When I was detailing the landscape of our contemporary sexual marketplace in Navigating the SMP there comes a point on women’s SMV (sexual market value) progression where she becomes cognizant of her SMV decline and impending date with The Wall. Generally this occurs in women’s late 20’s and possibly early 30’s but as a rough estimate on the graph I provided in that post, this is the point of transition at which women realize their decaying capacity to hypergamously compete with women in their sexual primes, and the point at which men are beginning to realize their own increasing SMV potential. I dubbed this intersection the point of Comparative SMV. It’s also important to note that this phase conveniently coincides with the social convention of women’s mythical biological clock. (more on this later).
The Epiphany Phase
I’ve previously described this phase as a parallel to men’s feminine-redefined midlife crisis. This is a precarious time for women, usually the years between 28 and 30, where she makes attempts to reassess the last decade of her life. Women’s psychological rationalization engine (a.k.a. the Hamster) begins a furious effort to account for, and explain to her reasonings for not having successfully secured a long term monogamous commitment from as Alpha a man as her attractiveness could attain for her. Even women married prior to this phase will go through some variation of self-doubt, or self-pity in dealing with the hypergamic uncertainty of her choice (“Is he really the best I could do?”)
It’s during this stage that women will make radical shifts in their prioritization of what prerequisite traits qualify as ‘attractive’ in a man and attempt to turn over a new leaf by changing up their behaviors to align with this new persona they create for themselves. Since the physicality, sexual prowess and Alpha dominance that made up her former arousal cues in a Man aren’t as forthcoming from men as when she was in her sexual prime, she reprioritizes them with (presumed) preferences for more intrinsic male attributes that stress dependability, provisioning capacity, humor, intellect, and esoteric definitions of compatibility and intimacy.
For the spiritually inclined woman (which is to say most women) this may manifest in a convenient return to convictions she’d disregarded since her adolescence. For other’s it may be some kind of forced celibacy; a refusal to have sex under the hypergamic auspices of her ‘party years’ in the hopes that a well provisioning male (the ones not realizing their own potential SMV as yet) will appreciate her for her prudence – so unlike herself and all of the other girls who rejected him over the last decade.
The self-affirming psychological schema is one where she’s “finally doing the right thing”, when in fact she’s simply making the necessity of her long term provisioning and security a virtue she hopes men will appreciate. And if they don’t, then there’s always shaming them to think they’re ‘less-than-men’ for not living up to her eating her cake once she’s had it.
The Shifting Point
Case in point Hephzibah Anderson, author of the book Chastened, The Unexpected Story of My Year Without Sex. Here we have a graphic insight into the inner workings of women’s rationalization at the crossroads of acknowledging her decaying SMV, the need for long term male security, provisioning and intimacy, and realizing the necessity for a new psychological paradigm to justify her shift in behavior.
It’s easy to dismiss this interview as just another 3 women allowing their hamsters to colate on camera, but when you view this clip in a red pill context a surprising amount of information is revealed about the Epiphany Phase women experience.
We begin here with the now clichéd Kate Bolick Brand® former boyfriend-in-love regretfulness as the catalyst for Hephzibah’s 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 proceeds through the predictable, “I’m 30 and need to reprioritize my life” boilerplate that’s made more than a few women authors a good deal of money writing for The Atlantic.
As I noted earlier, this phase also coincides with a woman’s sharp decline in fertility and childbearing capacity, so the instinctual urgency to breed, reinforced by the myth of the biological clock contributes to this internal crisis. All of this coalesces into some amazing feats of rationalization hamster acrobatics.
I’d thought those thoughts once or twice, but it would never have occurred to me that I’d actually go ahead and voluntarily eject sex from my life. It took a bizarre serendipity, a torrid affair and a chance anecdote to make me realize that the kind of sex I was supposed to be cool with as a post-feminist, 21st-century Western woman — a casual sort of intimacy without intimacy — was not working for me.
Better late than never right? Unfortunately no. While I’m sure this realization will seem ennobling to the more moralistically predisposed mindset, what you see now is the expectation of a new appreciation for her insight which was prompted by her need, not a genuine introspective. It’s kind of ironic in that the Chastening Hephzibah is so proud of was prompted by her own necessity.
All right, in most circumstances it’s still just about required for life’s perpetuation, but we can lead perfectly healthy and, indeed, happy existences without nooky, whoopee or bonking. People can — and do — go decades without sex. Some live their entire lives without it.
Side Note: In Girl-World a woman can electively forego sex for an entire year and it’s recognized as a sacrifice worthy of writing a book to be published by a major print publisher, while the only way a man can be recognized for his 40 year celibacy is when he enters a fitness center and guns down 7 women in a pilates class. As I’ve stated before, when a woman tells you “I don’t understand why sex is sooooo important to guys“, she’s telling you the literal truth.
Elizabeth I was known as the Virgin Queen, and there was nothing metaphorical about the title, history assures us.
Robert Dudley and a long list of the Queen’s confirmed lovers disagree. What follows here is an attempt by Hephzibah’s rationalization engine to affirm what she’d like to think is her radical decision to go abstinent – plenty of luminaries from the past have gone without and lived perfectly fine lives. What she’s in denial about is the necessity of sex in a mature human experience. Sex is the glue that holds a relationship together; without sex a woman becomes a man’s mother, sister, daughter, aunt, friend, but not his lover, and certainly not his wife. Deemphasizing the importance of sex, actively desexualizing yourself in the hopes that it will make you more sexually arousing is an effort in self-defeat.
What follows here is yet another overwritten self-examination of a woman facing the Wall and attempting to reconcile a past of eschewing offers of genuine intimacy with (albeit probably beta) guys and her own hypergamous impulses during her 20’s. When a pre-Wall Anderson makes a conscious effort to remove sex from the equation in order to bring her more “clarity” about a man’s long term value what she’s doing is attempting to dissociate hypergamy from that process. In doing so she devalues the important sexual aspect of a relationship and turns off the men she’d probably fit well with because she believes that sex is the foil in her past failures, not herself, not her ego-investments, not the delusions the feminine imperative has saddled her with. Sex isn’t her problem, her innate hypergamy will eventually reveal this to her, but it’s how she’s been doing it and the late hour at which she’s come to her “new” epiphany with all of its urgency.
Hephzibah is easy pickings for the manosphere Men with a bent for shaming women about riding the Cock Carousel (she even alludes to this in the article). That’s a given, but it’s not the operative issue I’m on about here. What her story illustrates for us is the psychological machinations behind the reconciliation of her unfulfilled hypergamy and her need for future intimacy, security and provisioning.
For red pill, Game-aware Men, this is a supremely important stage in women’s maturation to consider. A woman in the Epiphany Phase is looking for a “fresh start” for a much more visceral reason than some newly inspired sense of self. This motivation prompts all kinds of behavioral and social conventions to facilitate a man’s commitment to forgiving her past indiscretions. As Roosh has pointed out more than once, it’s women in this phase of life (or the mothers of women in this phase) who most vocally complain about men’s lack of interest in committing to them. As Hephzibah is painfully aware of, women in their peak SMV years don’t complain about a dearth of marriageable men– “Man Up” is the anthem of women in the Epiphany Phase.
December 19th, 2012 at 11:56 pm
^ It’s a woman thing but a man shouldn’t worry about that. Men don’t owe women provision. They don’t owe them protection. They don’t owe them children. They don’t owe them families.
With how women get most college degrees and get paid the same while working less hours at less dangerous jobs, I’m astonished at how men still pay for everything. I get that not every man has the resolve to say no to the possibility of a quick one but seriously, this is pathetic.
There’s a time when a man has to say, “why is that when it comes to women, what’s theirs is theirs but what’s mine is *ours*?”
December 20th, 2012 at 12:12 am
Fascinating article Rollo. I’d say one of the greatest impacts that the Manosphere has had on my thinking is the way I view age. This is largely influenced by you, as I have previously written! 3rdmilleniummen.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/manosphere-female-age-and-sexual-market-value/
I used to think women at 30 were incredibly hot. Some still are, but more than ever I notice their wrinkles, white hairs etc… I’m sure they do too, which is part of what sends them into a tiz. Will be including this article in my next Manosphere examination of the subject!
December 20th, 2012 at 12:41 am
@ Infotroll
It’s pretty common for women to assume that feminism is about equality for women. After all that’s what THEY get out of it…equality at work, and special treatment from the government and blue pill men.
You complain about our anger without attempting to see the world from our point of view. For instance, what have you studied about how feminism treats men? As a man raised by a self-described feminist, I can tell you that the primary training is to be kind to women and listen to their stated needs at all times. This assumes women are rational at all times, which they aren’t. Imagine for a few minutes that you’re a guy…told throughout your life to pander to women out of love, so you go at it with all your heart. Women in high school reject you, so you blame your own social ineptitude. Women in college ignore you, so you focus on your study. Women out in the real world complain “where have all the good men gone?”, so you shout out, saying “I’m right here, see how much I care for you!”…then they recoil in horror, call you creepy for not having talked to them much, entitled for giving a care while asking for something in return, and rapist for being a man.
Now, can you see why a man in this position might not think feminism is the great accomplishment that you do? If you can put yourself in those shoes emotionally, you should be able to better dialogue with a man. If you can’t, you should cry to your orbiter-boy about why you got pumped and dumped for the 27th time, asking why the world is so unfair.
December 20th, 2012 at 12:49 am
deti: “According to the feminist narrative, this “niceguy” isn’t really a nice guy at all, but is a creepy, threatening, potential rapist/murderer who feels entitled to sex with her because he was “nice” and kind and deferential.”
Yes, but my question is how many of these men actually exist? They can’t be all that common.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:59 am
So it is 9:35 pm CST. My comment is incredibly far down the page both in number and actual page size, meaning the length of the average comment is quite long.
Obviously, this is a subject that strikes some nerve with men.
It seems that a lot of comments have kind of a “Hah, take that bitches!!! How ya doin’ now? Nah Nah Nannnh Nah Nannh Nah, Nobody wants to marry you. Back when we wanted you, you shit on us. But NOW da tablez iz turned baby. Ha!!”
Let me remind you of something. It’s not as bad as it might seem for women.
On Dalrack’s “Never Marrieds Piling Up” post, he told of the number of Never Marrieds dramatically increasing.
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/06/09/never-marrieds-piling-up/
And he had a subsequent adjunct post “More grim news for carousellers hoping to jump at the last minute.”
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/11/24/more-grim-news-for-carousellers-hoping-to-jump-at-the-last-minute/
Dalrock, at least I think, is the originator of the Cock Carousel meme.
His intended readership would be Christian men, even though it is actually much broader. But when I do comment there, I try to be respectful of his intended base of readers and not say “Fuck those cunts” quite as much as I might say say, for example, on Roissy. I generally thank him for the data and his perceptive eye for making novel and astute perceptions of patterns, and his conclusions from that data that often seems to fly in the face of what the Femcentric cultural narrative wishes us to accept and believe.
His meme strike a chord with his readership because, to me, Christianity is about
(1) 48.64% justifying that Christ existed, he really did, he really really really did, that he is the son of God, and here are testaments of his disciples that he did, and if you believe in him then you will receive the equivalent of “Cash and Prizes” ( a favorite term of Dalrock) upon your death, not 70 virgins, but, hey, something even better, because good Christian men are not obsessed with Sex because Sex is the work of the Devil. (OK, I admit I took literary license a little bit, but so fucking what. This is the internet and I can.) No, you get some nice wings and halo. And probably a nice cloud of your own to sleep on.
(2) 10.22% of it is about the hellfire and brimstone eternity of punishment you will receive if you do accept Christ as your lord and personal savior and if you actually break any of the rules of it, like say, beating off to porn, you perverted fuck. So while the reward is kind of vague, and certainly not any 70 virgins, this eternal damnation is fucked and so maybe heaven is kind of vague as to what it is, hell is definitely a very very fucked place that you don’t want any part of.
(3) 6.14% is about when Christ will come back and all the Christians that really believe will come flying out of their cars, rising up into the heavens, leaving those cars blocking traffic on the 405 and rest of us unbelieving fuckers will perish, especially the Jews, and those fucking Arabs, and Hindus, and also the Chinese, probably, the Mormons, but certainly the Arabs, those fuckers and their fucking Shariah law.
(4) And the rest is a whole bunch of rules that dictate and support the cultural suppression of male sexuality and of overall masculinity that is propagated and sustained for women by Christianity in order to maximize the scarcity model for the benefit of the biological imperative of women. Did you get that whole sentence? Long motherfucker, no?
ANNND a whole bunch of rules. For men.
Don’t touch it, don’t think about it. You are going blind if you beat off. Don’t look at women with lust in your eyes. Marry before sex. NO porn. No Hookers. At certain times, during the history of Christianity, sex was something should only be “done” in order for the “holy” and virtuous reason of impregnating the senora with a blessed replica of the baby Jesus whose mother was the Holy Virgin, impregnated by the real Alpha Buddha, God. Fuck Corey Worthington. God blows his ass away.
And now sex has become, in the modern female dominated MegaChurch, to become both the Carrot and the Stick to slap men around and keep them in line, prosperous, and devoted to gaining the material resources and displaying proper subservient attitude towards his Lord and Master here on earth, his earthly overseer, appointed by God, anointed as such by the Holy Sacrament of Marriage.
And these rules provide the moral background and basis for the whole enchilada of Male Shaming.
So when the Church backed down and bowed, meaning God bowed, to the true power on earth, FemCentrism, and employed numerous numerous Relativistic rationalizations on behalf of the major stakeholder in the power structure of modern society, yet maintained the justification for control and suppression of male sexuality, it pissed those men the fuck off.
They were supposed to wait, if they were good Christians, to keep that dick in their pants. There was no backing on the dictates that the bible had about men and what was expected on men.
Yet princess could do the entire Atlanta Falcons on Saturday in the club, show back up at a MegaChurch when she turned 30, become a Born Again Virgin, and Praise Jesus, Hallelujah, the Glory of God is once again shown in his majesty. She is completely accepted and the message is tailored to glory her and Shame Shame Shame those that would be the First to Throw Stones. Especially “those men”
So Dalrock slapped the shit out of them with the meme about the Cock Carousel. To me, it is single most damning meme in the whole Manosphere.
So then the rest of the Manosphere jumped all over Dalrock theme with their own version of Nah Nah Nahhn Nah Nahhn Nah.
I think the biggest source of resentment from the rest of the men is idea that after sucking alpha cock, taking it the ass in exotic locations and places, after, as Mentu put it, burning gallons of Slut Fuel to remain in Alpha orbit, then they become Born Again Virgins, slap some poor Beta around, get state sanction, have the kid, then eject the beta with the cheers and acceptance of all other women, keeping Cash and Prizes using state sanction, and then return to Alpha orbit, albeit a lower orbit on reduced quantities of slut fuel.
So it’s the divorce that pisses of the men rather than the actual slutting.
I don’t think we really resent the slutting behavior, I think we are pissed off about the suckering the beta and then divorcing him.
So now we are all jumping up and down on the couch and boy, we are having fun now aren’t we? Ding Dong the bitch is dead, the bitch is dead.
Yeah well, look real fucking close at the Dalrock data. That bitch is nowhere near dead.
Even though the numbers of Never Marrieds are growing, if you actually peepeye at the data, like that category 35-40 and look at those Never Married, white women, 35-40, the ones that “kinda” need to pull into the Last Chance Texaco and Gas ‘er Up, it has really only increased by 4% in the last 10 years.
That’s not quite the devastating blow to the Female Imperative that we all are jumping for joy over.
And I would say a bunch of that 4% are saying “Fuck those men. I can’t see any financial reason to marry any of those losers.”
And the quite visible “Uglification” of America is proceeding post haste.
While women love love love to say “40 is the new 20″, I think it is far more true to say “A not fat 4 is the new 6″. Any HB 5 or above pretty much names her ticket, even after she has supposedly “hit the wall”.
So I think the other members of that bunch of 35-40 “Never Marrieds” could receive a new data category in US Census data “Two baggers that no one wants to marry” or “Walmart Electric Shopping Cart users” that are too fat to even walk around the store to buy more food to get fatter.
I realize that Dalrock consistently says that one 10 year cohort should not be used to judge what a younger cohort will do or experience. The social trends tend to be more manifested in the younger cohorts. So, yes the thing that we all jump and down about could happen to the 25-30 and 30-35 cohorts, that they become 45-50 never marrieds.
But the numbers today say, those bitches, those white bitches that are generally the greatest object of our ire, will most likely get that man.
Even a Plain Jane 5 will slap around some fairly attractive physical 6/economic 7 man, inject him with some Vitamin P, dull his judgement, dress him up in a Tux while he is under the stupor of the regular dose of Vitamin P, and shotgun his ass into “I do” slavery. And 7 years later as he is sitting out in the Man Cave and suffering from Vitamin P withdrawl, he will say “I can’t believe ‘I did'”.
The great “bubble” of unmarrieds is occuring among Black women and to a slighty lesser degree, Hispanic women and for now, is no great reason for your level of celebration.
And also in evaluating US Census that is exactly where the great celebrated increase in number of female graduates are occurring.
The discrepancy between White Males and White Females at the bachelor degree level is not large, 4%. The discrepancy between White Males and White Females getting a Masters Degree is larger. But the Majority of STEM degrees, 90%, that offer little incentive to continue towards a Masters Degree are earned by Men. And Dalrock had a Monday post showing that the income for men in all age groups was slightly leading women in the same age group.
So the explanation in the data is that minority women are not finding suitably employed males to meet their hypergamistic requirements due to their higher level of educational attainment. Some white women might be snobs and say only “Master degree or Above” for me. But for most, the bachelors degree will do. It is the job title that is everything and size matters, the size of the paycheck.
Now, I think this post by Rollo is valuable in illuminating to Red Pull men a celebrated and recurrent female meme, Born Again Virgin, basically pulling back the curtain, on the rationalization behind it.
But I also think it is another high mind version of us high minded Rational Male readers, who one comment said “probably have an IQ greater than 125, and many over 140″, just piling on with our own high minded version of some Chateau Heartiste Neo-Nazi saying “Yeah, fuck those cock carousel riding sluts”.
It could also be claimed to be a part of the maturation process of a modern woman where she realizes that it is time to “leave childish things” behind and to actually do what many of us piss and moan about. That they stop valuing men on non-intrinsic reasons and look at the whole man. Keep in mind, we constantly note the affect that alpha men have on women in a visceral sense. So if the woman says take sex out of the equation to make a more proper judgement, there is as much validity to that claim as the “Hamster” realizing declining SMV and saying “Yeah, Yeah, that’s the ticket. We are now abstaining from men that no longer want us because we are accessing our future and gaining true insight on the really valuable offerings of men other than cock size”
Many men do the same thing, starting at 30, to re-evaluate previous patterns of behavior. For some, it will occur again when their own SMV makes past behavior no longer workable.
Mine occurred at Bahama Mama’s in southwest Houston on a Sunday night in July when I was 36 and when the only woman in the place that seemed to notice me was a veteran Cock Carouseller that was doing about the best burnt out Stevie Nicks impersonation I have ever seen.
I proceeded post haste to shut down my life, head to Colorado and father Vail and Caleb, and making my own contribution to the Dot Com revolution. I began my descent into beta husbandhood, armed with the conviction that I was “doing the right thing” by not dating girls like Roseanne the stripper anymore.
Shit I regretted that choice later in life. Roseanne could fucking rock. Actually, the night before heading to Colorado and I had a date set up with her and she flaked. I wonder where life would have taken me had she showed up. But that was my male version of declining SMV getting shit on by alpha women that I previously had easy access. But in defense of Roxanne. I had fucked her around first, so I actually deserved the flaking that I received.
Now, if Game had been around then, and I had known how to do more than just dress up pretty and lean against the bar and wait for girls to come and say “You know you look just like David Bowie”, then I might not have been so quick to rush into a marriage with the same desperation as any 33 year old Carouseller.
And if I knew the reality of the odds of the choice I was making, then I never would have done it.
So let me state her and now, for the record, that I, Mark Minter, am against Slut Shaming.
And, I, Mark Minter am for sluts.
And I will stand in defense of sluts. I happen to be very fond of sluts.
I like sluts so more than I like virtuous chaste virgins. I despise virgins and church women. Sluts don’t make me jump through stupid hoops to get what I want from them. Sluts don’t have horseshit Male Shaming of the true nature of men to hide a power grab from men those things that women really wish from men, money and support cloaked under “commitment”.
So I will continue to be the White Knight in the manosphere to defend and protect a slut’s right to slut.
Because in the end marriage only exists as a means to force men into slavery by withholding sex unless he agrees to marriage. It might have changed into a modern definition of “Regular access to sex”. But it still implies a trade of sex for the surplus labor of men.
So we should celebrate sluts in the Manosphere, we should lift them up on our shoulders and sing “For she’s a jolly good fellow”.
Yes, we should hold the slut as the model to which all women should aspire.
And we should make her the Goddess of Liberty.
Because that is what she is. If 100% of the women were sluts then 0% of the men would marry.
And we should change last line of the Star Spangled Banner
“O’er The land of the free, And the home of the sluts”
December 20th, 2012 at 2:07 am
>100 in <24hrs = hitting a nerve
December 20th, 2012 at 4:52 am
“and who knows? Maybe you’ll get lucky in the end.”
Oh PLEASE can I split up my assets even further with some bitch that didn’t earn it and doesn’t respect me in the least for the effort that went into it. Cuz, ya know, losing 2/3 wasn’t enough the first time.
I’M FEELING LUCKY.
December 20th, 2012 at 4:54 am
>100 in <24hrs = TROLL
Fixed it for you.
December 20th, 2012 at 4:55 am
Oh I thought you were talking about whatsherface, not the post. Mybad.
December 20th, 2012 at 6:04 am
The shaming of the aware man continues – http://jezebel.com/5969902/dear-dudes-here-are-five-reasons-why-you-dont-need-a-dating-coach?utm_source=gawker.com&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=recirculation
December 20th, 2012 at 6:39 am
The flowchart on the Gawker article is hilarious.
Are women obligated to do anything? Yes? Then you are not a nice guy.
December 20th, 2012 at 6:45 am
she couldn’t take my call because he dad was yelling at her about “what she was going to do with her life.”
From Wikipedia:
After Lauper’s parents divorced, her mother remarried, divorced again, and went to work as a waitress.
Hm, any wonder why she sang songs like the above?
That said…
Lauper has been married to David Thornton since 1991. They have one son, Declyn Wallace Thornton (b. 1997).[36] Lauper was raised Roman Catholic and attended Catholic school. She refers to herself as a “Recovering Catholic”.
December 20th, 2012 at 6:46 am
@johnJohnz
Hah that jezzie bitch is complaining about dating coaching when no dating coach would have a client talk to her. Ever. Unless she’s a warmup set.
http://pic.twitter.com/knGxGfDx
December 20th, 2012 at 7:07 am
There’s a time when a man has to say, “why is that when it comes to women, what’s theirs is theirs but what’s mine is *ours*?”
The answer…solipsism.
In reality it’s more like what’s hers is hers and whats mine is hers too.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:11 am
I like your analysis of her narrative being projection, and your terse mirroring seems a skillful way to handle it. Barely any feedback, just letting her stew in her own juices without trying to fix her, but at the same time not letting her walk all over you with her neurosis, you maintained your boundaries with “I employed “Outraged sensibility game”: ie: You are judgemental, entitled, what do you have to offer? etc etc?”
It’s an interesting paradox. When we become more selfish and dominant, we can actually care more.
I’m hoping to see that the manosphere starts to realize that dealing with women is very similar to what the Dog Whisperer advocates: greater meaning and bonding through leading. When the woman submits, the man can be more affectionate.
Men blaming women for being ferile was a fun past time, but was also adolescent. There comes a time when you truly man up, and learn how to make women submit. So that there can be genuine intimacy.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:40 am
“With more then half of all college/uni degrees going to the modern woman, and their ability to scale the highest peaks in business, why would they br needing security and provisioning?”
Why take some if you can have it all? They’re basically maximizing profit.
Moreover, it would be a real big mistake equating women’s rapid rise through the college and business ranks with intelligence, like the media in the anglosphere likes to do. College and grad school have evolved into a ‘repeat-after-me’ game, in which even those as dumb as a rock can’t fail. It’s poisonous to creativity and to that ‘rebellous’ way of thinking which characterizes the brightest. Credentialism in the 21st century is flawed and void.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:45 am
“With more then half of all college/uni degrees going to the modern woman, and their ability to scale the highest peaks in business, why would they br needing security and provisioning?”
Why take some if you can have it all? They’re basically maximizing profit.
Moreover, it would be a real big mistake equating women’s rapid rise through the college and business ranks with intelligence, like the media in the anglosphere likes to do. College and grad school have evolved into a ‘repeat-after-me’ game, in which even those as dumb as a rock can’t fail. It’s poisonous to creativity and to that ‘rebellous’ way of thinking which characterizes the brightest. Credentialism in the 21st century is flawed and void.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:58 am
Yeah most college degrees amount to toliet paper.
Especially if the subjects math or science (not counting political) ever enter into the equation.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:59 am
*never
December 20th, 2012 at 9:40 am
@johnJohnz @Lumpy
I have just responded in a comment in depth to that Jezebel article. Looking forward to the responses!!!
December 20th, 2012 at 10:14 am
@DeNihilist,
You’re defining security and provisioning in too narrow a scope. Masculine dominance is a form of security, emotional connection is a form of security, there’s far more to security for a woman than just financial security. This is exactly why they find themselves thwarting their own hypergamy when they base their estimations of a man’s value solely in comparison to her capacity to provide for herself.
Women love to say they don’t need a men anymore, yet even on Jezebel you’ll read article after snarky article on how men “should’ be in order to please them. There must be some need, some security men uniquely provide for women ‘who don’t need them’ otherwise they’d be indifferent to molding men into their misguided ideals.
December 20th, 2012 at 10:27 am
I’m noticing that the Manosphere seems to be getting a lot of attention from the femweb lately. We must be starting to hit a nerve.
December 20th, 2012 at 10:38 am
“There must be some need, some security men uniquely provide for women ‘who don’t need them’ otherwise they’d be indifferent to molding men into their misguided ideals.”
Precisely.
Power is a useless notion if there isn’t someone or some group to dominate and acknowledges that power. Women, especially those ‘high-powered’ career ones, can’t stand living without others acknowledging what they have. It’s the classic ‘look-at-me’ frame of mind. They can rise to the top in the corporate world, they can amass a laundy list of credentials…it’s all useless to them without the in- and outgroup validation.
December 20th, 2012 at 10:42 am
“There must be some need, some security men uniquely provide for women ‘who don’t need them’ otherwise they’d be indifferent to molding men into their misguided ideals.”
Women’s need is for the things she doesn’t possess.
Much like men’s prime derivative need for women is access to their uterus, women’s prime need in men is their strength (physically, emotionally, morally) and drive.
December 20th, 2012 at 11:02 am
@Martel
I’m noticing this too. Apparently Gawker is warming up a hit piece about AVfM:
http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/154pqj/gawker_is_apparently_doing_an_article_on_the/
I don’t necessarily co-sign anything over at AVfM, but Gawker is barking up the wrong tree (not that their readership will care).
edit—–
Wow. Was anyone aware of this?
http://equalitycanada.com/cafe-response-warren-farrell/
December 20th, 2012 at 11:05 am
Rollo-
It’s FFY. Just gonna drop this here for your enjoyment-
http://niceguysofokc.tumblr.com/
December 20th, 2012 at 11:18 am
In one of the Gawker photos Rollo just posted, they cite the following exchange as evidence of not being nice:
Do you believe you have the right to forbid your significant other anything? Yes.
So, forbiddiing her ANYTHING is evidence you’re an asshole? The keys to my car? Blaring death metal at 4 AM when I have to go to work the next day? A night with that guy she thinks is cute in sales?
And for those still doubting the connection between the matrix and politics:
(emphasis mine) “So the notion that more Americans quote unquote in the words of Governor Perry, ‘packing heat’ will make us safer is not founded in reality, in facts or in history,” Himes said bitterly during a press conference. “It is founded in the fantasy of TESTOSTERONE LADEN INDIVIDUALS who have blood on their hands for articulating that idea.”
December 20th, 2012 at 11:19 am
Nate posted the Gawker thing I refer to.
December 20th, 2012 at 11:22 am
And, I forgot my link. Brain no work this morn.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/connecticut-congressman-rick-perry-a-testosterone-laden-individual-with-blood-on-his-hands/article/2516503
December 20th, 2012 at 11:27 am
Related to the above Gawker post about “nice guys” on OKCupid: there is now an entire Tumblr blog devoted to this: http://niceguysofokc.tumblr.com/
December 20th, 2012 at 11:32 am
How is this not cyberbullying? They’re essentially doxxing these guys. Expect an uptick in mass murder suicides from these nice guys.
December 20th, 2012 at 11:33 am
@Martel
Yeah the guy running the site is a retard and his “gotchas” are lame as fuck.
I think the better lesson is learned from seeing these piles of profiles by dudes thinking that they are entitled to something by being nice. And entitled is exactly the correct word. Boo hoo I acted nice but no girls liked it so I’m not going to be nice anymore!
Can you blame girls for thinking this is creepy? If that doesn’t look like a facade than I don’t know what is a facade. To them, these guys are only being nice to get a girl, and to chicks that’s creepy as fuck. It’s disingenuous. It reeks of ulterior motives, and chicks are nothing if not incredibly good at sniffing out ulterior motives.
This is why men who are successful with women are open with their needs, wants, and sexuality. “Nice guys” play hide the penis, thinking that it will win them points, not realizing that women want men who own their sexuality.
December 20th, 2012 at 11:48 am
@Nate: I agree with your assessment regarding the specific guys in question, and with the probably majority of “nice guys.”
But not always. Sometimes my niceness was a strategy, but sometimes also I was genuinely trying to do the right thing. If I heard “I need time because I’m going through a rough breakup”, that made sense to me. I didn’t want to make her uncomfortable or pressure her during a rough time, so I did what I though was right. I figured that being nice should get me the girl, but if it didn’t, I still followed my conscience.
Of course, she’d end up banging some other dude. It bugged me, but I just figured that she was too immature or whatever to see what a great guy I was. Her loss (but when it’s “her loss” time after time after time, guess who’s loss it really is?)
One thing Rollo mentioned in his “Promise Keepers” post that I don’t think got enough attention was something along the lines of how real tangible women often seem unworthy to feminized males. They’re all like that, but they shouldn’t be, so it’s THEIR problem that they won’t climb up onto my pedastal
But we live in the real world with real women and real hypergamy. Pretty lies are still lies and they get you nowhere.
December 20th, 2012 at 11:50 am
All this talk about nice guys and shit… All you nice guys this is the perfect cure-
http://boldanddetermined.com/2011/11/18/the-only-piece-of-advice-you-will-ever-need-to-pick-up-and-attract-women-and-keep-them-vying-for-your-love-attention-and-affection/
December 20th, 2012 at 12:19 pm
I’m sorry, but when I see the pics of the women writing these articles on jizabell and related sites I cant take them serious because of their looks alone. A woman writes an article slamming pick up likely because she’s never been cold approached in her life, it bothers her.
December 20th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
Nice guys…to women your personality is made up and the points don’t matter.
December 20th, 2012 at 12:27 pm
Roissy tweeted this article on how shootings are the result of men being socialized into valuing violent behavior:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/living/men-guns-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
December 20th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
@ Nate Thing is these guys didn’t become nice guys out of thin air, society encourages them to become nice guys. Its a battle of what they’re being told vs. what they see. Looking at the tumblr page pretty much confirms womans definition of nice guys: men who do whatever I want them to do and don’t complain about it.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:23 pm
Wow. Was anyone aware of this?
http://equalitycanada.com/cafe-response-warren-farrell/
These kids look and sound like the G20 protestors that lit up Toronto a few years ago.
They’re provoctivists (I think I just made that up).
Their MO is to instigate confrontations under the guise of standing up for the poor downtrodden, hoping to incite an imperfect response from the system, so they can further attack in a public forum with howling indignation. Essentially, anarchists posing as activists. Brats.
The women’s rights/anti-patriarchy movements are part of a greater superstructure of anti-establishment sentiment.
These misguided youth have grown up in one of the most bent-over-backwards, egalitarian, accepting, permissive, inclusive atmospheres ever to exist, yet somehow imagine they, and those they profess to argue for, are trampled upon by the “evil system”.
They simply could not exist without the current plenty and bounty afforded by such a system. Created and maintained mostly by men, of course. They enjoy and take for granted so much from it (clean water, food, heat, electricity, safety), but they’d never admit it. Their world view is luxurious, decadent, and dangerous.
I think deep down, they know they’ve never worked hard for a thing in their lives. They haven’t earned their comfort, so they repress tremendous guilt and self-loathing.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:25 pm
“Roissy tweeted this article on how shootings are the result of men being socialized into valuing violent behavior:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/living/men-guns-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_c1”
I did the Picard double facepalm after reading that article.
Some ‘distinguished’ sociology professor blaming outbursts of violence on the sole act of being male… and white. Are they really that short-sighted in those ivory towers?
December 20th, 2012 at 1:35 pm
@nate
lots of good shit on that bold and determined site.
http://boldanddetermined.com/2012/07/17/how-to-be-a-leader/
replace ‘dog’ with ‘girl’. perfect.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
@itsme: Which explains why single motherhood is such a bad idea.
Imagine being raised by a dog…
December 20th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
@nate
I never saw being selfish in that way. With your fellow man being selfish is a bad trait…with a woman it brings out her good traits.
Being the good kind of selfish establishes boundaries.
December 20th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
@walawala
Your scenario sounds all too familiar. It sounds to me like you didn’t really like her too much either way. If you did, perhaps you would have employed at least some semblance of empathy, or turned her blame-game-projection into a lulz and left it at that. Like redirected her “sadness” into “at least we fucked like French artists having an affair” or “now that he’s out of the picture you don’t have to feel bad about us” or “do I need to get checked for STD’s?”…however you’d be both positive & aloof instead of pulling dread so soon after she clearly fell prey to your predatory game skillz. Emphasis on using “us” or “we”. Then again, I am just rambling.
And that’s beyond the point. The point is she was exhibiting primary traits of female nature that Game makes men aware of & encourages some to exploit or use to their advantage – as harm prevention, or pleasure promotion. Is it exploitation if the actions are involving the free will of two individuals, even though you had the upper hand with Game?
Can I ask, did it hurt you emotionally at all when you found out she was fucking her ex and you simultaneously? Or had you invested so little that it was simply a tiny pang of disappointment akin to “another bish’s a sloot, whatever”?
December 20th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
I guess our life lessons inform our point of view. My wife is very strong emotionally and independant. One of the main reasons I was attracted to her. So for me to think about a woman needing security and provisoning, it is hard to grasp. I will just have to take accept your experiences/knowledge for it, and accept my bafflement.
December 20th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Rollo, every day I check your site for updates because this place has given me new life and at one point, brought me out of depression. Today’s topic describes exactly what I am going thru with one particular woman that has been in my life since I was 13 years old. She will be 34 in February. Everyone around me told me she would be going insane shortly and that her ways would catch up to her unmarried, entitled ,pilates instructing, “you’re not “___” enough”, narcissistic ass .. so I wait. Patiently, with a grin on my face.
Thank you once again. One of these days I have to buy you a beer my friend.
December 20th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
@michaeltx
Don’t revel in a certain woman’s decent into walldom. The better coarse of action is to cut ties with her if possible or at least cut the emotional coard that she still has you trapped in which will mindfuck you. This woman has done enough damage why make it greater?
“Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned.”
December 21st, 2012 at 9:13 am
Not gone through the comms. yet, so if nobody else has, I’ll coyly and titteringly suggest that “InfoMatron” may be the entity “Info” already given a citation for trolling on Price’s site. Failed miserably there, too. Why can’t you guys get quality trolls anymore? This one’s not as dumb and incoherent as Hopeless Raghead, I admit. So less amusing.
December 21st, 2012 at 9:35 am
@Lazarus: that Gawker hack-piece is true comedy gold. More mirth from the Lindy
“They treat a woman’s brain like it’s just her vagina’s doorman”
Hey Rollo, sounds almost like she’s getting half a clue about the female mind. Wassup? Although not the whole brain, obviously. Just the bits in the middle near the neckhole. Everything else is cut right out of the decision loop.
December 21st, 2012 at 9:40 am
Urgh, now she’s creeping me out
“And it’s hard for us to get boners for you when we are busy feeling sad.” Boners? From a chick?? Jesus.
December 21st, 2012 at 5:44 pm
I’m not sure how many anime fans out there, but I think this particular episode of Golgo 13 sums up alot of what this site has to say.
December 22nd, 2012 at 1:22 am
In the video she states “It brought into focus how much pressure we are under, I THINK PARCTULARLY AS WOMEN, TO SEPARATE SEX FROM LOVE.”
Very interesting projection of her own experience of dating in her 20s. Sucks for chumps like me, who actually would prefer to have the hottest sex with a woman I love and not a one-nighter.
December 22nd, 2012 at 1:23 am
Particularly. Embarrassing typo.
December 22nd, 2012 at 6:22 am
It’s not a rational yearning for security and provisioning, it’s instinctual. Besides which, college and the workplace are just meat markets for them to find Mr Beta and never work again, or go on never-ending maternity leave.
Those who are successful “career women” are generally the most masculine in traits and behaviour, so they care less about their familial instincts and are more obsessed with the male world.
December 23rd, 2012 at 1:43 pm
@JohnJohnz
“The shaming of the aware man continues – http://jezebel.com/5969902/dear-dudes-here-are-five-reasons-why-you-dont-need-a-dating-coach?utm_source=gawker.com&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=recirculation”
Thank you for posting. Personally, this is most explicitly gaming off pua’s that I have EVER seen. Can anyone come up with a more blatant example in pop culture?
I dunno fellas, the hating seems to be hitting epic proportions lately. Or is it just me? It was interesting to see Roosh post recently that he thinks 2013 will be the year the manosphere hits the mainstream…we shall see.
December 26th, 2012 at 1:03 am
[…] marry a women in her late-20s. Related: Bad news for post-marital […]
January 19th, 2013 at 5:30 pm
Do all women hit “The Wall” at the same age (30)?
Please enlighten me
July 11th, 2013 at 11:57 am
@Nate, you wrote: “‘Nice guys’ play hide the penis, thinking that it will win them points, not realizing that women want men who own their sexuality.”
So true.
February 23rd, 2014 at 10:54 pm
[…] cash out of the SMP with a provider, but again, I’m not entirely convinced that women in the Epiphany Phase of life are reserving these tells exclusively for Beta […]
March 26th, 2014 at 10:42 pm
[…] written extensively on these phases so please have a read of my prior posts The Epiphany Phase, Time’s Up and Cashing Out for a more in-depth understanding of what to expect from women […]
April 13th, 2014 at 7:52 pm
[…] she enters the Developmental stage. This is when the security a woman was so incensed to in her Epiphany Phase becomes a burden, but still a necessity of her life. Unless a man has reinvented himself and […]
May 20th, 2014 at 11:57 pm
[…] Nothing upsets the feminine-primary balance of sexual selectivity and betrays the secret mechanics of women’s need to optimize hypergamy than having a man overtly expose the transactional side of women’s sexual strategy. The side that puts him into a friend zone purgatory for being a ‘tryer’ when it comes to sex, but her need for his trying hasn’t reached a critical point. […]
August 14th, 2014 at 12:19 am
[…] hindsight I know she was leaning into her Epiphany Phase (maybe a bit early) and was trying to do things “the right way” after getting after it […]
September 1st, 2014 at 11:32 pm
[…] not until after a woman’s Epiphany Phase at around the time she becomes aware of her SMV decline that she begins to consider making that […]
September 23rd, 2014 at 1:00 am
[…] they want performed in their Party Years will be different than the ones they want after their Epiphany Phase, which may be different than the character they want for their mid-life […]
November 4th, 2014 at 11:55 pm
[…] you describe being attracted to you (different than being aroused by you) are entering what I call The Epiphany Phase – the point at which their sexual market value begins to decay in earnest while a man’s […]
November 7th, 2014 at 7:17 pm
[…] conflict; on one hand the urgency of consolidating on a long term prospect leads her to the Epiphany Phase rationalizations for wanting to do things ‘the right way’ with the Beta provider, but […]
November 11th, 2014 at 7:19 pm
[…] women approach the Epiphany Phase (later the Wall) and realize the decay of their SMV (in comparison to younger women), they become […]
November 20th, 2014 at 12:00 am
[…] attraction start to take precedence. This switch roughly coincides with a woman’s Epiphany phase- the point when her SMV starts to drop enough that both she and the men around her notice it, […]
December 1st, 2014 at 11:21 pm
[…] amount of time to sort out her hypergamous options. It’s no coincidence that women’s Epiphany Phase is concurrent with the latter stages of her fertility window (27-32 y.o.) – the social […]
December 17th, 2014 at 10:55 pm
[…] Alpha Fucks during a woman’s prime fertility window in her peak SMV years, and her post Epiphany Phase necessity to retain a comforting (but decidedly less sexually exciting) Beta […]
January 18th, 2015 at 11:08 pm
[…] a woman approaches and enters into her Epiphany Phase, she has a limbic understanding that her genetic chips need to be cashed in with a man who has […]
January 21st, 2015 at 2:05 pm
[…] that I have going for me, in combination with the former oneitis being a single mother and in the Epiphany Phase (I gave it another read this morning), are a perfect mixture of characteristics and situations that […]
February 2nd, 2015 at 5:37 pm
[…] and pined to be intimate with for so long finally “comes to her senses” around her Epiphany Phase and accepts him. For men with this AMOG mental impression, that woman’s acceptance comes with […]
February 6th, 2015 at 3:09 pm
[…] lot of Blue Pill men feel a sense of vindication for the Epiphany Phase “success” they finally get with women once their long-term usefulness to women finally […]
March 24th, 2015 at 10:44 am
what about the women who have always thought it was best to learn from alphas and never under any circumstances fuck them? alpha, beta, it only matters to women who cant control their emotions and keep their feet firmly planted in reality.
March 24th, 2015 at 7:54 pm
[…] of the primary disconnects women are conditioned to believe during their Epiphany Phase is that a “good man” will be willing to forgive and forget her past indiscretions. On […]
March 27th, 2015 at 11:49 pm
My wife hit this Epiphany Stage at age 30 as best I can tell and filed for frivorce a month after our 10th wedding anniversary. She was 21 when we were married and she was a virgin. She proceeded to ride the CC for the first time and she was post-wall. Needless to say she isn’t landing quality men and they don’t commit.
I am very Sigma and we had a whirlwind romance and courtship. I was her Chad Thundercock. As the marriage progressed I became more and more beta, failing shit tests all along the way. I had no idea about TRP. As a Sigma I am at the peak of my game at age 36 as my ex-wife’s life keeps getting worse and worse. She even admits it to me.
I am curious to see what she does over the next two years as she approaches age 35 and even 40 and most likely has another epiphany. Part of me thinks she may act like a Sigma-widow of sorts. Misses me but despises me at the same time. Her hamster is probably the busiest its ever been because she is so close to going from the wall to the cliff. She is very beautiful still and that has afforded her some extra denial.
I have never really come across much information about women who never ride the CC in their 20’s but do as a frivorcee in their 30’s. I feel bad for her. I feel bad for my kids. I really thought I found a unicorn and fought TRP for at least two years. But AWALT. Any thoughts you folks have would be great.