The Savior Schema

“Every time a man is being nice to you, he’s offering dick. That’s all it is. ‘Uh, can I get that for ya? How ’bout some dick? Can I help you with that? Can I help you with some dick? Do you need some dick?’ ” – Chris Rock

The Savior Schema – the beta male expectation of reciprocation of intimacy (usually sexual) for problems solved.

This is a learned/developed behavior that results from men’s natural push to deductively search for the most rational solution to a problem. It’s really a linear logic; I need sex + women have sex + I must discover what is required for me to get sex from women + I will perform/embody/identify with said requirements = woman will reciprocate with her intimacy. Needless to say this is simplistic at best, but men have a tendency to believe that women will respond as rationally as they themselves would in qualifying for her stated desires. The manosphere is full of men who can tell you this simply isn’t the case for any number of reasons, but sadly they still think that women ought to live up to their implied “agreement.”

The fundamental flaw of the Savior Schema (also, Captain Save a Ho) is that it is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine. You can fix a woman’s flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on, take care of her kids and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she’ll still go fuck her outlaw biker boyfriend because her intimacy with him is genuine, unnegotiated, unobligated desire. She wants to have sex with him, she doesn’t owe him sex.

What AFCs fail to understand is that all the financial, emotional, dependable support you could possibly offer a woman is no substitute for raw, unmitigated, chemical desire. Some of the most irresponsible, unreliable, poverty level washouts often get more sex than any dutiful AFC suffering from a Savior Schema, because there is no obligation.

Reciprocity

In the wild, the law of reciprocity and fair exchange is a fairly obvious one. Most high-order social animals have some innate understanding of exchanging resources. In fact you could argue that pair bonding, family structure and social collectives are for the most part based on this shared exchange arrangement. So it stands to reason that in the course of human evolution we too developed this innate psychological wiring, thus making men prone to seeing it as the shortest distance between what we have and what we want.

The difficulties arise when (perhaps cleverly) women learned to covertly use this  innate psychology of exchange within the context of a social framework that gives them a resource advantage for little or no exchange of their own. Thus women modeled a social norm, that mirrors men’s natural default position of disposability, and put their attentions and intimacies as unassailable resources so valuable that no effort on a man’s part can merit it. When a woman is appalled by the notion that she should be obligated to have sex with a man in exchange for a dinner and a movie (even over multiple occasions), this social convention is the root of that insult.

The Protector Dynamic

Of course the flip side to this argument is the Protector Dynamic which is the natural propensity for a man to want to provide protection for his mate. Over the course of our evolutionary history certain psycho-biological behaviors proved to be beneficial to the survival of our species. Specific hormonal releases prompt different emotions and behavioral reactions as a response to our environments. Women, for instance, produce higher volumes of oxytocin and estrogen thus prompting a natural instinctual feeling of wellbeing and nurturing her children (which also, interestingly enough, is released after female orgasm). The same is true for men. Being generally physically stronger and posessing 17 times the testosterone, men have evolved chemical cocktails of their own and thus feel a natural protection instinct when prompted.

The conflict comes when the AFC confuses this Protector Dynamic with a Savior Schema. The natural feelings derived from his biochemistry only serve to reinforce his Savior mentality and solidify it as part of his personality. Even when a woman’s repeated behavior directly contradicts this notion of reciprocating intimacy for help (or his idea of ‘protection’) the Savior Schema only rationalizes it as being inconsistent with a single, individual woman.

This then is the root of the White Knight schema; exchange protection for intimacy (i.e. sex). And, once again, women cleverly, almost subconsciously so, use this dynamic to arrange a beneficial, but unequal, exchange of resources.


25 responses to “The Savior Schema

  • YOHAMI

    Why offer help when you can just offer dick.

  • Firepower

    Yep – and the WHOLE SCHEME comes a-crashin’ down
    when Missy hits
    forty

  • Acksiom

    It’s a holdover from the old days, kid. It used to be that offering and providing help marked you out as a good catch to the older, wiser people still in authority over the hormonally addled little darlings.

    Unfortunately, your own couple of generations of older, ‘wiser’ folks sold you out for the beads and feathers of promises of “security” from the government. They gave up everybody’s parental authority to the State, and now as a result the hormonally addled little darlings actually get *rewarded* for humping big thugs and spawning little ones.

    Basically, your dick, effectively ‘on the side’, is all they need anymore, because the State is their impotent old sugar daddy who fills all their betaboy needs otherwise.

    With, BTW, your tax money. Which is why they’re clamping down harder all the time. The moochers basically skim off the top of the resource transfers. The more energetic those transfers, the easier and the better the mooching.

    It’s like pressurized water flow. They narrow the nozzles so that the water comes out a higher energy level. They can mooch better and more easily from that artificially scarce higher pressure.

    But now the pressure is dropping from more and more MGTOW liberation branches being added to those main lines. So they keep narrowing the nozzles to maintain the mooching levels to which they’ve become accustomed. Which means, effectively, more and worse hate speech shaming and blaming of men and boys, and discrimination against them, and disenfranchisement of them, and so on.

    Of course, this increased pressure just ends up making more and bigger MGTOW liberation branches, lowering the water pressure again, so they clamp down even harder, and on it goes.

    I’m betting that the good money and rewards for the younger guys, and the adaptable older ones, will be found through making more and better MGTOW liberation branches.

    So in short, the ever-increasing MGTOW market is the yang to the misandry bubble’s yin. If you want to anticipate, ride, and benefit respectably from the coming waves from the latter’s crash, start looking for rising crests in men’s products and services, and positioning yourselves to take advantage of them.

  • Survivorman

    In his book “No More Mr. Nice Guy”, Dr. Glover refers to this a “covert contract” — “I will do X for you, and expect Y in return.” While never voicing these expectations.

    In essence, the whole “White Knight” scheme is based on the assumption that all women are, at heart… prostitutes.

    If a truly self-respecting woman is “propositioned” by a White Night in this manner — she will be insulted, and you lose!

    If a woman *does* respond favorably to the “savior” act, and reciprocates (eventually) with nookie.. Well congratulations son — your new girlfriend is a whore! You win!

    Sort of..

  • Coy

    Just saw a dude playing savior to a chick on phone.He’s helping her get over the “Jerk”.I come back and see this!!! Cosmic co-incidence!!Lets see how his luck plays out.

  • rgoltn

    A la’ “No More Mr. Nice Guy” (http://www.amazon.com/No-More-Mr-Nice-Guy/dp/0762415339/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1335476489&sr=8-15)

    Book hits on your exact point. Beta males playing savior get nothing but frustration. Add some Alpha and you get some dick.

  • Samuel

    The key point is the skewed market values.

    The pussy isn’t worth that much- we don’t need it to survive, food n shelter, etc…

    But the provision and protection- women DO need in order to survive.

    Well, they used to.

    Now that they can feed themselves and pay their own bills and there’s no tigers that’s gonna kill them…

    Their commodity holds its value, but the man’s commodity plummets to nothing, thereby elevating the pussy.

    The red-pill men know that there is still something men have that women value HIGHLY, and will eagerly offer sex for… Dominance and leadership.

    Turns out, paying your own bills and having a car does not a contented girl make. They have stupidly put themselves in a position of a much harder life just to be ‘independent’, only to discover they still need men anyway.

    We are now in the driver’s seat that women used to be in-

    All we have to do is have a swingin’ dick and a pair of hairy boys, and we can get the pussy without the work and cost it used to require.

    Go grrl power! LOL

    geniuses.

    That’s the value of information, and the peril of lying to yourself.

  • Firepower

    Acksiom

    It’s a holdover from the old days, kid. It used to be that offering and providing help marked you out as a good catch to the older, wiser people still in authority

    Good poiint.

    At one time, civilized people “helped” one another out of sheer sociability – to display and reinforce the ethos that kept anarchy and violence at bay.

    Today, it is a wise man who can remain civilized, yet still harbor a true potent killing streak.

    When men like us go, tell me: Who’ll remember that such a time ever existed, in the dark days of chaos.

  • Johnycomelately

    Brilliant.

    Aren’t all men marrying foreign brides engaging in the savior complex? I can’t save a woman here so I’ll go and find a woman I can save?

  • Johnycomelately

    Super post

  • Survivorman

    @Johny,

    Maybe. But I think (at least some) foreign women still have the values that would be more in line with the “provider/homemaker” arrangement that seemed to work pretty well in pre-feminesta marriages (before ~1970).

    IOW, mutual *co-operation*, rather than competition for power and control in the relationship.

  • DonJuan_DeRosco

    Perhaps the difference between cultures could be looked at for a future article Rollo.

    I’ve been seeing a german girl for a while now, known her a bit longer and it’s a completely different easy going fun dynamic without the other crap I’d expect from women in my country (uk).

    For now at least. :p

  • Ted F.

    “Maybe. But I think (at least some) foreign women still have the values that would be more in line with the “provider/homemaker” arrangement that seemed to work pretty well in pre-feminesta marriages (before ~1970).”

    Yeah I think this is the appeal to going expat for a bride. Many other countries still work on a U.S. 1950′s type model of marriage, so these women are more than willing to fill the “domestic goddess” role.

    But, I wonder how many are spoiled by American women within 10 years? Didn’t Eddie Murphy do a skit on that back in the day? I remember him talking about going to Africa to find a bride, but he figured that he would someday come home to her asking for half of his shit…

  • unscathed

    “Independence” And who ultimately pays the price for all of this? The children of single mothers. I’m a MGTOW approaching my prime smv years and won’t go near a single mother unless it’s for a mutually arranged sober night of fun with nsa. These women usually hate men and they nickname their sons “Little Man”. These kids are fucked with no male in the picture to embed masculinity. Thank you Feminism! As far as what it takes to get laid these days with all the emasculated men running around in society? Eye contact. It’s like a staring contest when you were in grade school and if she backs down right off the bat you’re dominant, you win. Then you’re in.

  • xsplat

    If you want to learn about how expats fair dating in SEA, read all the readers submissions at stickmanbangkok.com

    If you are beta at home, you won’t suddenly become the man of the house in Thailand. Women there will eat you alive.

    Generally betas travel to foreign countries and are duped by the masks the girls put on. They take them off either after they marry you and move to your country, or after they marry you and you move to theirs.

    The only solution, wherever you are, is to learn to manipulate your woman better than she manipulates you, and to have greater hand than she has.

    It’s less about culture than people realize.

    Again, if you doubt me, learn from those who know – hundreds if not thousands have contributed to the site I mentioned.

  • Smith

    Cant believe you ripped off this post from another website: solvemygirlproblems.com

    Your site is good, but a blanant rip off was very disappointing.
    http://www.solvemygirlproblems.com/2011/02/savior-relationships-never-work/

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Brother, not for nothing, but if anything your link only proves that my material’s been getting lifted by everyone for years now.

    http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=119147

    Post #5, February, 27th, 2007. And even this was a c&p from an earlier post I’d written.

    Any questions?

  • JACKAL

    “The fundamental flaw of the Savior Schema (also, Captain Save a Ho) is that it is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine. You can fix a woman’s flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on, take care of her kids and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she’ll still go fuck her outlaw biker boyfriend because her intimacy with him is genuine, unnegotiated, unobligated desire. She wants to have sex with him, she doesn’t owe him sex.”

    The absolute end to any further debate on this topic. Perfectly stated.

  • The Crying Game |

    [...] comes back to the Cap N Save a Ho dynamic and the Savior Schema. Empathize, protect and bond with a woman in distress (particularly emotional distress) and the [...]

  • MMC

    @Smith

    I wonder why the knowledge being laid down in front of you, knowledge that is meant to educate your sex in an attempt to reclaim liberties from a manipulative feminized society, is less important than pointing out similar knowledge being dropped elsewhere. This is a good thing. We’re all on the same side here. Well, those of us with balls and and eye toward future power posturing are.

    Are you female and had to find a distraction to hopefully detract from the knowledge being dropped? Perhaps you’re just a well-socialized effeminate male taking offense to such knowledge and posturing as a warrior for women against such “sexist” ideas. Or perhaps you’re just a nerd. If two guys warn you not to step in shit on the sidewalk, are you going to be thankful for the double warning against a shit-spackled shoe sole that could be in your path, or will you be so confused by the fact that two separate souls warned you identically that you fail to actually avoid that steaming pile of dogshit on the sidewalk in front of you.

    Eyes ahead, man, eyes ahead.

  • Derb Labour | The Pillars of Hercules

    […] Related though slightly different to ‘Premature Favours’ is the concept of indebtedness. In this case the Derb does indeed assign value to his labour and expects future recompense. The value he assigns though is inter-relational rather than coldly economic and the recompense he expects to receive is also inter-relational. He expects the return on his labour to be romantic, affectionate or sexual in nature. […]

  • Wittgenstein and Kant’s Manosphere | The Pillars of Hercules

    […] – Relational Equity – Plate Spinning – The desire dynamic – Saviour Schema […]

  • Selling Sense | Alpha Is Assumed

    […] of the deteriorating state of modern men and Marriage.  I suspect that some like Driscoll have a vested interest in perpetuating much of the problem, much like the Anointed of the left.  Others, not unlike the […]

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 3,645 other followers

%d bloggers like this: