires a strong frame and Game; how strong, and how much, depends on the situation. A man who finds himself putting up with sex once a month, or once a quarter, or worse, will have his work cut out for him. In any of these situations, pre-planning could be a requirement for successful LTR Game. Now do you understand? Do I have to get even more detailed?

    If that’s the case, I do know what I’m describing on your part.

    It’s funny, you women are supposed to be the ones who are experts at reading between the lines…and yet, I find that in general that simply isn’t true.

    And this is pointless.

    It’s become that, yes, because you do not actually seem to read what is written for the purpose of understanding, but merely to pick something out to score points on.

  204. Anonymous Reader

    Have you been aware that I’m simply saying you can’t kno w everything to do in every situation?

    I’m aware you have been waving a strawman around and pretending it has something to do with Game.

    I think you’ve been saying that there are many situations you can be prepared for; I don’t disagree with that, or with getting advice from experienced guys on how to talk to an upset wife (though some of those suggestions I might disagree with).

    On the contrary, you’ve been disagreeing with that for some time now. Women like to pretend that life is spontaneous, that things “just happen”. Well, a lot of “spontaneous” moments are carefully pre-planned, and that is why they are such a success.

    I’m just saying you can’t pre-plan what to do in EVERY situation, line by line.

    Strawman. No one here – not me, not Badger, not Det – no one has asserted that. You made that cute little notion up in your own head, and have been pretending for a while now that it’s a real concern.

    But having the openness that Athol generally has with his wife helps smooth the road for such things, I think.

    That openness is a result of a strong frame on his part that enables him to lead his wife where they want to go. That strong frame does not come naturally to a lot of men, and so they need to learn Game. Even a man with some natural Alpha in him can become beta-ized by letting events get the better of him, as I pointed out in the preceding posting…and to regain strong frame takes Game, and it likely will require some planning that includes mental scripting.

    But if you want to pretend that it all “just happened” by Athol “just being himself”, if that makes you happier, then by all means, be swept away by the strong, firm, tides of your imagination. Just don’t lecture the rest of us on what Game means, ok?

    I hope this is clearer. If we’re still dodging each other’s meanings, we’ll just have to leave it.

    I understand what you are saying. I just reject parts of it as the utter poppycock that it happens to be, that’s all.

  205. In a topic as nuanced as this, Anon, I find it can be remarkably easy to have trouble misreading between the lines, so to speak. I do not at care about “scoring points”.

    “Do you have a point, or just a complaint?”

    Well, if I think a suggestion is morally wrong, I don’t see it as being ok for anyone. My main concern was not being prepared for certain situations, but assuming (as some seem to) that for every situation, no matter the nuance, there’s a rulebook somewhere that could work unilaterally. I have no problem, though, with giving men a general mindset to work with that’s beneficial to their marriage; Christians do this as well.

    Your examples make a lot of sense and have clarified your viewpoints well; I agree with the scenarios you gave. Thanks for posting them.

  206. No one here – not me, not Badger, not Det – no one has asserted that. You made that cute little notion up in your own head, and have been pretending for a while now that it’s a real concern”

    Bullsh*t. It’s a concern developed by men other than the ones here, and I’ve seen that attitude repeatedly; I don’t make things up for the hell of haranguing and being harangued about them. I never said that Athol coatsed smoothly without putting things together over time; my point was that they do what’s best for them, they don’t in fact pretend it’s for everyone, and they’re natural with each other; I highly doubt he has to plan how he sits next to her or addresses her every morning.

  207. Kathy

    “Game gets all kinds of women, because it works on all kinds of women. Is the
    author of the site “Gaming your Wife” looking for sluts? No, he’s not. Is Athol at “Married Man Sex Life” looking for sluts? No. It appears that you still do not understand what Game is. That’s fine, but if you don’t know much about a topic, the wise thing to do is to refrain from commenting on it.”

    Anonymous reader, you are labouring under some misapprehension here. Gaming the wife(or husband) is completely different to gaming some unknown
    woman. It is most unwise to conflate the two.
    Go and read what Marky Mark has to say about game, he makes a lot of sense.

    With regards to Athol I find some of what he writes rather silly and inane with regards to gaming one’s wife. I often game my husband(but he knows I am doing it) It’s all good fun.. Slwerner has also said that he games his wife and she also knows that he is doing it. Married game can enhance a relationship and keep the spark alive. Of course it is much different to a single game. Married people have already commited themselves to one another. There should be no pretence. Trying to be something that you are not. Which is often what gamers do to seduce a woman. It may work in the short term, but insofar as marriage is concerned highly unlikely, to do so.
    I have been married for fifteen years, to a man who didn’t have to use game to get me.

    I am well aware of the sorts of game employed by men. I had enough of them hit on me over the years. And, no it never did work on me. The negging nonsense was a great turnoff for me. My husband was confident, not cocky. Assertive not a bragger. Honest not deceptive. I fell for him like a ton of bricks.
    There ARE women who just fall for a guy because of who he is you know. ;)

    Game mostly attracts sluts and shallow women., if the man is acting on pretence and is not being himself. . Now a confident and assertive man is something else. A man needs to focus on these two things., first and foremost if he is after a LTR.

    “So you would object to a married man carefully planning out a romantic
    evening for his wife, from dinner to bedtime? Are you sure you want to do that?” Well, if that’s what it takes for him to get her in the mood in order to get a bit, then no.
    But after fifteen years it would be a waste of time for me. Guess I am just not a romantic. I, like my husband like the direct approach.
    Prefer him to come up behind me while I am doing the dishes and just give me one. ;)

  208. Anonymous Reader

    Yup, the cat keeps batting at it. So I’ll just say this: as far as I know, you guys are good guys who care about your women, so I’m just going to give you the benefit of the doubt and leave it at that. Have a good one.

    Actually we are all Svengali types who use mind control rays to build our genormous harems. (Except for those of us living in the basement of our mom’s house playing real-time computer games endlessly and wanking our small penes to online porn, of course. )

  209. “Actually we are all Svengali types who use mind control rays to build our genormous harems”

    HA! I knew it..

  210. Brilliantly said, Kathy. I agree about some of Athol’s points, but his wife knows what’s up too; he doesn’t pretend with her. I think you have the right balance of what good game is in marriage and the difference between a man pretending and learning to tap into his natural, assertive masculinity.

    “I, like my husband like the direct approach.
    Prefer him to come up behind me while I am doing the dishes and just give me one”

    Heh. But there’s nothing wrong with romantic dinners either :) Sometimes they’re very needed if things have greatly lapsed; it can depend.

  211. Kathy

    Hey Jen, I’m not against romantic dinners. Like I said, if that’s what it takes..
    We do things differently at my place. Whenever we can farm the kids out for a bit of time on our own, it’s usually sex first.. Then sex again.. Lol. Then dinner. (my husband will usually cook it as he loves doing the exotic stuff) Then maybe we’ll watch a football game or a movie together. Then more sex.. :D

  212. Oh shaddup, you’re making me jealous :P

  213. Anonymous Reader

    Anonymous reader, you are labouring under some misapprehension here. Gaming the wife(or husband) is completely different to gaming some unknown woman. It is most unwise to conflate the two.

    Game is applied psychology. Whether you believe in evo-psych or not doesn’t matter, it works. Different variations are useful in different situations. I will, out of the kindness of my heart, offer an example: the neg is very useful in running game on cold situations, both day game and night game. The younger the woman, the more likely a neg will be needed. In an LTR, or marriage game, negs are much less useful, and can even produce negative results if used carelessly, but a teasing neg still works for the intended purpose. I can give other examples but this one, spelled out in painful detail, should be enough.

    That’s based on my experience. Your experience as a man in both short and long term relationships, might be different. Oh, wait…(this is the part where all the smart women can read between the lines, I hope)

    Go and read what Marky Mark has to say about game, he makes a lot of sense.

    Never heard of him. Your reco doesn’t make me interested, either.

  214. Anonymous Reader

    There should be no pretence. Trying to be something that you are not. Which is often what gamers do to seduce a woman. It may work in the short term, but insofar as marriage is concerned highly unlikely, to do so.

    You do not understand Game, Kathy.

  215. Anonymous Reader

    “So you would object to a married man carefully planning out a romantic
    evening for his wife, from dinner to bedtime? Are you sure you want to do that?” Well, if that’s what it takes for him to get her in the mood in order to get a bit, then no.

    Then you do approve of Game after all, although you say you don’t.

    But after fifteen years it would be a waste of time for me. Guess I am just not a romantic. I, like my husband like the direct approach.
    Prefer him to come up behind me while I am doing the dishes and just give me one. ;)

    That’s a reliable Alpha type of move, and a straighforward Game move. So you like Game, the way your husband runs it.

    So what’s your point?

  216. Kathy has experience as a woman, Anon, and she knows what she, as a woman, wants. Negging is not essential for a relationship, but it can be fun and harmless; teasing is a good part of humor and I can certainly see how certain types of women need some of that; a guy needs to not be intimidated by either her or her good looks or wiles, and negging’s one way to avoid that. As for pretense, for some men game IS just a charade. That’s not the point of real game, but some use it thus and Kathy’s experienced that; I’ve seen shades of it as well and Athol addressed just what she was saying.

  217. Anonymous Reader

    Me
    No one here – not me, not Badger, not Det – no one has asserted that. You made that cute little notion up in your own head, and have been pretending for a while now that it’s a real concern”

    Bullsh*t.

    Do you use that mouth to pray in church? Just wondering.

    It’s a concern developed by men other than the ones here, and I’ve seen that attitude repeatedly; I don’t make things up for the hell of haranguing and being harangued about them.

    Ok, name these men, and name the places that you have seen this, because I do not believe you. I do not believe that there is any Game blog anywhere that claims it is possible to memorize a line or response for every possible permutation of every situation. Roissy’s never said it, just for a start. Maybe you think you read it some where, but I don’t believe it.

    Post your prove. Post it right here.

    I never said that Athol coatsed smoothly without putting things together over time;

    You very strongly implied it. You certainly have worked hard to put out the impression that Athol just naturally got to where he is today, without any work or frame-forming.

    my point was that they do what’s best for them, they don’t in fact pretend it’s for everyone, and they’re natural with each other; I highly doubt he has to plan how he sits next to her or addresses her every morning.

    Will you please cut out the strawman bogusness? It is getting really, really old.

  218. I think some could easily mistake certain “game” moves, like planning a dinner or just springing a kiss, as being fake because of the label “game” that some give it. It can be easy to misunderstand, especially if you’ve seen game abused or misapplied.

  219. You can use sarcasm all you want, Anon, but the implication I’ve gotten has in fact been partly from Roissy. No guy’s tried to literally offer a line for every situation, but they’ve advocated certain behavior in a unilateral sense, especially Roissy with his words that any woman would, for example, secretly like an inappropriate move on the first date, or that men should carefully make sure they always give their woman one less act of affection than she gives them to keep her working hard; that’s simplifying, and ugly, crap, which he advised regardless of the woman or the couple’s individuality.

  220. “my point was that they do what’s best for them, they don’t in fact pretend it’s for everyone, and they’re natural with each other; I highly doubt he has to plan how he sits next to her or addresses her every morning.

    Will you please cut out the strawman bogusness?”

    It’s not surprising I misunderstood you at one point after your words thus: “There are all sorts of reasons why a man who has been in a relationship with a woman, especially for years, might have to map out every word, every gesture, every physical pose”.

  221. Not that I mind the traffic, but I am going to have to ask that everybody stop the “game doesn’t work” “yes it does” “no it doesn’t” “yes it does” “no it doesn’t it’s only for sluts” back and forth.

    Kathy, Jennifer, with all due respect you are way out of your league here. Unless I’m mistaken neither of you have dated women so I question how you know what guys should and shouldn’t do. Your sneering dismissal of Athol Kay, who is racking up thousands of satisfied customers, suggests to me you’d rather men be miserable than actually try to improve their lives (you’ll notice that their wives are happier when they are “gamed” as well).

    You don’t have a particularly good idea of what Game entails – in your mind it seems game=PUA. It sounds like you saw a photo of Mystery in a glossy magazine and surmised the whole field was bunk based on that. I will probably move up my planned post on this, but Game is social skill with women. It’s not an overt set of flowcharts a guy has running through his head when he meets a woman, “oh OK so she gave me an IOI so I have to recalibrate and soften my negs before I hook another DHV then kino.” So you can’t really say “my husband didn’t have to use any game on me” – if he’s attractive to you, in all likelihood he naturally does many of the things the field of game teaches men to do better.

    To say game only attracts “sluts” is just patently untrue. The men reading and commenting here have used knowledge of human psychology to gain relationships with women of all types. To tell men to “be nice, be yourself” to attract women is criminally ignorant of both sexual psychology and the eternal frustrations of men who weren’t born with the skills they need to love and be loved.

    Though controversial, Kathy has a history of varied perspectives that have been interesting in her time in the Manosphere and she is a valued contributor at many blogs. Jennifer on the other hand has deployed the same moralistic know-it-all shtick in every comment and doesn’t seem to listen to anybody’s responses. If I didn’t know the IPs I’d think she was Butterfly Flower’s sockpuppet. To say nothing of your arguments, I’m not sure what you expect to accomplish with that kind of attitude.

  222. Mike C

    but his wife knows what’s up too; he doesn’t pretend with her. I think you have the right balance of what good game is in marriage and the difference between a man pretending and learning to tap into his natural, assertive masculinity.

    Ugggh….at the risk of prolonging this, the way you’ve framed this and perceive this is the problem. You’ve drawn this artificial distinction between “pretending” and “learning to tap”. You BECOME what you DO. A guy who was raised to be supplicating, unassertive, essentially has to unlearn that. The only way to unlearn that is by taking the correct actions in terms of communication and behavior, and yes planning it ahead because it isn’t natural to him yet. Over time, deliberate behaviors and communications should integrate into the subconscious just as you brush your teeth or drive your car on autopilot.

    I have no delusions my words above are actually going to get you to carefully think through your view here, but your repeated comments are instructive to the reader. Fact of the matter is women instinctually don’t like the idea of a beta who had to “learn” to be masculine and alpha and then the hamster is off to the races on the reasons why. All the comments against “planning” and “pretending” are really about that root feeling.

  223. Badger, since I am a woman, I am in a position to say what personally turns me off. I’ve clarified over and over again that I recognize the difference between the PUA type of game and the marriage type; that’s been covered in several of the recent comments. I also explained why some, including me in the past, were misled by the meaning of game simply because of its title: it sounds like playing. I know now that game is usually simply a label for seductive traits, but after seeing so many myriad, subtle ways that some misuse it, I’m more wary. I’m not even that familiar with Mystery, but after reading Roissy and those of like-mind, my guard has gone up.

    “Your sneering dismissal of Athol Kay, who is racking up thousands of satisfied customers, suggests to me you’d rather men be miserable than actually try to improve their lives (you’ll notice that their wives are happier when they are “gamed” as well).”

    I have given Athol a lot of credit, here and on his blog, and we’ve personally discussed many of our disagreements; I do not like all of what he’s said by any means, but I give credit where it’s due; why do you think I’ve been using his openness and honesty with his wife as an example for how game should be in marriage?

    “(you’ll notice that their wives are happier when they are “gamed” as well).”

    Depends on the game. Flirting with other women doesn’t usually make a woman happy, and this is one piece of advice I’ve seen.

    “suggests to me you’d rather men be miserable than actually try to improve their lives (you’ll notice that their wives are happier when they are “gamed” as well)”

    That’s very untrue, and I’ve expressed this on more than one blog; just because I dislike the abuse of game, or certain suggestions of it, doesn’t mean I write it all off. If you’ve seen people abuse it, you must know why some people get a soured impression of it. I certainly want men to have social skills and confidence.

    “Jennifer on the other hand has deployed the same moralistic know-it-all shtick in every comment and doesn’t seem to listen to anybody’s responses. If I didn’t know the IPs I’d think she was Butterfly Flower’s sockpuppet. To say nothing of your arguments, I’m not sure what you expect to accomplish with that kind of attitude”

    After seeing and being wary of ammorality, I am very leery of it. You have not seen my posts on every blog on this subject, and while I try to understand others, I am not the only one who’s misspoken here with either an ugly tone or an unintentionally unclear post. One of the things that irritates me particularly is when I’ve seen other gamers tell me and other women, in a know-it-all tone, that they know we really like the uglier stuff they’ve done; I despise that. Having said this, your two middle paragraphs excellently explain the kind of game I think is genuine and important; you’ve helped reassure me on that score, so thank you.

    I am aware that my attitude has gotten an ugly sheen at certain points, and I genuinely apologize for that. I’m usually good at expressing myself, but in subjects that are complicated and/or involve how to treat women, especially in a patriarchal fasion, I can become woefully awkward at expression and understanding (I first heard of game on a severely patriarchal blog, and it was spoken of like a magic wand to get women to open their legs). I’m sorry about the derailments here and will be happy to drop this.

  224. detinennui32

    Badger: I’d put this thread out of its misery.

  225. detinennui32

    Jennifer:

    I like you. This isn’t my house. But I like seeing you around here.

    The Badger’s been patient. Please don’t try that patience further.

  226. Those are good points, Mike. And it’s true, most women want substance, so if we hear that a man “learned” a new way to behave, we can be naturally suspicious. But what I’m describing here is not simply based on that kind of suspicion; when I first really wanted answers for Game, I spoke to Leonidas and was happy with his answers. Then I read a load of Athol and was happy with that; then I came across some suggestions that directly contradict a Christian relationship, and I wasn’t so happy. This happened repeatedly, the mixed results, and resulted in some confusion and frusteration on my part from the different kinds of gamers I’d seen.

    “A guy who was raised to be supplicating, unassertive, essentially has to unlearn that. The only way to unlearn that is by taking the correct actions in terms of communication and behavior, and yes planning it ahead because it isn’t natural to him yet. Over time, deliberate behaviors and communications should integrate into the subconscious just as you brush your teeth or drive your car on autopilot.”

    That’s an excellent explanation. But some men going into game do enter into pretense; instead of actually learning, and in their own frame of assertiveness and confidence (all men are different), they put on a facade. Athol described it this way: “The trap for the PUA seeking a long term relationship is that they may land a hot babe through their game, but if they cannot back that up with substance, the relationship will fail. If the PUA’s actual value isn’t equaling the display of higher value their PUA Game implied, the girlfriend will eventually wise up and move on with extreme contempt once she discovers that you are not in fact an Alpha Male, just a suboptimal Beta Male who had a funky hat and a cool belt buckle”. That beta male he described was pretending, not learning or training himself to acquire any real substance in the game department.

  227. I’m sorry Detinn, I thought my last post with explanations and an apology might help. It’s not fun on either side being misunderstood, and sometimes my run-ons are a flailing attempt to be understood and receive clarity. Thank you a lot for your nice words and for listening and explaining.

  228. detinennui32

    Jennifer:

    I get that you’re trying to understand and learn and elicit responses and explanations. I would gently suggest that you might sit back and listen for a while instead of talking. For example, I lurked around Roissy’s for a good couple of weeks soaking up everything I could. The very first thing I posted anywhere was on this blog.

    My professors used to say:

    Read. Think. Conclude. Then write.

    I might suggest the following:

    Listen, Soak. Absorb. Think. Ruminate. Consider. Grapple.

    Then talk.

  229. Thank you Detin. I turned this over a lot in my mind, the different points, and have been reassured as to what the men on this blog think of game; I will need to be more careful in the future how I perceive things (several times, in a patriarchal setting especially, my hackles have gone up and I end up selling people short, because I mistakenly associate them with negative things I’ve seen elsewhere from people with similar beliefs). Some gamers I distrust and avoid, while still others have a mixture of traits; I don’t know why this can be hard to grapple, but I guess it’s partly the array of both similarities and differences between different types of people; sometimes I have to remember that even if Vox Day, for ex, resembles Tucker Max in one way, he won’t in another, and go from there. It did take me some years to realize that complimentarians (Christians who lean towards patriarchal ideals) come in so many different kinds of colors, some barely resemble each other at all.

  230. Sorry for things getting ugly, Anon. I, assuredly, did not intentionally misunderstand you or anyone else.

  231. detinennui32

    Jennifer: Listen. LISTEN.

  232. Retrenched

    @Badger

    “To tell men to “be nice, be yourself” to attract women is criminally ignorant of both sexual psychology and the eternal frustrations of men who weren’t born with the skills they need to love and be loved.”

    David Collard had a good post on this topic about a year ago. Basically he stated that most women will generally be less than honest about what turns them on, because deep down they feel that any man who doesn’t know these things already shouldn’t be taught them. Most women prefer that men know these behaviors naturally, or not learn them at all. This is what he called “policing the hierarchy” – i.e., ensuring that only the “real” alphas get to mate.

    As David put it…

    “Women will not tell men what really turns women on sexually. They will tell a man that being a “nice guy” works best, because she thereby creates one more nice guy and ensures that he is kept in his low place in the hierarchy.”

    http://davidcollard.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/women-policing-the-hierarchy/

  233. Anonymous Reader

    Kathy has experience as a woman, Anon, and she knows what she, as a woman, wants.

    Irrelevant. Both you and she have been making claims about “women” that do not hold up under inspection.

    Negging is not essential for a relationship, but it can be fun and harmless; teasing is a good part of humor and I can certainly see how certain types of women need some of that; a guy needs to not be intimidated by either her or her good looks or wiles, and negging’s one way to avoid that.

    In other words, Game works in an LTR, which I’ve been saying for how long now? Thanks for finally agreeing with me. Now what are you arguing, again?

    As for pretense, for some men game IS just a charade. That’s not the point of real game, but some use it thus and Kathy’s experienced that; I’ve seen shades of it as well and Athol addressed just what she was saying.

    Game is Game. It’s like cooking; frying a hamburger is cooking, building a fancy omelet is cooking, working all day to create a multi course dinner with freshly made Bernaise is cooking. Fancy or simple, it’s cooking. The cook should bear in mind who’s going to eat: serving up a steak to a granny lady with no teeth would be inappropriate. Game is like that. The Game one might run in a college bar is not the same as day game in a coffee shop is not the same as game in an LTR. But it’s still Game.

    And to tie back to the original topic, every married man needs Game, because of the dangers of marriage 2.0; every single man needs Game because of the shifts in the SMP due to the sexual revo, and frankly learning Game produces two positive outcomes: men learn the reality of women’s psychology, and men learn the reality of their own psychology — both realities being the exact opposite of what feminism teaches, by the way.

    So Game is real, and it works, no matter how much you and Kathy may contradict yourselves. That’s reality, deal with it.

    Now, do you have a point, or is this just “contradict Anonymous Reader for fun” day?

  234. Have a good night, Anon.

  235. Retrenched

    Re: above post…

    To be fair let me add that I, personally, don’t think women are being malicious when they do this. Rather, they just expect men to win or lose in the dating market based on their natural abilities.

  236. “It’s like cooking; frying a hamburger is cooking, building a fancy omelet is cooking, working all day to create a multi course dinner with freshly made Bernaise is cooking. Fancy or simple, it’s cooking. The cook should bear in mind who’s going to eat: serving up a steak to a granny lady with no teeth would be inappropriate. Game is like that. The Game one might run in a college bar is not the same as day game in a coffee shop is not the same as game in an LTR. But it’s still Game”

    Ah..I get it.

    Retrenched, I had no idea women might have that deeply buried instinct. I think so many just told men to be nice because, in the wake of feminism, they were terrified of guys wanting to dominate or whatever.

  237. Kathy

    “Then you do approve of Game after all, although you say you don’t.”

    If you read what I had said previously you would not have made that statement.
    I said that game could be fun in marriage and that it can be a useful tool.
    It is not the same as game outside marriage and it is wrong for you to conflate
    the two.
    It is also unfair (and also rather arrogant and petty) for you to dismiss the views of Marky Mark just because I recommended that you read what he says. Lol.. shakes head. He has been blogging for many years now, and Novaseeker/ Brendon Elusive Wapiti, Professor Hale, Hestia nad many others have posted comments on his blog.
    I do not always agree with Mark but I find he makes intelligent commentary
    about modern women right on the ball in many instances. He is not a proponent of game. Not everyone is.
    But after fifteen years it would be a waste of time for me. Guess I am just not a romantic. I, like my husband like the direct approach.
    Prefer him to come up behind me while I am doing the dishes and just give me one.

    That’s a reliable Alpha type of move, and a straighforward Game move. So you like Game, the way your husband runs it. ”
    I love it. Yeah, he’s been running game on me these past fifteen years by being himself. No negging , no cockiness, no having to go to lengths like setting up a romantic dinner just so he can get into my pants once in awhile. (rolls eyes)
    Ya crack me up, really ya do.

    If a couple have been married for many years, going to extreme lengths just to get sex out of your wife just seems ridiculous to me. Taking her out on a shopping spree then to dinner, to keep her happy (and willing to put out) just smacks of shallowness to me. Yeah so the husband gets a nooky afterwards. Seems like he is doing all the work in the relationship… Many women expect this. I don’t. And I think it’s also up to other women to make an effort to keep the relationship alive and on an even keel.
    And then you say ” So what’s your point?”

    I made that quite clear, I thought.
    A man should be himself if he wants an LTR or marriage.

    Be confident and assertive. Don’t be a doormat.
    These are things a man can work on without changing who he is. Unfortunately there are many women around today who are not marriage material. A woman who sleeps with a man after the third date is indeed a slut and not worth pursuing for marriage and children.
    Most women are indeed easily gamed because most women are not marriage material. Nor are they very discerning…
    And, btw, I did not say all of what Athol wrote was silly and inane.. But some stuff just is. Like the latest chewing gum post. Read it. It’s cotton candy stuff.

  238. Kathy

    “It sounds like you saw a photo of Mystery in a glossy magazine and surmised the whole field was bunk based on that.”
    No Badger, Mystery is a FAG. Just watch the video that Marky Mark posted of Mystery over at his blog. The man is vapid, as Mark says.I can’t a man who wears black nail polish and a poncy hat seriously. His cred is destroyed imo.

  239. Kathy, at its core, game is social skills that help build confidence and assertiveness in a man; Badger helped me remember this, and Anon with his cooking example did too. I think it’s just a way of learning positive interaction. Certain types of game (social traits), like cockiness and over-negging, as well as as*hole game and manipulative ugly tactics (like flirting with other women and keeping a GF hungry for affection by always giving her a little less than what she gives her man), are unChristian, dishonest and frankly mean-spirited, but this is not what general game is; neither, necessarily, is the PUA type thing. In general, game is really a blanket term covering several natural things that have been around for all time: productive communication between the sexes, attractiveness, seduction, and male confidence, assertiveness and social dominance.

  240. Hmm, I think I muddled things a bit there in the last few sentences. But I think my basic meaning is clear: game has to do with what’s really natural interaction and healthy communication skills, armored with confidence and charisma. It need not include sleaziness, an over-inflated ego or being an asshat; that only applies to certain personality types. An individual guy, like anon said, will have somewhat individual game (I say somewhat because certain game traits are universal) and different kinds of women will also respond to different types of game. This was my mistake, rolling it all into one huge ball.

  241. “game has to do with what’s really natural interaction”

    Not to say that it COMES naturally to everyone; some people need help with social skills.

  242. Kathy

    And I am not disagreeing with what you say, Jen. I am not against HONEST game,(which is what I have been saying all along) just the unChristian type you speak of. Like I said, I engage in game myself, to enhance my own marriage. There is nothing wrong with it. It should not have to be ongoing though, in order to get sex. (in marriage)

    When we went through a rough patch and hubby was busy with the business, I employed some game tactics to ( to get sex-hey I gotta licence)
    get things back on track. Sexy suggestive text messages. Calling him, so he would drop by , even if only for a short time. etc It worked.
    I never said that game did not work, I differentiated, though, which is something anon reader failed to grasp. And which you have summed up quite succinctly, here, Jen :)

    Mostly however, game seems to be lauded primarily as a tool help a man get into a woman’s pants. This is what I have gleaned from my extensive reading in the manosphere.

  243. Jennifer,

    Are you on medication or are you drinking?

  244. Kathy,

    “Taking her out on a shopping spree then to dinner, to keep her happy (and willing to put out) just smacks of shallowness to me.”

    That’s actually more like anti-game, that’s what women’s magazines tell married guys to do to get laid – “help with the housework, take her out, but her shit.” The reality is that your _frame_ is what gets you laid more than the things you do. So Athol can take his wife on a shopping spree because they’re buying stuff for her to look hot and he likes that. Buying her stuff in a “please take these goodies and return the favor by giving me some poon” is a begging beta frame that won’t work.

    If you’re with a woman who demands a shopping spree and dinner out before she’ll F you, you need to dump that B…even if you’re married.

  245. “No Badger, Mystery is a FAG. Just watch the video that Marky Mark posted of Mystery over at his blog. The man is vapid, as Mark says.I can’t a man who wears black nail polish and a poncy hat seriously. His cred is destroyed imo.”

    First off, I’m not one to kick off about language but calling an obviously straight guy a fag is really beyond the pale. I thought we had gotten past the age where calling a guy gay as an insult was over.

    Second, Mystery is outstanding at attracting women. You may not like that, but it is true, and it reflects a deep understanding of interpersonal psychology that he built through observation, trial and error. Mystery started out as a magician, and cultivates a bizarre and occult image that works because he fits well into his frame. Meanwhile, Mystery’s comfort game is unbelievably strong.

    Mystery, Neil Strauss and Roissy have probably done more benefit for men writ large than anybody in the past five years, and that certainly includes women telling guys to just be themselves.

    Just because you don’t like his getup doesn’t make that untrue.

    I like Marky Mark, and I understand his perspective. I for one use my improved social skill with women to weed out bad prospects rather than trying to influence them into better behavior.

  246. Kathy

    Let me put this another way Badger, he dresses like a gay man. How any woman can be attracted to a man who wears black nail polish and an effiminate hat beats me. I saw nothing manly or attractive in his dress or manner.
    Sorry it is indeed cringeworthy stuff.
    In any case he is in a bar not on a stage. He apperaed to be more of a curiosity, like the freak in a circus than anything else.
    He is outstanding at attracting women?
    How do you know this? I see no evidence there from the video that I viewed, Badg.
    Really most women do not like effeminate looking men..Only as friends.

    (I would love to see how many successful marriages have been the result of game, actually.)

    Mystery is really no mystery at all He is relying on gimickry.

    I found him boring and banal in the video.
    I don’t think he comes across as obviously straight either. Perhaps he is hedging his bets? Who knows..

  247. Stephenie Rowling

    I do remember when I didn’t understood game and I claimed I was immune to it, that I read a definition about women responding to the positive Alpha traits, like honesty, justice, strength and courage and no responding to the negative Alpha traits like arrogance, dishonesty skirt chasing…Someone remember who did that definition? Hawaiian libertarian maybe?
    I think that might be of help in this.

  248. Kathy

    Now if a butch looking female was handing out advice, would you pay any
    attention to her?
    Looks do count, Badg, and really, I would not be caught dead going out with some guy who wore black nail polish and a funny hat. I like my men to look like men. :)
    I am sure you like your women to look like women, too..

  249. Kathy

    http://omegavirginrevolt.wordpress.com/2011/08/12/mystery-cant-demonstrate-game-because-game-doesnt-exist/#comments

    Take a look at this Badger, and the subsequent comments.I am not the only one who has noticed how effeminate Mystery is.
    These men are not going to read anything written by Mystery any time soon. An, I can’t say that I blame them.
    To quote “someone”The guy in the video doesn’t seem ordinary to me – he seems perhaps little socially inept. He goes on and on and doesn’t really say anything. Doesn’t he know how to make conversation? He keeps repeating vaguely that his friends are great people. If a regular, normal person is in a social situation and they’re talking about the good fortune to have a great group of friends, it would seem they would me more natural-sounding and less-contrived sounding. Not only could dude not hold those girls’ attention, he doesn’t even seem that interesting to other people in general, men or women”
    Someone nails it!
    TRQ says “Thanks for the laffs, what a queer. He can have any woman attracted to that.”

    I’m not Robinson Crusoe here Badger. There are others who think as I do.

  250. detinennui32

    Good Lord.

    The influence and effectiveness of Mystery, Neil Strauss and Roissy in my view is beyond any debate.

    Game does exist. To me it consists of men improving themselves, being the best men they can be, presenting themselves to the world, and showing confidence in themselves and their abilities. These are the things that make a man attractive.

    Like it. Don’t like it. Accept it. Don’t accept it. It matters not one whit. Women will tingle at what makes them tingle.

    These things cannot be changed. We cannot wish them changed. We cannot ask God to change them. He won’t. He designed us this way. We cannot ask Barack Obama to change them. We cannot get married and hope the tingle arrives after the rings are exchanged. We cannot divorce and hope that something else will tingle her. We cannot stay with women who do not tingle with us, and hope that more time will bring the tingle. It won’t. It never will.

    All the dinners, drinks, vacations, and gifts we have purchased for women will not change these facts. All the entertainment dollars we have spent will not change them. All the begging, supplicating, asking, wheedling and cloying will not change them.

    The most loyal, steadfast, kind and faithful man is as unattractive and invisible as a street bum who hasn’t showered in a year — to a woman who just isn’t tingled.

    These facts are not in any way controversial. They cannot be. There is nothing to controvert. These facts about human nature are absolutely immutable. They have always been this way. It shall ever be so.

    And that is the last comment I will make on this thread.

  251. There’s no question Mystery has given a major contrabution to the Game community. Saying otherwise is just inane. Anything OmegaVirginRevolt has to say about Mystery should be viewed akin to Sarah Palin giving Hilary Clinton a character reference.

  252. Kathy,

    You know how critics are always accusing the Manosphere writers of being bitter angry guys who can’t get laid? Well, OmegaVirginRevolt is that guy. Nobody I know across the ‘sphere reads him for anything other than comic relief. He’s a petulant whiner and total attention whore – come to think of it I don’t think he has any right to criticize someone else as effeminate.

  253. Sox

    How do you ladies suggest a guy just “be confident and assertive”? It’s akin to telling a girl with body dysmorphic disorder to just relax and believe she’s perfect the way she is. You have to look at WHY the guy’s lacking that confidence and assertiveness to begin with. Most people can’t just cultivate that out of nowhere; ESPECIALLY when there’s a negative feedback loop for guys trying and trying hoping for results and only getting repeated failure.

    Look at it another way: A guy can’t even go out and get a quick ego boost/cheap validation the way a woman can. An insecure/unconfident guy is immediately repulsive to all women around him. His female counterpart might as well have a bullseye on her back, men know she’s an easy target. You could argue whether or not this ultimately helps a girl’s self esteem, but I’d say it does- it’s the primary reason why women generally move on from relationships so much easier than men and why most women I know have rebounds available upon a break-up.

    On top of that, men aren’t told by society that they deserve anything in relationships, that they have this intrinsic value that women will recognize if they only assert it. If a 40-year-old basement-dwelling WoW playing male actually believed in his own value as a person, he’d probably triple his attractiveness to women despite possessing conventionally unattractive qualities.

    I’m not saying things are just peachy for women. I think most men in the ‘sphere are just looking for a freakin’ bone here and there from a woman actually acknowledging their experience and not immediately trying to explain it away or debunk it. They’re not looking for a declaration of war against feminism or a condemnation of the female race.

    A guy running dark Game, while he may be very much off the mark of what it’s all about, will still get better results than a guy who’s trying to “be himself” with no real understanding of how to be the best version of himself, or the most attractive version of himself. And guys are results-oriented. Sometimes a guy has to drag himself through the mud to really get the full picture.

  254. Sox

    Jennifer,

    I’ve only read your posts in this thread, but I commend your efforts to broaden your perspective a little bit.

  255. Anonymous Reader

    To be fair let me add that I, personally, don’t think women are being malicious when they do this. Rather, they just expect men to win or lose in the dating market based on their natural abilities.

    That’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that women crave natural Alphas and loath natural Betas, so the idea of some Beta learning to display Alpha traits is a horror to them, a fraud, an impersonation.

  256. Mike C

    That’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that women crave natural Alphas and loath natural Betas, so the idea of some Beta learning to display Alpha traits is a horror to them, a fraud, an impersonation.

    The interesting thing is the male parallel isn’t an issue at all. Take a girl who was obese, had bad acne, bad hair, no makeup. Now have her lose the weight, clear up the skin, and learn to style her hair and do her makeup well. Is any guy going to care WHAT SHE USED TO LOOK LIKE or only be focused on the here and now? As Obsidian would say, to ask the question is to answer it. My GF at one time was 200+ pounds with pink punk hair. Now she is a fitness competitor with traditional long feminine hair. The idea that I am with a “fake, pretend” hottie because she was once obese is ridiculous. I still find this artificial distinction between “pretend” and “genuine” somewhat perplexing because at the end of the day you are what you do.

  257. organicist

    Without the argument to cover it up, the apex fallacy is a rather old phenomenon; what used to be called, “envy.”

    People who use the apex fallacy want you to think their reasoning goes like this: “Everyone is intrinsically equal. Therefore, any inequality in society is due to oppression. Therefore, anyone who is at the top must be keeping everyone else down.”

    When you examine the ‘logic’ (a malapropism, I know), it begins to look like this: “I have no basis for thinking that everyone is equal and there’s a lot of evidence against it. So I’ll take equality as an axiom and assume that all the evidence against it is instead evidence of ‘oppression.’ I’ll then use this as a device to get back at anyone who has something I don’t have.”

    And when you examine the motives behind it, it begins to look like this: “I am so incredibly egocentric and envious that I can’t bear the thought of other people being better than I am. I am also too lazy to fix this by making myself better, especially because, deep inside, I feel like a loser and I am afraid of competition. So I will use ‘equality’ as a rhetorical bludgeon with which to keep anyone from pointing out the fact that I’m a talking chimp with car keys.”

  258. Stephenie Rowling

    “Everyone is intrinsically equal. Therefore, any inequality in society is due to oppression. Therefore, anyone who is at the top must be keeping everyone else down.”

    Got Communism?

  259. organicist

    Well, the conclusions (“Therefore, any inequality in society is due to oppression. Therefore, anyone who is at the top must be keeping everyone else down.”) do follow from the premise (“Everyone is intrinsically equal.”). But, the conclusion is obviously false. So, it looks like we’ll have to reject the premise :) .

  260. “The apex fallacy is what is going on in Lilly’s treatise. Most men don’t have anything resembling easy access to sex (more on that below). But because Lilly and millions of young educated women only consort with – that is to say date and sleep with – attractive men, who DO have access to sex essentially on their terms, the women they are seeing can only fathom “it must be great to be a man.” Without realizing the massive selection bias they are operating under.”

    this is excellent

  261. Pingback: Read “Bankrupt,” And Also This New Blogger | The Badger Hut

  262. Pingback: Happy Birthday to the Badger Hut, Part 2: Best Posts | The Badger Hut

  263. urs

    Wow. I’ve just stumbled upon this blog and have gotten totally sucked in. It’s nice to finally read intelligent discourse between and among the sexes regarding….all of our issues.

    Also, the commentary on how men are bombarded with sex all day and have to constantly control that impulse – I had never really thought of it that way, and I feel a lot more sympathetic to that now. I actually just said to my son yesterday on a trip to the store: “No, you don’t need to go ‘just look’ at the toys, because then you end up wanting all of them, and you can’t have all of them, and then you just feel bad.” And of course, why should this not apply to women and sex and all of it, but I had never considered it from a guy’s perspective. Even though, I myself have had to make similar decisions for myself and my own sanity – I can’t stand to read Cosmo or any of that other crap anymore because I get done with it and feel fat, ugly, old, and poor. And oh yeah, not freaky enough in bed, as has been mentioned.

    I guess I just tend to think of guys as so confident and comfortable with themselves that they don’t have to deal with similar struggles that women do, and I need to stop taking that for granted. I’ve often wondered how my husband, along with so many other guys, seem to go through life thinking they are just total rock stars, without any self-doubt or any apparent worry about how they interact with the world. I do admit it’s hard to conceive of the male level of visual arousal, since virtually all men are largely invisible to me anymore. But that doesn’t mean that men are not presented with their own unique challenges, and reading a lot of your stuff here is helping me appreciate that more.

    I remember once explaining to my husband the differences between how he and I perceive our attractions to others, and being surprised at HIS genuine surprise upon my description of my own attractions, including my attraction to him. I said, “When I see you, or any other man, looking just terribly cute or appealing or strong or wearing a white t-shirt or whatever it is that gets my attention, my first thoughts do not typically go to sex, although they may if I’m ovulating (that’s often exactly how I know when I’m ovulating). I will just feel a general overall sensation of that person being very generally appealing, and I will be filled with a very strong fondness for them, and think to myself how much I just like that guy. It’s not usually an immediate ‘I gotta jump your bones’ thing, as that can now take a fair amount of effort to induce since my schedule has gotten really busy in the last few years (kids, running two small businesses, in college for another degree, commuting, homeschooling, am I forgetting anything?) Whereas if I simply bend over to get the laundry out of the dryer, even in my stretched out yoga pants, oversized t-shirt, and floppy ponytail, his brain goes straight to I NEED TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU NOW. I told him, “My brain just doesn’t make that jump nearly that quickly or easily, and I think that goes for most chicks. It doesn’t mean I don’t love you or aren’t attracted to you. I just need to let the idea percolate a little bit – my mind needs time to wander around with the idea while my body gets warmed up.” He really was surprised. And we really learned something about each other. But I guess it helps me understand it even more to see that validated here.

    This all makes me want to go hug my husband and be extra appreciative towards him. Thanks.

  264. Pingback: Reciprocal Scarcity: A Treatise in Two Parts (Part II) | The Badger Hut

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s