Further Thoughts on the Bereznak-Finkel Kerfuffle

Like much of the manosphere did, on Thursday I discussed hedge funder and Magic: The Gathering champion Jon Finkel’s unfitness to date blog intern Alyssa Bereznak. Thanks for making it the most-viewed day in Badger Hut history to date.

In a well-done summary of the incident with a personal bent, Chenda Ngak of CBS News’ Tech Talk blog calls Bereznak a “mean girl,” says the blog staff was “peeved” and likened Bereznak’s revelations of Finkel’s personal life to cyberbullying.

Finkel gave some very interesting answers in an email interview with Ngak, in which he handles the case with impressive aplomb:

CN: We know you felt your privacy was violated. Are there any tips that you’d like to pass on to anyone who might encounter this type of public exposure?

JF: My main advice would be to have an army of game-loving fans who remember you from your glory days 10 years ago. Probably also, and this is good generic life advice, “try not to be a [jerk].” If she’d posted about me being a real [jerk], things might have developed differently. But I suppose this sort of stuff could happen to anyone with a large enough Google footprint, even if they are a “Grade D Celebrity.”

Self-deprecating humor with a Groucho Marx-esque twist. I like.

CN: Do you think you were a victim of cyberbullying?

JF: I mean not really. 18-year-old Jon might have thought that, especially if it had been a girl that he had been really into, or had left himself vulnerable to, rather than just an uneventful, say goodbye forever kind of date.

He has enough detachment to be self-aware.

CN: As of today, has she contacted you to apologize?

JF: Nope.

Here’s guessing that within two months, Bereznak will be only a footnote in Finkel’s public image.

CN: On a lighter note. What are you looking for in a woman? Do you have a type?

JF: I always think people backwards rationalize their lists. My main criterion is, “When I wake up in the morning, do I want to see/call her?” That being said, I think I’ve devolved my list into two main things that I think everything else follows from: “Self awareness and intellectual curiosity.”

CN: Can you describe what a perfect date might be like?

JF: Someone smarter than me once said, “All good dates are the same but all bad dates are different.” You just know when it’s good – the details fade away. Oh, that and Jeffrey Dahmer-based One Man Shows.

Brilliant. She twice tries to bait Finkel into playing as shallow as Bereznak, and he deflects it both times with appeals to unmeasurable traits and nebulous metaphysics. He even discussed the rationalization hamster! (If not by name.)

CN: Playboy model Sara Jean Underwood asked you out on “Attack of the Show.” Are you going to take the date offer? Ha ha…sorry. I had to ask. I think the entire Internet wants to see that date happen.

JF: I definitely don’t want to let down the Internet. I would definitely be down to go on a date with her, but not if it’s televised (sorry everyone). Just not my thing.

CN: Good luck on your tournament! And have a good holiday weekend.

JF: Thanks. Here’s to hoping I make grandpa proud!

This guy is good. Admittedly, this exchange was over email, where you have time to come up with witty and charming responses, but even consider that, Finkel’s replies are excellent public relations – he shows little to no investment in Bereznak, plays down his fame and fanbase without denigrating them, and even negs a date invitation by a Playboy model.

Ngak also quoted from Finkel’s Ask Me Anything thread.

What was your first reaction upon reading her post about you? – Scarker

I felt a little, I dunno, violated. Even though the post itself didn’t make me look bad at all (at least I didn’t think). Still, it’s sort of like someone publishing emails you wrote to your girlfriend, or posting part of your diary – it just feels wrong

Are you upset that she revealed your identity in the article, or do you think that ultimately this is going to work out for you with the great publicity? – OilGuy13

It’s nice to know the Internet has my back, so in total it looks like it was a net positive, though I still feel oddly creeped out by it.

How many girls have asked you out since this all exploded? I noticed Felicia Day in your Twitter; did she say something to you? – kbilly

If you include Twitter messages from other continents saying ‘Id date you’, then a lot. As for Felicia Day, it appears she made a tweet or two about it, but I don’t really know much about her, except that she seems like a lovely woman who is apparently loved by gamers.

Did she tell you she was a blogger? Did she hint maybe she would post about the date? – sweetgreggo

Yes and No.

Did Gizmodo contact you at all about disclosing your name? – clifwith1f

Nope, although it looks like one of their editors just sent me an email 15 minutes ago, but I haven’t really had time to sift through all my emails. This is already cutting into valuable [Pro Tour] Philly test time – which is the initial reason I took off work today.

For good measure, Ngak interviewed an empathetic psychologist on public shaming (emphases mine).

What can you do if you’ve been bashed publicly?

We asked clinical psychologist Dr. Leah Lagos, Psy.D, to advise anyone who has experienced a public bashing and violation of privacy.

“Online dating, particularly for men, can test their self-esteem. Because it’s often the men who do the asking it is often the men who are more vulnerable to rejection. The key here is to remain detached from the outcome,” Dr. Lagos stated. “Strong emotional reactions on a first date, like love or hate, are likely to reflect the most about the person experiencing them. People sometimes forget that making oneself vulnerable is an inherently anxiety provoking experience.”

OTHER ADDENDA

A New Nadir Of Nasty

Michael Tresca of examiner.com has uncovered a different version of Bereznak’s post on the Australian version of Gizmodo, which puts the reprehension of her writing in even starker relief. It appears that her ire is stoked by two factors.

1. She was expecting a “normal finance guy” (it’s not hard to read between the line: a rich, handsome, charming banker)

I was lured on a date thinking I’d met a normal finance guy, only to realise he was a champion dweeb in hedge funder’s clothing… if everyone stopped lying in their profiles, maybe there also wouldn’t be quite as many OKCupid horror stories to tell.

Amazing. In her world, Finkel is engaging in malicious dishonesty for not being the man she imagined he would be. This tone is intensely narcissistic.  Also note the hypergamy in play: even though she’s employed by a geek plublication, geeks aren’t good enough for her.

But it doesn’t stop there – by using OkCupid for its advertised purpose of meeting dates, Finkel engaged in predatory behavior as well!

I later found out that he infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people I sort of know, including one of my co-workers… Also, for all you world famous nerds out there: Don’t go after two Gawker Media employees and not expect to have a post written about you. We live for this kind of stuff.

Note again the self-absorbed tone – “infiltrated,” and threats of revenge for the crime of trying to go on a date. As soon as he was “un-selected” as a suitable mate, which again was due to his not living up to whatever stereotype she expected for her perfect man, he was no longer even human and deserved a public lashing. She’s basically accusing him of being a stalker.

She wishes. One of the most interesting exigeses to come out of the comments on my original post was the theory that homely women loudly publicize their advances by and rejections of men so as to publicize that somebody, anybody, was interested in them.

At What Price Clicks?

The point has been made that Gizmodo parent site gawker (which also owns the first-class hamster farm Jezebel) pays writers by number of hits per story. OK, that partially explains notorious content posted to the site. But there are additional long-term spillover effects to such intellectual pollution. Maybe you’d call them externalities, or self-externalities as they affect the parties involved in the exchange (I’m not an economist so maybe there’s a proper term I’m missing).

Gawker will probably be fine – it has a business strategy, and nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people. The biggest damage is likely to Bereznak herself. Maybe she has a future at a snark site or a bloodless boiler room, but most businesses in this country want to get down to business, which means hiring an army of the least notorious people possible, people who can put their heads down and produce without needing to get their rocks off creating drama and launching personal attacks on other individuals. It’s one thing to write a screed or a strong, uninformed opinion in say a college newspaper – professional courtesy dictates that most of what you do in college is firewalled from professional judgment. It’s quite another to publish under the masthead of a fully-functioning technology publication and oh by the way alienate a key segment of the technology community in the process. (I would be remiss if I didn’t criticize Gizmodo’s editorship for allowing her to commit such a massive professional misstep.)

I’d like to say I’ll be curious where Bereznak ends up, but in reality I’m looking forward to forgetting about her as soon as I pen my next post.

Poker? But I Just Met Her!

Finally, Finkel was asked at AMA about similarities between MTG and poker, and came up with this gem that expresses a key life truth:

I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it’s the right play. Magic players have been developing that since their teens, and its just so applicable to poker, gambling, and life in general.

I read a cracked article about online poker where they talked about it making you “immune to bad luck”. You just take the bad beats in every area of your life in stride and move on.

What he’s saying is to override your emotional impulse by relying on your academic knowledge that you are playing the best strategy. I can say from experience that eventually you gain so much confidence from being in the right strategy that it becomes your emotional impulse; it starts to feel natural.

You’re not always going to win. Guys who practice their game know this in spades (no pun intended). No scheme works every time; the question is, are you maximizing your chances with the best strategy? It is typical in relationship discussions, especially among women, to attribute a failed attempt to a bad strategy and change it instead of running the same move again. (The most common I hear is “I/my friend approached a guy and initiated and he turned me down, so it doesn’t work and I am never going to initiate again,” or “I dated a beta guy and it was too stressful to do all that relationship work so back to alphas it is for me.”)

Sample sizes of 1 are for silly people. It’s the difference between knowing when to quit, when you remove your investment to protect opportunity cost, and flat-out quitting, where you lose tolerance for the failures that precede flashes of success.

About these ads

35 Comments

Filed under junk culture

35 responses to “Further Thoughts on the Bereznak-Finkel Kerfuffle

  1. Stephenie Rowling

    Great post.
    Gambling is indeed stressful, you need to pick a strategy and analyze enough variables to know that the outcome will work even if it takes time. But the amount of time for finding the “right play” is usually the problem for many people. Who wants to look like a loser for an unknown period of time? Few people.
    That is why success is admired because is rare the person willing to commit to it, not matter what. They have faith in the outcome.

  2. “Who wants to look like a loser for an unknown period of time? Few people.”

    It’s the same thing with picking up game – the barrier to entry is enormously high (the reason it will never get widespread market penetration) and the plateau after a burst of success is frustrating. In the first run it really is something of a gimmick. Those who stick through the “second wave” of learning, who really integrate it into their personality, come out changed men.

    “That is why success is admired because is rare the person willing to commit to it, not matter what. They have faith in the outcome.”

    It amazes me how many people quit before they get to success because they just don’t want to be bothered with the trouble of waiting for it to happen. Most people just don’t have the faith and patience to do all the little things, they want the end results without having to scrub the toilets and other details. I’m sure you know the fable of the Little Red Hen.

  3. Badger-
    good post. i’m sure bereznak is getting SLAMMED on her twitter account.
    deservedly so.

    and damn right he handled it well.

  4. fdsa

    In fairness, if he said in his profile that he works at a hedge fund, he’s setting up some expectations there.

    Imagine if a woman said in her profile that she was a model, and it turned out she was a 200-lb plus-size model. Sure, “model” is true. But there’s pertinent information she left out.

    That’s not to defend ANYTHING else this bitch has done or said; just that with his profile, this guy is going to skew the dates he gets toward women who can’t deal with the Magic thing. But it’s his life.

    He’d be better off meeting women in real life: Then he can create attraction before he brings up Magic, and she won’t have gone into it thinking there can’t be any surprises. Once she’s tingling, the hamster will take care of the rest.

  5. johnnymilfquest

    “I was lured on a date thinking I’d met a normal finance guy, only to realise he was a champion dweeb in hedge funder’s clothing… if everyone stopped lying in their profiles, maybe there also wouldn’t be quite as many OKCupid horror stories to tell.”

    “I told you so!” x 100.

  6. Johnycomelately

    I used to wince at Whiskey’s ad nauseum repetition of a phrase he would parrot on Roissy, “Women hate, hate, hate Betas.” Now I’m not so sure….

  7. Danny,

    Bereznak will go back to grad school and get a healthy dose of “you go girl” from the chattering princess peanut gallery; meanwhile the tech community and most of the rest of the world knows what low-quality stock she’s made of. Not a good outcome, on balance.

    fdsa,

    I don’t agree with your analogy. First, one can tell if a “model” is plus sized from the pictures. Secondly, he said he was a hedge fund manager, which is absolutely true. He’s not a “dweeb in hedge fund clothing,” as if it was a Halloween costume. Her hamster filled in the rest, which was her expectation of a frat-guy stockbroker type who would be enough of a dominant asshole for her hypergamouse (and hopefull pay off the loans for her expensive but pointless master’s in journalism).

    I don’t know if she knows anybody in finance, but if she hasn’t noticed, lots of hedge funds are run by quants and science guys (I have a friend who works at a hedge fund who has a PhD in chemical engineering). It sounds like what she’s really angry about is that a guy with a “high-status” occupation would actually have geeky traits; she calls it lying because it didn’t fit the story she told herself when fantasizing.

    Also, as I said in my first post, he didn’t bring up MTG until she told him her brother was a gamer. There’s no indication he was trying to milk it as a status play; she only found out about his championship because she googled him after the first date. It was cruel, clueless or a massive passive-aggressive shit test for her to socially proof a geeky activity and then fault him for revealing his involvement in said activities.

    This woman has serious problems. She’s just an entitled princess, and unfortunately they are a dime a dozen in the college-educated community. Sadly for her, there’s no telling how many misogynists and MGTOWs her post created, men who read it and said “forget this, I’m done with women.”

    Yet they never stop writing crap like this raging at “unfit” men and telling men they are the ones who need to change. Which only backs up my impression that modern feminism is a big collective shit test, trying to weed out compliant beta males and geeks so that these women can get the alpha males they deserve.

  8. “I used to wince at Whiskey’s ad nauseum repetition of a phrase he would parrot on Roissy, “Women hate, hate, hate Betas.” Now I’m not so sure….”

    They do. The idea of being sexual with or pursued by a beta is nauseating to them, betas are subhuman and deserving of calumny.

  9. anon1

    I propose that women have to issue an “Amanda Warning” – just like the Miranda Warning. It is issued prior to a date to let a man know that if he falls short of whatever 463 point checklist she has, that everything he does and says will be used against him on the internet.

    Let’s make this an Urban Dictionary term.

  10. detinennui32

    It’s the same thing with picking up game – the barrier to entry is enormously high (the reason it will never get widespread market penetration) and the plateau after a burst of success is frustrating. In the first run it really is something of a gimmick. Those who stick through the “second wave” of learning, who really integrate it into their personality, come out changed men.”

    Cosign. And add the fear factor.

    Many have read here and elsewhere how I discovered the manosphere. The first reaction is wonderment and revelation, a road to Damascus moment. The second is anger at the realization that everything you’ve been told about women, their natures, how to attract them and what they find attractive are lies; and realizing that you’ve been doing it 100% wrong for the better part of 30 years.

    The third is fear. Once you realize and then get past the anger, then you have to face down and defeat your fears. Once you start putting game into practice, you must face the very real possibility that you may have to let your woman go for whatever reason — because it’s not working out, your relationship is not improving, one or both of you aren’t getting what you need, etc. And I had to face that fear and go ahead anyway.

    A couple of things I did realize: For the single man, Game seems to make rejection a lot easier to swallow, especially after you realize who and what women are and what makes them tick.

    And: There will always be another woman.

  11. “A couple of things I did realize: For the single man, Game seems to make rejection a lot easier to swallow, especially after you realize who and what women are and what makes them tick.

    And: There will always be another woman.”

    My general approach to a public rejection is to immediately open another woman. As long as I haven’t been rejected twice in a row, preselection won’t hurt me with the second girl (who probably didn’t notice anyway). And it’s priceless to see the look on the first girl’s face as you strike up a successful approach with the second. Like how jealous Elizabeth Bennett got when her cousin accepted the proposal of a man Elizabeth had just rejected.

  12. “A couple of things I did realize: For the single man, Game seems to make rejection a lot easier to swallow, especially after you realize who and what women are and what makes them tick.”

    indeed master Yoda. tease them playfully, make them laugh, look for IOI’s and escalate as soon as you can. if she turns you down, her loss. move on.

    it’s talking to a woman, not quantum string theory.

  13. detinennui32

    There Will Always Be Another Woman.

  14. these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.

  15. Anonymous Reader

    detinennui32

    There Will Always Be Another Woman.

    This is very important. Most men go through a period in their 20′s when, as the saying goes, “If I dropped dead even the female flies would avoid me”. It can lead to one-itis. What’s more, years later under emotional strain, that one-itis can surface again.

    A man who knows TWABAW inside as part of inner Game manifests that belief in various ways. In an LTR, that manifestation can spark fear, and then desire, in the woman. Either way it is a good thing.

    If I were back on the market this month, there would be another woman by New Years. I know it, and believe it, and that makes a great deal of difference.

  16. deti/AR,

    TWABAW is the anti-dote to oneitis; if you get dropped, go find another one. Easier said than done though.

    It’s hard to explain this to women, because they have such intrinsically narrow attraction filters and just don’t find that many men attractive – it’s not that women are fungible, it’s that our taste for variety means that many women are interesting to us in different ways.

  17. detinennui32

    Hmm. I feel a possible suggested guest essay coming on.

    AR said: “If I were back on the market this month, there would be another woman by New Years. I know it, and believe it, and that makes a great deal of difference.”

    Just so. I came to this realization a few months ago. It really freed me up and gave me a whole new perspective. I am in my mid-40s and I’ve been married 15 years. But if push really came to shove, in a worst case scenario, I know that there would be another woman. When I look back on the long arc of my life before marriage, when one woman left, another one showed up. When one exited stage left, another entered not long after. If I wanted one for short term, I could find one. If I wanted an LTR, a reasonably suitable woman almost always showed up. When one did not appear it was always because I was putting out signs of unavailability or DLVs. It always had to do with how my inner game and confidence was, and whether I was putting myself out there meeting people. When you’re on top of your inner game, your life intersects with many different women. And that’s why There Will Always Be Another Woman.

  18. Anonymous Reader

    deti/AR,

    TWABAW is the anti-dote to oneitis; if you get dropped, go find another one. Easier said than done though.

    It is easier said than done, up to a point. And that point is when a man accepts himself as he is, including his sexuality, accepts that he’s attractive to some group of women – not all women, but some subset – and that he has some worth, and dignity, as a man. It isn’t something that is easy to explain to anyone under 30, frankly. But in time it can, and ought, to exist.

    It’s hard to explain this to women, because they have such intrinsically narrow attraction filters and just don’t find that many men attractive – it’s not that women are fungible, it’s that our taste for variety means that many women are interesting to us in different ways.

    This is true. This is a profound truth, in fact, because it is part of the difference between men and women. There is another aspect, and it’s common knowledge on men’s sites: our attractiveness ages differently than women’s. It’s trite to point out the difference between milk and wine. A man who learns from his life experience, good and bad, can become more discerning about people and their motives. Women ought to be able to do this, and some can, but all too often they learn in their 20′s to rely upon their looks, and their looks alone, and arrive at 30 with a pretty skimpy tool set for coping with the world.

    Look at it this way. A man in his 20′s learns, painfully in most cases, to deal with women at the height of their sexual power. He acquires some ability to spot manipulative ones, some ability to spot entitled, special, snowflake princesses (Hi, Ms. Walsh, I have not forgotten you), some ability to spot the egregiously materialistic ones, and so forth. So he arrives in his 30′s with some ability to protect himself against the more rapacious women, and if he learns Game he acquires the ability to stand up as a man to the demands of women as well. Meanwhile, for many, many women in their 20′s life is a playground. Their looks, including their bodies, gets them things, and situations, and men that they want. So much so, that some number of women ride the carousel like there’s no tomorrow, because they’ve always been entitled to ride the carousel for free. When their looks begin to lose that freshness, they don’t have anything else. If they never learned basic manners, some degree of kindness, some degree of empathy – if no one ever
    impressed upon them basic human decency then what they are is an unpleasant harpy who is no longer cute, nor nearly as sexy, as a few years before. And their toolbox for human relations, which has always been full of T & A, is looking mighty empty.

    A man who has had to learn the hard way how to attract and keep a woman in his 20′s and 30′s has the ability to continue to do the same into his 60′s. A woman who has relied on her T & A, taking it for granted that she can be a brass-bottomed bitch and it won’t matter, finds herself at 35 having to lower her sights over and over again, unless she had the wit to “settle” earlier. A man may want to be with the same woman for the rest of his life, and that’s fine, but if he knows -somewhere inside – that There Can Be Another Woman if need be, he’ll be all but immune to oneitis, and that in turn will keep a bit of a tingle in the woman. I don’t have to explain why, Roissy’s got a whole article on it up since last week.

    There’s some blunt truth. I’m sure the hen brigade won’t like it. Too bad.

  19. Anonymous Reader

    detinennui32

    When one did not appear it was always because I was putting out signs of unavailability or DLVs. It always had to do with how my inner game and confidence was, and whether I was putting myself out there meeting people. When you’re on top of your inner game, your life intersects with many different women. And that’s why There Will Always Be Another Woman.

    Yes. Exactly. +1 on this. And IMO inner game is the key.

    In fact, I’ve found that over 35 even when I felt quite down in the dumps if I consciously had to project competence on the job, a competence that came from years of experience to be sure, there were women who were attracted to me. At the time it was baffling, because I did not understand female psychology. Now it’s just something to enjoy, like looking at the beautiful roses in someone else’s yard – looking, but not taking any. Good to know that they are there, however…

  20. AR,

    “some ability to spot entitled, special, snowflake princesses (Hi, Ms. Walsh, I have not forgotten you)”

    Lay off Susan Walsh. She’s far from a snowflake princess, she’s one of the only women posting on men’s issues with a lick of sense in her.

  21. “A woman who has relied on her T & A, taking it for granted that she can be a brass-bottomed bitch and it won’t matter, finds herself at 35 having to lower her sights over and over again, unless she had the wit to “settle” earlier.”

    There are certainly pretty women who are quite nice (possibly because their attractiveness has caused everyone to be nice to them and they are simply responding in kind). They may not date regular dudes but they are least won’t be bitches about it.

    But it’s darkly humorous to see a woman whose assets are on the decline try to pull the foot-stomping princess routine. I’ve seen guys just laugh in their faces. Serves them right for being so unpleasant all their lives. It’s a classic positive-feedback loop that reinforces itself – the refusal of attention and supplication makes them more desperate and likely to make another bad relationship decision.

  22. Anonymous Reader

    Lay off Susan Walsh. She’s far from a snowflake princess, she’s one of the only women posting on men’s issues with a lick of sense in her.

    No where have I said that she was. However, earlier on this site she claimed that in her neighborhood, there are no entitled women. None. Because she can’t see them. I find that arrogant at the very least. Possibly protective of entitled princesses? I cannot tell. But I do know, from personal experience, that women with an entitled mindset don’t walk around with a scarlet “E” on their breast, it takes some amount of time and observation to see them for what they are. Sometimes it can be a bit expensive, and not just financially, to find out.

    Seems to me that Walsh is claiming she can just look at women, and tell if they are entitled or not. That’s nonsense. Also seems to me she’s arguing that we men don’t really know any entitled women, that it’s just something we made up. That kind of denial of men’s experience is so 2nd wave, so 80′s, and so tiresome.

    Just because she talks some sense, doesn’t mean everything she says is right. Does that clear things up?

  23. Octavia

    I think Finkel has handled this situation well. From what I’ve seen:

    - He didn’t make rude, obnoxious comments about Bereznak in return.
    - He probably realizes that the amount of money he has, in and of itself, doesn’t mean others will automatically want him.
    - He hasn’t made disparaging remarks about women in general.
    - He also appears unlikely to post details about his private life. This is key because even when you don’t use name, with enough details, others could identify exactly whom you’re referencing.

    Now, it’s not that women hate betas. It’s that some betas need to examine the quality of the women they repeatedly want. There’s a chance for introspection that many people miss when they believe the issue must be outside of themselves. Also, some people take the alpha/beta labels to the extreme. If a person can be easily categorized, he/she can work on being more multifaceted.

  24. Anonymous Reader, why don’t you have a conversation (or another one) with Susan Walsh? She’s one of the few women I’ve seen who’ve made an honest effort to understand how men see things. She even admits when she’s wrong about something.

    In other words, you took a parenthetical cheap shot at someone who didn’t deserve it. That kind of shit makes you look bad.

  25. They’ve actually studied the phenomenon in social psychology. Specifically they’ve studied why some people like to reject in humiliating ways, and even ascribe all sorts of negative traits on the rejectee. It explains both the Watson incident and the Bereznak incident.

    http://aleknovy.com/2011/08/10/a-scientific-look-at-trolls-like-rebecca-watson-why-do-trolls-like-to-make-a-big-deal-out-of-rejecting-someone-and-why-do-they-obsess-with-finding-fault-with-the-rejectee/

    Here’s some excerpts for ya

    In other words, when an individual is disinterested in the offer of another person (a behavior), he/she is more likely to attribute that disinterest to a characteristic of the requester

    So, there is a bias to blame the requester for not liking the request

    (Fein & Spencer, 1997). Essentially, people can get a self-esteem ”boost” from putting others down (like when they “reject” others harshly). This is especially likely to occur when they are feeling badly about themselves

    There is an automatic psychological bias to incorrectly blame the requester’s personal characteristics for being disinterested in the request. Also, there can even be a temptation for a self-esteem boost by devaluing the other person, while exercising the “power” to say no

  26. Oh women HATE HATE HATE beta males. They do. Not all women but most. The reason is … most beta males are now their social equal or slight inferior. Even for women of utterly average looks. The same kind of guys women 50 years ago found sexy are now … “inferior males,” “useless beta males” etc.

    The whole point of the article was the guy wasn’t sexy. That was it. So … always be sexy. Women will forgive anything … but not being sexy.

  27. Anonymous Reader

    Anonymous Reader, why don’t you have a conversation (or another one) with Susan Walsh? She’s one of the few women I’ve seen who’ve made an honest effort to understand how men see things. She even admits when she’s wrong about something.

    “Conversation” means that both parties actually pay attention to what the other is saying. I don’t see Walsh doing that. She claims that there’s no entitled women in her neighborhood, because she can’t see them. That’s arrogant, and rather stupid. Walsh seems much too stiff necked to back off from that bogus claim. So far as I can tell, she won’t admit that she’s wrong about this, preferring to insult me.

    In other words, you took a parenthetical cheap shot at someone who didn’t deserve it. That kind of shit makes you look bad.

    What cheap shot? She’s claimed she can tell, just by looking, if a women is entitled or not – or maybe she’s saying that special snowflake princesses don’t exist, that it’s something men make up, I can’t tell from her text. The guy whose wife spent them into Chapter 7 never showed anything in public. If Walsh had seen him, his wife and their kid, likely she would regard them as “happy”, even though he was holding down a lot of anger and resentement over the situation. Lots of men hold it all in, you know that, I know that, Walsh doesn’t know that apparently. When I point out the painfully obvious falsehood, she won’t defend her claim, nah, she’s Woman and doesn’t have to do that “facts”, “reason”, stuff, right?

    Interesting that both you and Badger have decided to White Knight for this arrogant woman. Even more interesting because she can’t be bothered to actually defend her own comment, leaving that for y’all to do – she deals out insults to me, then retreats to her pedestal, leaving the dirty work for the men. And you like this betatude?

  28. Stephenie Rowling

    A.R.

    Given that you think men shouldn’t try to defend a fellow manosphere commenter/blogger because she is a woman, completely different from white knighting, I will step up, not that Susan needs it mind you.

    Mostly I will advice you to read HUS, she has more than 500 post that are the best defense she could have about her position and her comment and my guess that is why she doesn’t come to highjack Badger thread with explanations that are already known by him and many other regulars.
    So yeah if you really are as insightful as you pretend to be, read her work and then criticize, if you most.

  29. Bereznak isn’t pretty, but from the pictures I’ve seen of her, she looks like the type who could easily acquire a group of uberbeta orbiters that she can be the queen of. She IS thin and blonde with clear skin, after all.

    Finkel handled the fallout very well. It wouldn’t surprise me if this episode raised his SMV more than anything else he’s ever done (or will do) in his life.

  30. “Bereznak isn’t pretty, but from the pictures I’ve seen of her, she looks like the type who could easily acquire a group of uberbeta orbiters that she can be the queen of.”

    I hadn’t exactly thought of that angle, but it’s a great point – and I bet that is what she is raging against, Finkel (or more accurately his resume) reminded her too much of her beta-orbiter posse of men she’s not attracted to.

    “Finkel handled the fallout very well. It wouldn’t surprise me if this episode raised his SMV more than anything else he’s ever done (or will do) in his life.”

    Bereznak threw him a retroactive shit test, and he passed it marvelously by barely responding. That will raise his value to others in his circle.

  31. Anonymous Reader

    Stephanie Rowling
    Given that you think men shouldn’t try to defend a fellow manosphere commenter/blogger because she is a woman,

    You have no idea what I think, and telling me what I think is pure arrogance. It was one of the hallmarks of 2nd wave feminism. Women / wimmen /wymmin who pull this stunt are not only arrogant, they often are attempting to shift the debate from substance to feewlings, and deserve nothing more than my utter contempt.

    Telling me what I think is a fast track to being put in the “clueless, arrogant bitch” bin. Make a note of that fact, Rowling.

    One definition of white knighting is this: attacking men who dare to stand up to women who behave badly. In my opinion, Ms Walsh has engaged in bad behavior. She’s arrogantly dismissed the experience of men, tens of thousands of men, with her little insult in the other thread, and has arrogantly and stupidly insisted that she has some magic power to detect entitled women on sight. It appears she isn’t adult enough to be able to admit when she’s wrong, either.

    I understand Ms Walsh runs some sort of finishing school for young women, in order that they can hook a MAY-un, and have BAY-bees. To the extent that she addresses only that issue, and refuses to even acknowledge the reality of divorce theft, marriage 2.0, etc. she is interested only in perpetuating the current misandric system. If I am correct in this, she’s no friend of men.

    I don’t have time to waste getting banned on yet another women’s / wymmin’s / wimmen’s / site. Thanks for inviting me to do so. It clarifies your motives.

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

  33. bob

    “Sample sizes of 1 are for silly people.” F’ing brilliant.

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