Duplicity

It’s endlessly entertaining (and predictable) to see how often women’s (and feminized men’s) default response to anything they disagree with in regards to gender dynamics is met with a personalization to the contrary. It’s always the “not-in-my-case” story about how their personal anecdotal, exceptional experience categorically proves a universal opposite. By order of degrees, women have a natural tendency for solipsism – any dynamic is interpreted in terms of how it applies to themselves first, and then the greater whole of humanity.

Men tend to draw upon the larger, rational, more empirical meta-observations whether they agree or not, but a woman will almost universally rely upon her isolated personal experience and cling to it as gospel. If it’s true for her, it’s true for everyone, and experience and data that contradict her self-estimations? Those have no bearing because ‘she’s’ not like that.

Recently I’ve been fielding responses generated from my Wait for it? post, courtesy of Susan Walsh and the Hooking Up Smart audience. What started as some really good discourse has kind of degenerated into the monogamy vs. biology team mentality. There’s a lot of good stuff, but after 300+ responses all that just kind of gets buried. However, Susan had a predictable come back to my (misunderstood) premise of the Iron Rule of Tomassi #3:

Are you saying that all women are prepared to bang a stranger at a foam cannon party on Spring Break? Or even that all women would attend a foam cannon party?

Are there any women who are in control of their lives and actions, in your view? It sounds as if you do not allow for that possibility.

One of the great failings of a good debate is casting your perspective in binary terms – and that’s what’s happening here. This isn’t an all or nothing, black or white premise; intelligent people falling back on binary straw-men arguments is usually a sign that they either don’t grasp the premise (my fault) or that they really have nothing to back up their own (their fault).

That said, lets put it this way, all women have the potential to bang the hot guy in the foam Cannon party. Whether they have the means, or their personal / physical conditions permit them to carry out the behavior is subject to speculation, but the desire and potential is there under the right circumstances.

Now, the next predictable retort will be, “so you actually believe women are unaware of their own impulses?” I’ll save you the time of asking, and just respond with, yes. ‘Lives’ and ‘actions’ are often conscious decisions, however, the motivators behind those decisions are are not. That’s going to seem outrageous to a gender who’s psychological imperative is to preserve an appearance of being worthy of long term provisioning at all times, but empirical study and observations will contradict this.

Have a look at the work of Dr. Martie Hasselton here:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/papers/

Pay particular attention to her studies and experiments regarding female ornamentation during periods of ovulation (high fertility) as well as women’s subconscious propensity for seeking men displaying Alpha cues during ovulation, and Beta male provisioning preferences during menstruation.

You might also look into the works of Dr. Meredith Chivers:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030613075252.htm

In their study, Chivers and Bailey showed erotic films to heterosexual, bisexual and lesbian women while measuring their genital and subjective arousal. They found that women, unlike men, showed the same genital responses to different kinds of erotic stimuli regardless of their sexual orientation, says Bailey. Whether the films depicted two males, two females, or a male and a female engaging in sexual activity, the different groups of women in the study responded similarly.

As I stated previously, hypergamy doesn’t afford a woman much waiting time with a Man she sees as superior stock, and women’s biology and psychological wiring have evolved to make women extremely adept sexual opportunists. So yes, ALL women have the propensity to want to fuck the hot guy on spring break, and simultaneously maintain the impression (for themselves and others)  that they’re worthy of long term provisioning potential. Women know their first, best, agency with men is their sexuality. On some level of consciousness they’re keenly aware that men’s primary interest in them is fucking – everything else is ancillary to sex. The value a woman has beyond the sexual only becomes relevant after she’s been sexual.

I can hear the gnashing of feminist, and their male identifiers, teeth at this, but don’t take this as some horrible proof of the human condition. The binary response will be to presume I mean women are worthless beyond sex; that is not my premise. What I am illustrating is that there will always be a condition of sexuality between the sexes that influences our dealings with each other.

I’d love to perpetuate the pretty lie that women hold off on sex in order increase their sexual market value to men, but the overwhelming meta-consensus as reported by men online is there are far too many “good girls” who’ll knowingly string along patient, dependable (not necessarily beta) men because “she wanted them to like her for more than that” only to fuck a high SMV Alpha the first night she met him. Opportunism is a universal human drive, but it manifests itself differently in each gender as fits their imperatives.

Self-Shots  NSFW.

Have a look here at the sheer volume and frequency with which average women will voluntarily become sexual here. This is just one collection, there are countless millions more. Remember, no one is coercing these girls to take nude and semi-nude pics of themselves in a bathroom mirror – they want to do this. Are they all sluts? How many of these women have uttered the words ” I want to wait so I know you want me for more than sex?” How many of these women would make great wives in 5-10 years? How many of these women are already (or have been) wife material? How many of these women are thought of as the sweet natured “good girl”? How many guys have considered these girls “Quality Women”? We can look at them with their clothes off and declare them sluts, but would you know the difference if you saw her in church?

Most women are literally oblivious to the underlying motivations of their sexual selections / attractions. Evolution has largely selected-for human females with a capacity to form psychological schemas that preserve an ego-investment that would otherwise afflict them with debilitating anxiety, guilt, and the stresses that result from being continuously, consciously aware of their own behavioral incongruities. Evolution selects-for solipsistic women who are blissfully unaware of their solipsism. Hypergamy necessitates solipsism.


20 responses to “Duplicity

  • deti

    “The value a woman has beyond the sexual only becomes relevant after she’s been sexual.”

    This. This right here. This is the key sentence in the piece. Well done Rollo.

  • xsplat

    Yes, all women are devilish whores. Or to be less polemic and binary, as close to all women as makes a difference have the potential to be lying cheating whores.

    For men this doesn’t mean that love is foolish, it only means that trust is foolish. Mate guard your loved one.

  • Sidewinder

    I agree with your premise, but I think you take the conclusion too far with your Iron Rule #3. It seems like your position is the more binary: either a girl screws the foam cannon guy on spring break upon first meeting him, or she’s “waiting” for some other bad reason and should be nexted. I think your above comment is correct in that all women have that initial impulse towards an alpha, if they are at the right point in their cycle.

    But I’ve known a number of girls who were head over heels in love with a guy and they still made him wait a couple weeks (a few dates). And not always for religious reasons. Women can have the authentic impulse you note, while still maintaining the self-control to delay gratification.

    Now if I am misunderstanding the hypothetical, than disregard. If you’re talking about a girl making a guy wait months, than yes, she either doesn’t like the guy enough or has a hangup that you don’t want to mess around with.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    But I’ve known a number of girls who were head over heels in love with a guy and they still made him wait a couple weeks (a few dates).

    That’s interesting. This is entirely after-the-fact speculation, but I would be willing to bet that women making a guy, whom they’re head over heels for, wait for sex are doing so during the anti-phase of their menstrual cycle.

    Consider that for a moment – here you have a woman in the down phase of her ovulatory cycle who meets with an Alpha guy who, under most circumstances, she would fuck spontaneously. It’s a well studied fact that women in their peak window of fertility will seek out men displaying Alpha cues for sex, and barter sex with beta males for provisioning during their down phase. However, a woman making an Alpha wait could be a subconscious mechanism to put him ‘on hold’ until her cycle comes around to the pro-phase when she’s going to want to fuck him and the fertility odds are higher.

    This would also explain the social convention that praises her for being cautious and prudent in filtering her sexual access. No one is going to tell her she shouldn’t be judicious, it’s a social norm with the latent, subconscious function of keeping an Alpha in reserve for breeding purposes.

  • Nas

    “Evolution has largely selected-for human females with a capacity to form psychological schemas that preserve an ego-investment that would otherwise afflict them with debilitating anxiety, guilt, and the stresses that result from being continuously, consciously aware of their own behavioral incongruities. Evolution selects-for solipsistic women who are blissfully unaware of their solipsism.”

    Can you please expand on this Rollo? I find it fascinating.

  • theprivateman

    ““Evolution has largely selected-for human females with a capacity to form psychological schemas that preserve an ego-investment that would otherwise afflict them with debilitating anxiety, guilt, and the stresses that result from being continuously, consciously aware of their own behavioral incongruities. Evolution selects-for solipsistic women who are blissfully unaware of their solipsism.”

    Here’s a thought – our intellectual abilities and personal liberties have advanced so far beyond our instincts that we are having difficulties holding our civilization together. Pax Romanus post mortum,

  • Dreamer

    This post is really confusing. I’m not following your deduction her question of the Foam Cannon party as a black/white question. A red herring, I can see that expand below. But I’m not following how binary logic is occurring in her question. Also, I’m not sure how the nude pics fits with the rest of the post.

    Let me try to write the short version and change a few choice words.

    The main point of this post (and the previous post) is “All women have a certain combination of buttons (conditions as you say) that can be pushed to make her jump head over heads. Their nature (solipsism) make them unaware of the buttons, but the buttons are there and can be pushed.” As to address your iron rule, if she’s making you wait, she just not that you. The buttons, from the environment as well as one’s own actions, were not pushed.

    If that’s correct, the use of the hypothetical scenario of a girl making this man wait then go off and fuck the hot guy at the foam cannon party doesn’t seem like the best example. As it distracts readers on the image of the Foam Cannon Party with sluttiness association. Your point might just be about that how willing a girl can jump when it’s the right time, right place, and right guy, but everyone is talking about spring break girls and the Form Cannon Party.

    Right now I’m ignoring that versus the shorten version suggestion above. The only thing I can getting out is you are suggesting women can get sexual fast or trying to use the pics as evidence all women are whores, just some put a better act than others. But even a few thousand pics might be enough to look endless and there’s millions of young women in this country alone.

    So how close am I?

  • (r)Evoluzione

    It would appear that *lots of things* have advanced so far beyond our instinctual nature, that we’re having troubles.

    To wit:

    1. 24/7 digital infotainment
    2. industrial agriculture
    3. mechanization of everything

    That said, there’s a lot of good things about the present state, we just need to adapt.

  • (r)Evoluzione

    Solid reasoning here. Much can be explained by peering into the annals of research on the effects of ovulation.

    “Evolution selects-for solipsistic women who are blissfully unaware of their solipsism. Hypergamy necessitates solipsism.”

    The fact that women are so disconnected from their own sexuality would seem to corroborate what you’re saying here. As the image-vaginal lubrication study shows (NY TImes published), it scarcely seems to be the same beings who are looking at the images, getting wet & then self-reporting arousal.

    It appears many women are far more driven by their hindbrain than even they themselves realize. Thus the hindbrain/lizard makes the choices, and the decisions are rationalized post-hoc.

    But really, the system has been set up to really benefit us, those that see the truth and go through the effort to learn the tactics and strategies to be succesful, with women or anywhere else.

    So, I will co-opt a statement from a total blue-pill, white-knight “game” blogger, Ali Benazir, MD. When referring to the rationalization hamster, or any other capricious, solipsistic trait in females, we can say, “It’s a feature, not a bug.”

  • Rollo Tomassi

    I guess the self-shots deserves some explaining. Whenever I use this example or link that site, the first response is that I’m using it for some salaciousness, but there’s much more to it than that.I picked up that link from Ferd’s post at In Mala Fide a couple months ago and I found it quite the eye opener.

    http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2011/06/03/mammas-dont-let-your-babies-grow-up-to-be-self-shooters/

    I’ve never really been a fan of amateur porn and least of all the self-shot garbage that used to be the fare of teenage girls on MySpace. However, there is such an overwhelming amount of these shots, with sites dedicated to displaying them (some with GPS locations) that it can’t be a coincidence that girls as young as 12 and women as old as 50 are doing this with such frequency.

    This phenomenon contradicts so many of women’s social conventions I found myself reassessing more than a few of my own interpretations about them. As it realtes to my topic here (Duplicity) and the comment thread at Susan’s blog, I meant to use this self-shooting phenomenon as evidence for the idea that women’s excuses for needing to feel ‘comfortable’ prior to sex was conditional at best, a filibuster at worst. It’s kind of hard to argue against millions of women voluntarily displaying their sexuality as overtly as this – in other words they’ll tell some chump that she needs him to wait for sex and shoot a pic of her cooter in the bathroom mirror to post online that same weekend.

    These aren”t just isolated sluts as ‘normal’ women would like men to believe – they’re millions of women from many different demographics, ethnicities, etc. all contradicting the notion that women have some special monopoly on the criteria for ‘meaningful sex’. They ARE the normal women.

    Just as an aside here, this self-shot phenomenon is also very useful in debating White Knights as to the virtues of their mythical “quality women” snowflakes.

  • Sidewinder

    I don’t think you can equate what is perhaps a universal exhibitionism in women to a universal willingness to engage in casual, non-committal sex. In fact, I think women demonstrate this distinction on a normal basis.

    I live in a college town and you should see what girls wear out to the bars these days. What’s interesting is that the vast majority of these hot girls do not screw some random guy that night. This is very confusing to guys who interpret this exhibitionism as a green light. But what’s really going on is social positioning in the sexual market place. Through male attention, female reinforcement, these girls are getting a market read on their value…they are testing the waters to see how valuable a body they truly have in comparision with market competitors.

    But they aren’t looking to screw alphas, at least not right then right there. Even despite the detioriation of our culture, women still do recognize that same-day sex does hurt their market value…it makes their resource appear much less scarce. Girls have anti-slut defenses for a reason. I agree that on some base level they want to screw the alpha right then right there, but they require either a green light from social convention, or somekind of complete assurrance (or drunken belief) that their tryst won’t be discovered.

  • Lily

    I don’t think you can extrapolate the self shooting and having sex with random men either. If we’re going to use multiple personal experiences as data, a fair few of the teenage girls I know who do the self shooting don’t know many boys. Thinking back to that age when I wore a short skirt for example as well as the interfemale stuff, it was testing the waters, not saying I was ‘up for it’.

    I’m assuming these spring break foam party references are in relation to college girls? Wouldn’t a fair few be on the contraceptive pill anyway in which case the cycle stuff is irrelevant. I just had a quick google and found 27.1% of 18 year old college girls prescribed, I’d guess % goes up during college rather than down?

  • Lily

    “I agree that on some base level they want to screw the alpha right then right there, but they require either a green light from social convention, or somekind of complete assurrance (or drunken belief) that their tryst won’t be discovered.”
    I think most women want the alpha provider, so it’s likely that they want to ensure he’s committed to them.

    Whether this is a biological thing that they ideally want to mate with the good genes and have provision from the same man or actually biologically they would rather have a different scenario (e.g. live in a tribe and have their father and/or other men in their family look after them and have a boyfriend/s) but are responding to the way society has been set up for a long time with 2 people in a monogamous relationship together and anything else being likely to be untenable*, I can’t say.

    *there are exceptions obviously, e.g. in upper class England once married as long as an heir already produced, a woman could often get away with having an affair.

  • Ernst Hof

    My girlfriend went to a foam cannon party in Spain with two single friends. The single friends both have high morale though. Should I be worried? Ofcourse I am but I feel like there’s nothing I can do other than speculate about what might have or not have happened.

  • Protracted SMV «

    [...] can fully understand why women would think men acknowledging this would be mean-spirited. Women’s innate solipsism predisposes them to thinking that viscerally identifying their SMV’s decay is an attack on [...]

  • Point, Counterpoint «

    [...] to support their personal interpretations when the source agrees with that premise. The innate solipsism of women promotes a self-centric primary position as the beginning of forming a premise and then progresses [...]

  • thechauvinistkaiser

    And this is why I was always wrong when I argued with me ex girlfriend!

  • Blueprint for an Alpha Widow «

    [...] to support their personal interpretations when the source agrees with that premise. The innate solipsism of women promotes a self-centric primary position as the beginning of forming a premise and then progresses [...]

  • Choreplay «

    [...] be fooled into thinking that this is just another example of women’s fickle duplicity. A lot has happened socially in the five years between these articles; the End of Men, Kate Bolick, [...]

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,611 other followers

%d bloggers like this: