Balancing Sexual Pluralism

Homecoming

I had an interesting occasion to do a bit of social observation this weekend. I drove Bebé Tomassi to her first high school Homecoming dance and got a glimpse of the Ghost of Hypergamy Future. As you might guess from growing up in the Tomassi household, Bebé is an exceptionally attractive girl, and this is coming from a red pill advocate, as well as a proud father. However, for all her innocent charm and Disney Channel inspired understandings of high school social dynamics, she was more than a bit shocked by the dress and behavior of the girls at her first ‘real dance’.

As I waited in the pick up line of cars at the end of the night I saw more short club skirts on teenage girls than I see on most liquor promo events I attend. I wouldn’t go so far as to say they looked like whores (my daughter’s analysis), but I will admit to being somewhat taken aback by how closely these 15-16-17 year old girls resembled the early to mid 20’s women I see in my line of work. At a club, at a tasting, or a promotional event, I will admit I enjoy the eye candy, I love a hot outfit like any other guy, but something just didn’t sit right with me seeing these girls dressed for a high school dance. Maybe I’m showing my age, but it did give me some food for thought.

Later Bebé told me she didn’t dance all that much, because she was surprised by how the gym looked more like a rave dance floor than a homecoming dance. She’d gone with 4 of her girlfriends, but none felt comfortable grinding their asses on some guy’s crotch whom they’d have to see at school the following Monday. Bebé has been a practiced dancer since she was 7. “They weren’t even dancing” she explained on the way home, “it was more like dry humping to music I didn’t even know.”

Varsity Blues

I kind of had time to take mental notes of all this when I was waiting in the car line. On SoSuave we have a high school forum (which I regrettably haven’t had much time to participate in lately), and when I do take the time to give advice there, the dynamic is drastically different for the young men there than the mid 20’s, 30’s and mature men I generally counsel. The reason for this dynamic shift is due to the fact that in women’s pluralistic sexual strategies, the long term side of that pluralism is practically nonexistent.

It’s very difficult for a teenage boy to display higher value beyond physical prowess and conveying a confident Alpha dominant attitude. Beyond maybe owning a car or truck, a teenage guy’s SMV is based almost entirely upon his physical presence and/or performance. Teenage girls only really care about how cute/hawt! a teenage guy is. It’s a Game of raw, Darwinistic tingles for adolescent girls, because even if they had some rudimentary appreciation for a guy’s intrinsic value, all of their security needs are more or less provided for by there parent(s).

From the sexual pluralism side, girls don’t develop an appreciation (or attraction) of men fulfilling that long-term security imperative until well into their mid to late 20’s. Throughout high school and through college, via their Fathers or the state’s provisioning, the security side of this sexual pluralism (the Good Dad attraction) is satisfied to varying degrees.

Short Terms

As I outlined in Schedules of Mating, hypergamy dictates women secure (commitment from) the best male exhibiting the traits of both genetics (short term breeding) and parental investment (long term provisioning), but rarely do the best of these traits exist in the same man. Then it hit me as I waited in that car line; these westernized teenage girls and their college age sisters, to a greater degree, have this long term part of their sexual plurality accounted for – or at least accounted for well enough that their primary sexual strategy focus is mostly fixated the short term breeding model.

Under such conditions ‘gina tingles preempt long term security concerns. So the logical next step is for girls to develop a sexually competitive strategy with other girls around hooking up with the highest value Alpha their looks can arouse. That isn’t to disqualify the attractiveness of intrinsic qualities (especially as a woman approaches the Wall), only that extrinsic qualities hold a higher prioritization. Thus, with the long term side of sexual plurality almost a non-issue, we see girls at earlier and earlier ages, learn to eroticize (not sexualize) themselves to be better prepared for that competition.

Long Terms

Rational reader, Wesley Dabney had some interesting input on Up the Alpha that dovetails nicely into this dynamic:

we can disagree all you want but that won’t make it any less true. a healthy woman’s central emotion is love. if you return that love to her, she will love you back and be faithful. no alpha can crack that connection. however, most men today have been so damaged by the sexual market place they are incapable of showing a woman the love they need to commit resulting in what you see today.

I’d advise anyone of this interpretation of women’s nature to read these posts first to get a better understanding of how women love (in this order):

Women in Love

Men in Love

Of Love and War

Wes, I have no doubt that your personal experience with your girlfriend’s love might lead you to think it contradicts what I’ve detailed in these posts, but she, like all women (including Mrs. Tomassi), loves opportunistically. I’ll explain, but don’t take this as an insult about you or your girlfriend:

I had a hard childhood. i have ptsd and anger management issues. my g/f makes more money than me.. etc etc.. according to many here.. she’s prime bait to be taken away from me by someone with higher status. however, she has proven to me that won’t happen. i put her through hell and she stayed by my side. i got lucky though and i know that.

The fact that you did put her ‘through’ hell’ is exactly why she’ll stay with you. After looking at your profile pic and FaceBook, from a physical standpoint, I’d estimate your SMV at least 2 points higher than her. Again, just being purely analytical, I’d put you at about an 8 and her about a 6 and this imbalance is exactly where Roissy has posited that ‘ real love’ exists between men and women. Your higher SMV provides you with default dominance.

Just from perusing your profile I get the impression that you enforce (maybe subconsciously) an Alpha dominance (anger issues), but this only contributes to her secure attachement to you. Your deficit in that she makes more money than you is sublimated by your own SMV. When women on some peripheral level of consciousness, doubt they can do better than the guy they’re with, hypergamy is satisfied. This is precisely why divorce rates level off progressively with age – post-Wall women can’t afford to reinsert themselves back into single life without a lot of motivation. A restart after the Wall is impractical, thus the rationalization hamster self-convinces women that her attraction cues are really her arousal cues.

All of this however simply proves that women love opportunistically. If Wes didn’t have the counterbalancing qualities to make him 2 points higher in SMV I doubt we’d be having this conversation. Women’s emotional center (if there is such a thing) isn’t love, but security. At its core, Hypergamy is an issue of optimized security.

Balancing Hypergamy

Security comes in a lot of different forms; financial, emotional, familial, etc. When a woman has established a base line of security for herself in one of these forms, other forms take precedent. So for a woman to make herself (or be by default) more or less financially independent, her impetus will be to find a guy who satisfies that hypergamic need of Alpha dominance and sexual prowess. Thus the hawt guy, with Alpha swagger outclasses the boring beta with equitable wealth to her own. Even a beta of higher socioeconomic status wont stimulate a woman who can comparatively and contextually assess that the Alpha she’s committed to, though lower on a socio-econ level, is still a better hypergamic match because his Alpha impact has left a long term impression on her (i.e a potential Alpha Widow).

You can also find parallels to this in the Cougar Effect. Past-prime women with their financial needs met by divorce settlements, child support and alimony will tend to look for the hot young(er) guy with whom she can satisfy the sexual short term strategy that a long term prospect can’t offset for her because she’s already provided for.

One important fact about Feminine Hypergamy is that it applies to both sides of a woman’s sexual pluralism. “Alpha fucks and Beta bucks” is a useful euphemism, but hypergamy applies to both of these instances and seeks a balance. It’s also important to understand that, while hypergamy may not care about much of anything, it does seek its own level. Despite social media and the feminine imperative’s attempts to convince a woman otherwise, to some limbic degree, women are aware of their own SMV. Hypergamy wants an optimized state, but that impulse is mitigated by the realities of her capacity to attain it.


79 responses to “Balancing Sexual Pluralism

  • The Association of Chronos

    Damn. So?. . . . Jeeze. At first I didn’t understand where you were going but, then it hit me before the last paragraph came up… Security. Basically, its all about Security to some degree when it comes to them… Rather Emotional, Financial, Familial, etc….

    Damn. I feel like that “Guy”, that just watched a classic movie like “American Beauty”, or “The Godfather”, an wants to talk about it with someone as if it had just been released. Ha. Basically, I’m late an, I’m sure this “Security” aspect has already been figured out by many on here.

    Damn you Rollo. Another great post as always. I’m sure there is “More” to this than just “Security” but, I need to do my usual Repeat reading, then let it all soak in. . . . . . I can’t even find the Blue pill anymore

  • taterearl

    Even if you found the blue pill…why would you want back?

  • The Association of Chronos

    Nah. I was just making a joke about “Finding it”. But, it would be interesting to see how I was back then VS Now. I’m sure I would Cringe an even laugh at the things an actions I was doing… Its hard to even enjoy a classic Teen type of movie now without going “Oh c’mon. She isn’t interested in you. Friendzone in 5, 4, 3. . . ” Ha…

  • (R)Evoluzione

    Rollo, regarding the thrust of this theorem, let me see if I understand you correctly: both alpha and beta strategies can generate hypergamous instincts, but the alpha hypergamy will generally predominate.

    Meaning, if a woman has a beta husband, and an alpha lover, the situation will remain stable, but if a more financially viable beta provider comes along, she may exhibit hypergamy by jumping up to the higher level beta provider, but will probably also keep the alpha lover on the side.

    I think this is what you mean, and I have observed this phenomenon on a few occasions.

    This post also brought up a few things as I reflected upon my own high school experiences.

    I have found what you said to be true about high school girl’s alpha prerogatives. However I will say that it seems high school girls are also just as susceptible to situational alphas as older women, though there seems to be less carryover into other environments. To explain–in the main body of experience in high school, the hot, athletic guys clean up. However there are situational alphas in more niche environments, given that those males demonstrate dominance in those environments; the skilled musically will succeed in the band room, the intellectual guys will succeed with the girls in speech & debate or drama club, etc. Overall, the social status of the athletes generally exceeds all others, but in these in niche environments, situational alphas can thrive.

    It seems evident that our social experiences in the very formative years of high school “color” a person’s social interactions for life. I think it was said on this site that most people spend the rest of their lives trying to either prove or disprove the social persona that they had in high school.

  • Dreamer

    Your intro resembles many social conservatives articles and blog posts – including those in the manosphere – of how young women now both dance and dress increasingly provocatively.

    This one stands different where the analysis. You delve that the forces that feeds this is the female drive in an environment where the security is met. With the girls going hard for the cute/hawtness, this leads to the increasing eroticism (why not call it sexualization? I don’t see the difference between the two words) in both behavior and age.

    But what about the typical social conservative commentator? The usually line is usually a combination that how this is harming women in the long run, liberals’ permissiveness is doing this damage, and at one time modesty led to better gender dynamics and happiness. Also there’s sometimes a lesson that the more resistant ones are the holdouts that represents the old dynamic (I do want to comment and check with the people here of this experience – the couples I observed that function better, there’s a pattern in how they dress in Halloween). How does that tie in with the thesis?

  • Mark Minter

    I think this post illustrates exactly why most of you are fucked.

    When a woman has some baseline of economic security then her priorities will exactly shift into short term mating schedule and physical attributes. It is my opinion that attractive women get helped along in their early life, in school and on the job and will almost all have financial security without men. And the demographics are walking against men when intrinsic qualities become meaningless.

    Roosh had a post from 2008 back before he hit the road for foreign countries. He assumed that 10% of women 18-33 have an SMV of 7 or above. He further assumed that 50% of that age group was some minority that he didn’t generally find attractive, so in 100 women 18-33, he would only encounter 5 that he found attractive. I don’t really feel like going into wikipedia and adding up birth rates. But for a workable number there were about 3,700,000 births per year between 1977 (3,326,632) and 1992 (4,084,000). So assume half were female and then sum all of them for about 27,7750,000 women between the ages of 20-35. Using Roosh’s 10% rule that leaves about 2.7 million women and white women would be an even small number. The current population of the United States is about 350,000 with about 175,000,000 men.

    And all 175,000,000 men are chasing those 2.7 million women particular that smaller percentage of white women. OK, some of the 175,000,000 men are married, some are old, but you can pretty much assume that the odds are easily about 20 to 1.

    Given that that social advantage is going to translate to economic advantage, you’re basically fucked.

    So by Roissy’s rule that women settle on men 2 points higher, (and I think given this demographic disparity it is even more than 2 points), women with a SMV of 7 want a male 9, an 8 wants a 10, and a 9 wants an 11 (which doesn’t exist).

    The reality is going to be more like a male 8 marrying a female 5 if he has an income in the fourth quin-tile (60%-80%). My niece is pretty much a pig. I would give her a 3 and she has a fairly normal looking husband who she treats like shit (and he takes it). All of her friends are basically pigs also and I am always amazed when they bring some normal looking guy around with 3 points higher of SMV. I would rather jerk off to porn for the rest of my than fuck any of them. I will go into a supermarket near my house in Austin and make a game of trying to find any woman that I would even give a rating of a 5 and many days I don’t see one. But I do see a lot of fat pigs riding around on those electric shopping cars because they are too fat to walk.

    So any woman that has an SMV of 6 or higher has an outsized amount of social power and ego to go with it. And very young teen girls understand this completely.

    The Center for Disease control released some numbers about births and all news articles about the numbers had the headline “Teen Birth Rate Drops”. Here is a bunch of stats from the data:

    The study shows birth rates dropped in 2011 for teens and young women aged 15-29.

    While teen birth rates hit a historic low in 2011, birth rates among young women aged 20-24 also reached the lowest rate ever recorded at 85 births per 1,000 women, a 5% drop from 2010.

    The average teen birth rate decreased 9 percent from 2009 to 2010, reaching an all time low of 34.3 births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19.That’s a 44 percent drop in the teen birth rate from 1991 to 2010. There were less teenage mothers in 2010 than any year since 1946.

    Meanwhile, birth rates among women over 30 either rose or remained unchanged from 2010 to 2011. (only 1% in women 30-35)

    For example, after three years of decline in the birth rate for women aged 35-39, the rate rose by 3% in 2011.

    Among women aged 40-44, the birth rate rose by 1% to about 10 births per 1,000 women, the highest rate for women in this age group since 1967.

    Researchers also found that the birth rate among single women has dropped a total of 11% since 2008 after rising steadily from 2002 to 2007.

    All the analysts of the data are mixed about why this is happening. My opinion is that girls and young women know the social and sexual power they have and are taking extreme measures to not get pregnant. My opinion has always been that “accidental” pregnancies are so fucking accidental. And I think the data for all age groups show that women have such high social value that they don’t want to fuck it up by having a kid and losing the power they have.

    So I would say that most of you are fucked in all facets of dealing with women during the course of your life. Those numbers, the demographics, to me, explain the source of your angst, the reason most of you have issues in dealing with women. If you are less than 5’10”, have a BMI of anything more than 25, earn less than $120,000 a year, then you are going to eat shit.

    I would advise you to figure out some way to emigrate from the United States to somewhere than can elevate your SMV. Hunker down, save all your money, do not buy any car that is any more expensive than mere transportation, spend nothing on clothes or luxuries, save that cash and get the fuck out of dodge. For $20,000-$30,000 you could open a business in some foreign countries. You would do better running a coffee shop in Cali, Colombia earning $3,000 a month then working at a tech job in the US, earning $100,000 dragging your beta ass out to discos in the United States.

    But if you stay, I would advise you to spend as much effort learning tight game as you spend studying for some career. Your money that you earn isn’t going to mean shit to you if you have no women. What today’s Rollo post is saying is that when financial security is taken care of, then women will always opt for physical attraction. So the trend is that women are going to take of their own financial security and opt almost entirely for physical attraction. And looks alone aren’t going to be enough given the reality of the competition that you face. Being a beta 8 isn’t going cut it like it did 20 years ago. You end up with fat 5 that treats you like shit. There is so much more psychological knowledge passed around by both women and men. This blog is evidence of that. Rollo says women have intrinsically aware of their hypergamy. Now that awareness is much more overt and few of the will have any shame in maximizing it even though they know that they are doing so. The hamster will tell them “I deserve it” or “my baby deserves it”.

    Roosh has a post today on “Calling is dead” and he gives a link to an excerpt from Bang where he details the intricacies of using text to communicate. He details when to send replies, how long to wait, what to say. There are more rules to the text game than chess, and probably more strategies. He says you can be sure that the woman will show every text to her friends and they will all pour over them looking for reasons to disqualify you. Text back too soon, you’re fucking needy and not sufficiently alpha. Say too much in a text and you’re a geeky beta. Express emotions and she pulls back. She laughs at your discomfort, your pain. He said that you should never call a girl until after you fucked her and it may even not happen until after that. And even after fucking her and then calling her, she may not answer your call.

    Also another young blogger wrote a post on “Dating is dead”. He said he assumed that when he got out of college then hook up culture would give way to something more mature. People would date as a prelude to relationships. What he finds is that it didn’t happen that way, and furthermore that even asking a woman for a date was a signal to a woman that you were pushing for something more serious and she would shun you because she wasn’t interested in that. So going out with your friends and meeting girls at bars, taking them somewhere after for sex, was the norm. They don’t want that LTR, they don’t need the long term provisioning aspects and the relationship crimps their short term options.

    So that is why I have been saying in comments that using Game in a marriage won’t work. Or that marriage won’t work, period, and you would be a fool to enter into one. Even a 43 or 44 year old woman can dump you and get someone else. My ex did. Fuck, I saw her a couple of years after we separated, in a swim suit, and I thought she looked like shit. I thought “Damn, I’m glad I don’t have to try to get it up for that”. And pretty soon after she got a new guy, younger than her by a year, 8 years younger than me.

    Your power is shit. No matter who you are, your transgressions are add up in her fucking little hamster rationalized mind. And one day, some little nothing you do, some way you chew your food, some sock you left on the floor, will tip the scales and princess will use that War Bride sense of rationalization, and be off. Ask Tom Cruise. Ask Robert Pattinson. Ask Russell Brand.

  • Thomas Gray

    Another extension of the point made that young women (up to 25-ish) don’t need to worry about their (financial) security can be seen amongst the student populace in Europe. Most notable in the countries with well established social securities.

    At university most girls (18-26) still seem to be guided solely by hot guy gina tingles, just as their young teenage selfs. As all students they get their monthly government allowance, often supplemented by some parental financial support, which takes care of most housing, food and clothing needs. Leaving plenty of room for partying and gawking over hot ‘alpha’ males. From experience these guys are not especially alpha, they just look hot/in shape.

    Instead of worrying about their security or having accomplished anything they are facilitated to ride the cockcoaster from a young age up until they hit the dreaded wall with little to no consequences.

    In short, government sponsored social security can be blamed for the ‘erotication’ of our female youth and allowing this to escalate into sexualization and letting it continue well into their mid to late twenties, especially amongst the higher educated.

    Side note: it seems many of the hot educated girls do know/think that they have to tie down a 8-9-10 looking alpha as soon and as hard as possible after obtaining him. Perhaps because they’re failry scarce.

  • taterearl

    We live in a world where women can do whatever they want and men sit back and let them. Either by choice (pedestal) or fear (the government).

    Personally I think this was all set up anyway. I must say it is a very effective way to depopulate the planet.

  • taterearl

    @ Mark

    You know why your 40 year old ex can get a guy….because there are so many guys hard up out there that even a 40 year old woman giving them attention is their heaven.

    It’s also why pigs with terrible attitudes can nab a man. When you are desperate for any female attention even vinegar can taste like honey.

  • Ras Al Ghul

    The best part of that picture, Rollo, is the kid holding the flowers in the background with that disgruntled expression on his face.

    That says volumes

    [Every picture tells a story.]

  • mikec74

    The best part of that picture, Rollo, is the kid holding the flowers in the background with that disgruntled expression on his face.

    Ha…I noticed that too. Kind of disturbing actually…kind of has that omega future shooting spree look

  • King A (Matthew King)

    Rollo has grasped the nettle.

    I wouldn’t go so far as to say they looked like whores (my daughter’s analysis), but I will admit to being somewhat taken aback by how closely these 15-16-17 year old girls resembled the early to mid 20′s women I see in my line of work. At a club, at a tasting, or a promotional event, I will admit I enjoy the eye candy, I love a hot outfit like any other guy, but something just didn’t sit right with me seeing these girls dressed for a high school dance. Maybe I’m showing my age, but it did give me some food for thought.

    For those of us who are interested in redeeming the culture — rather than the dyspeptic beta males who seem to gather here for the purposes of either bemoaning their fate or taking advantage of the chaos — we understand that civilization will not be spared the degeneration of the SMV or the ravages of feminism simply through “Men Going Their Own Way.” Men indeed have to pioneer an independent course, but it must be “Man, and his Daughters, and his Sons, and his Wife, Going His Own Way.”

    That undulating flesh mass of “15-16-17-year-olds” is squandering its birthright for a mess of pottage. Those once-and-done tarts are frittering away their single most important and invaluable asset on penny-stock speculation. Rollo’s foresight and insight into female character have wisely spared his daughter and his wife from this fate, to the extent that Rollita sees the whores-in-training for what they are more clearly than he! Bravo, brother. She is the one who matters now, not you.

    There will be no justice in this lifetime for crimes that occurred before we were born. There can only be a steady effort at rollback. As it stands, we are only able to 1) effect justice within a man’s individual sphere of influence, and 2) lay the predicate for our sons and grandsons to complete the epic unfucking. Rollo is doing both, in word and in deed. You would each do well to imitate him.

    All I see among the comment rabble are castrated men and poseurs either wallowing in their despair or spazzing out in a hypersexual frenzy with the thought that such posturing will redeem them for years of beta servitude. Both will end in the horror of unredeemed solitude. I.e., hell. The hell that begins before you die. The hell that many of you are already living, which culminates in some impotent, egotistical act of self-immolation or pitiful self-indulgence.

    I just don’t understand how you can let the bitches in your life misbehave so. And further, I cannot fathom whining to the public how they have to put the girls on a leash for you. Strong paterfamilias frame is the cure for hypergamy, as Rollo exemplifies.

    Matt

  • cynical optimist

    @ Rollo
    to some limbic degree, women are aware of their own SMV. Hypergamy wants an optimized state, but that impulse is mitigated by the realities of her capacity to attain it.

    I think there awareness of their SMV is there to some extent but its just creates to much cognitive dissonance for them when you try to covertly communicate that their is SMP and a MMP, it apperas like a worst case scenario of bounded rationality. I tried to explain this to a woman i know recenlty that juat beacuse she got “five minutes of alpha ” while travelling, (an actor on Home & Away ozzie TV) that she is batting way out of her league for marriage. She’s 30 and “just wants to find a husband”

    What prevents women from differentiating the SMP from the MMP or is it just me?????

  • FuriousFerret

    I think that King A makes some very good points in his post.

    From what I can pick out from his essay, it’s that the end goal should be to build individual family units that derive common sense values that lead to integrity and honor. Also, this revival of this long defunct unit is on the duty of men of means.

    From the various bits of information that I gleaned about Rollo’s family life it seems that he has mastery over his own household. He plays the role of Marcus Aureilus of his home empire. He uses tactical mastery to control his wife and children. He doesn’t do this through caveman style tactics or abusive methods but a higher way. Because of this his daughters and wife both respond and look up to such leadership. However it seems such leaderships is a rarity in the current Anglosphere.

    What has been learned is that women in general do not change. Left to their own devices they will naturally suck up resources and behave in a soliphistic manner. It’s up to men to tame them and bring society back to some sembalance of order.

    However, this is the reality. The men that put their blood, sweat and tears into making themselves in being men that can achieve mastery over women want no part of it. They have seen women up close and they revulse in the thought of being chained to one because they have seen their true nature. They think why should I sacrifice my own life for sake of society? I’ve worked hard to get all this pussy. I don’t want to have the epic task of actually having to domineer one of these shrews.

    Likewise, the betas are a lost cause. Their families will inevitably be sucked up into feminism part VI.

    I don’t see a happy ending here.

  • King A (Matthew King)

    They think why should I sacrifice my own life for sake of society?

    Because that is how there came to be any society in the first place. And because it is your purpose on earth to contribute, rather than reducing to a gluttonous solipsism and dying in your own soul-obese slop.

    Duties are a matter of maturity. You eventually grow up, as Rollo did, and gain the understanding that the world is not all about you and your satisfactions.

    The epic crisis at hand isn’t the unchained hypergamy of women — that is always with us. No, it is the continuation into adulthood of a boyish understanding of what man owes the polity that threatens complete dissolution. “Ask not …” you self-centered brats.

    Matt

  • Random Angeleno

    This quote from Minter is an excellent summary of Rollo’s post:

    “When a woman has some baseline of economic security then her priorities will exactly shift into short term mating schedule and physical attributes.”

    Those high school girls Rollo observed are already taken care of at home; they already have some degree of economic security in their background. Think back to the time of our parents, grandparents and prior generations: their economic security wasn’t such a sure thing then. That lack of security was constantly in their face from the time they were little. They watched daddy claw, scramble and scrape to make a living while mommy pinched dollars at home until the eagle screamed; most of their clothes were hand-me-downs from older siblings or extended family. Economic sustenance was never far from the parents’ minds and that permeated the environment the children grew up in. Girls were told at a young age to “marry that Jones boy, he’s a hard-working young man who’ll do right by you”, etc. And they were told that their virginity was critical to securing their economic future. Today … not so much. We are seeing the results of that in spades.

    Nowadays, even food stamp recipients often have smartphones. Most of them have toilets to piss in, TV’s to watch, etc. But in the absence of real drama, the younger generation always has to manufacture it from somewhere. Thanks to Rollo, Roissy and others, I can see now how much of that is driven by biology…

  • xsplat

    Guys resist knowledge of how love works in women. But with some hard work we can use it to advantage. It’s not that women love your money instead of the man, it’s that the don’t differentiate between the two. To women financial security is one of many character traits. They can and do love a man more because of it.

    And that’s a good thing for men, long term. It gives us sexual marketplace longevity.

    As Mark said and many have known for a while, you also get a big status boost moving to poorer countries. But that will again confuse most men. They think that the women will therefore “really” be interested in a passport or pay for play a lifestyle upgrade. As opposed to what? To what western women want? It’s the same game anywhere, the only difference is that in the in other countries the man gets an advantage. Same game, better tools.

    So I’ll remind us all again that although 90% of men have a hopeless situation of barely attracting barely attractive women, that doesn’t mean it’s not realistic to be in the top 10% who can succeed at intimacy with attractive women. Intimacy and romance.

  • xsplat

    But you have to actually want it.

    Sour grapes is not a life strategy. I don’t want to play that game anyway. (…because it’s too difficult and I don’t think I can win)

    And if I’m wrong that must mean that all my successes have either been a string of flukes or due to fabulous innate advantages. I don’t believe either. If I can go from doing relatively poorly to relatively well, so too can any guy who takes the risks and puts in the time and effort.

  • The Rock of Masculinity « On the Rock

    [...] decided it was time to attack it, but had still been apprehensive about it when, lo and behold, Rollo posted this gem today (read the comments as well, as some are very relevant to my point).  From the post: Hypergamy [...]

  • Random Angeleno

    To expand on xsplat’s post, “sour grapes” is really a bad overall life strategy. It is so very easy to default to perpetually derogating the SMP and the MMP that this sort of outlook seeps into everything a man does. Which in turn makes him even more unattractive not only to women but to his workplace, his friends, his social circle, etc. Which then feeds back into his continuing derogation of the SMP. Which is ultimately saying more about himself than he about anything else. At some level, a man caught in that cycle has to break out of it. The truth of the red pill won’t be a pleasant thing, but it will set him free. If he lets it.

  • BC

    Mark Minter: I would advise you to figure out some way to emigrate from the United States to somewhere than can elevate your SMV.

    I cannot agree more. If I were to give any advice to a younger guy today it would be that if you do plan get married, wait until you are 1) at least 30*, and 2) have lived outside your home country (preferably in two or more foreign countries) for at least 4-5 years.

    *: by which time you may have talked yourself out of it. heh

    Also, xsplat said:
    you also get a big status boost moving to poorer countries. But that will again confuse most men. They think that the women will therefore “really” be interested in a passport or pay for play a lifestyle upgrade. As opposed to what? To what western women want? It’s the same game anywhere, the only difference is that in the in other countries the man gets an advantage. Same game, better tools.

    Again, agree. And part of this advantage is “hand”. I have lived overseas for over 20 years, and am also still stably and happily married to the same woman after over 20 years. But even though my wife can easily be considered one of the truly “good” women, I don’t lie to myself about the hamster and hypergamy. I retain my former citizenship, my income is mobile, and I keep the minimum assets here necessary to maintain a modest but comfortable lifestyle with no debt. Everything else is either portable and in a form not easily understood to someone not familiar with the genre (i.e., collectibles), or outside the country.

    Slight aside: I think that one of the best things that could be done for the manosphere would be for older (40+) and experienced guys with varied relationship and marriage experiences like Rollo, Dalrock, Deti, Mark, etc. to write brief but brutal summaries of their life/relationship/marriage courses thus far explaining what they thought were the best and worse decisions they made (and why) that led them to their current states. I think having a number of these case study pages with comments by other manosphere heavyweights would be an invaluable resource for younger guys to peruse and contrast against current situations and choices that they may be facing. If this kind of resource can be created, I would be happy to contribute in greater detail as well.

  • King A (Matthew King)

    Mark Minter: I would advise you to figure out some way to emigrate from the United States to somewhere than can elevate your SMV.

    I cannot agree more. If I were to give any advice to a younger guy today it would be that if you do plan get married, wait until you are 1) at least 30*, and 2) have lived outside your home country (preferably in two or more foreign countries) for at least 4-5 years.

    Thirded. I also couldn’t agree more. Get your faggot asses out of my country.

    Our republic was built by the men who made it here to compete at the highest level. Now the sons of their sons are fleeing because they allowed their bitches to slip the leash.

    Cowards running from a fight to get cheap brown pussy. Good riddance.

    Matt

  • Apollo

    @King A

    Duties are a matter of maturity. You eventually grow up, as Rollo did, and gain the understanding that the world is not all about you and your satisfactions.

    The epic crisis at hand isn’t the unchained hypergamy of women — that is always with us. No, it is the continuation into adulthood of a boyish understanding of what man owes the polity that threatens complete dissolution. “Ask not …” you self-centered brats.

    Your opinion of duty is very… classical. It’s very much old fashioned masculinity, which is in a way impressive, but in another, more important way is just plain out of touch with the reality on the ground. What you fail to appreciate is that role you’re trying to fulfil just doesnt fit – it was created in societies that valued men and honored and rewarded their efforts. Patriarchies essentially.

    That is not the society we live in. This is not a patriarchy, despite what the feminists might say. This society denigrates and mocks the traditional masculine role. It sends a very clear message to men that they are not needed, that the very values that make them stand out are harmful or irrelevant. It is not set up with our interests in mind, and so in a very real sense, as men it is not OUR society any more. It doesnt belong to us, and by the same token we do not belong to it.

    Even though I personally also have a strong sense of duty, stronger than perhaps you realize, I refuse to invest in this society by marrying and having children because of this. Because this society is not mine. This society doesn’t deserve our investment, and unlike what you seem to think, our selfless personal sacrifice is not going to restore things back to how they were, things are too far gone now for that. In fact I think the most likely thing you will achieve by acting out your traditional masculine role is acting as grist in the mill.

    Which is fine if that’s what you want to do with your life. That’s your choice, and the consequences will be yours to deal with. Your pushing this bullshit on other men however, is less fine. Luckily, I think the “man up” rhetoric has now completely lost it’s power over the majority of us, so this nonsense isn’t likely to win any new converts.

    Brats indeed. You don’t seem to even understand the need to change with the times, even when everything else is changing around you, so don’t pretend at a level of maturity and wisdom you clearly don’t posses.

  • BC

    Queen A, go fuck yourself.

    Were your ancestors traitors for leaving their countries of birth? For escaping tyranny and other poor conditions and seeking a better life? Are you the descendant of traitors, who now dishonors their memory by acting like the kind of fascist they sought to avoid?

    You talk like you have all the right answers, and the only right answers, but you are just another bombastic, holier-than-thou wuss who appears to get off on telling other people what to do, and where to go.

    Go fuck yourself. Again.

  • BC

    Queen A(sshole): Cowards running from a fight to get cheap brown pussy.

    That says everything I need to know about you.

    Real Christian there, you hypocrite.

  • GeishaKate

    “That is not the society we live in.”

    It would be if more people tried. Keep in mind that you only need to find *one* woman who will treat you the way you truly want to be treated and you can live in a mini version of that society. When we start banding together, then we can have that kind of society again on a larger scale. If everyone jumps ship, there’s no one to save the man overboard.

  • John Galt

    Matt “King” – go back to your christian blogs and stop polluting the best blog in the manosphere. Mr Minter is a fantastic contributor and your constant heckling with your bullshit “man up” garbage is getting old. Oh, and some “cheap brown pussy” is much better than anything your smallish cock will ever see.

  • James

    BC:

    Just a thought. I hope you won’t be too bothered by Matt King. I think you may be responding to someone who’s not right in the head.

    How else can one explain his delusional self-awarded moral high ground, yet by his own comments such as the “brown pussy” proves he’s a fanatical racist? He’s looking for attention, plain and simple.

  • BC

    @James:

    Thanks, and I know, but not only were his ignorant assumptions completely overboard, he crossed the line when by implication he insulted my wife. Nice to be able to do so cowardly from safety and comfort of his computer over the internet; face to face he would either be on a gurney in the emergency ward or a slab in the fucking morgue.

    Quite the hamster to be able to call other people faggots and pussies.

  • Apollo

    @GeishaKate

    “That is not the society we live in.”
    It would be if more people tried. Keep in mind that you only need to find *one* woman who will treat you the way you truly want to be treated and you can live in a mini version of that society. When we start banding together, then we can have that kind of society again on a larger scale. If everyone jumps ship, there’s no one to save the man overboard.

    True to some extent, but there are numerous practical issues for any man wanting to take that path, including the risks the man faces, the incentives for women to divorce and the poisonous culture fighting you every step of the way and on multiple levels (Government, education, MSM, religious institutions, popular culture, etc). It takes critical mass for a culture to change significantly, to make this mess right again, and the numbers of red pillers just aren’t anywhere near high enough. I don’t see this changing in a meaningful way in my lifetime either.

    I also have to mention that a number of divorced and currently very unhappy men thought they had found their one women at one point, only to find out that they were very badly mistaken. “Our” society pretty much throws its men under the bus when it’s women decide that they want out of the commitments they made in this regard, and regardless of whether you have tried to segregate yourself off into your own little society of sanity, the insane rules of the feminist parent society still apply when it counts.

    Marriage as a concept also doesn’t fit too well into our current day society. It was originally designed as an economic contract between a man and a woman, his excess labour to be traded for her reproductive capacity, and within a framework where fatherhood was deemed necessary and sex outside of marriage was a sin. Now women can get all the economic support they need through working or from the government, fathers are considered redundant and are not respected and some men get sex from multiple women and the rest don’t even get sex from their own wives. Marriage has also been significantly altered from it’s original state, due to the fact that only one side of the contract is enforced and it can be ended at a whim on the flimsiest of pretenses. I think that even when first invented, you could argue that marriage wasn’t the best deal for men, but now it’s a positively horrendous one.

    Our ship of society is quite content to callously disregard all of the “men” overboard, and because of this I really have no reason to take a personal stake in the fate of the vessel as it starts to founder into shallow treacherous waters. If the ship sinks, it sinks. I’ll be watching from my yacht.

    Don’t take my glib attitude to mean that I’m particularly happy about this either. I’m not. I do understand the wider implications of what Im saying. But I refuse to work or sacrifice for the benefit of a society that treats men the way ours does. and if nothing else I am extremely pragmatic, and am easily able to make the best out of this situation.

  • James

    BC:

    Tough guy internet assholes come a dime a dozen, which you already know. Scripture-quoting tough guy assholes, well they’re less common. I’d love to see him say what he said to your face. : )

  • YaReally

    Also, I agree with King A. Bailing and hiring desperate 3rd world prostitute poon (“allowance” lol, okay there) because you don’t have the game to compete here is about as impressive as joining a kid’s basketball league because you can’t compete with the adults. It’s cool that you’re scoring points and all, but letting that delude to into pretending you’re on Michael Jordan’s level is laughable.

  • Joseph Brant

    YaReally:

    What makes you think BC or anyone else gives a -uck about impressing you?

    Some guys just want alternatives aside from pursuing disease-ridden skanks and entitlement bitches. I care about you. Therefore, I happily surrender my share of disease-ridden herpes harpies to you. Enjoy!

  • gregg

    of course, women date up – in looks, money, personality, power, everything. Offer – men has to be there, for women to be able to choose the best. Given that women are limiting factor of procreation, almost every woman has to be able to find a mate. If males were not blinded by their hormones, very few realtionships take place. Women date up – men blinded by their hormones and illusions date down.

    So we have those intelligent, decent looking men with great personalities, sense of humor, burdened with fat, bitchy, stupid wives. It is really strange – woman as low as 4 or even 3 in SMV is able to catch male 7, enslave him and make him to work his life away for her fat, ugly, stupid ass. How disgusting and how PATHETIC!

    But I DO agree, that IF you have higher SMV than her, you are perfectly willing to be without her – you have your mission and if you have not given her your soul, woman could be in acquisitive mode – i.e. respect and adore you, for years. This IS possible and it has to be proven to me several times. Of course, this acquisitive mode, massaging your little ego is nothing but biological program implanted in her in order to catch and hold male of high SMV value. There is VOID, there is NOTHING in women besides those automatic programs. Therefore Freud could not understand them – he was searching for the core, for soul. He were somehow able to understand males. But in women – he found nothing. Women are on autopilot all the time. In their natural, emotional state they are most charming and most lethal. Logic can ruin it all. Amusing creatures :)

  • xsplat

    I’ll agree with you Gregg, but take it one step further. We men also have automated sub-routines running inside of us. A pretty face and an hourglass figure causes many involuntary reactions. Even our love is conditional.

    So I advocate managing the women like a puppet, but doing so with the intention of managing our own internal sub-routines also. We are happier when we have regular sex, when we feel some emotional bonds in our lives, when people show us affection, and even when people treat us as having relatively high status.

    We have the option to take the every-man-should-strive-to-be-an-imperturbable-self-contained-island-of-equanimity-and-joy attitude, but I think it’s a cold hard fact that our sub-routines never really go away. It makes perfect sense to manage our outward life in order to attain inward happiness and fulfillment.

    So being expert at keeping women in that aquisitive state is a form of auto-regulation.

  • YaReally

    @Joseph

    From your laid back, unreactive, relaxed response I am certain that accepting your share of the disease-ridden herpes harpies is not a significant threat since your share is approximately 0.

    It’s cool man, when I’m budgeting I convince myself the NoName brand of ketchup is as good as Heinz too. I just wouldn’t brag about it to people lol

  • Team-Red

    @Gregg

    I’m shocked too when I see friends of mine settle for pigs that I wouldn’t consider banging even if I were completely shit faced. Talk about taking one for the team. It’s like they just gave up and settled for a steady stream of poon that requires no effort. I’m 34 single and happy with dating and running game as it keeps me sharp and on point. Variety never gets old and remaining free of commitment fucking kicks ass.

    My friends married with kids are miserable and their wives are bitches. They’re all unhappy. I dodged so many land mines by not settling where the women I was involved with ten years ago are so beyond busted. They were gorgeous but after kids and marriage, look awful. I still look great and have dated 6 different women over the last year ranging from 22-47. It’s all for fun and I have learned to truly not care about anything beyond what I want. No games or hidden agenda. If I want a break from things I just hide out. Spinning plates is exactly that. My main focus remains on my aspirations and goals in life and women are just there as a source of enjoyment. My friends that are married with kids are miserable because their dreams died once they tied the knot. I feel bad for them not reaching their full potential as men and in the family hell they are now in. They are broken and I can see it everywhere. No life or positive energy, a slave to the wife and kids who despise his very existence. I am so grateful to have found the red pill and didn’t head down that path.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Looks like the UK is one step ahead of Matt King (A):
    jezebel.com/5950287/slut+dropping-and-other-ways-college-teaches-kids-to-be-sexist-assholes

    What’s funny is that the ‘walk of shame’ is so predictable, and such a regular occurrence that these guys know the route these girls take to get back to their dorm.

  • Ad Fortitudo

    Pluralism indeed.

  • GeishaKate

    @Apollo: I like the way you expanded the metaphor:) I certainly understand what you’re saying and I think you hit upon something important here:

    “I also have to mention that a number of divorced and currently very unhappy men thought they had found their one women at one point, only to find out that they were very badly mistaken.”

    I completely understand this as that was my experience too (except with a man, naturally) and I do know several men who experienced this as well. But, from that very large group of people who were married and are now divorced, they are divided into two separate groups: those who give up and those who keep looking. I know a lot of women who thought when they got divorced they’d find someone else again relatively soon. Most don’t. Most people fixate on their first object of affection after divorce. Somehow this “grass is greener” mentality fails to sink in with women that it could take YEARS of being single/looking again before they find someone wonderful who complements them. I don’t know if this giving up falls along gender lines or personality, but I really believe people should not give up. I try to be better, not bitter.

  • E.J.

    King A is some piece of work. Here’s a guy full of demands and expectations for other men, lecturing us on our supposed duties. He’s like the wife of the manosphere. “Take out the trash, Roissy!”

  • dem

    i am 22, and have very little experience in dealing with girls etc. Game for me is trying to be better in all spheres of life, but gettting as much poon as possible. So reading this, all i can think is, it’ss all about looks.Except getting big muscles, there is nothing i can do because girls my age are looking for the super hot guy.? WTF should i do?

  • Simon Corso

    Gregg,
    ” …you have your mission and if you have not given her your soul, woman could be in acquisitive mode – i.e. respect and adore you, for years. This IS possible and it has to be proven to me several times… ”

    The optimal strategy would seem to be to keep women in their aquisitive mode as long as possible. This way you enjoy and appreciate their warm and loving companionship,their sweet girly charms.

    Most the women I date are very intelligent. Which means I can only string them along for so long. So from 3 months up to a maximum of say, 2 years. Starting over at these intervals is no big deal, thanks to game.

    But here’s the catch.

    This means no marriage or children.

    But wait , is that really so bad ?

    Marriage is not, and never was natural for a man. We’re meant to spread our seeds in as many fertile fields as we can plow. Not to put them carefully into one single little patch of grass that we spend the rest of our lives tending. Nature did not design us to put all our seeds in one little basket. It is not in our best interest as a species

    Marriage was NOT designed for us or our benifit. It was HER idea . It maximizes HER biological imperative simultaneously forcing us to sacrifice our own.

    The draconian laws brought about by the codification of feminism have simply erased marriage and children as a viable option to the modern man. I encourage others to do what makes them “happy” but I will not be a drone or a coppertop.

    So I still end up sacrificing my biological imperative, but at least I get to live my life the way I want and spend my money the way I want…And hey, the fucking planet is already overpopulated anyway.

  • Sis

    Their dresses almost look like lingerie. I don’t think I would ever want my daughters to be grinding with boys at a school dance.

    I’ve never heard that true love most likely occurs when the man is ranked two points higher than a woman. Interesting, I will have to think about that one and decide if I agree or not.

  • gregg

    @ simon – completely the opposite. Marriage WAS designed for the benefit of society and their best drones – ordinary men. Marriage IS beta thing. You could see now, what happens when women are left at the mercy of their emotions and baser instinct. I myself have robbed many men of their women in my previous harem years.

    Marriage was designed to GIVE woman to every man, thereby making him invest in society. Men with women a families contribute and fight for society like lions – Napoleon realized this. If we leave this thing to natural laws – there are men with harems – you and other attractive men. Bur given the number of men and women, there are many men without wives, even withou girlfriend. If you have those 5 women in your harem, it means that 4 dudes are left with blue balls. Do not be mistaken – marriage is NOT designed for women – they could do perfectly well withou it, once their secutity needs are met – the situation we are witnessing today. They have and share harem mentality.

  • John Galt

    Dem – don’t beat yourself up about the short term, you are very young so focus on achieving longterm value (or SMV if you would). At this point in your life, you are best served by getting top grades in your major, bust your ass off, and work in a field where there is serious upside (finance, growth internet companies, certain sales positions, etc). Or better yet, take some risk and start a company or join a start up and get some equity. And of course maintain top fitness while doing this (shoot for 10% body fat). Remember, women are the compliment, never the focus of your life’s work (good ‘ole Rollo). In ten years, you will be better looking, more fit, and VASTLY more wealthy and accomplished. In other words, pulling pussy like it was your job when you peak in your 30’s. Trust me on this one.

    But during the interim, while you are building serious SMV for yourself, as a practical matter you should read Bang by Roosh and practice his concepts. From a philosophical standpoint, Rollo is the best out there. He organized his blog (link below) so start reading from the beginning! As in business, its best to balance the practical and the philosophical/theoretical. Good luck my brother.

    http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/year-one/

  • John Galt

    Sis – that is a theory from Roissy, for which I agree (cant find the link at the moment). Basically, it is saying the man’s status (whoever you define it…money (rich banker), social proof (politician), and yes, looks/fitness) should be 1-2 points higher than a women’s looks (her looks dominant her status so they are synonymous for this example). So a good match would be a status 9 male (35 yo, 6 2, fit, $300k annual comp, Stanford MBA) with a solid HB 8 female (26, 5 8, 118 lbs…rest is irrelevant, ha ha). This means the guy has a hottie who might retain her looks for up to 20 years (so he wont leave) and the man is high enough status where the women’s hypergamy wont kick in (so she won’t leave). Both parties feel like they are “winning”. Modern day love story!

  • John Galt

    “however”, not “whoever”. oops.

  • Apollo

    @GeishaKate

    I completely understand this as that was my experience too (except with a man, naturally) and I do know several men who experienced this as well. But, from that very large group of people who were married and are now divorced, they are divided into two separate groups: those who give up and those who keep looking. I know a lot of women who thought when they got divorced they’d find someone else again relatively soon. Most don’t. Most people fixate on their first object of affection after divorce. Somehow this “grass is greener” mentality fails to sink in with women that it could take YEARS of being single/looking again before they find someone wonderful who complements them. I don’t know if this giving up falls along gender lines or personality, but I really believe people should not give up. I try to be better, not bitter.

    It’s not a matter of giving up, it’s a conscious decision to take a different path. Theres a difference. Giving up suggests that marriage and kids are what I really want, but I’m going another way because I cant, or haven’t yet, been able to make the pieces fit right. No. What’s happened is that I’ve looked at marriage as a whole, the risks, the benefits, the likelihood of success, and I’ve decided it’s not viable, so I have never pursued it.

    Part of this is due to my personality type. Im an introvert and have very little need for socialising, so this likely gives me a different persective on this than your average extrovert. Essentially, I don’t NEED relationships for social reasons, so I’m much more free to asses them objectively and take part in only the ones that are an overall net benefit to me, in whatever form they may take. In fact its actually necessary for me to look at things that way, because I get very irritable when I have to spend sustained periods of time with people, even those that I like. If you imagine this is you for a moment, and look at marriage from a mans perspective, what a man risks, what a man has to offer, and what a man gets back. What conclusion would you come to?

    That part of course may be somewhat unique to me. I know there are other introverts out there, of varying degrees, but we do seem to be in the minority in society. But even disregarding that there are still those other parts, namely the large numbers of low quality, marriage unworthy women and the horrendous divorce and child custody laws. I think those two on their own are enough for men to eschew the very idea of marriage, but for me it’s a triple threat and impossible to ignore. So no, I haven’t given up on marriage, I was never seriously considering it in the first place.

    And I’m certainly not bitter. I love how bitterness always comes up any time a guy says he doesn’t want to marry. Frankly I can actually see a silver lining here. Despite the damage done to our society by liberalism, it is much more acceptable for a man to choose not to marry nowadays, and the increased sexual availability of women outside of marriage too. Even before marriage got mangled beyond recognition by feminists, I still think men were getting the raw end of the deal, having to work all his life, and be responsible for a wife and children. If we were still living in a society where men were valued and respected, marriage is exactly the path I wouldn’t have chosen though, if for no other reason than a sense of duty. But perhaps having the freedom and time to pursue my own interests, and live life as I choose will be preferable?

  • xsplat

    Apollo, women are not capable of cognizing a man living for his own satisfaction. It does not compute. To them it’s impossible. Wrong. Must be corrected.

    It’s built in. When I was 27 I mentioned to a pretty 21 year old lass that I was never going to marry again or have more children, and she was appalled.

    Well, biologically speaking, she should be programmed to be appalled. That’s what men are for!

    Some guys are appalled at lesbianism. But, but, you can’t be a lesbian! You are hot! And if you are a lesbian it means you are of no use to me, but that’s just wrong! Hot girls should be of use!

    Women can not grasp the concept that men are not extensions of their own solipsism. That we have our own agendas.

  • xsplat

    It’s the same with mentioning that you don’t want kids. Does not compute. They actually refuse to believe you! They think you are lying, or somehow don’t know what you want, or that you’ll come around, eventually.

  • Apollo

    @xsplat

    Yes, I’d have to agree that my experience so far seems to support your theory. I don’t mind spending some time trying to explain this to women who are open minded and willing to listen though. Maybe this time they will believe me, and it’s always better to know the truth.

    And that truth is, many men can do just fine without women, and not just survive but thrive. They can do this not because they haven’t been able to find the right one, but because they have deliberately chosen not to look.

    In this, sex is always going to be the biggest issue for those men, but this is made easier these days when women basically just give sex away for free. In addition, men’s sex drives decrease over time, and men learn better control over their urges, until the point is quickly reached where the majority of women, those who have concentrated their youth solely on spending their sexual capital, just have nothing left to offer a man. At least nothing that he wants or needs.

    It’s very sad for society really. Patriarchy was what made western society great, and by dismantling it we have sown the seeds of societies downfall. It’s also sad for those few “good girls” who do actually treat men with respect, and don’t beat men with the large club feminism has provided, because some of those girls are going to become victims of this trend of men “going their own way”. No one ever said life was fair though.

  • GeishaKate

    @Apollo: I certainly wasn’t suggesting you, personally, are bitter. Au contraire! You come across very reasonable and calm in your writing. Its nice to hear. And we are looking at this from different angles. I thought we were talking about divorced men, but you are talking about men who’ve never been married.

    I do get that some men are happy alone. I’m *relatively* happy alone myself. I’m not a social person by any stretch of the imagination. So, yes, I can imagine being a man and not being interested in marrying if there were no exceptional prospects. I don’t see any purpose to dating, myself.

    However, its your very attitude towards marriage and contentment with how you are that makes you the ideal candidate for a happy marriage :) I suspect you will end up in that state someday and, more importantly, be able to pull it off.

  • xsplat

    I don’t hanker for the dying social order that I hear men grieving over. I never was a family man, so I can’t share that emotional connection. So for me I don’t see a collapse of society, because I don’t define society as being the social order of families. Instead of social collapse I see social change, and I’m fine with it, because it benefits me. I never wanted a family, and if all the girls are stuck in monogamous marriages and marrying young, I can’t live the lifestyle I want.

    So every time I hear of social collapse, it’s always a puzzle to me. Collapse?

    But now I get it. It’s collapse of not of our economic system that is being talked about. It’s collapse of the way of lifetime monogamy and two for lifetime parent families.

    Guys like me who prefer the girls being able to flit between men either date by date or year by year are still motivated to produce economically. More so. Those who remain in the dating game know that wealth gives them a dating edge. Especially over the long haul. Which is exactly what we are in for if we don’t marry.

    It’s true that men can adjust to less sex. Some can, at least. We can also adjust to not eating chocolate or drinking wine or eating steak.

    I hear that it’s a cost benefit calculation.

    I’d like to think that with supporting life choices, the cost benefit swings to the favor of satisfying and loving intimacy with (a variety of) women.

  • Apollo

    @GeishaKate

    You’re quite the optimist! Most would claim there’s “no hope” for me. ;)

    We can only wait and see what the future holds.

    @xsplat

    I don’t really hanker for the return of Patriarchy either. It’s better for society certainly, but maybe not better for me. More importantly though, things just can’t be put back the way they were, so wishing for it to return is impractical.

    Yes, you can make a distinction between economic collapse and social collapse, although the two definitely are related. Social collapse will lead towards economic collapse. A healthy economy requires efficient production, and factors resulting from social collapse, such as large levels of wasteful unproductive Government spending (e.g. social security) and lack of incentives to produce hamper this. I can see from your perspective why you are motivated, but a lot of other previously existing motivations are being removed. Particularly beta provider motivations, which is a big one, and pretty well outstrips Alpha player motivations. Also consider that the beta provider fund traditionally got invested in the next generation of society, in turn giving them better opportunities to become good producers themselves, as opposed to the drains on society they are likely to become if they lack proper care in their youth.

    Cost benefit is exactly right. And since we each have different risk tolerances, and place different relative values on various things in our lives, the calculations are going to be individualized. It’s certainly possible for two different people to reason this through, and come to two completely different conclusions on how to live their lives, with both conclusions being “correct” (if you can put it that way).

  • xsplat

    Freenortherner put a lot of thought into what social collapse might mean. In his post here http://freenortherner.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/the-collapse/ most of the more likely scenarios aren’t what I’d call collapse.

    Econonomic downturn, barring increases in production due to technology, I can certainly agree with. Collapse means something more than that to me.

  • Apollo

    @xsplat

    Hadn’t seen that post yet. I’ll have a closer read tomorrow, looks interesting.

    Just quickly though, what I had in mind when I referred to collapse was on the level of the fall of Rome. Not immediately and all at once though, more gradually worsening over a longer period of time, a spiral downwards that takes a while to complete. Which is how I believe it happened in Rome too.

    But since we’re essentially talking about predicting the future here, and since a number of the particulars about our current day society are unprecedented (esp. the level of technological advancement) the honest answer is, I don’t know exactly what could happen or precisely how bad it could be.

    The main reason why I predict the continual downward spiral is that I don’t see how we get from here to a state where we can properly recover. It took many decades for Feminism and the other associated liberal policies to become properly entrenched, and I don’t see them getting removed any quicker than that, and by that time it may be too late to do anything. A significant cultural change is needed, and those are never quick to implement absent very drastic motivating events. In this case it’s especially troublesome, considering the entrenched opposition who are loathe to admit fault, and the fact that the change calls for more discipline and personal responsibility, not less.

  • xsplat

    I’m not going to quibble about either definitions or what futures are most likely, but you’re plainly right that much of what we were used to has irrevocably changed, and much for the worse.

    I agree with you that there is nothing for it but to adapt and prosper on an individual level.

    There were times when a guy didn’t have to be in the top 10% to make a decent go of it with women. But now this seems to be an age that works best for an elite.

    A guy can be elite through natural endowment, training, or by playing in the special olympics. Again, it’s cost about cost benefit. It’s not about being the best and having the shiniest trophies. It’s not about the hard work. It’s about cost benefit and a satisfying life.

    For me, that means going to a place where young attractive women more easily date old ugly guys. They don’t hand them out at the airport, but at least we have a chance at all here.

    I don’t fuck for the challenge of it. It’s not a sport that hands out ribbons and buttons and flags that I can show off. It’s about the actual girls, not the actual challenge.

  • xsplat

    That last comment was aimed at those guys who seem to think other people care how good they are at fucking western girls, and all guys who lower themselves to melanin tainted breasts don’t gain any man points.

    You can keep you man points, and I’ll keep melanin tinted breasts.

  • Emma the Emo

    “It’s the same with mentioning that you don’t want kids. Does not compute. They actually refuse to believe you! They think you are lying, or somehow don’t know what you want, or that you’ll come around, eventually.”

    Happens to my female friend all the time… She’s really not into kids (and it only got more powerful with age, not less), but everyone (including guys) just refuse to believe it. I think we’re living in a world where most people want kids and not wanting them seems bizarre.

  • Jalex

    So how can we determine the role that a woman’s income vs a man’s other dominant traits plays in hypergamy?

    I ask because I was very financially and female successful for most of my 20s, but like many was hit by the economy and went from 175k +/- per year in income to being unemployed / underemployed for the past 3 years (now 31). I have minimized the current struggle to my current gal, have family money (cant access currently but she senses its there), have a couple boats, etc (so I have outward appearances of wealth, but currently cash flow is bad).

    Understanding the ‘alpha’ dynamic, I gamed the hell out of my current LTR gal. I qualified her from date one, was hard on her, critical and teased her, and she pursued me. She constantly mate-guards me, is worried about me looking at other women, freaked out over an innocent flirt session a year ago, and generally lives in anxiety (DREAD). When I met her, she didnt cook. I told her, you dont cook for me, that’s it, and now she cooks for me constantly (elaborate meals). If I go a day without fuvking her, she gets anxious. I get back rubs on demand.

    She’s an MBA and makes like 120-150k a year, is probably a 7 in looks, is super submissive (to me anyway).

    I am on the verge of (hidden from her) near-term financial collapse (close to getting a job but WTF already). I come from a classier family. I am a good-looking guy, socially very dominant, women flirt with me all the time, leader of men type. I lead every frame. I own her in bed; I tell her what to do and she complies. She dotes on me constantly. I did make a lot of money, but am currently and temporarily cash-flow negative.

    So I guess I’m just wondering how we all think hypergamy intersects at the sexual vs. social vs financial level with a woman of this type. She is 31. Sexually fairly inexperienced (I truly believe <5 partners..I've done my research).

    Thanks for any input.

  • nek

    About Wesley,

    I basically said something similar to him in a comment on a previous post. He has alot going for him, rather he realizes it or not. A bit of an extreme example, but if you asked a celebrity man dating an average woman w/o fame on her own, he’d probably go on about true love and loyalty. And to him she would be loyal and very good, but it’s not because she’s a “good one”, but rather the discrepancy in value. Also, not to take away from Wes or his girl, who is attractive, but if I gather right from his comments, he and her are in their early 40s roughly (not 100% so if you read this Wes, feel free to correct), so her demands are going to be less stringent than they were when she was younger simply by decline in value relative to her younger years, if my age estimate is correct.

    About Mark Minter,

    While he’s bold in his delivery, I think some people are missing his point when I read comments about him here or on the roosh forum. He’s not saying that a guy shouldn’t enjoy women in life (in fact he says quite the opposite), he’s just not advocating marriage specifically and too much investment in a woman generally. Keep it light. Is he bitter? Probably, but not at women, rather the model he was raised to buy into and believe in and that he followed. And I don’t think that this is unreasonable. As long as it doesn’t interfere with his future enjoyment with women for what they are.

    About Marriage,

    I agree that the best situation for kids is a two parent family, but somehow it seems that guys are rationalizing this as why they need to be in relationships, their sense of responsibility if they wanted to have kids. But what about the women, with kids, who are initiating the divorce most of the time or getting pregnant when they aren’t married? Where are these same guys holding them accountable? Women have a plethora of birth control options, men have 1 (two if you consider pulling out a method). I have yet to see a compelling arguement for marriage, the only one that is ever offered is the “better environment for kids” one but I hope guys will see the other side of the coin (the woman’s role in all of this). I’m not saying it has never “worked” for anyone anywhere ever, but I’ve typically only noticed that in deeply religious people (a whole other matrix).

  • xsplat

    Nek, putting it that Mark advocates “keeping it light” is an understatement. He advocates pump and dump. I’m reading that he deliberately avoids romance, intimacy, and bonding. And he makes no mention of the joys of affection.

    That might work for some guys who do not enjoy forming attachments. But advocating such a lifestyle would be horrible advice for those who do not have some attachment avoidance issues or who retain any semblance of normal romantic bonding abilities.

    MOST men prefer intimacy in their lives.

    Now maybe for Mark he is not just adapting to a feeling that honest healthy intimacy is impossible with women with a sour grapes “I didn’t really want it anyway”. Maybe he really didn’t want it anyway! In which case for guys who did want it anyway, that would be HORRIBLE advice to follow!

    Mark is a very good writer with deep and frequent insights, the kind of guy I’d be honored to keep company with, the kind of guy who adds more than he gives. But I don’t think he understands how normal male-female attachment can work, when it works at it’s best.

  • Ran

    Rollo… do you allow you daughter to have sex?

  • Rollo Tomassi

    At 14, there is no ‘allowing’ of anything. We’ve raised a daughter who at this point is very aware of herself and displays self-disciple on her own.

    That may sound Pollyanna on my part, just rest assured I’m very aware from my own sexual past that teenage girls want to fuck, and when a father lapses in his concerns, there’s a teenage guy ready to exploit that lapse. I’ve been that teenage guy.

  • John Galt

    To keep on this tangent….Rollo, what advice are you giving your daughter in general about relationships, a women’s role, etc. (if you already wrote about this, please send the link) I have a couple of young neice’s that I want to set straight but have no clue where to start. Thanks.

  • Good Luck Chuck

    I’m a little late on this one but I wanted to point out that last week a buddy of mine made the same observation regarding how 16 year old girls are dressing when he dropped off one of our high school aged employees at his homecoming.

    And this isn’t in an urban area, this is way up in a middle of nowhere upper midwest small town. He also mentioned how it was crazy how little these girls were wearing considering the temperature that night was in the upper 30’s.

    The culture is quite a bit different here from the sunny, urban south I am used to, but apparently even the small town girls are still subject to the sluttification that plagues urbanized western women.

  • Ran

    Hey Rollo, let me get you straight on this… So after all your posts, what you are saying is that you expecting “bad teenager” trying to “exploit” your daughter? Now, I’m not saying that she should sleep with the whole football team… But now you put all men as a pack of hungry wolves. Are you going to chase away all her suitors (by means of your martial arts and amused mastery) untill she’s 26?

  • AD

    BTW, that picture is from a 2008 school graduation thingy in Russia. Notice the absence of ugly and fat chicks..

    http://englishrussia.com/2008/05/26/graduation-2008/

  • S

    What I am wondering, looking at these comments..is how does one determine SMV exactly; their own and that of others. Also I would like some opinions regarding how YOU think a woman should date in terms of selecting a man based on his SMV. You say that women date up and men date down but should they? For arguments sake what should a female 4 compared to a female 7 be aiming to attract (male 4, male 7?) and visa versa for men..what should a male 4 and a male 7 shoot for?

  • LIGFY – Oct 14 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

    [...] Male – Balancing Sexual Pluralism, 50 Shades Of [...]

  • Shit Test, Loyalty Test, and Build a Better Beta « stagedreality

    [...] at in life), will see that right away. For a good example, his latest post on the issue is on Balancing the Pluralistic Sexual Strategies. As usual, he’s good about linking to previous relevant [...]

  • Time’s Up «

    [...] union with the best available mating option in terms of breeding and long term provisioning (i.e. pluralistic sexual strategy). Men on the other hand are biologically predisposed to mating with the best available short term [...]

  • - In the war of playas against sluts, I’m Sweden. | The Woman and the Dragon

    [...] to this war, I’m like Sweden in WW2 – neutral.  Playas can read The Rational Male (try Balancing Sexual Pluralism for an overview) and will learn upsettingly true things about women that they can use as heavy [...]

  • He’s Special |

    […] fucks and Beta bucks is literally a biological imperative for women. I wrote in Balancing Sexual Pluralism about this pluralism describing the desire for that perfect balance of Alpha sexuality when […]

  • Saving the Best |

    […] The author of this reddit thread is feeling the sharp end of that Hypergamic equation. While I’m sure there will be every effort made to paint this man’s wife as some fucked up, emotionally damaged, and conveniently, sexually abused victim (we don’t know this, but that was the default association in the comments of his original thread), the operative I’m driving at here isn’t about her individualized experiences, but the methodology she and all women use to justify their sexual pluralism. […]

  • JackBlack23

    “Women’s emotional center (if there is such a thing) isn’t love, but security.”

    In my book, this is the central truth of the Red Pill (at least with respect to intergender dynamics) … I’ll never forget the first time I read it, I was absolutely floored …

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 5,064 other followers

%d bloggers like this: