Don’t wait for the good woman. She doesn’t exist. There are women who can make you feel more with their bodies and their souls but these are the exact women who will turn the knife into you right in front of the crowd. Of course, I expect this, but the knife still cuts. The female loves to play man against man, and if she is in a position to do it there is not one who will resist. The male, for all his bravado and exploration, is the loyal one, the one who generally feels love. The female is skilled at betrayal and torture and damnation. Never envy a man his lady. Behind it all lies a living hell. – Charles Bukowski
For my more optimistic readers, you’ll be happy to know I don’t entirely agree with Mr. Bukowski’s sentiment here, however Charles gives us a great introduction to the next progressions of intersexual hierarchies. While I’m not sure every woman is as skilled as the next in betrayal, torture and damnation as Charles’ waxes poetic about, I do believe that his understanding of the male nature is not only accurate, but that male nature is actually the source of his equating women with betrayal, torture and damnation. It’s not that women are inherently evil, it’s that men’s idealism make them so available to being betrayed, tortured and damned.
If you’re at all familiar with Charles Bukowski, you’ll know he was one of the last true son’s of bitches – the unapologetic epitome of gloriously arrogant self-concern and masculine independence. For what he lacked in polish he made up for in talent and a brutal honesty that could never be acknowledged in the fem-centrism of today. In the mid 60’s he was a feral, instinctually red pill Man.
Charles, for all his musing on women, knew that it was the male nature that facilitated women’s damaging of men. The feminists of his generation and today simply dismiss him as a relic of a misogynist era, but his real insight was about men’s inner workings.
“The male, for all his bravado and exploration, is the loyal one, the one who generally feels love.” I’d like to believe that Bukowski was ahead of his time with this, however I think it’s more accurate to presume that, due to a constant feminine-primary socialization, men have been conditioned to interpret love under feminine pretexts, rather than acknowledging men and women approach love from different concepts.
In light of these differing, often conflicting, concepts of male-idealistic and female-opportunistic love, it’s easy to see how a man might find women duplicitous, torturous and damnable – particularly when his feminine ‘sensitivity training’ predisposes him to believe women share the same love idealism he’s been encouraged to believe.
The Feminine Primary Model
The Feminine Primary model of love is the idealistic fantasy the vast majority of men have been conditioned to presume is a universal model of love. In this fantasy a woman reciprocates that same idealism he has about how she should feel about him based on his concept of love. That love eventually has to (potentially) include children, but the fantasy begins for him with a woman’s concept of love agreeing with his own love-for-love’s-sake approach, rather than the performance-based, opportunistic approach women require of men in order to love them.
The best illustration I can apply to this model is found in the very tough lessons taught in the movie Blue Valentine. You can read the synopsis, but the plot of this film graphically outlines the conflict that occurs when a man conflates his idealism of the feminine primary model of love with women’s opportunistic model of love. That idealism is exacerbated by a feminine-primary conditioning since early childhood which prepares him to expect girls and women will share in it.
When you look at this model objectively you can’t help but see the Disney-esque, blue pill promise of a mutually reciprocated love. Men being the true romantics predispose themselves to wanting to believe this model is really the only acceptable model. The dispelling of the fantasy this model represents is one of the most difficult aspects of coming to terms with red pill awareness – in fact one of the primary reasons men become hostile to the red pill is an inability to imagine any other possible model.
Most men’s dispelling of this fantasy comes after he’s reached the ‘happily ever after’ part of this schema and he realizes the conditionality his wife places on her terms for loving him. He comes to the realization that women’s love model is based upon what he is before who he is.
While there is a definitive conditionality placed on her love, men don’t necessarily expect an unconditional love. It’s usually at this stage that men are conveniently expected (or expect themselves) to ‘Man Up’ and earn a woman’s mutually reciprocated love by adopting the male responsibility aspects of the first, conventional model. As Gustavo describes, “a man provides” and for all of his previous equalist conditioning that made him believe a woman would “love him as he loves her” he blames his inability to achieve that idealistic love on himself for not living up to being a “man” deserving of the feminine primary model of ideal love.
What he’s really done is convinced himself into accepting a woman’s opportunistic model while retaining the idealism he’s been conditioned never to reject – thereby leaving her blameless in her own concept of love.
It’s hard to consider this model without presuming a woman’s manipulative intent of a man, but let me state emphatically that, for the better part, I believe most women simply aren’t specifically aware of the mechanics behind this intersexual hierarchy model. Through any number of ways women are socialized to presume that their feminine-primary position implies that men should necessarily take the life and maturity steps needed to fulfill women’s opportunistic approach over the course of their lifetime.
We like to bemoan this as feminine entitlement, and yes it can get, and is getting abusively out of hand, but this entitlement and expectation originates in women’s opportunistic approach towards love.
Men are the “romantics pretending to be realists” and women; vice versa.
The Subdominant Model
Lastly we come to male subdominant model wherein a man, by conditioning and circumstance, expects love from a woman as he would from a mothering dynamic. Often this situation seems to result from an overly enthusiastic belief in absolute gender equality and parallelism, but the underlying motivation is really an abdication of masculinity and, by association, abdication of conventional masculine responsibility. There simply is no presumption of masculine ‘headship’ prior to, or into a long term relationship.
I outline the origins of this hierarchy model in Pre-Whipped:
These are the men I call pre-whipped; men so thoroughly conditioned, men who’ve so internalized that conditioning, that they mentally prepare themselves for total surrender to the Feminine Imperative, that they already make the perfect Beta provider before they even meet the woman for whom they’ll make their sacrifice.
The social undercurrent of an ideal gender equalism plays an active role in creating these men, and specifically this hierarchical model. Unfortunately the social and / or personal illusion of control this model is idealistically based on is usually overshadowed by the male-dominant / female-submissive expectations of the more naturally fluid conventional love model.
These are the ‘house husband’ arrangements, and the ‘gender is a social construct’ relationships. While the hope is one of a realized egalitarian equalism within the relationship, the psychological struggle eventually becomes one of dominant and submissive gender expectations in the pairing.
From Master and Servant:
In an era when Hypergamy has been given free reign, it is no longer men’s provisioning that dictates her predisposition to want to be a submissive partner in their relationships. To an increasingly larger degree women no longer depend upon men for the provisioning, security and emotional support that used to insure against their innate Hypergamous impulses. What’s left is a society of women using the satisfaction of Hypergamy as their only benchmark for relational gratification.
Men with the (Alpha) capacity to meet the raw, feral, demands of women’s Hypergamy are increasingly rare, and thanks to the incessant progress of feminization are being further pushed to marginalization. The demand for Men who meet women’s increasingly over-estimated sense of Hypergamic worth makes the men women could submit to a precious commodity, and increases further stress the modern sexual market place.
For all of the mental and social awareness necessitated by this equalist fantasy, men subscribing to this model inevitably fall into a submissive (conventionally feminine) role. As the red pill gods would have it Heartiste had a timely post outlining all of the logistical failing of this arrangement today, but underneath all of the trappings that make this model seem imbalanced is the reversal of conventional roles which place women into the love flow state men are better suited for since their approach to love originates from idealism (and not a small amount of martyr-like sacrifice for that idealism).
Essentially this model forces a woman not only to mother her children, but also her husband.
In the beginning of this series I stated that men and women’s approach to love was ultimately complementary to one another and in this last model we can really see how the two dovetail together. That may seem a bit strange at this point, but when social influences imbalance this conventional complement we see how well the two come together.
When a woman’s opportunistic approach to love is cast into the primary, dominant love paradigm for a couple, and a family, that pairing and family is now at the mercy of an opportunism necessitated by that woman’s hypergamy and the drive to optimize it. Conversely, when a man’s idealistic approach to love is in the dominant frame (as in the conventional model) it acts as a buffer to women’s loving opportunism that would otherwise imbalance and threaten the endurance of that family and relationship.
From Heartiste’s post:
7. Arguments about chores, money, sex life, and romance were highest in couples where the woman made all or most of the decisions. Female decision-making status was an even stronger determinant of relationship dissatisfaction than female breadwinner status. Women can handle making more money in a relationship, but they despise being the leader in a relationship.
8. Argument frequency decreased among female breadwinners if they were not the primary decision-makers. Lesson for men: You can have a happy relationship with a woman who makes more than you as long as you remain the dominant force in her non-work life. Or: GAME SAVES MARRIAGES.
When a woman’s love concept is the dominant one, that relationship will be governed by her opportunism and the quest for her hypergamic optimization. The ultimate desired end of that optimization is a conventional love hierarchy where a dominant Man is the driving, decisive member of that sexual pairing.
May 15th, 2014 at 7:30 pm
I wish I had the link available (I did search), but Roissy once had an excellent post and third party study outlining the proclivity of women to fake orgasms with high value, Alpha men, more so than lower value Beta Nice Guys. Naturally the “nice guys finish last, because their women finish first” chumps fired off their comments assuming this was some kind of validation of their Beta Game. Because they still subscribe to the ‘her first’ feminine primary doctrine as being the normative, their default presumption is that women would fake orgasms with Alpha Men because they were sexually unsatisfied with them. However, as the study indicated, the harsher truth was that women’s tendency to fake orgasm with high value men was the result of a desire to secure that man for commitment and breeding prospects – not as some feminine courtesy for a bad lover.
Naturally this is the socialized narrative women follow themselves – a bad lover gets a fake orgasm, nyah, nyah, try better next time – but when you look under the hood, why would a woman be bothered to fake an orgasm with a bad lover? You might argue that it’s to end the act, and you’d be right, but a faked orgasm is really an indictment of the Beta mindset, because he’s not worth the courtesy of faking one.
In the end hypergamy doesn’t even care if the woman is sexually satisfied or not – that’s up to her – all that matters is optimizing the best mating that her attractiveness can afford.
May 15th, 2014 at 8:42 pm
@jf12
I would never say the actions of a group could be blamed on 1 person. If the majority of women are narcissistic in sex, then that’s their fault. Forgive my constant questioning please, it’s just that I am not like that, nor have I shared more than a simple kiss with another woman…Ergo, I don’t know how they act.
I will speak to my lover about his previous partners instead, if I’m becoming tiresome, should you prefer.
May 15th, 2014 at 8:47 pm
@Rollo
That is both sad and interesting at once. I can honestly say I’ve never faked an orgasm, because I see little point in doing so. Well, that and it helps that I’m what my FwB calls “hyper orgasmic”. Apparently out of his 12 previous partners, I’m the only one who has been able to cum from not only penetration and clit play, but tit play as well. Again, I’ve never been with a female even though I’m attracted to them sexually, so I’d no idea this wasn’t normal.
May 15th, 2014 at 8:52 pm
“So here’s today’s fuck-with-your-head question: Is going down on a woman the sexual behvior of a Beta care-giver? Does getting her off orally send her the latent message to her that you’re a ‘tryer’?”
As mentioned above, it depends on the context.
I have a normal healthy mating instinct. I don’t want to stick my dick in a woman’s asshole or cum in her mouth. I like pussy. That’s where I want to cum. I like the way it looks, smells, tastes and feels on my lips and tongue as well as dick. It makes her nice and juicy slippery as I like it.
Making a woman cum repeatedly gives me a feeling of power, control and competence. It puts me ahead of most lovers most women have had. Making a woman cum good is worth a lot of goodwill.
I do it for my own benefit.
IMO guys worrying about it being beta just suffer from a deep lack of feeling self worth, like a narcissist who has to put others down.
Speaking of liking pussy, the other day I read CH talking about ‘destroying her anally’ like it was some kind of big achievement. I thought to myself: what, you like women with colostomy bags?
Fudge packing is for gays. You might as well go out and masturbate with a piece of dog shit.
The lack of respect in wanting to ‘destroy’ her anally is a symptom of a lack of self respect. And a malfunctioning reproductive instinct.
May 15th, 2014 at 9:32 pm
Going down seems beta to me. You are in a vulnerable position, not only are you not getting satisfaction out of it but it is also uncomfortable, etc.
Anecdotally, the guys that seem to profess to like it the most also seem the most beta otherwise and vice versa.
I stopped doing it a few years ago and haven’t had any complaints.
May 15th, 2014 at 11:25 pm
I don’t know … there’s some satisfaction in getting that pussy to spasm and queef … but maybe that’s just my beta conditioning talking.
May 15th, 2014 at 11:48 pm
@ Mark Minter
@ Rollo
I disagree that Marriage somehow came out of an agreement amongst Lesser Males and Lesser Females.
Marriage (of one man and one or more women) predates history. If this were a reproductive strategy for 20% Betas… why has it persisted? Why has the construct of marriage been so successful that it has been implemented world wide by nearly every culture?
To answer this consider the story of the Irish King Niall of the Nine Hostages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_of_the_Nine_Hostages
This guy was a prolific f*cker.
“Early in 2006, geneticists at Trinity College, Dublin suggested that Niall may have been the most fecund male in Irish history. Of their Irish sample, the geneticists found that 21 percent of men from north-western Ireland, 8 percent from all of Ireland, a substantial percentage of men from western and central Scotland, and about 2 percent of men from New York bore the same Y-chromosome haplotype. The geneticists estimated that about 2–3 million men bear this marker, and concluded that these men are patrilineal descendants of Niall.”
Ponder that a KING who’s Y is currently dwelling in 2-3 MILLION MEN.
If you think about this two seconds… it is obvious that MEN created marriage to MANAGE the genetics arms race. If marriage were not invented we would ONLY have Nialls as Y’s. Marriage limits common men’s genetic options while opening the possibility of the Kings like Niall to bed every maiden in a nation… because the King IS the Law. Call it Lords privilege. There is even a term for this…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur
So in essence Marriage absent any Medieval extralegal Lord Trumping fornication rights, IS something that MEN found value in. (and note that even with Droit du seigneur there is always ONE and ONLY ONE guy in the general area that trumps the one woman thing).
This is probably why ancient societies punished the WOMAN for adultery and not the man. (Perhaps because it was recognized that the woman was not benefiting from Marriage like men were and therefore would stray???)
Marriage with it’s attendant social conventions makes modern society possible. Otherwise we would all be barbarians running from village to village making babies for beta farmers to raise for us. A Man does NOT HAVE TO be a Niall to make sure his offspring are not crowded out by Alpha Barbarian Rapists… Since nearly ALL MEN have an equal chance to populate the future with Marriage as a social structure.
This is the key pernicious quest of feminism to BREAK the male patriarchal order and radically re architect the future. They in essence want to maximize the chances that Empowered Females will spread leg for a modern day NIALL. THEY want to maximize the wait time for Alpha Sperm to make a highly competitive offspring that will maximize HER genetic future not a MANs.
Ultimately this speculation rests upon a non-trivial thesis… Do women “know” or “by instinct perceive” the benefit of offspring by Alphas?
I believe they do. I believe women empowered by feminism are really just Hypergamy “Waiting for the Alpha Godot” Hamsters that once unchained from the Male Patriarchal order are questing for Alpha Sperm.
Just read a bit about the original HERO of feminist literature – Mary Shelly to get a glimpse into the Feminist Hamster Gone Wild.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Shelly
And as always these Feminist Gone Wild ideas always have a host of unintended consequences.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2159476/Tennessees-deadbeat-dads-The-men-81-children-46-different-women–theyre-paying-child-support-them.html
Kings of the modern world indeed…
May 16th, 2014 at 12:05 am
@titanic, yes being happy to please your woman is indeed beta. I’m beta, so I’m not judging negatively, merely realistically. An alpha is happy to be making her be pleasing to him.
May 16th, 2014 at 12:13 am
@Rollo, “In the end hypergamy doesn’t even care if the woman is sexually satisfied or not – that’s up to her”
Yes and no. It’s up to her beta to care, because he cares more than she does.
There’s talk of lesbian bed death and women’s lack of masturbation (serious, women have to take classes in how to, and are always being scolded by their lady teachers that they aren’t in touch with themselves enough), but it doesn’t go nearly far enough. After the honeymoon period, which is half as long as hetero honeymoon periods because there’s two women, the frequency of genitally-involved sexual activity directed towards orgasm approaches the frequency of Abraham and Sarah in the Bible.
Wait, I hear you say, the statistics say …
Yes, well, the statistics comparing lesbian sexual frequency with hetero frequency can be a teensy bit misleading, not just from leaving off the piv category. They start to count lying on the couch cuddling as sex. Seriously.
May 16th, 2014 at 12:22 am
Classes on how to masturbate? Dafaq?
That can’t be real, or it has to mean “tantric” masturbation or something…What’s next, classes on how to breathe correctly?
May 16th, 2014 at 12:54 am
@Tarnished, yes, really. Instruction booklets, “certified” teachers, and everything. It’s also part of many public schools’ sex education for girls. Only for girls.
According to society, women’s sexuality is to be cherished, nurtured, carefully encouraged like a tiny ember which can be fed Tinder slowly until the little flame is hot enough to melt some minimarshmallows.
Men’s sexuality is to be punished, discouraged, shoved into the basement along with the xbox and cheetos, doused with a hose if he starts acting randy.
May 16th, 2014 at 1:46 am
“@titanic, yes being happy to please your woman is indeed beta.”
Again, it depends on the context.
If you try to please your woman all the time because you think it will buy you attraction and/or ‘security’, that is indeed beta and blue-pill.
Taken too far, the idea that there is something wrong with occaisionally trying to please a woman implies that only psychopaths are not beta. Because a psychologically healthy person pleases themselves by now and then pleasing someone they care about. It’s about empathy.
But I suppose feeling empathy towards a woman is considered beta too ;-)
Hey, I used an emoticon. Dead giveaway of betatude.
May 16th, 2014 at 4:22 am
On cunnilingus, Titanic has the right of it.
When you please your woman because you want to please her, it’s Alpha.
Also, women need Alpha and Beta, so if you are going all Dark Side, CH on her and don’t fulfill her needs for security, she won’t be happy and eventually will leave you.
It’s about balance: treat her like a princess in the relationship, but never forget you’re the prince.
Buy her flowers and create a romantic picknick, but expect homecooked meals and blowjobs.
Just command her to come over, then ravage her with your mouth. Then take her or go do something else like nothing happened.
So busy thinking about what women want and manipulating them, instead of just outlining what you want and nexting if you don’t get it.
May 16th, 2014 at 5:29 am
@jf12
Can honestly say I’ve never seen/heard of such a thing. Sounds like a waste of taxpayer dollars. I’m all for true sex education in schools (rather than the magnificent ineffectualness of abstinence-only), but teaching girls to masturbate is just weird. So it’s assumed that females couldn’t pleasure their way out of a wet paper bag, but I’m guessing they also assume every male is well versed in it? Sexism at it’s finest.
Neither male nor female sexuality is better or worse than the other. Both are required for reproduction and bonding, and both can be extremely pleasurable. Why is this such a difficult concept? It’s as though parts of society are willfully ignorant…
May 16th, 2014 at 5:37 am
@Rollo
Oh, and just from rereading that blurb you posted…”urinate out the sperm”? Sorry but how exactly would this even happen? The act of urination has nothing to do with the vagina as the urethra isn’t in there. Is this part of the joke and I’m just missing it completely?
May 16th, 2014 at 8:11 am
Re: “only psychopaths are not beta” to some degree.
Correct. As an examplar, as an extreme example, the full-out dark triad evil abuser is the alphaest, only out for his pleasure all the time.
May 16th, 2014 at 9:09 am
@Tarnished, keep in mind even today when a married woman is sexually unsatisfied all women blame that woman’s man 100%, despite the lipservice (pun) to the idea that she could exert a little effort on herself sometimes.
May 16th, 2014 at 9:50 am
@jf12
You mean she should be responsible for her own orgasms, be honest and communicative about what she likes in bed, gently direct him if he’s doing something “wrong”, ask him what he enjoys most and pay attention to his body language, and work just as hard as her man to make sure both of them are satisfied?
Nah, sounds too easy. /sarcasm
May 16th, 2014 at 9:59 am
I am interested to know if guys in the Manosphere practice what they preach; i.e bravado is a cardinal sign of beta tendency….
May 16th, 2014 at 10:07 am
In my view, what’s missing from Bellum’s equation is the cold hard fact that women never stop testing, never stop creating drama. I agree that over-thinking ways to proactively manipulate is disadvantageous, however it is concomitantly wise to equip oneself with empowering responses to disrespect, poor treatment, or garden-variety shit tests.
May 16th, 2014 at 10:41 am
@Rollo
The Houston Chronicle had this whole series, 6 parts, called “The Evolutionary Mystery of the Female Orgasm.” It goes through various theories about why the thing even exists because her orgasm certainly isn’t a necessary component of conception. The first idea was that it was an artifact of evolution, the clitoris as female analog to a male penis. But then this big evolutionary idea permeates that “nothing is for nothing”, meaning everything is there for some reason.
So the money section to me was Part 5.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-v-an-evaluation-test/44543
This part says she uses it as “signal” of fitness. It made reference to other animals, some monkey girls that tended to orgasm more often with higher ranked males; also the lower ranked male grizzly bear tended to fuck fast with his head on a swivel, like he was stealing, and watching for a higher ranked bear that might come along and kick his ass. And the higher ranked grizz tended to take his sweet ass time because he was the biggest, baddest bear in the woods.
So if the orgasm is so fickle, so elusive, so hard to start her up, then it could be as if, when she does have one, subconscious signals are telling her “this guy is the one”. That might seem a bit like closing the barn door after the cows got out. “He done fucked her already”. But most human sex is not actually about reproduction. She does not directly signal ovulation to allow her manipulate males into sex at other times for other reasons other than fertilization. One study listed 256 reasons why humans have sex and reproduction was only one of them.
Yes, women do fake and Part 6 speaks about the orgasm as manipulation of males. So it would make sense that if a woman has determined “attraction” towards a man on some conscious level based on his status, social position, even looks, and deemed him to be a high value mate, yet orgasms don’t occur, then she would be more prone to want to manipulate the dude and not risk the consequences of his reaction to her not having one during sex with him.
I think though that there is kind of a Pandora’s Box in you learning too much about the what and why of the Female Orgasm. It can totally fuck you up and jade you towards the experience.of it. In Part 1 when the author is considering the “why” of the thing, he speaks of the “what” of the thing. A male orgasm is like a “pop” gun going off, spit, spit, and we’re done. In, contrast the female orgasm is like a fucking A-Bomb going off when it is genuine. So the author speaks of the direct experience of it, hers, and the indirect experience of it, him being there when she has it.
The whole sexual experience is quite manipulative and the explanation is that it has to be because of all the complexity surrounding reproduction in humans. If you think back to one of your posts about the son of some friend of yours. He was slacking on moving forward, picking a school, or making a choice to go in the military or something. Your analysis was that it was his young girlfriend with whom he was having sex and she had put the voodoo on him. He had this loyalty towards, this protective desire to hang back, at the expense of his future, just to be near her.
So if we begin to contemplate the what and why of sex, and especially of her part in it, then we can arrive a something called Neurotic Suspension. You could define Neurosis as two or more responses to a given stimulus. If I give you the opportunity for a valid investment, then it could invoke neurosis in you, the desire for gain but also the fear of loss. One of key justifications for women to have orgasms is to override the fact she possesses consciousness and awareness of the reality and cost that sex act can lead to pregnancy, and it is so strong that it compels her to “risk” and flirt with the possibility of conception. And the same goes for men, conception has a cost. So when presented with an indicator of attraction, this can and probably does create neurosis in the man, fight or flight. He can approach and be successful or he can flee and avoid rejection or even avoid paternity.
And during the sex act itself you can experience neurosis to the point that you are unable to act, frozen, and even impotent, all due to conflicting responses to the stimuli that is presented to you.
And then to worry and contemplate the what and why of the female orgasm can lead to heightening this experience of neurosis and diminishing the sexual experience. If she is having one and in the back of your mind you are thinking “This bitch is manipulating me, trying to con me, hook me, put that voodoo shit on me”, it certainly can jade you to the experience, contribute to impotency caused by Neurotic Suspension.
You could even argue that is why psychopathy is attractive; this personality is fearless and impulsive, prone to short term gratification, low on neurosis. You could even argue that psychopathy is not necessarily the most attractive, but rather that it is successful. Women are attracted to multiple types, but it is the psychopathic man that is responsive to signals, prone to act, regardless of consequences, and thus, he seals the deal with more regularity than a more prudent man.
So probably the best attitude to have is not to worry about her and her orgasms but rather just go in there with attitude that “I am going to beat that pussy up”.
In response to your question about “whether oral sex is beta”, I would respond “Not if Chuck Norris is doing it”. If with each tongue stroke he is lifting her a foot off the bed, banging her head into the headboard, plaster is coming off the ceiling, then it’s not beta.
May 16th, 2014 at 10:49 am
@MM female orgasm is vestigial. At best. Females please alphas, not other way around. “I don’t know if female grizzlies experience orgasm” not with alphas.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:14 am
@Mark:
Very good, Mark. That’s the random factor. But it could also be linked to emotional security. I mean, if she is emotionally attached, she might orgasm more easily and frequently (hypothesis). Also, have you done any research that might indicate a link between verbal communication and female arousal/orgasm? I have heard that the male tongue might be the most powerful sexual organ he possess, in this sense… Thanks for your thoughts.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:17 am
@Chokmah, women orgasm percentagewise more frequently and harder when in love in a long term relationship with one man. But they appreciate him less and less.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:21 am
I would add one last thing then I am off this thread. Stats show that 30% of women can’t have an orgasm at all, another 1/3 can only have clitoral orgasms, then another 1/3 can have vaginal orgasms. There are multiple arguments as to why those 30% that can’t have them. You might argue they never get a high enough status male to fuck them and the schlubs that do don’t ring her bell. And the same could go for the one third that have clitoral orgasms. But one thing is for sure, the woman that has vaginal orgasms with you is probably prone to them and because she has them with you then she will be more eager to sex with you.
First, it is like writing off a girl if she is a vegetarian. Just fucking fire her if she is. It is far easier to be with one that is not. She is picky and wishes to impose herself on the world. The woman that isn’t less prone to be this way, less difficult to arrive at decisions about restaurants and about grocery shopping. So if that woman will not eat Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, and like it, then dump her. You remove tons of headaches and complications.
The same could be said about a woman in those two bad categories. If she cannot have a vaginal orgasm, then like the vegetarian then dump her. It is one thing to talk about sex in the first months, but cross that year mark, and sex “simmers down” and often it turns into “I get mine then you get yours”. There is nothing worse than on a cold night, your ass is sticking out of covers while you are down there licking and licking until you get a fucking cramp in your jaw. So if oral sex has to be part of your arsenal with a girl on a regular basis, then fire her ass. Find one that is responsive to vaginal sex. It doesn’t matter if it is beta or not; it is a hassle.
And second, it could be a damn good indicator of genuine desire.
So the one Maxim I have gained from this site that trumps all others is that if you think she might not have genuine desire for you then she probably doesn’t. Sticking around exposes you to a buffet of potential problems. Get the fuck out. Lips don’t lie. There are women that want sex because they easily have vaginal orgasms and those that don’t. There are woman that will have sex with you and those that want. Only keep the ones that are in the intersection of those two sets of women.
So one damn good reason to not have oral sex is that it flushes out those women in those two bad categories and they are not keepers. And it tells you if you have a woman that doesn’t show she has Genuine Desire for you.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:31 am
Men have nipples that don’t really serve a purpose, but they’re essential for nurturing infants if you’re a woman and essential to the survival of our species.
Orgasm for a woman may simply be an enjoyable characteristic of the human genotype, but for human males it represents a reward that is similarly essential to drive our species’ survival.
I don’t necessarily believe that wholesale since much of the oxytocin and various endorphins which promote mate bonding and parental investment are released post-orgasm, but that may be an adaptation on the part of the female where it is a necessary feature for human males.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:34 am
@jf12
If the female orgasm is vestigial, then that would mean the male one would be too since they stem from the same biological structures in most mammals. From gendertree dot com;
“All embryos are identical in external appearance for the first eight weeks of gestation, and then several factors nudge the infant toward male or female development. In the seventh week, the embryo has both male and female primordial ducts. In the normal female fetus, the millerian duct system then develops into oviducts and a uterus. In the normal male fetus, the wolferian duct system on each side develops into the epididymis and vas deferens. The external genitalia are similarly bipotential until the eighth week (The reproductive organs and genitals associated with “female” or “male” arise from the same initial (fetal) tissue). Thereafter, the urogenital slit disappears and male genitalia form or alternatively, it remains open, and female genitalia form.
If the egg was fertilized with the x chromosome then the female structures continue to mature, the default system.
However if the y chromosome fertilized the egg then a hormonal switch happens,,, two genes are activated and the female structures are completely dissolved and destroyed and the male organs take their place.”
Hence why both the clitoris (which is actually about 6-8 inches altogether if we include internal genitals) and penis have huge amounts of nerve endings. If the female orgasm became null and void due to some genetic mutation that eliminated these sensitive nerves, it stands to reason that the male orgasm would “suffer” the same fate. I for one am very happy that humans, like many other species, are capable of having orgasms rather than just having quick, uneventful copulations like fish or amphibians.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:34 am
“First, it is like writing off a girl if she is a vegetarian. Just fucking fire her if she is. It is far easier to be with one that is not. She is picky and wishes to impose herself on the world. The woman that isn’t less prone to be this way, less difficult to arrive at decisions about restaurants and about grocery shopping. So if that woman will not eat Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, and like it, then dump her. You remove tons of headaches and complications.”
+1.
Difficult to please at the dinner table = difficult to please in general.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:42 am
Thanks, guys, for the excellent comments and clarity. I will be off for a while.
May 16th, 2014 at 11:49 am
@MM
Vaginal orgasms are great, but in essence they are still clitoral orgasms…some women just don’t have a well placed g-spot it seems.
Question: how are vegetarians imposing themselves? If I go to a steakhouse with my FwB, I’ll order a salad and buy him his steak and potatoes. If I’m cooking us a meal, he gets meat and I don’t. If one is a responsible adult instead of a whiny bitch who expects people to cater to his/her dietary choices, it shouldn’t be that bad.
Though if you’re talking about militaristic, force-my-diet-down-your-throat vegans or vegetarians…then yeah, screw them. They need to get a grip on reality and stop being so damn imbecilic.
May 16th, 2014 at 12:13 pm
@Rollo
Male mammals have nipples for the same reasons I’ve described above. Namely, that during fetal development we are all initially cut from the same cloth till about week 8. The nipples/breasts just become more developed in females (though even this includes outliers, since men can get breast cancer and even potentially make “milk” in times of great stress). See here for more info:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_lactation
May 16th, 2014 at 12:56 pm
Any man’s nipples will work if he takes the right hormonal treatment long enough. Similarly, any woman’s orgasms will be much stronger and satisfying if she takes hormonal treatment i.e. female to male transsexual levels of hormones. And she will exhibit mannish behavior in seeking those orgasms.
May 16th, 2014 at 1:12 pm
@jf12
Men don’t have to take excess hormones for their breast tissue to work, nor do biological females have to take supplements to have good orgasms. It seems to have more to do with the females level of vulnerability than anything else. Or at least, this is what my own research into orgasm-deficient women has shown.
Outlier example: I have gender dysphoria, and slightly higher levels of testosterone than the average woman. However, even these levels aren’t at all close to what a male body produces on a daily basis.
At work now. Will be back in 9 hours.
May 16th, 2014 at 1:19 pm
@Tarnished, I’m kind of surprised that even when you see and admit the parallel that you deny it. I’ll go so far (boldness has never been a weakness of mine) to say that women’s orgasms are vestigial to the same quantitative amount that men’s nipples are vestigial, and the quantitative measure of that sameness is the schedule of hormone treatment that makes them work better.
May 16th, 2014 at 1:21 pm
@jf12
In case you’re curious:
http://tarnishedsophia.wordpress.com/tag/gender-dysphoria/
May 16th, 2014 at 1:57 pm
It’s not the how do the features manifest themselves, but why did they evolve dear.
More food for the orgasm thought:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-013-0152-7
May 16th, 2014 at 2:25 pm
Speaking of masturbation and pleasure, circumcision comes to mind. I was pretty pissed when I found out that the frenulum is basically the male equivalent of the clitoris and that mine was *completely* destroyed in circumcision, and I literally have *zero* sensitivity where I’m supposed to have the most.
That, and realizing that I have a complete lack of “light touch sensitivity,” due to the loss of foreskin and frenulum. It explained why I always had to use so much pressure to feel anything when I first started masturbating, and why it hurt so much when I tried to masturbate without lubrication. I was in the dark my whole life until I started reading about this stuff online. No one ever told me anything about it, never learned about it in the school I went to.
After some stretching and jelqing for a while the skin became mobile enough so I could masturbate without lubricant (the skin was way too tight before and it would be painful). It still is nowhere near as easy as it is with lubrication though, and it’s been difficult for me to accept that the sensitivity is just never going to be there.
One time a girl was going down on me and started licking where my frenulum would’ve been and said something like, “How does that feel?” I just shrugged and said I didn’t really feel anything. And I really didn’t. She was fine and kept going, but the fact that sensationally speaking it felt the same as someone sucking on my elbow just took the wind out of my sails.
I have no idea what to do about that. I don’t know if I can ever “get over it” being that I have to live with this for the rest of my life. I just have to make peace with it. But I really do wish that the knowledge about what circumcision actually does to the sensitivity of the penis would go more mainstream. It’s genital mutilation, and just because it’s been done on little boys for such a long time, no one questions it. You hear about female circumcision though and there’s an uproar.
I was going to write something about enjoying sex, but this just popped into my mind and distracted me.
And it is a serious issue. From the moment we’re born, a lot of males in the world’s first experience with sexuality is having their genitals mutilated, and not to mention the effects that desensitize them to pleasure are permanent.
Even in the mainstream media, the main focus is always on female pleasure, female orgasms, how women can be “empowered” through unleashing their sexuality…meanwhile little boys are having the most sensitive bundles of nerves on their penis destroyed before they ever get a chance to experience them, and then on top of the permanent physical damage they’re conditioned psychologically in this backwards society we live in to deny their own wants, needs, and pain, and put everyone else’s — especially women’s — first.
May 16th, 2014 at 2:26 pm
Really quick:
@Rollo and jf12
I still postulate that female orgasm evolved for the same reason male orgasm did…it makes both sexes more likely to want to reproduce. Even if we say that female orgasms are “vestigial” (not as in useless, but as in not 100% necessary for basic reproductive needs), the fact remains that male and female fetuses have similar nerve endings. If, by chance, males were able to ejaculate without having an orgasm (as can sometimes occur), I’d still not say that the male orgasm is unnecessary *as a whole*. As was pointed out previously, there are a vast multitude of reasons that people have sex only 1 of which involves the desire for children. I know that I never wish to be pregnant or raise children, but I still initiate sex because it is fun, provides comfort, relieves pain, ensures sexual release, alleviates tension, makes my partner happy, is a physical representation of love, provides bonding, promotes relaxation, creates a safe environment for openness, let’s both my FwB and I be vulnerable for a time…I could go on.
If we are talking *only* about female orgasms as necessary for fertilization…then sure, it’s “vestigial”. But if one is to count all the ways orgasm helps men and women in emotional and psychological ways, then it’s obvious why it began to be a chosen trait in mammals.
Jf12, I’m sorry if it seems like I’m being hypocritical. Let me try to help you understand…
You state that women have better orgasms when on hormones. I state this is true, but not necessary. The reason I see excess hormones as unnecessary is due to personal experience (albeit with the possibility I’m an outlier). I am physically a woman, but am fully capable of orgasms from my breasts, vagina, and clit without needing supplements. Thus, the 1/3 of women who find orgasms difficult to have may actually benefit from having testosterone supplements…but the remaining 2/3 who *don’t* require supplements would attest that they are not necessary. Does this make more sense?
Also, Rollo, if I could respectfully ask that you not call me “dear” that would be great. If it gets too hot, I’ll get out of the kitchen, but until then I’d like to be spoken to just like every other commenter here.
Thanks.
May 16th, 2014 at 2:34 pm
@Softek
That is horrible. I’m sorry that happened to you. Male circumcision should be illegal, just as female circumcision is. I’ve no issue with an adult who wants it done to themselves, but to cut a baby in such a horrendous manner is child abuse, imo.
May 16th, 2014 at 2:43 pm
@ Tarnished
“Nah, sounds too easy. /sarcasm”
Don’t you know doing what’s easy is seriously beta?
May 16th, 2014 at 3:42 pm
@Rollo, great article you linked! Key takeaway “The finding that male-reported female orgasm intensity and frequency during sex were positively related to male relationship satisfaction, and the finding that men’s relationship satisfaction was only positively related to their reported sex frequency for men whose partners orgasm frequently during sex, suggest that men may indeed be influenced by female orgasm in a particular way. The relationship between female orgasm and male relationship satisfaction might be explained in two ways. It may be that female orgasm increases male relationship satisfaction. Alternatively, men who are satisfied with their relationship may be more interested in their partners achieving orgasm, and make greater and more frequent effort to ensure its occurrence. Either case is consistent with the idea that female orgasm contains information about paternity probability.”
So, like female copulatory vocalizations, the purpose of female orgasm is signal the male about relationship quality.
May 16th, 2014 at 4:24 pm
@ Tarnished
It is horrible. It is child abuse. I would love to spread the message that no one should ever have this done to their child. Not all circumcisions end up as poorly as mine, a lot of guys have some foreskin and some of their frenulum intact — but a lot don’t, and the ones that do still have suffered irreparable damage and have to cope with the grief of knowing that they will never be able to fully experience their sexuality as they were designed to.
Long story short, it’s genital mutilation, and the public opinion needs to come to recognize it for what it is. Call a spade a spade. It is genital mutilation and there is nothing that’s okay about it.
As for dealing with it:
I mentioned Faster EFT before. In Faster EFT, the key is aiming: you aim at what stirs up the emotions. When I was learning about all this, pictures of intact penises made me feel like I was going to throw up.
Reading about all the pleasure and having flashbacks to porn I’d watched with girls blowing intact guys or giving them handjobs, playing with them and touching all the parts of their penis that were so sensitive, and seeing the guys react, like coming from them rubbing his frenulum with their thumb, or twitching when they’d touch the rigid band area lightly —
— it fills me with so much rage and sadness and helplessness.
So what I do is focus on these feelings. It feels like a deep black void inside of me that’s sucking me into it by my stomach. And the heaviness in my chest, and the intense pressure behind my eyes.
I close my eyes, think of those images and feel all the feelings, and then I tap. “Let it go. It’s safe to let it go. I am safe as I let it go. It is okay to let this go. Whatever it means, wherever it comes from, whatever it represents, I am safe as I let this go.” Then I grab my arm, deep breath, and say “Peace.”
I keep repeating and repeating until I can think of a memory, e.g. a video of a girl getting a guy off by rubbing his frenulum with her thumb, or the times I’ve gotten handjobs and had to tell the girl to back off because it was painful….until the emotional connection to it starts to subside, and I no longer feel the intense gnawing physical reactions in my body (i.e., what we verbally label rage, sadness, helplessness, etc.)
I use the SUDS scale, 0-10, after each repetition of tapping. I usually start out at a 10, naturally, and sometimes I’ll tap it down to a 4 or 3, and sometimes it’ll go back up to a 10. But I keep doing it until I get to 0 — that’s the goal.
I believe circumcision is wrong. But here’s the mental conflict: feeling the need to attach to pain about it in order for it to be wrong. The pain I feel is validation that it’s wrong. But this is not reality. The reality is scientifically and morally, we have shown that this is wrong, and we can put an end to it.
It does not mean that I have to suffer psychological torment over something I can’t change for the rest of my life. What is still intact is my ability to have emotional control over myself, and also to enjoy sex with women. When I tap the sick, ‘black void’ feeling away and I can calm down, I can see that there is still plenty for me to enjoy and that I’m only hurting myself more by isolating and shutting down and feeling miserable.
Make peace with the pain of what you can’t do so you can allow yourself to enjoy the pleasures of what you can do, is how I’ve been thinking of it.
May 16th, 2014 at 5:35 pm
@AngryGamer re: “I disagree that Marriage somehow came out of an agreement amongst Lesser Males and Lesser Females.”
I also disagree. Clearly marriage is the result of a gentlemen’s agreement from the betas not to kill the alphas, in exchange for the alphas forcing the women to give the betas a more equitable piece of the, er, pie.
“Do women “know” or “by instinct perceive” the benefit of offspring by Alphas?”
Sure, but their pickers are broken.
May 16th, 2014 at 5:43 pm
@Mark Minter, @TheMonkeyKing, @Tarnished – I have noticed from being with two vegans/vegetarians, plus a vegetarian friend, that if they are really into you then the whole vegan/vegetarian thing goes out the window and they’ll start eating meat again. It doesn’t take long for this to manifest.
May 16th, 2014 at 6:01 pm
@Tarnished re: “the remaining 2/3 who *don’t* require supplements would attest that they are not necessary.”
Keep in mind I’m not advocating taking supplements, I’m merely stating unequivocally what would happen if they were taken. An average healthy male has much thicker and stronger pelvic floor muscles than an average healthy female. Much thicker, much stronger.
May 16th, 2014 at 6:45 pm
On the flip side of cunnilingus,the best measure to see if a girl really likes you, is by how dirty she gets with you in bed. If a girl blows you, sucks your balls, and rims you, consider yourself top sexual priority in her world. It’s far more revealing to measure what she does to you, rather than what she lets you do to her. This has been stated many times on this website but it really needs to be drilled into some guys that girls are very feral minded in the presence of alpha.
I remember having a wild session with a girl who had a boyfriend at the time and right after it, she told me something that I always knew but never heard straight from the horses mouth. It went something like this:
Sloot:….wheew!…you know I never do anything like this with _____.
JB: oh
Sloot: Yeah, he doesn’t turn me on enough. I mean, it took him 5 times of asking for a blowjob before I gave him one. But, I just go all out for you because I feel it’s right.
JB:oh
Sloot: when i’m super horny for a guy, i’ll do anything to please him.
I remember reading a website on game and sex (mostly about sex) and the owner said something along the lines of, “Giving a woman an orgasm from cunnilingus is a lot different than giving her an orgasm with your dick. When a girl cums with your penis in her, it’s a very primal way of saying she wants your seed deep in her because you’re that much of a turn for her. It’s something so embedded in the recesses of her reptilian brain, that she cannot help it. When she cums from cunnilingus, it’s not as intense nor will she crave your dick and that’s because you can’t trick the reptilian brain.”
After years of hearing, “Women don’t know what they want.” I can’t help but laugh because eventually, they will find out what they want. And let me tell you this, it isn’t pretty for most men. Anyone with enough experience will know what it is, but what some guys will find disheartening is that some where never equipped to fulfill this want.
That’s where this entire red pill business turns very dark and some will wish they never knew.
May 16th, 2014 at 6:55 pm
@jf12
Of course. If men are given estrogen, they will develop breasts and get emotional easier (in general). If women are given testosterone, they will grow facial hair, have an easier time developing muscles, and their libido will rise (in general). That is true so if that’s what you were saying I agree.
The thing about the pelvic floor muscles is interesting. Where did you hear that? I was taught that women had stronger ones due to the fact they are made to carry 10+ extra pounds while pregnant. Do you have any data supporting your claim? I tried googling it, but couldn’t find any studies saying men had thicker/stronger muscles there.
May 16th, 2014 at 7:06 pm
@blackpoisonsoul
Weird. I guess they weren’t doing it for long, or had weak reasons for being vegetarian then. I can’t imagine going back to eating meat just because someone else, even a lover, thought it was “easier” for them somehow. Then again, my vegetarian diet has a religious bent to it and I’ve been doing it for 17 years, so it’d take a life-or-death issue for me to consider changing.
May 16th, 2014 at 7:14 pm
@Jordan
Lol. And what does it mean if she cums from nipple play or fingering or pelvic massage or from watching you jerk off?
May 16th, 2014 at 7:37 pm
Robin Baker, in ‘Sperm Wars’ states very clearly what the function of the female orgasm is. When a woman orgasms, several things happen. Sperm already in the cervical crypts is flushed out and becomes unusable for fertilization. The vagina and other associated lady parts ‘milks’ the penis and any ejaculated sperm into the cervix. The cervical mucus, which acts as a filter inhibiting the transit of both infectious microbes and sperm, ‘opens’ for about 90 seconds, allowing a larger quantity of sperm to enter the cervix.
Women orgasm for two purposes, 1) To give a partner a superior chance at fertilization – during PIV intercourse if a man ejaculates within about 90 seconds before or after a womans orgasm a much larger number of sperm enter the cervix. 2) To inhibit a partner’s chances of fertilization. If a woman has had recent (within 7 days) sex with a man and she (her limbic system) decides that there might be another man she might have a better offspring with, she can masturbate or have a nocturnal orgasm which flushes the previous lover’s sperm from her, leaving a clear path for the subsequent partners sperm.
May 17th, 2014 at 12:27 am
There isn’t any data on any one female orgasm enhancing fertility, at all. While it makes sense that an easily-orgasmic woman enjoys better sex and therefore enhanced fertility, other than effects of overall health no such link has been shown, and believe me no other link in all science has received more attention by more intelligent males for more decades. What is true is that a woman near peak fertility in her cycle orgasms more quickly i.e. more easily, requiring less effort, less time, etc. Thus it is more appropriate to say that reality supports the hypothesis that fertility enhances orgasm, not vice versa.
May 17th, 2014 at 6:51 am
As per that chick who made her boyfriend ask 5 frickin times for a blowjob before giving him one: What a bitch.
I could understand if he refused to give her oral and she thusly didn’t want to either, or she just hated the idea of penis in her mouth, or had an overactive gag reflex…but to deny a type of sex to someone you’re supposed to love (or at the very least, like) simply because they “don’t turn you on enough”? What the hell? If you’re not attracted to them enough to want to make them happy, you really have no right being with someone. Relationships aren’t one-way streets, there’s this thing called reciprocity.
May 17th, 2014 at 7:12 am
@Softek
I’ve tried doing the tapping as well when going over my childhood sexual abuse, but it doesn’t help as much as the meditation I do. I’m really glad it works for you though…you deserve to overcome the shitty cards other people dealt you. I’m sorry to hear that your penis isn’t as sensitive as most cut guys. Gods, I’ve heard of botched circumcisions (in as much as it’s not just a botch unto itself), but to not have any sensitivity along the frenulum and for the skin to be *that* tight, the guy in charge of your circumcision truly messed up. My lover is cut, but he likes it and has a decent amount of looser skin on the underside. Strangely, his frenulum isn’t that sensitive either…the ridge of the glans is what gets his toes curling.
You say you’ve done some stretching…do you think there’s enough skin to do even a minor foreskin restoration?
May 17th, 2014 at 8:52 am
@ Tarnished
Have you looked at any of Robert Smith’s videos of Faster EFT on his HealingMagic channel on YouTube? I’m not trying to be pushy by the way — it’s just that I had tried Gary Craig’s EFT (the method that’s been around much longer) multiple times in the past and had mixed success, but overall did not have that great of an experience with it.
If you’ve tried traditional EFT and had no success with it I highly recommend checking out Robert Smith’s method. It has a completely different approach and belief system and is a different system entirely; the only thing in common is four of the meridian tapping points.
I’m only saying that if traditional EFT has been your only reference, as it was for me, and I gave up on it because it wasn’t helping. I hope you don’t take offense to me saying this, because I know it can feel like people are shoving something on you. It’s only out of my own excitement that I’m sharing this. So even if your mind you are thinking “Yeah…fuck you”, know that I’m just saying this out of excitement and wanting to share it — that’s all.
As for the circumcision:
http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm
My circumcision looks almost identical to the first image on the top left, with the prominent scarring. If you scroll down more too you can see the penis that has no frenulum. That’s what mine is like — it isn’t that the frenulum has no sensitivity, it’s that it literally is not there.
My circumcision was done freehand, which you can tell from the uneven scarring.
The ridge of the head of my penis on the back (from my perspective looking down at it) is the most sensitive part for me. And even then the sensitivity is not that great. But there is at least some light touch sensitivity there, it isn’t much, but it is at the very least something. I don’t think I will ever be able to experience toe-curling pleasure but I at least have some sensation that I can enjoy.
http://www.thewholenetwork.org/twn-news/the-touch-test-can-you-feel-the-difference
The skin mobility I got from doing stretches and jelqing helped a lot. It didn’t seem to do anything for the sensitivity, but after some odd months I had much more mobility in the skin. There’s enough skin now that when I’m flaccid I can roll some skin over the head, which I was never even close to being able to do before.
I started getting “turkey neck,” which is some loose skin between the base of the penis and the scrotum, because of how I was stretching. After I realized that, I stopped doing it. But it’s a cosmetic issue and compared to having painfully tight erections I would choose the ‘turkey neck’ any day.
My erections also feel much better now because I have ‘breathing room.’ When I’d get very hard erections in the past it would be painful, which is bad because it killed the height of excitement and was very frustrating. Since I stretched the skin out I can have the hardest erection I can have and it feels fine. Even though the touch sensitivity isn’t there and will never be there, I shouldn’t take the improvements I made for granted.
It’s very nice to be able to have a completely full erection and enjoy even just the sensation of having it, without experiencing pain or tightness. The first time a girl started to jerk me off I had to tell her to ease up because she was hurting me. And when she loosened her grip it felt better.
I’d done the stretching and jelqing before I had any sexual experience with women. So I’m glad that the first time something did happen, she was able to grab my penis and massage it without using any lubrication, all I needed was a little disclaimer to be more gentle with me and it was okay.
So there is at least that much hope. I’m also still a virgin and I have no idea what it feels like to have intercourse. Maybe there will be something to enjoy with that; I might be surprised.
That being said, it helps me to think of the whole body as a sex organ. My penis is attached to the rest of my body after all. The fact that I’ve only had a handful of sexual experiences and for the most part have gone 99% of my life with zero affection/sex is an equally big part of the problem. I would probably not feel as bad about the lack of sensation if I was having some fun once in a while. When you’re by yourself all the time it’s very difficult to let go of anything. So there is more hope there too.
May 17th, 2014 at 12:14 pm
I think most men are miserable, either with how things are or because of a knowledge of how things could be if humans weren’t humans. Because of harsh reality, or stubborn idealism. Isn’t the real key to “happiness” being okay with the fact that, if you’re really honest with yourself, you are miserable, one way or another?
May 17th, 2014 at 12:21 pm
Brilliant quote from Charles Bukowski. This is real.
May 17th, 2014 at 12:40 pm
@Tarnished, most women refuse to acknowledge knowing how hard-up most men are. Haven’t you ever heard the joke about why the bride is smiling as she walks down the aisle?
Most women are least giving sexually, even if they give in other areas of their lives.
May 17th, 2014 at 12:49 pm
@jf12
All my friends are men in various states of relationships. Of course I know this. That’s why a good percentage of women suck in areas of sex.
Or rather, they don’t…
I don’t get it, because I throughly enjoy sex of many types (everything from sensual “vanilla” to role-playing bdsm). It boggles the mind that there are women out there who can’t/don’t initiate it every chance they get, especially if they have a nice, giving partner who enjoys it just as much.
May 17th, 2014 at 2:13 pm
@Tarnished
Anyone who had sisters and/or daughters understands why women seem to lack interest in sex. Their mothers train them from their earliest days to see men as requiring their control. Sex is not to be enjoyed for its own sake, but is to be used as the reward in a Pavlovian behavior control scheme. To do anything else opens up a woman to being called a slut by her peers.
May 17th, 2014 at 2:42 pm
@Tarnished, re: “It boggles the mind that there are women out there who can’t/don’t initiate it every chance they get, especially if they have a nice, giving partner who enjoys it just as much.”
Yes. This is the reason that most men seek out redpill understanding (someone who is being successful with women usually isn’t interested in why he is unsuccessful): the women in their lives are mind-bogglingly lousy at desire. The very best that most women seem capable of is to lie there enjoying what their men are doing.
May 17th, 2014 at 7:37 pm
The old romantic model did work WHEN the woman’s very existence was tied to the man’s. In Wild West Frontier days for example, when the woman was more captive to the man than his horse…. she better damn well love him unconditionally and give him every support she could.
May 17th, 2014 at 7:54 pm
I would bet that the average frontier homesteader woman would make the most masculine woman alive today look like an infant by comparison. Survival and hunger has a way of making all humans, but women especially, understand the value of hard work.
May 17th, 2014 at 9:54 pm
@Richard
True, women had fewer options than they do now in Western society. Marriage was expected, and in most cases needed for the resources necessary for survival. But is it not preferable to have your spouse with you because they truly care for you as a person and want to stay to make life easier/happier, instead of them staying out of fear or necessity? I mean, that’s one of the reasons I’ll never marry…nowadays it’s too unfair to the man and basically unnecessary for the woman. Unless you’re of a strict faith that says “sex before marriage is wrong”, there’s less and less reason for marriage as it stands in modern Western society.
May 17th, 2014 at 10:12 pm
@jf12
That’s too selfish to be considered “real” sex, imo. Don’t get me wrong; I greatly enjoy lying back and receiving pleasure from my lover’s talented mouth and fingers. But it’d feel very…off-putting…if I couldn’t then service him in a similar fashion. Sex isn’t a one-way street. If someone just wants to take, they are hardly worthy of the term “partner”. Leech, more like.
@blurkel
I can honestly say that’s not how I was raised, at least by my grandmothers. I haven’t had female friends since 8th grade, so have little experience with that. My sisters…yeah, that seems about right. The rest of my family is very traditional leaning when it comes to relationships, so that might explain it.
If this was not the case…if women and girls were taught that sex is fun and loving rather than a tool for manipulation…everyone would be better off.
May 17th, 2014 at 10:25 pm
@Tarnished
Is it?
Having too much food to eat, rather than too little, is often regarded as a blessing. However the U.S especially is suffering from an epidemic of obesity. Granted that obesity is as much a product of the high caloric content of the food sold as much as the cost of said food. That doesn’t change the fact that as a people, we were healthier when the struggle for food was a daily chore. There is no day-to-day survival requirement for modern men to lift heavy objects on a daily basis, machinery was invented to relieve this burden from us. That does not mean that it is healthy for men to never lift heavy weights. In fact, it is unhealthy for men to do so. Men are both less-attractive to women, and are more prone to injury and disease when they do not develop muscle mass. Work/Life-necessary walking on a daily basis has been almost entirely removed from human existence. You don’t need to walk to the market and walk back, you drive instead. This is true throughout the highly developed west. Yet, every scientist and biologist will tell you that walking is the healthiest behavior humans can engage in on a daily basis.
Simply because technology has changed what society can look like, does not mean it is healthy to change from multiple millennia of how human society has existed.
It is easy to think, “Well, it’s better if there is no struggle for survival, because technology has alleviated this burden.” But such thinking ignores the biological benefits of daily struggle that humans “evolved” to need. There is nothing in human progress that has changed human biology or the associated behaviors from not needing to be tested once in a while. This is why a lot of nutritionists recommend occasional fasting, because the human body was actually “designed/evolved” to occasionally go hungry. Based on all this, I find it reasonable to expect that human interaction between the sexes is healthiest when survival is tested from time to time.
May 17th, 2014 at 11:42 pm
@Jeremy
I never claimed that technology is purely good. Actually, we are in agreement that it has, for all it’s wonders and benefits, been misused and taken advantage of. Men and women alike should avoid overeating, and take part in more exercise. For example, I walk outside for 1 hour every morning if weather permits or use my treadmill and weights during the winter. It would be easier to not, but physical health and strength is an excellent trait to have. More Americans ought to.
Yet this does not change the fact that I believe neither men nor women should be part of a relationship that holds one (or both) of them “captive”. One can have a hard life but that doesn’t mean a man or woman should spend it with an uncaring/unloving partner. I for one would loathe having a relationship with someone who only remains with me due to fear of unpleasant circumstances, and I would prefer to have a harder life as an individual than to have an easier life as an indentured servant.
May 17th, 2014 at 11:42 pm
Sleep on the floor or a hard surface instead of a mattress, learn how to breathe only through your nose and using your diaphragm, learn proper oral posture and proper swallowing to encourage proper development of the facial structure, avoid blue light at night, get a Nature’s Platform and squat in the bathroom, use fluoride-free toothpaste, mineral spray/magnesium chloride brine and/or essential oils for deodorant, use natural chemical free shampoo or none at all and just rinse with water, get sunlight, spend a lot of time outdoors, get comfortable walking barefoot, wear minimalist shoes, the list goes on and on.
Modern civilization is very, very far off from acknowledging, respecting, and fulfilling the things we were biologically designed to do. George Caitlin, Henry David Thoreau and many others back in the 1800’s already realized that modern society was getting away from our roots and they saw problems back then, and problems on the horizon that are even worse these days.
As far as sexuality goes…I have no idea. Mating and bonding behaviors have some things in common and some things are different. What are the sexual and bonding/touch/affection parallels to all the things I just mentioned?
We do so many things nutritionally and lifestyle wise that are completely inappropriate for our biology. What is appropriate for our biology sexually and just in terms of community/bonding/affection?
That’s where it gets interesting.
I believe we are influenced by the past and what we’ve inherited, but we are also remarkably adaptable creatures and we also play our own role in our own evolution.
“Die, selfish gene, die,” or “Why it’s time to lay the selfish gene to rest,” by David Dobbs, has a lot of interesting things to say. That is a very good read. Lamarckism is not popular these days but I think that’s to the detriment of society. People look at biology as if it’s black and white and that we are hard wired to function in certain ways and we simply have to abide by that —
— that is true in some things, but not true across the board. Not by a long shot.
Sex and affection, mating and bonding, are similar but different. Both are ambiguous in terms of their relationship to human health and well-being, although we know through Harlow’s unfortunate experiments that affection is at least an actual physical need in infancy and babies can and will die without it.
Again, this is not black or white. Biology is not cut and dry. There’s a mixture of nature and nurture and the extent to which both of these come into play and interact with each other is very much up in the air.
May 17th, 2014 at 11:46 pm
@Softek
Yes, absolutely! +1
May 18th, 2014 at 12:03 am
@Tarnished
My comment was not accusatory, it was exploratory. You posed the question:
That is still an open question. Your use of the term “captive” does not fit your original question, since males do not seek to enslave women, nor is it a subject in this thread. The question remains, is it preferable to have a relationship where woman is only with you because “she cares about you” rather than staying out of necessity? It is not clear to me that survival stress (of some kind) in this case is not a requirement for healthy interaction between male and female in this situation. It is only when there is no survival pressure that female hypergamy is unchained. Suddenly, removed of the daily stress of meals and harvesting, women begin to look around and compare their status with other females, triggering jealousy and competition for mates.
I would also submit, as Rollo has stated before in many different words across his blog/book(s), that a woman staying with a man purely because she “cares about him” is a myth. Relationships between male and female are, at their core, transactional and will remain so for the forseeable future.
May 18th, 2014 at 12:59 am
Reverse Rollo’s question. Ask any woman if she could have sexual access to a single, unattached, very physically attractive, very successful, very well-socially-connected man whenever she wanted, but she could never appear in public with that man, never be introduced to his social circles, and never have any access whatsoever to any of his resources (no gifts, no paid-for fancy dinners, no expensive vacations, etc). i.e., ask any woman if they would accept being the totally secret lover of George Clooney, with all his wealth, social connections, and fame being denied to her, she would literally never be known to the world as Clooney’s lover. Ask any woman if she would stay with that man, given those conditions. I’d wager the answer from 99% of women would be no. That’s because the very things that women seek (transactionally) from men are being denied to her, despite having unlimited physical access to a man who is everything a girl might want. It’s hypergamy denied.
If you accept what I’ve outlined above, it’s hard to see how the transactional nature of male/female relationships is not always the base upon which such relationships are built. Human males and females are in procreational competition with one another, while at the same time needing each other. Modern society seems willing to acknowledge the “needing each other” part of that equation, while trying it’s best to deny the “competition” part. That competition means that you should never (be you male or female) enter into a voluntary relationship with the opposite sex wherein your needs are not being met. Women understand this instinctively, on such a base level that they convince themselves they’re not operating transactionally. Men know they need/want sex from women, but most developed-world men have been convinced that their needs are “dirty” or “evil” in some way, so they attempt to deny themselves their own instinctive needs. Modern notions of “true love” attempt to deny the transaction that takes place, they attempt to convince men (and women) that true love is somehow altruistic. It is anything but. Healthy relationships are ones where both parties continually meet the requirements of the other, for a long period of time.
May 18th, 2014 at 1:02 am
@Jeremy
True, this was a rather open question. However, recall that it was initially directed toward Richard and it was he who stated that a woman was more a captive to her husband than even his horse. Perhaps I could have used a different wording, but I was attempting to keep within this tangent. Apologies if it wasn’t as clear as it could’ve been…I of course recognize that women are rarely held as literal captives in modern society.
As for the aforementioned “myth”: I have no experience with this, and I don’t see how my relationship is transactional. (Unless I’m “paying” him for sex?) I admit that most other male-female interactions seem to be, though.
Understand that I’m an egalitarian, and strive to live as such in everything. I’ve seen other relationships, obviously, and see the truth of at least some of what the manosphere says…I’d not speak out about men’s rights in real life if this wasn’t so.
But other topics, such as the one we are discussing now, are so foreign to my own way of thinking and personal relations that it’s as though I’m reading stories from alternative realities. The idea that my FwB arrangement is transactional in the way I’ve heard the term used here causes me a great deal of cognitive dissonance. I *know* from my years of reading manosphere blogs, listening to friends issues with women, and my own dealings with them that ABC is generally true, but when I look at my own friendships and other relationships it appears that XYZ is the norm instead.
While I have empathy and understanding for the men who have been disenfranchised by society as it is now, and suffered due to female negligence or rampant entitlement, it is difficult to actually *agree* with everything as my own daily interactions are opposites to what is being said. Perhaps I should go back to simply reading and providing support, as I don’t have the same experiences as everyone else…At least then it won’t seem I’m just piping up with NAWALT all the time.
May 18th, 2014 at 1:19 am
@Jeremy
This is what I mean…I understand, accept, and acknowledge the truth of your scenario. You are correct, 99% of women would most likely balk at this relationship. Women as a whole do look for resources in a man, and would generally not be with him if such prospects were denied to her. I *get* that. In this the red pill is bitter but accurate.
Yet I look at my own relationships and the pill still sticks in my throat because I’m the 1%. I care nothing for my lover’s resources…I have my own, and 99% of the time I share mine with him rather than thother way around. Why should I take anything from him when I have a great deal more disposable income? To do such would be stupid and cruel, not to mention financially irresponsible on his part.
I care about my lover, not his wallet or lack thereof.
I want sex and friendship and good memories and to make him smile, not money or material things.
Now, I’m to bed, but hope everyone has a good night/day.
May 18th, 2014 at 1:42 am
@Softek
I have to be awake in 5 hours, but wanted to just let you know that A) I’m not at all offended by your excitement in sharing tapping tips and will try to take a look at the channel you suggested tomorrow, and B) I will have a better response for you after work regarding circumcision, etc.
Also wanted to let you know I appreciate and am a bit touched that you are willing to share such a potentially painful or uncomfortable topic with me. I have a great amount of respect for those who put their own troubles out there to help others, and will treat further discussions of your circumcision with the care it deserves. Just letting you know, because I’ve seen other threads (not here) about male genital mutilation that were utter clusterfucks of mean spirited insults that did nothing to help the men attached to the penises in question.
May 18th, 2014 at 7:48 am
Jeremy’s point at 10:25 pm seems to have been dismissed, or missed, by Tarnished at 11:42 pm. “I for one would loathe having a relationship with someone who only remains with me due to fear of unpleasant circumstances”
Women in general do not function well by being treated nicely. It does us no good to be advised “Well, just pick a woman who will function properly then” just like it does no good to be advised “Justt pick one of the 1% like me.”
The point is that most women have to be made to feel Dread of their spouse, whether physically, or that he might leave, or whatever works, in order for the women to work. It’s not the men’s fault that their women are broken that way.
May 18th, 2014 at 9:56 am
@Tarnished
Even FwB’s are a transactional arrangement. Sex is tremendously validating for both men and women. The man is getting a woman telling him that, “Yes, I’ll give you access to something I don’t give out easily, you are worthy of that.” The woman is getting a man turned on, which says, “Yes, your body/wiles can still make a man hard, you are cock-worthy.” That’s the transaction in FwB, easy validation. It’s still not as attractive to a woman as a high alpha male’s attention. It’s not as attractive to a man as a wife/LTR either as the woman is not providing a man with any respect or admiration, things that he doesn’t need to survive but are something women used to give and were fantastically validating to a husband. Even if you still remain friends after the benefits are turned off, the FwB was still transactional.
Lets (again) use economics to analyze the situation. You have two people, both of which have no need for each other, they are not in any kind of forced relationship, but they both have different possessions in their garage, tools, workout equipment, etc.. Lets say one has a full machine shop, and the other has fantastic workout equipment. The guy with the weight bench would like some validation of his machining ability, and the guy with the machine shop would like some validation of his ability to bench press. They could both just be friends. Such a relationship is completely voluntary and has no requirement of physical exchange, just being friendly (which is itself a transaction, but that’s a different topic). If these two guys, being already friends, decide to share their differing equipment (sorry for the innuendo), their friendship has now taken on an overt transactional nature. What happens to that friendship when one of the guys decides to share his equipment with the rest of the neighborhood (being a “slut” outside the FwB), thus reducing the time available and the validation available to the original friend? What happens to the friendship when one of the friends decides to simply stop allowing access (for whatever reason)? I think it should be clear to you that FwB is transactional.
Hooray for you being one of the 1%, a unicorn, so-to-speak. Would you then make yourself out to be the ideal that men should look for and adapt to when 99% of women are not like you? If what you say is true, you’re coming off as the exception that proves the rule and no man should look for a woman like you unless he wants to never have a satisfying LTR in his entire life.
Rollo has directly stated on this thread that equality between the sexes is an impossibility. Others have said it. I’ve said it. We say it because it’s true. There’s a childhood saying that we should treat others how we ourselves would like to be treated. This works so long as everyone in the world can be treated the same way, which means it breaks down when males interact with females because women do not expect to be treated like men, and men do not expect to be treated like women. To a certain extent this will always be the case. I certainly don’t go around looking for women to carry my heavy bags, nor have I asked science to find a way to let a woman impregnate me. The sexes are not equal, so equality of treatment is impossible because biology dictates our roles in a functioning society to a large degree.
May 18th, 2014 at 10:04 am
@jf12
No, I didn’t miss reading it, it’s just difficult to scroll up and down on my phone all the time and sometimes I neglect to respond to a certain part of a comment.
Making a partner feel dread to have them stay with you is abuse in my book. No if, ands, or buts. This is a concrete, unbudging part of my moral core.
The man who pushes his wife to the ground to remind her who’s boss…the butch lesbian who routinely slaps her femme girlfriend…the woman who threatens to kidnap the children so her husband never sees them again if he doesn’t submit…the gay man who doesn’t take no for an answer and anally rapes his husband one night…these are all cases of people using dread to keep their partners “in line”. Each one is horrible and disgusting.
Fear is not, cannot be love. Love can be based on mutual respect, or grow from being around one another. It can be a friendship that becomes something more, or a chance meeting where you just somehow connect with the other person. It can even blossom from an arranged marriage, so long as the parents did it for the right reasons. But if you have someone’s “love” because they fear losing you or being hit by you…you have nothing worth owning.
If you have a relationship with someone who *is* broken in such a way, you should care about them enough to either aid them in getting psychiatric help or break up with them so they don’t have to be afraid all the time (and so you don’t sully your own morals by being a controlling ass). The problem with power is that it’s incredibly easy to become corrupted by it. We see this in government, in local politics, in religious organizations or cults, in the police force, in our very judicial system. It can happen (and does happen) in psychological experiments, just as it can happen in the home. I should know.
Maybe it’s because of the community I belong to, but the gamers I know have mostly happy marriages. (Gamers as in nerds and geeks, not puas.) Do spouses and boy/girlfriends fight sometimes? Yes, of course. And I’d be lying if I said there was no instances of divorce. But as a whole I do not routinely see the type of woman you speak of in my circles. I am still horrible at talking to women so I don’t have any female friends, but I can count on one hand the number of catty, bitchy, money-grubbing gamer women I know…and they don’t tend to last long before we point out to the guy “hey, she’s hot but she’s also a royal pain in the ass, you deserve better”.
I know so many overweight, stocky, short, lanky, gangly, or unmuscled men who have happy relationships it’s not even funny. Most of their wives/girlfriends aren’t HB 9.5s…this is true. But they are all still pretty and attractive, they bring cookies and drinks to their husbands games (or play in them), they don’t generally complain if the guys are late leaving the store, they buy $60 videogames and $100 miniature sets for their men, etc. These are genuinely nice guys who have found genuinely nice gals to be with. And I’m so happy for them, and myself, because if the manosphere is a true indication, we *are* the 1%.
May 18th, 2014 at 10:31 am
@Jeremy
1. How are you defining LTRs? I’ve been friends with X for 8 years, and lovers for 7. Or is it just not a “long-term” because we aren’t boyfriend and girlfriend?
2. Biological equality is not ever going to become a reality, this is true. But we should still strive to get as close as possible in society. Misandry and misogyny need to both be eradicated, and laws need to be fair regardless of the sexes involved.
3. No, I don’t think I’m a “unicorn”. I do not think of myself as a woman so that might have a little to do with it. But as I have just commented, I know a good number of geeks and nerds whose women aren’t what the manosphere talks about. Could just be the circles I run in, though.
4. I’d only be an ideal if my traits are what someone is looking for. If a guy wants a HB 7+ who will order pizza, play Left 4 Dead with him, and then lead him into the bedroom for some fun and satisfying sex…yes, I’m ideal.
If someone wants a chick who wears dresses, is submissive, desires children, and acts as though her boyfriend is her entire world…no, I’m far from ideal.
People want different things in a mate. No one person can ever realistically be “the” ideal.
5. Why do you assume that FwB have no respect or admiration for each other? I have a lot of respect for my lover-friend, and admire certain traits of his. He does and says things that let me know he feels the same toward me.
6. Okay, I can see how even FwB can be transactional now, though I must say I’ve never thought of sex as validation of anything except pleasure and care before.
May 18th, 2014 at 11:19 am
What is it that we want out of relationships? What makes it worth all the effort? Are sexual relationships a need or a want?
Again…the biological significance of sex and general affection in adults is very ambiguous. As far as I know there’s almost zero research done on this beyond some cursory studies talking about heart disease risk and relationship status. Which is not anywhere near in-depth enough to really understand these issues.
I’ve been single my entire life. Never even had my own pet. I keep myself fit and strong, I’m a good cook and make great meals for myself every day. I go on walks and hikes by myself. And I do plenty of other things. I am not bored a single moment any day of the week, and can’t even remember (and don’t want to remember) what that feeling feels like.
I’ve never been in a full-fledged relationship. The totality of my sexual experiences with women include fooling around with a girl from out of state who visited me a few times for about 5 days each time. That was years ago. And the last was a recent brief hookup. I’ve never had intercourse. Anyway, these are all very good memories for me and when I think about them they make me feel good. I felt completely relaxed and open to having fun and it was a great and loving experience while it lasted.
Sometimes I feel very lonely and crave sex for all the interaction it provides. But I tap through the lonely feelings, the craving, and “I release and let it go, it’s safe to let it go, it’s okay to let it go, I’m safe as I let it go,” deep breath, and….Peace.
It kind of messes with my head to feel so much desperation for attention and affection and sex, but it melts away when I tap, and also while I maintain getting enough sleep, eating well, exercising and getting sunlight and fresh air when I can. I just went on a hike this morning by myself, felt some emotions coming up when I got to the top, but I just tapped until it subsided and then I sat there and watched how beautiful everything around me was, how good and clean the air smelled and it was just an intensely relaxing and beautiful experience.
I’ve spent a whole lot of my life reading and wondering about the importance of bonding/affection/sexual relationships on an emotional/psychological/biological level….and haven’t come to any clear conclusions.
I’m a firm believer in the importance of nutrition, physical activity, and the long list of things I’ve done to improve my health…as well as coping with emotional pain and finding inner peace — for me what has worked with that is Faster EFT.
It’s interesting to think about in any case. I don’t know of a single person who’s researching with any intensity the importance of sexual relationships on adult psychological/emotional/biological health.
Whatever impact you’re looking at, it’s all just a very gray area.
I do have good friends that I see once in a while, although there is no touch involved, no hugging or anything, just the occasional handshake. All male friends — and to be honest I was never comfortable hugging other men. Although one of my friends who has been committed to mental hospitals over 24 times and has been in jail probably half as many times gave me a hug a number of months ago and told me “Hug people like it’s the last time you’re going to see them, because some day it will be.”
And that was nice. But I enjoy these memories and when I use Faster EFT to cope with the emotional pain/attachment, I can just enjoy them and I feel no immediate craving for affection or a feeling of emptiness that I don’t have it in that moment. Then all I can think even when I’ve been completely alone and haven’t seen any friends for a while is that I enjoy spending time with my friends and I always appreciate their company, and then I just go back to whatever it was I was doing.
So yeah. Who knows? Beats me.
May 18th, 2014 at 11:27 am
@Tarnished
Not relevant. All LTRs start from a position of a freely entered into transaction, that forms the base. Your relationship may evolve over time, it may turn into something else, or start to include other things or even become altruistic (I know men/women who still provide 100% care for their completely handicapped wives/husbands) but it starts from a voluntary transaction.
Actually I disagree with you here, but that starts to go down the path of politics, so lets avoid this.
This is hyperbole, and not suitable for discussion. You are presenting a false dichotomy of “either I’m awesomely independent and hot and play video games with my lovers,” OR, “I’m totally submissive, requiring my boyfriend to tell me what to do at all times, requiring his protection and provision at all times.” Thinking of relationships in such specific black-and-white terms is only useful to pretend as if any concessions towards male ideals in a relationship is unpalatable. We both know that’s simply not true, but that such pretense is useful for thinking that the current standard by which you judge yourself as a partner is just fine. We also both know that women actually enjoy when men take charge. What you’re doing is pretending that there is no spectrum of submissiveness in the middle in which most relationships fall, and that there’s significant room for concessions towards male-relationship ideals from most modern women.
That’s not what I said. I was trying to express that an FwB situation does not typically include what a married woman used to provide in terms of inspiration and support. We both know that’s the truth. FwB situations are no-strings attached. In your case, since you’ve been with someone for 7 years as a lover, is that really FwB? Do you live separately? Do you only see each other 2-3 times a month? What you’re describing seems to strain the common definition of FwB and come closer to life partner.
May 18th, 2014 at 12:21 pm
@ Tarnished
Thanks. My belief is “I’m not unique” — someone else is suffering with the same stuff I am. A lot of people are ashamed of their feelings or are afraid of being made fun of for expressing them. But when one person shares their experiences, someone else who had no voice can find comfort in it.
A lot of the reason I’d imagine guys go to the manosphere is because they’re shunned/criticized/dismissed everywhere else. They’re just told it’s their problem, no matter what’s happening, and they have nowhere else to go for sympathy/empathy/support/understanding/help.
Much like how people write off circumcision and loads of other things. The denial of problems and pain puts people on the defensive. When we go on the defensive, we obsess about making a ‘court case’ for why we’re in pain, and it further attaches us to our pain. Because now I have to justify to you all the reasons I feel so bad, and why I have every right to feel the way I do, and how very wrong you are — now I am really attached to my suffering and am wearing it like a badge of honor. It becomes my whole identity and my one mission becomes needing to prove to you that I went through the things I went through.
When there’s a lack of judgment, there is no need to defend, no need to attach, and then we can approach our pain much more effectively and have a real chance at clearing it out and letting it go and making true peace with whatever it is that’s tormenting us.
May 18th, 2014 at 12:22 pm
@Softek
You and I are on the same basic wavelength here. One can be alone without necessarily being lonely, though it may creep in every once in a while when family/friends are all busy at once. Enjoying nature, sunlight, fresh air, the slight sting of overworked muscles as you challenge yourself to climb higher than you did last time…few people actually realize *this* is what being alive is about.
Sex, intimacy, and the like are very weird topics. On the one hand, some people are denied them while others swim in them. For some, sex is all about numbers and notches and the pure physical aspects…I can’t wrap my head around that. Sex and intimacy will always have a “spiritual” component in my mind. It’s not something to give, it’s something to share.
One difference between our experiences is pets. There has never (no exaggeration) been a time in my life where I had no animal companions. Whether they were dogs and cats, or rats, mice, gerbils, frogs, birds, lizards, hamsters, chinchillas, or guinea pigs…I’ve always had someone non-human at home. Honestly, they help a lot with touch deprivation that I still sometimes have. It’s easy to become touch-starved when one has to relearn that intimacy doesn’t have to hurt or humiliate or make you want to scream. Luckily I’m personally getting better with this (I can endure hugs from people other than my lover, and I no longer jerk away when a handshake lasts too long) but having pets helps tremendously.
Depending on what your schedule is like, Softek, I might recommend getting a companion of some kind. Rats are easy to keep and are very social, and bearded dragons are amazingly laid back if you prefer non-furry creatures. Of course, dogs and cats are good options too. Touch deprivation is seriously unhealthy for adults, and can kill otherwise healthy babies. It’s not something to fool around with. (There’s also The Snuggery, but I don’t know what state you are in or if you’re in the US at all.)
Intercourse is…different. I can’t really compare it to anything else I’ve ever experienced. It feels like completeness, I guess. And I don’t even mean that in a “his dick filled my pussy” kind of way, because you can get the same feeling without penetration of any type. Sex (for me) is being completely open and vulnerable to your partner in all ways, and being accepted as is. You see each other physically naked, yes…but emotionally naked as well. It’s two people who want nothing more than to pleasure each other. Even when you’re role-playing or partaking in bdsm, it’s with the full knowledge that anything that happens is because both want it to. A lack of danger, a lack of the discomfort of not knowing if this person is going to harm you with words or deeds. Pure trust in each other. Respect for each of your desires and boundaries.
This trust is even more important as people get older and stress affects the body in more aggressive ways. For example, last month my lover had trouble getting something off his mind and was not able to relax enough to cum. In our 7+ years together, this was the first time such a thing happened. He was so upset and frustrated, which was only making it worse. But if you cherish someone, you accept them for who they are…flaws and good traits alike. So I got out my lotion and gave him a nice, long pelvic massage to loosen his muscles and help him to relax. After a while I added a blowjob to the massage, and he finally found release. I cuddled him for a bit too, even though I don’t like to usually (makes me feel suffocated if done for too long).
I’ve read enough online to know that a man who’s unable to cum/perform is typically mocked. I don’t get this…making fun of someone doesn’t *help* them. It doesn’t remedy the situation, it creates worse feelings and breeds resentment. There’s no reason for it. Trusting that your partner accepts all of you as a person is a need, not a want.
I wish this feeling could be given to everyone. It seems like so many are searching for it but can’t find it, which is so very depressing.
May 18th, 2014 at 12:40 pm
@Jeremy
1. Ok. Was just looking for some clarification.
2. As you wish.
3. If you think I was presenting a false dichotomy, I apologize. However, these were just two ends to a spectrum I believed we both knew about and took for granted. I never said they were the only options available, or even that one is better than the other. I believe I stated that different peoplehve different mate preferences and that’s fine. Things are *never* that clear cut.
As for taking charge, I don’t know. I imagine most women do like it, same as some men like it. One of my commenters is a happily submissive woman who likes her husband to make the “tough calls”. Another is a househusband who is considering taking his wife’s last name as a deference to her leadership position in their family. See? Two very different sides, but with numerous possibilities in the middle.
4. No, we don’t live together. We don’t share living expenses or loans. None of our pets belong to the other person, and we don’t keep articles of clothing/hygiene at each others homes. I pay for most of our food and entertainment but only because it makes sense given our financial differences. He usually comes over to my place because it’s closer to his job. We see each other about 2-3 times a week, sometimes less sometimes more. We both work 50+ hours a week and have oft-conflicting schedules, so I still think we are pretty lucky as is.
May 18th, 2014 at 12:43 pm
@Jeremy
Oh, and I’m not “hot”. Others have said I’m a 7+. I don’t see it, and would probably call myself a 5. All in the eye of the beholder, eh?
May 18th, 2014 at 12:49 pm
@Softek
I like the way you think, good sir.
Agree 100%.
May 18th, 2014 at 1:01 pm
I’m not going to continue feeding narcissism.
May 18th, 2014 at 1:10 pm
@Jeremy
Okay…? That’s a good plan. Narcissism is a poor trait to have. Better to be humble yet confident than irrationally prideful.
May 18th, 2014 at 2:10 pm
Tarnished, read this:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/06/04/cant-buy-me-alpha/
May 18th, 2014 at 2:12 pm
@Rollo
Alright. Thank you.
May 18th, 2014 at 2:34 pm
Okay, so when women out earn their men it makes it difficult to satisfy their desire for resources since they are the ones doing the providing. This then leads to the men feeling the strain of trying to keep the role of family provisioner, and they begin to feel neglected or unnecessary. Thus the women are also left without a male leader in the family (the “you just can’t handle a successful woman” vibe), and either get frustrated and irritable towards their men, or divorce them in exchange for someone who’s more “alpha”.
But the article also stated that when the relationship starts with a female breadwinner there are no issues. Is this because roles have already been decided upon and accepted, so there’s no upheaval?
May 18th, 2014 at 2:41 pm
Lets just say that women’s need for security extends beyond just the financial. Women have a need for emotional, physical and familial security. So while a woman may be independently wealthy and is capable of her own material provisioning, she still needs a man to be a Man.
Thus, there will always be a transactional aspect to any sexual relationship between men and women.
May 18th, 2014 at 2:48 pm
A “Man”? Not just a man? What is the difference?
And what, then, do men need from women? Comfort? Validation? Acceptance?
May 18th, 2014 at 2:50 pm
Sex
…and occasional appreciation.
May 18th, 2014 at 3:04 pm
You’re saying:
Men want sex from women.
Women want security from men.
I get the sex part…Sex is great. Everyone should want it.
But I guess I’m still confused about the security aspect.
Women tend to have larger social circles and more friendships than men, so it seems her emotional security is covered. Your post discussed how many women are becoming or are primary earners, so there’s the financial security. Men as a whole are already more likely to be harmed or killed in fights/robberies/etc, so it doesn’t seem like they should be forced into defending a female just to provide her a feeling of physical security, especially if they are going to be targeted more anyway. So what security is left?
*Note that I am not saying men are useless to women or some similar bs, since I think we both just want acceptance from each other rather than sex/security. I am just wondering if there was a type of security I missed or didn’t expand on. Plus I like hearing other opinions, even if I don’t agree with them.*
May 18th, 2014 at 3:08 pm
Before I elaborate, have a read of these two:
http://therationalmale.com/2011/09/01/sexual-fluidity/
http://therationalmale.com/2013/04/12/master-servant/
May 18th, 2014 at 3:36 pm
Rollo rightly claims that what women can give men is “Sex … and occassional appreciation.” It’s very very easy to make a man happy, which makes it all the more shameful to women that so many men are so unhappy.
Tarnished makes the all-too familiar claim that women love nerds and nerds have a lot of girlfriends. So, there’s not much point continuing down that garden path.
May 18th, 2014 at 3:51 pm
Women who ‘love nerds’ or self-identify as “gamer girls” are often looking for an intersexual venue that they can dominate in.
Most gamer guys suffer tragically from saviors schemas, white knighting and a nice guy game born from the overwhelmingly feminine-centric fiction they immerse themselves in.
It’s an ideal intersexual venue for ‘outsider’ girls who lack the capacity to relate well with other women and lack the capacity to compete with them sexually.
An HB6 gamer girl becomes an HB8 when she walks into the formerly male-space of a game store – and every guy there is only too happy to help her understand it in as PC and feminine-primary a way as they can muster.
May 18th, 2014 at 4:04 pm
Re: buying beta. One of the ideas I’ve had rolling around is that since betas provide such great boyfriend experiences to women, women should be paying betas for their services. Instead, what we find is that betas pay bux in order for women to accept boyfriend experiences from them.
May 18th, 2014 at 4:10 pm
Re: hunter girls and fisher girls and baseball girls and etc. It’s not just girl video gamers, but also girl race care drivers, girl prison guards, girl comics books, any girl that intrudes on any (? any not?) majority male activities gets a lot more sexual attention than she would otherwise.
Interestingly the opposite effect occurs for boys intruding on female activities.
May 18th, 2014 at 4:28 pm
“Lets just say that women’s need for security extends beyond just the financial. Women have a need for emotional, physical and familial security. So while a woman may be independently wealthy and is capable of her own material provisioning, she still needs a man to be a Man.”
Word.
jf12: Betas don’t get paid for anything; that is their curse.
May 19th, 2014 at 8:58 am
@jf12
I atually do talk about the difference between “grrl gamers” and gamers who just happen to be women. It’s a constant issue among gaming communities, trying to figure out who is an attention whore who wants everyone to know how “special” they are VS who actually just wants to frickin sit down and play. It’s sad that we have to deal with this, but I think most are good at weeding these females out.
http://tarnishedsophia.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/the-games-we-play-part-2/