Blueprint for an Alpha Widow

Hithard’s recent flushing of his nest drew the unsurprising female indignation response from Rational Reader ‘S’. Hers is the predictable reflex with which women feel the need to associate with themselves when confronted with (even hypothetically) another woman’s behaviors reflecting badly upon the feminine as a whole. In Indignation I touched upon the need for women to create the rise that comes from indignation for themselves, or live it vicariously through the proxies of their friends or media that caters to this need.

However there is still a need for a disconnect from that indignation impulse in order to preserve the feminine ego. It may be satisfying to experience drama via a third party, but not many women can afford to be called out for it.

So when a woman inserts herself into the psychological proxy role of another woman experiencing that indignation first person, the immediate response is one of ego preservation. My drawing attention to this isn’t to burn down S’s feelings about casting herelf into another woman’s role, but rather to observe the more rational process women will use when they’ve got a disconnected God’s-eye view of all the aspects of a relationship between the two parties causing that indignation.

“I would never stick around / go back to a man who dumped me! Here’s what she should do,…”

For all of what makes women primarily emotional creatures, it’s interesting to see how rational a response they can muster to a vicarious source of indignation. And in predictable feminine fashion S makes that third party indignation about herself (here’s what she / I would do). From Point, Counterpoint:

Women on the other hand almost exclusively rely upon personal experience and anecdotal evidence to form a premise; only using extrinsic information 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 to extrinsic sources for ancillary support.

What S fails to account for, and what Hithard elaborates on in his final comment is that, with the first person emotional investment, women will routinely return to a former lover if his Alpha impact was sufficient enough. Even when a woman cannot physically return to that Alpha defined relationship, she will return emotionally.

What Hit hard describes is the blueprint for creating an Alpha Widow:

@ S
“Well that’s good for those women but I’m serious. Why would anyone want to hang around someone who does not want them?”

That’s a valid enough question for me to give an answer on before I go. I do feel it is a topic that can benefit us all.

For women it all depends on how strong the emotional connection is to a man and if you are filling her needs.
Let’s focus on the emotional connection though as it has the strongest pull factor, and hopefully I can give you some form of idea through a post. Which is difficult when challenging a held belief

Now for arguments sake let’s say you and I (hey try to visualize I am your perfect match) S go through the usual process and begin a relationship.

Things start off strongly. There is both a physical and emotional attraction, but more than that… When we are together there is an element of excitement that sets your heart fluttering. The feeling that I overwhelm your senses, where you feel safe to begin investing in me, both emotionally and physically. With each passing day you feel a stronger and stronger connection that warms your core. Where mind body and soul feel as though they are full of the pure essence of being. You are happy to be led in this passionate embrace. Your needs are satisfied, your spirit fulfilled. YOU ARE HAPPY!!

“Wait, what you’re breaking up with me?”

“What do you mean you want to break it off, no I don’t understand?”

“How is this for the better?”

And this is where the residual emotional attachment comes into play.
Developing an emotional attachment with a woman is a bit like hooking someone on drugs when it’s done right. It is very hard to maintain past a certain timeframe though in a relationship. And there can be numerous other mishaps, with this post only touching the surface.

Now first thought is usually ‘a$$hole’ and anger.
But that passes as the innate need for contact develops. The feeling of just being close to that person even if only briefly, gives them that fix that they crave.

Now I can drip feed your emotional needs to position you to where I want you to be. If I have anchored the emotions right, then you will feel as if no one can love you like I do. Or no one touches you or makes love to you with the passion that I do. Each stage through the escalation I have to ensure I am leading, directing and in touch with where I want to be. The end result I am looking for is your emotions screaming out to be fed in my absence. The reason you run back and fuck me is because it feels as if my intimacy is feeding your soul. The reason you try to please me is to grasp at the high I can deliver

You’re probably thinking:

“I’m not that stupid”

But most people can think back to moments in their life where the heart ruled the head. Hypotheticals are always a mother foucker. The most I can say is this is a high percentage occurrence.
Guys do this as well and God knows there are forum boards full of guys wanting to run back and get stomped on again. Guys tend to get hooked from their feelings being taken high, low, high, low etc over time. Women more from an intense high to a low over a shorter time frame.

Just reading something about a situation can be very hard to identify with because it reads like a no brainer. But if a lot of people wrote down the dumb things they do in love they would simply cringe and think;

‘Was I really that stupid?’

So bear that in mind when challenged with what may feel is an inconceivable notion. Emotions can blind you.

And you are right – why would a sensible person stay. The saving grace for a fool in love is time. Time to wake from his/her stupor.And generally people eventually wake up

I suppose I treat relationships a bit like bubble gum from time to time. I mean it’s great when it has flavour but over time it gets bland and tasteless and I have enough of it and throw it away. The last thing I want to do is go find it and pop it back in my mouth again for another go.

The above was just an over the top example to try and answer the question. Not something you should try and do, some kind of relationship advice, or something I go out of my way to do. Generally you only need a bare minimum of emotional attachment and play it from there. Each step can be expanded on massively and you will have to forgive my syntax, rambling and bad grammar.

Big thankyou to Rollo who has been a great mentor over the years. Someone who has my greatest respect.

Just learnt of the passing of Jophil, a great loss to the community and one that has saved many a broken man. I regret not letting him know the positive influence he had on my life.

Later all and best wishes

I’ll come to you like an affliction, but I’ll leave you like an addiction, you’ll never forget me, you wanna know why?,…


36 responses to “Blueprint for an Alpha Widow

  • S

    I think this is the third post this month where I have been mentioned. Hey, I’ve always wanted to be a muse…

    Just kidding, nice post but still stand by what I said.

  • S

    *I mean in the space of a month…

  • GeishaKate

    What we say we will do in a given situation may or may not have any correlation to what would happen if we were in that situation. The only thing we have any claim on is the past: what we’ve actually done.

  • S

    I think at this stage..if I did get into the situation I’d be too stubborn not to do anything else than what I have asserted here I’d do. :)

  • Dean

    I don’t disagree with this but there is an important point that this overlooks; a person’s ability to introspect. What Rollo constantly does is stress the ev-psych, bio-chemical factors at play. But like a true determinist, he ignores volition. If our culture trained the young to delay gratification and constantly consider the CONSEQUENCES of our actions, the alpha widow phenomenon would not be nearly as predominant.

    But this blog does not focus on the philosophical influences on our culture; namely the Progressive movement and Post-Modern philosophy and of course the LEFT. No, this blog is mired in biologic determinism. Rollo has his uses and he makes his points. But if you are analyzing culture and you never mention THE LEFT then your cultural/socio-sexual analysis will always be wanting.

    Get rid of progressive education, post-modern philosophy and philosophic pragmatism and then lets see what the sexual marketplace looks like. But until then, sure – protect yourself from today’s women because the Left and the Progressives have made them insane.

  • Acksiom

    Note to self: add “personal pronoun usage tracker” to list of open-source blogcomment plugins to be funded.

    1st-person used 10 times in just three posts over just 5 sentences, with a 1st-to-2nd+3rd ratio so-far infinite for this thread, at 10:0.

    Note to S: this is not about you, or about getting you to change your position.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Once again, evo-psych, the biological influence of our in-born instincts, the nature in nature vs. nurture, is NOT deterministic – it is probablistic.

  • S

    @ Acksion,

    Duh.

    Peace out.

  • King A (Matthew King)

    S wrote:

    I think this is the third post this month where I have been mentioned. Hey, I’ve always wanted to be a muse…

    Just kidding, nice post but still stand by what I said.

    Are you tingling yet?

    I encourage you to keep commenting because you are a very good example of feminist-decadent presumption that is impervious to the brand of logic regularly presented at The Rational Male.

    Like a woman, you luxuriated in the attention of getting talked about (“I think this is the third post this month…”!) without even pretending to engage the substance of that talk.

    You are an excellent — or, depending on your attractiveness, perfect — example that proves the truth of the dictum: never attempt to explain anything to a woman, but rather demonstrate. None of us here expect you to intuit or conclude syllogistically in the manner of men who must regularly be accountable as rational beings. We understand that in a medium of words you are largely immune to the masculine power designed to defeat your emotional presumptiveness, and that is, force.

    The female mind protests, cries out, rejects rationality like a cornered feline, until she is tamed. Don’t imagine any of us believe for a moment that syllogisms can tame you. What contains you is restraint, often physical, but with the sophisticated man, it can be psychological and rhetorical. But never rational. What puts you in place is a good whip, a comment that cuts to the quick, and a hard fuck.

    In other words, though we may talk about you as a matter of coincidence, we are not ever talking to you.

    Matt

  • S

    “Like a woman, you luxuriated in the attention of getting talked about (“I think this is the third post this month…”!) without even pretending to engage the substance of that talk.”..

    Matt,

    I was just trying to be humourous. I can’t believe that you would actually interpret that literally. Attention over the interwebs..hurray!!! Get real.
    :)

    (Acksiom- there’s two more to add to your tally).

  • no

    King A, start a blog. Even just a place to archive your comments elsewhere. Also, any book recommendations?

  • Good Luck Chuck

    Dopamine is a helluva drug….

  • peoplegrowing

    I don’t disagree with this but there is an important point that this overlooks; a person’s ability to introspect. What Rollo constantly does is stress the ev-psych, bio-chemical factors at play. But like a true determinist, he ignores volition. If our culture trained the young to delay gratification and constantly consider the CONSEQUENCES of our actions, the alpha widow phenomenon would not be nearly as predominant.

    But this blog does not focus on the philosophical influences on our culture; namely the Progressive movement and Post-Modern philosophy and of course the LEFT. No, this blog is mired in biologic determinism. Rollo has his uses and he makes his points. But if you are analyzing culture and you never mention THE LEFT then your cultural/socio-sexual analysis will always be wanting.

    It strikes me that Rollo has no interest in the political realm (blogging wise, at least), and, indeed, none of this would matter if the political/cultural norms of the modern world hadn’t sufficiently changed to allow for unrestrained sexual activity based on men and women’s respective impulses. Of course, women’s impulses are much more nobly enshrined, while men’s impulses are generally roundly shamed, but the fact is, both men and women can get away with such activity with little to no (forseeable, at least) consequences.

    Besides, the effect of feminism (and politics in general) is well and thoroughly covered on so many other blogs (including a couple on Rollo’s blogroll, like Dalrock) that I don’t believe there’s a need for Rollo to cover it here, except, perhaps, for the occasional nod. Again, what Rollo writes would not matter in a more restrained social context. It would be the study of a few professors at University, a few arm chair psychologists, not the general male population.

    What there is a need for, which Rollo does exceptionally well, is cover why game works by unearthing the primal motivations. The “truth” to NAWALT (or probably most any variation thereof) is not that women don’t all have these tendencies, below the surface, but that historically women were better trained and better guarded against giving into foolish decisions based on these impulses. Now that, socially, “all bets are off,” we have the opportunity to see (and take advantage of) what’s “under the hood”, so to speak. So, yes, some women may be more introspective or better restrained, but, since this has not been widely encouraged by society at large, many women are operating principally on instincts.

    I have seen many blogs devoted to the excesses of the political and societal trends which got us to this point. I have yet to see another which gets at the theory, the evo-psych elements of how and why game works. WHAT works is also well documented, but still not why.

  • feral1404

    “I have seen many blogs devoted to the excesses of the political and societal trends which got us to this point. I have yet to see another which gets at the theory, the evo-psych elements of how and why game works. WHAT works is also well documented, but still not why.”

    Hear hear.

    In addition, I’d personally like the community aside from Rollo to start charting – even theoretically – how to manage (if not wholeheartedly reverse) the damage done by the feminine imperative… or to argue if it is even in our collective best interest to try.

    Otherwise (and no offense to them, for they do fine work overall), we’ll end up like Roissy (sitting poolside while the West caves in) or Roosh (jumping off to foreign locales to discover those few feminine women left in the world).

  • AD

    “The tears she sheds are remarkably sadder and more complicated because she’s crying for Brown, too: he was painted as “a monster,” she explains to Oprah, and everyone just “blamed him” for the incident.”

    http://jezebel.com/5935268/rihanna-tearfully-tells-oprah-chris-brown-needs-help

  • peoplegrowing

    In addition, I’d personally like the community aside from Rollo to start charting – even theoretically – how to manage (if not wholeheartedly reverse) the damage done by the feminine imperative… or to argue if it is even in our collective best interest to try.

    In theory, I would EXPECT that to come from Spearhead. And the actual contributors to Spearhead have edged around that topic, and Futurist came up with the URLs @ Urinals campaign, but I haven’t seen anyone go further. Most of the comments that I’ve seen there (Spearhead) sounded like they either felt society was too far gone and they were going to sit poolside while everything went to ruin, or that they weren’t going to be happy until someone agreed 100% with everything the MRA stands for and pushed every single issue immediately.

    Frankly, I don’t see why what worked for feminism can’t work for masculinism – in that, feminism (and gay rights, for that matter) pushed for one change at a time, and once they attained a success, they used that as a launching point for the next. They framed the conversation about how women were ‘oppressed’ – isn’t Game largely about unshakeable frame? And when you’re working with actual truth – the abuse of marriage and the courts, etc. – how much better to push for change. I suggest that the movement needs to pick one issue to push over all others, support mainstream politicians/media when they edge towards MRA content.

    The most radical edge of MRA may never catch on, but neither has the most radical feminism. If we can mainstream the core principles though, I think that’s the best shot at making a real change. It will require compromise, but I still think it’s better than all-or-nothing.

  • furiousferret

    My question is, is an alpha widow simply damaged goods? Is the only cure for an alpha widow then to have a suitable alpha replacement?

    Seems like any beta men that come after this phase are just in for pure trouble.

  • kellytaddea

    Seduction is not love, it is just using someone for entertainment by
    exploiting their vulnerabilities.

    It is the misuse of personal powers in the pursuit of the superficial
    that always has to it an element of fear.

  • furiousferret

    I agree with seduction is not love. But it’s the women that want to be seduced. They are not stupid. They know the score. They are willing participants in the whole process. In fact, the seduction is their interview process. If a guy isn’t able to seduce her then he’s not worthy of her. You made your own bed.

  • peoplegrowing

    If women didn’t want to be seduced, why do they go in droves to bars in skimpy outfits? They ain’t lookin’ for a soul mate.

    I find it interesting that many women (especially feminists) seem to believe that women can have sexual agency right up until the point it’s not convenient. Going out at night to get laid is a demonstration of a woman’s agency and grrrrl power! But the next morning when they wake up drunk and realize they slept with a guy who is no kind of ten, suddenly they were realize how they were “taken advantage of” – they were “seduced” into a “mistake”.

    Either you have the agency to make your own sexual decisions and you take responsibility for when you have regrets, or you DON’T have the agency to make your own sexual decisions and had better listen and stop bitching when men (with YOUR best interests at heart) tell you not to dress like a slut, not to go out alone out night, not to drink to excess, and so on.

    And for the ladies here who take issue with this? Who suggest that’s awfully easy for me to say, here on my pedestal? I have made those mistakes, I have been talked into things, but I was the one who said yes when I should have said no. No one threatened me, or coerced me in any kind of way. Just because I have regrets and made a stupid decision or two doesn’t make it their fault. And I’m not going to go back and say, “Well, I knew it was a bad idea at the time, so clearly THEY must have MADE me do it.”

    Because, frankly I’d rather have the agency to make my own mistakes then need to be shut up for my own protection.

  • BlackCat

    My question is, is an alpha widow simply damaged goods?

    Yes. Unless you are can raise the bar high enough that her ‘tingle standard’ resets to you, then the five minutes of alpha in her past will always remain the heaviest imprint on her psyche. Even if she marries and remains faithful until death do you part, she will always remember the one(s) who made her tingle the most.

    Is the only cure for an alpha widow then to have a suitable alpha replacement?

    Probably yes. There are stories of alpha widows who ‘reformed,’ married, had kids, and stayed married for many, many years. Prime example: the Chief HUSsie, who has blogged about both her beta husband (most likely a stable, decent man, but a beta nonetheless), and her tingling for past alphas, which she still talks about in fond terms (the tingling at least, if not the actual bad boys themselves).

    Seems like any beta men that come after this phase are just in for pure trouble.

    Again, yes. Given current society based on the feminine imperative of unbridled hypergamy, that is the safe bet. While there are exceptions of course, NAWALT and all that, at the very least the alpha widow will never bond with and respect the beta the same way a virgin or other low-N non-slut would.

  • Emma the Emo

    Hithard’s comment was great, explained everything.
    As for S, there is one thing I’m curious about – why identify with the nagger who got dumped at all? If I understand correctly, nagging is more than just an occasional valid criticism, it’s more of a chronic nitpicking that strains the man’s nerves and could have been avoided without anything bad happening. (Either that, or it’s a sign you and the man are incompatible and you might as well part ways peacefully, since he won’t change and you won’t accept his behavior.). Why be upset on behalf of a nagger?

  • Wilson

    peoplegrowing, women don’t recognize men’s rights as an issue at all, while most men are sympathetic to feminism and many even identify with it. Feminism is therefore dominant, and the whole point of the “patriarchy” Big Lie is to justify any kind of mistreatment or marginalization of men to give women a punitive and compensatory advantage over the male “oppressors”. “Small steps” won’t overcome this tyranny of the majority any more than small steps would have gotten Japanese Americans out of internment caps during WWII. It’s every man for himself for the foreseeable future.

  • Simon Corso

    Kelly,

    “Seduction is not love, it is just using someone for entertainment by
    exploiting their vulnerabilities.

    It is the misuse of personal powers in the pursuit of the superficial
    that always has to it an element of fear.”

    That is truly a profound insight to the way women view seduction . Did you write that ?

    As FF said, women made that bed. Men are the ones who have to learn to play in it. If the exploitation of vulnerabilities and fear didn’t work, we wouldn’t do it. Do not expect us to bear any guilt for meeting the criteria women overwhelmingly select.

  • peoplegrowing

    peoplegrowing, women don’t recognize men’s rights as an issue at all, while most men are sympathetic to feminism and many even identify with it. Feminism is therefore dominant, and the whole point of the “patriarchy” Big Lie is to justify any kind of mistreatment or marginalization of men to give women a punitive and compensatory advantage over the male “oppressors”.

    In fairness, neither did men (or most women, in fact) recognize women’s rights as an issue when the feminist movement began. Unmasking Feminism (http://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/) does a great job showing the origins of feminism as much more extreme than is widely known (certainly not taught in schools), and how the majority public opinion was that suffragettes were mostly unhappy spinsters with nothing better to do than make drama.

    Granted, at that time, there was much more overall fairness and neither party bore a greater share of life’s general hardships, so theirs was a more advantageous starting point. They hadn’t already “lost” ground in the way men currently have. Perhaps mainstreaming masculinism isn’t possible, or not to the degree that feminism was. On the other hand, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be possible to basically “game” women into supporting and pushing for masculinist aims. They may have their own reasons, but if they push for reform with you, then that’s another voice to get things changed, and then you go from there.

    Sooner or later maybe they decide they don’t want to go along with you so much after all, but that doesn’t leave you the worse off – whatever progress you made with them you keep, then you continue on for more with or without them.

  • peoplegrowing

    I would also like to add that I don’t think most women are even aware that there is an issue with Men’s Rights. Blame it on solipsism if you want (that’s certainly part of it, I don’t deny) but there’s also the element that Feminists have controlled the conversation so far. No one considers men’s rights because we’ve all had women’s rights discussed so much, that, well, that must be the issue, right? Instead of letting them control the frame, YOU take control of the frame.

    Women are fickle enough; it’s easy to play on their sympathies, and more and more women are starting to distance themselves from feminism – even if only in name. Women are increasingly burnt-out on the school-career-kids maybe? pattern. Take control of the conversation! Hell, START a conversation! Maybe it’ll take a long time to change things, maybe you won’t get everything you want, but you get nothing at all by staying silent.

  • GeishaKate

    I agree with you, peoplegrowing. I wrote an article here about a case I think the manosphere should get behind.

    http://eradica.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/manosphere-on-fire/

  • Linkage Is Good For You – Cypher’s Week | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

    [...] Rational Male – Reality Vs The Internet, Flushing The Nest, Blueprint For An Alpha Window [...]

  • Cheater?

    Oh yeah, I’ve been there after a break up where I knew I wasn’t wanted but still wanted to run back. Its natural and you get over that within 2 months. If you meet a really hot guy you’ll get over it in 2 weeks.
    ;)

    The reason for this is that there are subtle electrical bonds (some call them psychic bonds) between individuals who have shared intimacy and they remain entwined for a while until they no longer are.

  • Just how different is dating in SEA? « Random Xpat Rantings

    [...] and that they fall deeply and can pine for a man for ages. That’s true in any county. The alpha widow experience is rare in all countries, but is another cross-cultural constant. You don’t [...]

  • The Epiphany Phase «

    [...] newly gained insight. He’s serendipitously buying a ring for his new fiancé and the Alpha Widow mojo takes root in her psyche, “some girl found him valuable enough to marry.” She then [...]

  • Pleasures of the Flesh | Free Northerner

    [...] treadmill takes its toll even after you get off. Just as a carousel rider suffers as an alpha widow, so to does the ex-player suffer from the player’s [...]

  • Awesome Manosphere Reading | 3rd Millenium Men

    […] treadmill takes its toll even after you get off. Just as a carousel rider suffers as an alpha widow, so to does the ex-player suffer from the player’s […]

  • Love Story |

    […] Rose still pines for her Alpha she lost so long ago. This scene epitomizes the concept of the Alpha Widow — As the heart that was given to her by her Alpha sinks to the bottom of the ocean, we pan across […]

  • Warren Buffett on Women | Patriactionary

    […] carous(e)l past a certain age, they can’t get off until they are kicked off;” they become Alpha Widows, meaning they will pine forever for the highest-status man who had […]

  • Preventative Medicine – Part II |

    […] the other side of her hypergamy demands and is increasingly becoming more urgent for her – most Alpha Widows are made during this period. However, it’s during the Epiphany phase women (conveniently) […]

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 3,667 other followers

%d bloggers like this: