Even for the most abject Beta man there comes significant points in his life when he makes a Red Pill connection – a point at which, despite his feminine-primary socialization and for all his own participation in a system that deceives him, his circumstance or a trauma rattles him into a state of clarity.
As I wind my way through the Preventive Medicine timeline in the second draft of the next book I come to understand the periods at which these moments of clarity most commonly occur for Beta men.
Early in life that prompt may be the sting of having a high school sweetheart break up with him before she goes off to college. In or after college it might be the undoing of a long distance relationship he thought for sure his soul-mate would help him dutifully preserve. Later it maybe the realization of how much of his personal potential he truly lost after investing so much in a wife who divorced him and separated him from his children.
Not all of these events are as traumatic as this, but it’s during these Red Pill moments of clarity a man begins to see a hint of the code in the Matrix; a suspicion that maybe what he’s believed about how intergender relations should be really haven’t been directed toward his best interest.
So it was with a certain amount of interest I took notice of a man named Stephen when he petitioned advice from a mouthpiece of the Feminine Imperative this week. Though he doesn’t yet realize it, Stephen is at a Red Pill moment of clarity in his life, and as most Beta men are won’t to do, he seeks answers from the same feminine-primary trough that’s kept him in a state of patient stasis until his yet unrealized potential has now become useful to the Feminine Imperative.
Rather than simply allow the feminine crabs drag him back down into the barrel (until his next Red Pill moment of clarity), I’m going to re-post his plea for understanding here and give him (with the help of my esteemed commenters) the Red Pill truth he deserves at so critical a juncture in his life.
Lately I’ve been thinking about my college dating experiences. I’m 28 years old now and I’ve noticed a very odd phenomenon lately. I’m getting noticed (and approached) by women that never would’ve given me the time of day when I was in college. Successful, accomplished women! One in particular is incredibly hot, but they all are attractive. I am baffled by this. You may laugh, but this is making me extremely frustrated and stressed out.
Reading your blog has offered some explanations. I’m an analytical guy, so I’ve been very impressed with the social science you weave into your writing, and the research about how 28 is the ideal male age for women helped to explain what might be going on. But I still can’t figure out what’s going on, with me or with them. I feel emotions like resentment and suspicion, as well as desire, but I’m not at all flattered. I find myself unable to respond in any way, positively or negatively. I feel paralyzed.
Sometimes I think I’m just offended. These are the very same women who rejected me time and again in college. I mean, I know they’re not the same but…they’re the same. I wanted relationships (I tried casual sex…EPIC FAIL), they didn’t want me. My one serious college girlfriend cheated on me with her professor. I was really, really hurt, felt like a chump, etc.
To put it in a HUS context, the [college girls] preferred alpha males (I’m definitely a beta, introverted, overly intense, with a baby face.) Or maybe they were reluctant to get involved during college because they wanted to be free to move on after graduation and not be tied down.The thing is, I don’t think I’ve changed all that much. Frankly, I couldn’t change if I wanted to, even if it meant getting these women. I may have come out of my shell a little, but I honestly don’t think it’s me that’s different. It’s them, and I don’t think I like the difference. I think I’m the consolation prize. I think they still want the alphas but they’ve given up. Time to settle. I’m offended. I don’t trust these women.
Am I too proud? Getting my revenge? Guarded from past humiliations? Or have I just grown up and learned from my experiences?
Stephen
Stephen, the moment of Red Pill clarity you’re now experiencing is coming from your newly realized status. The women you describe being attracted to you (different than being aroused by you) are entering what I call The Epiphany Phase – the point at which their sexual market value begins to decay in earnest while a man’s begins his greatest potential to capitalize upon his own SMV as it steadily (should) increase.
This is a precarious time for women, usually the years between 28 and 30, where she makes attempts to reassess the last decade of her life. Women’s psychological rationalization engine (a.k.a. the Hamster) begins a furious effort to account for, and explain her reasonings for not having successfully secured a long term monogamous commitment from as Alpha a man as her attractiveness could attain for her. Even women married prior to this phase will go through some variation of self-doubt, or self-pity in dealing with the hypergamic uncertainty of her choice of husband (“Is he really the best I could do?”)
It’s during this stage that women will make radical shifts in the prioritization of what prerequisite traits qualify as ‘attractive’ in a man and attempt to turn over a new leaf by changing up their behaviors to align with this new persona they create for themselves. Since the physicality, sexual prowess and Alpha dominance that made up her former arousal cues in a Man aren’t as forthcoming from men as when she was in her sexual prime, she reprioritizes them with (presumed) preferences for more intrinsic male attributes that stress dependability, provisioning capacity, humor, intellect, and esoteric definitions of compatibility and intimacy.
Where you find yourself now, Stephen, is in the midst of these women coming to terms with their waning SMV and the increasing effort it takes women of that age bracket to effectively compete in a sexual marketplace where younger women simply outclass them with every new year that she doesn’t consolidate on a man who represents a good long term provisioning prospect.
As you suggest, these are the same women who found you sexually invisible when they were younger and enjoying the same SMV peak with the relatively more Alpha men they wanted to have short term sexual experiences with. These women were the younger competition they now find threatening their sexual selection today.
Are they exactly the same individual women? I don’t know for sure from your outline, but even if they aren’t, the Schedules of Mating script women follow is so common and predictable that they may as well effectively be the same women to you – and this is precisely what your subconscious instinct is attempting to relate to your conscious-self now.
…I honestly don’t think it’s me that’s different. It’s them, and I don’t think I like the difference.
Unless you’ve made a drastic improvement to your physical appearance or you’ve become more Game aware and have changed your intersexual outlook and behavior the obvious answer is, it is these women who’ve changed.
Now the question remains, why?
What has changed in these women’s lives that prompted this dramatic shift in how they’ve re-prioritized what they now find sexually acceptable? What is it about you in the now (and not back then) that makes you ideal for that acceptability?
Aunt Giggles wants to convince you to let bygones be bygones and follow along with the script the Feminine Imperative expects of you by shaming you for not forgiving a woman of her past indiscretions…
No doubt the girls at college rewarded the males who were early developers and exhibited masculine qualities then. Why take that personally?
I’ll tell you why, because the men they were interested in short term sexual prospects with then weren’t being asked to make anything resembling the life changing personal investment in these ‘reformed’ women she hopes you’ll man-up and be a ‘Better Beta’ for. Those men got the milk for free because the cow milked herself and gave it to them, gladly.
Now that’s a hell of a proposition for a guy who’s played by what his prior feminine conditioning would have him believe were the ‘rules’ for as long as you have. Is it really that far a stretch to want to protect the investment of your personal potential, not to mention your yet unrealized peak SMV potential, with women who now hope you’ll be sex, love and desire starved enough for the past 10 or so years to look past all the short term sex they had with more Alpha men in the Party Years of their early to mid 20s?
Maturation of Beta Bucks
Aunt Sue has always ridden the fence when it comes to acknowledging the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks nature of women’s sexual strategy. When it suits her narrative she agrees with Hypergamy, when it doesn’t, well, you’ll never know because those posts get scrubbed from her blog.
Fortunately you don’t need her input on Hypergamy to understand women’s pluralistic sexual strategy – there are many, much higher profile women than Susan Walsh who openly and publicly endorse exactly the strategy these women (who are suddenly attracted to you now) are using:
“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”
― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead
And since we’re interested in the research perhaps we can ask Aunt Sue why it is nearly half of women in relationships retain a ‘Plan B’ guy:
Whether he’s the one that got away, the office husband, or a gym partner, chances are he is the “Plan B” man you fantasize about running away with. Like an insurance policy, this man is the handpicked boyfriend or husband replacement you have on standby once “plan A” starts to break down on you. According to a survey conducted by OnePoll.com, an online market research company, half of women who are married or in relationships have a Plan B man on standby who is “ready and waiting” because of “unfinished business.”
You see Stephen, it’s not those “Red Pill, Dark Triad cads” who perpetuate the “Beta Bux” theory; we don’t need to, it’s modern women who proudly, triumphantly, openly confirm their own Hypergamy and blatantly expect you to comply with it by default. In fact they’ll shame you, as all the commenters on HUS are doing now, for even questioning your expected role in affirming their sexual strategy.
So, with the knowledge of this new Red Pill truth, openly confirmed by the very same women who are ‘attracted’ to you now, how do you intend to benefit from it? Will you stick your head back in the blue pill sand of HUS, or will you become curious about the broader truths of the Red Pill. Just remember, now you’re aware of a Red Pill truth, there’s no going back.
However, bear in mind, you’re 28, the women you’re dealing with now have had a lot longer than just the 4 years they may have spent in high school to decide if you were attractive to them – these women have had the better part of the past 10 years and the benefit of experiencing the peak of their SMV potential up to this point in life.
Aunt Giggles’ would have you believe your new found SMV is the result some maturation process or change in your personal conditions when in fact it’s the very calculated result of an proudly confirmed, pre-designed sexual strategy. And it becomes really insidious when the operative feminine social convention in play accuses you of wanting “revenge” for acknowledging the same strategy that these women do openly already; you could be cowed into the fear of remaining alone, but that’s a myth to bust in another post.
Commenters, perhaps I’ve missed something here.
Please, feel free to post your advice for Stephen in the always open, never moderated and entirely uncensored comment section only here at The Rational Male.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:34 pm
What if you’re happily fucking a hypergamic women that left her Alpha fuck. Say, you get along well, have fun and she fucks generously. As long as you’re red pill aware and don’t give away your freedom, any harm in that?
November 5th, 2014 at 10:35 pm
See Rollo, that post is just depressing. I have no idea how I want to navigate this. Why involve yourself at all with a creature capable of such behavior. MGTOW like to bash the NAWALT, but I see there point more and more every day.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:55 pm
You can definitely share deep emotion with a woman in connection with a life that you built together…..BUT….it has to be emotion from a masculine frame. The fundamentals of sexual attraction are masculine and feminine roles. You can never violate that premise for too long. Panicking, confusion, indecisiveness…..these are all feminine behaviors that kill male sex appeal…..this is why a man has to focus on his development first and foremost. Create a beast out of yourself that takes life by the horns…..and you will see that your need for feminine-type emotional release will go drastically decrease. You will simply be a more confident, better man.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:56 pm
This is pretty much dead on.
But then @rollo:
What would you advise for guys who are early 20s and single/struggling to have sex with various hot girls?
It’s confusing. Because I’ve been working on building myself through education and getting into grad school etc. but that is a beta provider route…….which, yeah, will pay off with 30 year old girls, but I want to maximize my options for hooking some younger hotties. The thing is that’s not what grad school will necessarily get me ya know? my theory is that its best to maximize all your ‘non provider alpha’ areas in life as well as keeping a beta backbone (I.e. School). So develop your best game develop your best looks and develop your ‘fun times’ ?
That’s a pretty exhaustive life ha. Rollo thoughts on lifestyles for early 20s guys? I do think it’s important to have that beta provider backbone for your future
November 5th, 2014 at 11:50 pm
“advise for guys who are early 20s and single/struggling to have sex with various hot girls?”
do some shit. Rollo was in a band.
see:
http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/28/the-death-of-rollo-tomassi/
what he said: “ask yourself what are your real gifts and talents? How can you best enhance them?”
November 6th, 2014 at 12:53 am
@ New Yorker
“emotion from a masculine frame”
That’s it. That’s what I should of said.
You can share genuine emotions with women, as long as, its within your frame and not hers. At least I don’t see a problem with that.
“you will see that your need for feminine-type emotional release will go drastically decrease.”
These days, I have definitely lost an urge to share much of anything with women (except my dick).
Back in the day, I felt like I needed to connect emotionally with women, just through conversation. Anti-vag tingle. I can’t tell you how many times I remember a girls face that looked like, ‘is he ever going to shut up and kiss me?’
Once I accepted the fact that women weren’t supposed to live up to my crazy unrealistic blue pill expectations I felt a huge burden being lifted off my back.
This thread discussion has really got me thinking about what I want for myself and what I want from the women in my life.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:03 am
The women there are shocked, shocked I tell you, that a man like Stephen would be that cynical that young.
SW’s ultimate advice, probably for our benefit because the women there wouldn’t like it, is “make women prove they really mean it”, meaning she pretends to believe the underexperienced Stephen is in a position to *force* the women to compete to demonstrate which one is most believably enthusiastically sexually attracted to him. She is deliberately rubbing his nose in the fact that he isn’t alpha enough.
One can never overstate the sexual contempt of women for safe men, and AWALT. No matter how evil you think women are in this way, all are much worse than you think.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:08 am
Getting back to a previous point, the reason that alpha harems thrive in bad situations is NOT because alphas are safer and have more bucks and provide & protect & kill spiders. In fact, the alphas are *dangerous* to their women, the alphas take resources from their women, and alphas’ women kill the spiders.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:38 am
The general manosphere narrative is that women who ride the carousel and then fail to lock down an alpha in their prime are forced to settle for a beta. This implies that, at the time the wall is imminent (or has passed), if the woman had her choice she would pick the AF over the BB, but can’t because of her declining value. Though I am sure this is sometimes true, based on my personal experiences I’m not sure it is true as often as one may think. In some cases, I wonder whether she actually WANTS the beta at this point in her life. Let me share a few personal anecdotes.
I’m out sarging and pick up a girl in a club. She’s in her 30s, but is at least a solid 7 (or higher depending on your taste). In her 20s she was an 8+, was running around with the A list Hollywood set and dating a whole slew of players. She later admitted that the night we met she was just looking for a hookup and didn’t care to hear from me again the day after.
Despite that, we get along fairly well and a mini-relationship ensues. She has expensive tastes and over time learns I am financially successful, relatively speaking. Surprise surprise, she “falls for me” and wants an LTR. I break it off, and she starts carrying on like a whipped beta whose oneitis just got a train run on her by the football team. Now, I know women can be great actors, but I genuinely believe her despair was real.
My point is, it was only once I showed “beta” attributes (being a potential provider) that she became emotionally attached. Before that I was just some asshole that she wanted to hook up with but really didn’t have any feelings for.
Second story: I date a girl very briefly, nothing serious, and she breaks up with me. I re-connect with her a year or two later (I know, bad, but this is before I discovered the red pill :)) We hook up, and a couple days later I look her up on social media and figure out she is married. I’m not a fan of looking over my shoulder every day, so that’s the end of that fun.
Now, I’ve never met the husband, but from what I can tell he is very well off- much more well off than I am- though not very physically attractive. If you see the couple, he’s pulled a glaringly obvious upset, by at least 3 points. My sense is she is happy with her situation, she is taken care of, though she clearly has flings on the side with the “AF” side of the equation- AF and BB all being relative here. But I really doubt she would leave her husband even if me or some other fling (with fewer provisioning resources than her husband) encouraged her.
Anyway, I want to be clear that I’m not trying to be a beta apologist- far from it, and I don’t want to suggest any sort of value judgment with these observations. I’m just questioning whether the woman truly believes she’s “settling” as the wall nears- or if as she gets older her attraction triggers are actually rewired to be geared towards LTRs with betas.
.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:39 am
I have to give credit to this guy.. at least he saw through the crap. When I turned 30, all of the sudden I was “handsome” and getting looks left and right.. and now, in my 40s, women stare at me regularly. Now, I did become a little better looking with age.. I was skinny and could have carried myself better, and honestly.. my looks was never something I cared about when younger. But here is the thing, I bought womens compliments hook, line and sinker. I still do. Maybe because I like what I see in the mirror now more than before. Of course now I am red pill aware too, which I’ve tried to use in my favor dress/look/style/behavior wise.
It never occurred to me that I was just the beta backupplan.
Mind you, I did ok as far attracting women when younger- but damn, was I blue pill.
In a way, I am in Stephens shoes now and have been for the last few years. It’s only very recently tough, that alot o this is finally becoming conscious in me and my embrace of RP is pretty much complete.
I am not angry anymore, or as much, but I have now moved into mourning a bit- alot like I feel about losing my best friends, when he died a decade ago. I knew it was impossible to ever have a friend like that again- shared childhood and all- and it was extremely heartbreaking and still is. And in a way, that is how I feel about women in general now. It’s a bit sad. I see what they are doing, I think about how beautiful things could have been, and I mourn that we are all sort of devolving into a more primal state. Mind you, it has always been there, of course.. but human beings aspired to higher ideals and that made a world of difference.
As to my approach now, it is simple.. I define my borders and my wants. I defend my borders and actively pursue my wants and needs. So I date women, I pursue, but never past a point of my self respect or giving more than I want, like I used to.. and I expect my needs to be met- whether it be a one night stand, a date or something else.. no sex by the 2nd date? I stop calling.. I’ll pursue if they come after me and do the work at that point.. and dates are a few drinks.. I give nothing more than picking up the tab on a drink or two.. but I expect her to get the next tab as well.
How does it work out? pretty damn well. Turns out, it flips the script on them, and although I doubt it makes me alpha, I think they perceive me as such. It is a form a dread that a guy barely makes much of an effort for them… If you think about it, it’s a move that takes away their greatest source of power. Meanwhile I push for what I want- the sex and a good time.
On the bright side, I am back in school as some of you may remember, and just today I had another new 20something columbian hottie practically falling over herself to speak to me. I had ignored her up to now and she finally just plowed through into my awareness… this is the 3rd, under 25 girl who has come on to me at school. Them I’m willing to put some effort into- but not much really.. just enough calibrated to keep them wet and tingling.
Got this ones number… may turn out to be a good weekend after all.
I apologize,I am rambling.. should maybe have waited til the morning to write something… but I’m gonna post this anyway..
November 6th, 2014 at 2:18 am
10 months red pill now.
One piece of advice – as much as your tempted to, when gaming women dont make reference to red pill knowledge – ever. Its like the sun shining on a vampire…they dont like it.
November 6th, 2014 at 2:21 am
@SAMO
Great questions. I’m curious as well.
Are women settling as they near the wall or are they wired in such a way that when she hits an older age she becomes attracted to provider type roles?
November 6th, 2014 at 2:25 am
@Hobbes
Thanks man. I enjoy reading shared stories from older guys.
It sort of helps prepare me, or give me any idea of, what I might be in for.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:16 am
SAMO – “But I really doubt she would leave her husband even if me or some other fling (with fewer provisioning resources than her husband) encouraged her.”
If I understand this correctly…
She’s having her cake and eating it too. She didn’t settle and make a choice so much as she found an easy mark to con. There’s no loyalty or fidelity in her, no commitment, no sacrifice on her part. If she’s got an open marriage fine, but otherwise her husband is a chump in a sham marriage. If the flings were cut off by her husband she’d either leave or stay and punish him for imposing a firm choice on her.
This is why there’s no value in being the Beta Bux, or committing to woman off the carousel.
November 6th, 2014 at 4:38 am
What Rollo writes and these comments have been great for understanding hypergamy. I still feel like I have virtually no tools to distinguish between normal hypergamous behavior and the bunny boilers or the girls that are planning the divorce before the check on the first date has been paid. Some of these women can be so convincing, especially in the short term. Their manipulative skills outstrip my ability to detect it at this point. Anyone care to school me on this bit of reality?
November 6th, 2014 at 4:42 am
This plays into a feminine imperative archetype, ‘the ugly duckling becoming a swan’ trope, the classic beta bucks story if there ever was one. And this precedes Hans Christian Andersen, Hephaestus and Aphrodite is one of the earliest renditions.
I think the frog and Price Charming is another variant though orientated towards women, to just get on with it and marry anyone. Nice that they were ‘keeping it real’ and didn’t eschew conflating a frog with beta bucks.
Just look at the Hussies, they can barely refrain from talking about ‘blooming into adulthood’.
Yeh, Stephen is positively blooming…
November 6th, 2014 at 4:59 am
Good Alpha Fux – Beta Bux story from Mike Rowe
November 6th, 2014 at 6:01 am
” Why involve yourself at all with a creature capable of such behavior.”
Because you are biologically driven to do so. It’s not only the only reason, it’s a tautology.
“Do you prefer longer days or longer nights?”
This question is based on a blue pill illusion. Time standards have no effect on the length of day/night. Day and night are physical realities beyond the manipulation of man. Noon occurs at the same time every day.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:14 am
“These are the voices which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint and inaudible as we enter into the world. Society everywhere is in a conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members. Society is a joint-stock company, in which the members agree for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.”
R.W. Emerson
‘Self-Reliance’
November 6th, 2014 at 6:35 am
@rollo
This blog is an awesome source of information and I have been reading your book over the last weeks daily.
That being said, I think it would be beneficial if actual advice for the case studies and / or phenomena described became part of the original post.
In most cases, a phenomenon is explained but I’m left with the thought “OK, now I understand, but what do I do?”. While the articles are excellent for raising awareness, I find them lacking in suggestions on how to cope with the situations detailed. Not that RM should transform into a How-To blog, just that I believe that awareness alone is not enough.
For instance, your advice to Stephen can be found in the comment section:
“My advice would be for Stephen to enjoy this new attention for what it’s worth – an opportunity to spin the plates he couldn’t when in his 20’s while further improving his career, SMV, personal aspirations, and accomplishments for the next 10 years.”
This would be most useful to have as part of the original article.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:58 am
@ is this thing on,
ohhhh this is gold. Three months later she married an investment banker. How coincidental, and she still emailed him to say the kids like dirty jobs??. the comments are golden too..
November 6th, 2014 at 7:29 am
“… girls that are planning the divorce before the check on the first date has been paid. Some of these women can be so convincing, especially in the short term. Their manipulative skills outstrip my ability to detect it at this point. Anyone care to school me on this bit of reality?”
look at your date, watch her closely, and say “I would never get married without a rock solid pre-nup”
November 6th, 2014 at 7:48 am
Stephen,
Your relationship with women, at this point in your life and understanding, should resemble simple husbandry. Necessarily empty vessels, waiting to be filled.
Find your emotional support within or within fraternity. What ever emotional depth you see in a woman is a reflection of yourself.
They are natures perfect predator and if evolution has done it’s job well, they are savage barbarians, Farmer Janes.
Learn to love them in spite of it, but never ever ever trust them.
November 6th, 2014 at 8:16 am
@Razorwire
>keeping a horse 20 miles away that must be cared for and ridden every weekend.
LOL
November 6th, 2014 at 9:01 am
This all comes back to the psychology of personality. I’ve commented here and elsewhere about Fi and Fe-dominant personalities, and about how Fi-dominant people base their personality on their own feelings/wants, while Fe-dominant people base their personalities on internalization of the values of others/society. Most women are Fe-dominant, while a greater percentage of men are Fi-dominant.
Why am I bringing this up? Because it is directly applicable to Stephen’s situation.
Women who are Fe-dominant (majority of women) change their personality and their desires based on their stage of life/perceived role. A woman in the “girlfriend” stage will want different things than a “wife”, who will in turn want different things than a new “mom”, who will want different things yet again when her kids are older. Differing stages of life lead to differing roles, which lead to real and actual changes in personality that are extremely PREDICTABLE.
This is, essentially, what the ladies at HUS are implying to Stephen. Yes, your female peers may not have desired you when they were young and immature and only looking for sex, but now they have “GROWN UP” and are looking for more than just a good lay. They want a man who is dependable, respectable, committed, good dad, attractive (in that order) – and that’s YOU, Stevie-boy, so enjoy!
What they are failing to acknowledge is that the changes in Fe-dominant women’s personalities do not stop at age 30. If they did – if what women wanted at age 30 remained constant through the rest of their lives (as it does in Fi-dominant men) – I would agree with Susan and her friends. But it DOESN’T. Just as her desires morphed and changed between 23 and 30, they will change again between 30-38. Once she has her security and her children, once she no longer needs a provider and father for her babies – once her ROLE has changed – she will begin to prioritize other factors in a man and wonder what she ever saw in the Beta man she married, the man to whom she would not have been attracted at age 23 but somehow married at age 31. At that point, such a man will either have to “up the alpha” and change himself to better attract her, or else risk losing his family life, children, and assets.
Now, a woman may argue that anyone can change. Men can change over the years too, not just women. This is true. But the difference is that for Fe-dominant women, the changes are PREDICTABLE.
As an example, friends of mine are currently going through a divorce – they’ve been married for 11 years and have 2 kids. Both are in their early 40s. He is pissed off because he wonders where the woman he married went. When they married, she was fun, giving, and prioritized his needs…..and now she focuses on her work and kids and hardly gives him the time of day. She is pissed off because she feels she has “grown up” and adopted new roles, and is upset that HE has not “grown up” to re-prioritize as she does. In other words, HE IS PISSED OFF BECAUSE SHE HAS CHANGED, AND SHE IS PISSED OFF BECAUSE HE HASN’T. And all the women I’ve talked to about this case agree that the man is at fault – “of course she changed….she’s a mom now.”
Fe-dominant women change – and the ways in which they change are predictable based on their roles. Fi-dominant men don’t change unless their feelings change. The female qualities he finds attractive when he’s 23 are the same as when he’s 63. Men don’t turn 30 and start finding a woman’s job and social status attractive – and WOMEN DON’T UNDERSTAND THIS, BECAUSE IT IS ALIEN TO THEIR PSYCHOLOGY.
Stephen, these women who did not find you attractive before and do so now will change yet again. The changes are predictable, yet no woman will tacitly acknowledge them until after they happen, after which time everyone will agree that it is only part of “growing up”, and that you should grow up too. Find someone who is genuinely attracted to you, and vet her very carefully before committing to her.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:02 am
“I’m just questioning whether the woman truly believes she’s ‘settling’ as the wall nears- or if as she gets older her attraction triggers are actually rewired to be geared towards LTRs with betas.”
Neither. The woman you describe–a common enough type in Los Angeles (proudly, my hometown)–is not really “settling,” nor is she particularly attracted to her BB guy. Instead, she realizes she’s in a place where the competition for higher-end providers is fierce, and she doesn’t have much time left to compete. She realizes that when she was younger she didn’t have to make the AF/BB tradeoff, but now she does. Such is life–which is no more about “settling” than is accepting that we’re all going to die one day. She’ll try to find a higher-end provider she gets along reasonably well with and can find in him a little something physically attractive or sexually stimulating. These can make for odd looking couples. But when you see them out, the women usually are focused on their wife/gf role–not surveying the field for sexy hookups.
The higher-end provider guy of this type usually isn’t merely a BB “chump.” He knows the deal; he went looking for it. These type of people don’t just casually run into each other on the street. The deal is: she’s younger, hotter, with sexual energy and time to spare. She’ll probably want to have her fun. Whatever–as long as she keeps it fairly discrete. She knows who’s providing her lifestyle. And she knows better than to ruin a good deal by getting carried away with crazy attraction and great sex: that’s for the young, stupid, or undisciplined.
These higher-end, BB providers tend to be busy with work, anyway. But when you see them out with their women, they’ve often got an air of confident, even disdainful, indifference to skeptical glances coming from younger, far more attractive men. The message: Whatever; she’s on my arm, in prime time, and you’re over there glancing; and if you did or do get with her, enjoy it, because it’s not gonna last; at least she has good taste. And off they go in his Bentley, Jag, or Carrera.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:09 am
Re: horsey girls. Boy, do I have some tails, I mean tales. When I was growing up quasi-hillbilly, the pre-pubescent girls who rode animals tended to be farm girls who rode their daddy’s good plow mule and got in trouble for it. Later in the big town and post-college etc., the horsey girls have tended to be rich girls who enjoy the eau de manure and wear leather accessories.
Growing up in Texas, my son noted that every girl goes through a cowgirl phase, and even though a lot (a LOT!) of (admittedly, rich-ish) adolescent girls go through a phase of being addicted to horses, literally falling in love with a horse (or two, or three, and this bestiality is encouraged btw), there are almost none post-adolescent girls with this addiction. I explained “they discovered boys”, but my wife demurred “they’re just growing up”.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:18 am
In the wake of heavy discussions YMY and catcalling etc, SW muses “Why shouldn’t men expect to have to qualify women for relationships?”
Apex fallacy compounded by harassment charges. “Why shouldn’t all men expect to have a Tom Brady ability to qualify?”
“I might consider being your boyfriend if you show me how enthusiastically you can consent.”
Do any women *think*, at all? Do any women *empathize*, at all? Are they all truly as stupid and solipsistic as they all seem?
November 6th, 2014 at 9:34 am
@JF12
Women empathize all the time – with other women, and with children. Women do not empathize with men, because they believe that men have it better than them. No matter how much pain a man is going through, he is always better off than any woman, so the feeling goes, and he should not complain. Hence women’s inability to empathize with men when they are sick (“man-flu”), suffering (“he should try child-birth!”), or scorned by society (“privilege”).
This is why so many women on HUS thought Stephen’s letter was fake/trolling, while others commented that women have it so much harder. It is difficult for women to empathize with men because they believe they always have it worse.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:42 am
@jf12:
Thinking: yes, I’d call it calculating
Empathize: for men, not mucho
stupid: see 1)
or were these rethorical questions :-D
November 6th, 2014 at 9:47 am
@redlight In my jurisdiction, prenups are useless after a few years. They are thrown out if any circumstances change from when it is signed. Something always changes.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:37 am
@jeremy, re: “women have it so much harder”
LOL. The Woman’s Burden of having to be contemptuous of 80% of men, of having to share the planet with so many undesirable men, is so much harder than the 80%’s Burden of being undesired.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:45 am
Teh menz and teh womynz advice to Stephen BOTH boil down to advising him to make the effort to connect with a lot more of the women who are now increasingly easier for him. The men, of course correctly, are advising him that younger less-experienced girls will be more authentically sexually desirous of him, while the women, of course incorrectly, are advising him that the older more-experienced women “now finally know what they really want”.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:47 am
Women’s reasoning:
Women want it, so therefore it is good. Women want it, so therefore men should want it too.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:51 am
If men do not want what women want, the men are wrong and evil
November 6th, 2014 at 10:56 am
Don’t call them …
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201411/don-t-call-them-rape-fantasies
Instead, force them to call you … “Say my name!”
92% of men’s fantasies revolve around giving pleasure, compared to 6% of women’s fantasies. Most women’s most effective masturbatory fantasies involve being forced by a dangerous stranger who is threatening bodily hurt.
It’s not my fault.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:56 am
I’m not saying a pre-nup makes you bulletproof, just talking about it detects and deflects the GDWs.
See all the love in this discussion:
http://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/2ead1o/boyfriend_36m_wants_a_prenup_i_30f_was_willing_to/?limit=500
November 6th, 2014 at 11:11 am
Another article from same guy trying to dredge up stuff from women’s psyche. Of course, he has to pay lip service to the clearly silly idea that women want to find *comfort* in dangerous alphas.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201205/the-triggers-sexual-desire-part-2-what-s-erotic-women
But this detail caught my attention: “romance novels pay scant attention to details of their genitalia”. It’s true. But it is also true about the heroes’ faces and other attributes: women’s objectification of men seems muted and hazy because it is muted and hazy because the men’s attributes are seen through the cloudy lens of how those attributes make the women feel. This doesn’t make the women LESS objectifying, just worse at doing it.
November 6th, 2014 at 11:25 am
@jeremey:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/11/13/empathy/
November 6th, 2014 at 11:27 am
Review of some findings in Dataclysm.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-murder-and-the-meaning-life/201409/sex-lies-and-big-data
Big takeaway: “So, older men are perfectly willing to admit an interest in much younger sexual partners, just as their teenage grandsons are willing to admit an interest in college-age women. Neither group expects to be getting much sexual interest back from those 22-year-old women, incidentally.”
And this is where the men have been misled by the FI.
November 6th, 2014 at 11:29 am
“Don’t call them …
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201411/don-t-call-them-rape-fantasies
Instead, force them to call you … “Say my name!”
92% of men’s fantasies revolve around giving pleasure, compared to 6% of women’s fantasies. Most women’s most effective masturbatory fantasies involve being forced by a dangerous stranger who is threatening bodily hurt.” posy by JF12
that’s one of the many reasons why a man needs to be viewed as and better yet actually be, dangerous
November 6th, 2014 at 11:33 am
More clarity: men cooperate, women quarrel.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-aggressivus/201410/men-make-gangs-women-make-quarrels
Basically, if you take everything sugar-and-spice you’ve been told about women and invert it, then you’re still giving way too much credit.
So, why is the desire to believe good about women, contrary to all evidence, so hard-wired?
November 6th, 2014 at 11:35 am
” . . . force them to call you … “Say my name!””
Sho’nuff!
November 6th, 2014 at 11:41 am
It should be pretty clear what I think is the reason that women want to think evil of men: fundamentally evil is what turns them on. It’s intrinsically as wetting for her to suddenly see, really see clearly, “I am the danger” from a nice guy, as loathe as they are to admit it, as it is for her to think that her attraction to her head-punching boyfriend is based on it feeling good when he stops.
November 6th, 2014 at 11:54 am
Reading through reviews of Dataclysm, women tend to be upset by or quarrelsome with its conclusions. So it must be a good read.
November 6th, 2014 at 12:06 pm
One more plug for a book that I haven’t even read yet.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/christian-rudder-dataclysm-okcupid/
The goal to “make the ineffable effable” is a great redpill tagline.
November 6th, 2014 at 12:16 pm
Deti at Donal’s continues to hammer the most basic truths, and the women keep pretending to be confused.
“Suppose the culture, the Church, society, and everyone in it sent the following message to women at large:
“Your dating/marriage to this man is no guarantee of his continued investment in you, his commitment to you, or his sexual fidelity to you. Every day you awaken until the moment you go to sleep, you must prove, prove and prove again to him your worthiness for continued investment, commitment and fidelity from this man. You are being constantly judged, evaluated, weighed in the scales, and compared to other women. You will know some, but not all, of the standards against which you’re being measured; and those standards are constantly changing. You’re being compared to other women who are dying to take your place. If you don’t pass muster, you will be jettisoned, and he will look for a woman who can pass muster. You might or might not know the reasons why you’re being jettisoned. He can do so for any reason or none at all, and if you are, you will probably never really know why or what standards you failed to meet.”
Does that help?”
Yes, that helps, deti. That is exactly how women *want* it to be; women *want* the apex man.
November 6th, 2014 at 12:51 pm
A warning for Stephen and all others who may not be aware…
The information on this blog is true and excellently written. The comments are open and freely expressed. You can trust Rollos take on everything 100%. For your sake read the book, the posts and any recommended reading.
Most of the subject is discussed from a sexual deprivation perspective and frustration with unbridled feral hypergamy. The concepts of game are very effective and powerful when applied in conjunction with physical development. Be warned. You will experience results. The results can have very negative consequences. Some women will “fall madly in love”, are obsessed with their sexual and or financial fairy tales and expect you to play roles you never want to play. There are women out there who can be be dangerous. “Beware of a woman scorned”. The laws are to an extent literally written to protect them from persecution for crimes they commit. Diasterous shit can be done by any one of your “spinning plates”. The world includes BPDs, sociopaths and psychopaths. Some of them are very well disguised. Ending a relationship with just one of these and avoiding disastrous fall out can be far more tricky than entering the relationship.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:15 pm
@yourtallness
“Red Pill = Theory, Game = Practical” -Rollo
“OK, now I understand, but what do I do?”
The actionable advice to turn the Red Pill into something useful is Self Improvement + Game. Go to Game sites. Try GirlsChase or Roosh or ROK.
After having accepted the Red Pill you must now go outside and try all that you’ve learned from Game, on the women you meet, date or have in you social circle.
Results won’t happen right away. But once you realize that all it takes is time and effort to attract a female then you will start to see these “phenomenon” right before your eyes.
I’m no pua, nor do I aspire to be. I use what works for me.
You must be willing to put in the work.
November 6th, 2014 at 1:18 pm
“You might or might not know the reasons why you’re being jettisoned. He can do so for any reason or none at all, and if you are, you will probably never really know why or what standards you failed to meet.”
Just comply with her most urgent wishes–whatever they are, whenever they arise–and you won’t have a problem. After all, most successful relationships require hard work. Getting married is the easier part; keeping her is where the real work…
Wait, what? Wasn’t the marriage or “commitment” part supposed to be the keeping part, barring some major breach of the marriage contract? And hasn’t she (usually) already demonstrated a willingness to have sex without that contract? So what’s the “contract” supposed to be good for, as far as he’s concerned?
Of course, the deeper question is: Now that you know this, what are you going to do?
November 6th, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Saw your twitter requesting alpha tells:
Wait till the very end for the beta guarding. I’ve seen many more instances like this in person and on other pictures/videos, which i can’t recall right now. I’ll post more when I come across anything else. anyway, a huge bulk of the alpha tells i’ve seen are where the man is physically attractive. coincidence? i think not.
November 6th, 2014 at 2:19 pm
@Tom
LOL indeed. T. Popp is great. She also “overpets”, one from his “why you are not married” post.
Red flags aplenty. Which is why I mention her. She’s but one plate. And she is quite sweet, pleasant, and kind. Just not helping herself out in any kind of way. She’s already got the cats. The job she dislikes. The boomer parents and beta orbiters who help her around the house.
I’m certainly not looking to save her from anything nor am I bending any of my life in her direction, but I can see how she might be a deadly catch for a blue-piller. The trap is set. I am certain she sees enough beta/provider in me to take a walk with me but I’ve also been very clear about my waning desire for any kind of boyfriend-husband path. I think women hear this from attractive men so often now that they just refuse to believe it.
So the wall does little to improve a woman’s existing inclination to pivot toward male attraction triggers, relationship values or desires, or build the kind of self-awareness necessary to toss the wet blanket of reality onto their 20-year long daydream. As much as Stephen is struggling to find his peers palatable; it does not get any easier with age. And like him, I’m always open to suggestion as to the emotional alchemy a man must perform to engage with women under such distasteful conditions.
One only needs to search the dating sites for the over 35 crowd or hang out in a moderately upscale hotel bar with a reputation for a “scene” (most often a mid-week night) to see that the female maturation process is a wholesale joke. They may take on a near professional level of sexual aggression and smile sweetly through the necessary inane conversation to progress toward plausible deniability but they cant shake the 1,000-cock stare nor can they read the script upside down. They just keep trying harder at the old games that used to butter their bread. Always looking for the bigger knife.
Bitterness and cray cray are natural outcomes. All this talk of “bitter” or “cynical” betas encountering epiphany phase women is precisely the inverse of what is actually going on out there. And when the youth and beauty go into full retreat, it only gets more hostile. I’ve yet to find a currency that can backfill the fleeting physical beauty and the pleasant grace of youth that exists before the carousel, career, fabulous tales of sexual conquest that lead up to “who she is today”.
November 6th, 2014 at 2:30 pm
I don’t want to break off the vinegar vinegar waves going on over here, but as the probably only guy who is under 40 here, let me tell you that this is all bulshit. I have a social group comprised of 18-35 year Old men and women and most of them are paired-up. None of the men are rich. Not one of the guys is Brad pitt and the women are decent, fit, and attractive. There’s this thing called “personal taste” which accounts for people of healthy weight pairing up with their esquals. And trust me, there are so many obese men, any guy with a healthy body is considered hot. I find it funny that rollo hates Susan walsh and Susan walsh hates him, but both are snake oil sellers. Rollo sells tge delusion that obese middle-aged obese men can get hot 22 year Old women if the game is tight game, and walsh wants to sell the ilusions that there’s an autistic stem man for every third world women that comes to the states. Grow up. I’ve lost hot women to ugly, short women and I’ve win women from 22 year Old calvin klein models. I didn’t use game. I’m not a pussy beggar and i’m not alpha fux not am i beta bux.
November 6th, 2014 at 2:48 pm
jf12 “Most women’s most effective masturbatory fantasies involve being forced by a dangerous stranger who is threatening bodily hurt.”
In my experience, this seems to be increasing in demand/popularity. Perhaps due to the feminized culture juxtaposed with so much violence and porn in the media (?) and the natural path of a hyper-sexualized SMP.
For example, my HPI (hair pulling index) is up 20 points this year. These 30-something women have been at it so long that they are well past the gateway drug of a simple hookup. They need to be dominated. Merely knowing what you are doing is not enough anymore; they want more physical-sexual manifestations of that domination because (my guess) outside of these sexual collisions it has all been diluted to the equivalent of mundane androgynous PC-approved watercooler banter.
I don’t mind – though I don’t choke (leave no marks is a wise policy these days) but I do sense that this is also quickly falling into the “just get it” category of things men should just magically know when engaging with a SIW. There is a point now where I get the sense that if they have to ask…its too late. Just the next step in the devolution of having it all-la-carte on the way to enlightened wife-hood.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:01 pm
Rollo, OT post but was I thinking recently about how in how in my youth around the 90s and early 2000s there was a lot messages in popular culture about the importance of sexual technique. There were ideas floating around in the public consciousness that being sexually “skilled” was really important. There was a big emphasis on foreplay and pleasing the woman. As an adult this seems very puzzling to me. There is certainly a learning curve to sex but we’re hardwired for it so we’re not exactly talking about splitting atoms here. And the real issue is that technique is of pretty minor significance relative to physical and social attributes. Anyways, I thought this idea might be worth some of your excellent analysis.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:12 pm
@Razorwire re: “Perhaps due to the feminized culture [including] so much violence and porn in the media”
There I fixed it for you. When women sexually devalue real men, typical men, then women greatly increase the sexual value of fantasy men, cartoon men. By far the easiest way for any man to increase his SMV is to become more cartoonishly villainous, if he didn’t feel like installing bloody fangs and becoming cartoonishly monstrous.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:17 pm
@Aaron…..if a woman is genuinely aroused by you, her satisfaction with sex is purely through the level of your arousal and satisfaction. She just wants you to go nuts on her in whatever way you want. Nothing else.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:19 pm
re: technique concerns.
They were simply looking for an excuse to keep blaming the man even after he was doing everything she wanted.
btw boys, you know how easy quickies are always the best? You know how when it’s not a quickie and you have to labor to try to get her off that it’s never as good? You know how she never thinks it’s her fault for being difficult? You know how she hardly ever reciprocates? It all gets worse, worse and worse and worse, post menopause.
The Labors of Hercules are playtime compared to what an old man has to do for an old woman.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:27 pm
[i]anonG on BB:[/i]
I had to read your comment a couple of times to get the correct implied situation. Otherwise, it would have seemed strange indeed, given my experiences when around such couples.
Namely, that the deal for him is indeed covertly if not outright acknowledging cuckoldry, at least accepting a possibility of serial affairs on her side. Ie. knowing that he’s largely buying the social front of her commitment and desire. Often these men do put up a confident-looking front, but sometimes the competition anxiety can manifest itself in semi-aggressive, semi-weak mate guarding actions. Non-physical, that is. Which the woman may for the first few times rationalize as his strong “defending” of her (even in cases where there even isn’t a threat of sexual competition) but over time will erode her view of the man, whatever the financial advantages for her.
Experiences point to a rather strong male rationalizing in providing for these women, while at he same time feeling the competition anxiety despite being able to keep the (usually past her prime) female public affectations and relationships.
Seen it all too many times for it to be merely a coincidence of especially weak BB specimens or something along those lines. Anxiety balanced with endless pockets and/or social status while the women know the score through the mini-tingles. But I guess everyone is happy in their chosen role.
November 6th, 2014 at 3:59 pm
@
High BallHi Princess, when you scurry back to the hen house be sure to take this message back to Giggles; tell her her concern with the Red Pill is misplaced – it’s the likes of Sheryl Sandberg, Jenny Bahn and the rest of the open hypergamy femosphere she should worry about confirming Red Pill truths.Tell her to take on the Sandberg quote, or the Bahn article on both Time and XOJane instead of c&p’ing the top 10 lists she reads in Marie Claire.
Also, she should really pay for the premium service at Alexa.com the demographics of the basic is “limited”:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2014/11/03/relationshipstrategies/where-were-you-when-i-was-still-unattractive/#comment-1679993624
November 6th, 2014 at 4:24 pm
re: women not knowing what they do, unforgiveably.
Mayo Shattuck’s first wife’s net worth, gleaned entirely from him, is in the low eight digits. Molly probably had visions of nine digits easily when they separated over a year ago, and she was careful to have no boyfriends or even be seen in public with a man. But she began counting her chickens a little too early, one might say.
November 6th, 2014 at 4:33 pm
Rollo, is the reason that “successful accomplished” women go after beta bux
1) Mostly about age (i.e. because it takes them years to become successful)?
2) Mostly about future time orientation (AF being a frantic choice, not a calculated choice)?
3) Something deeper?
I’m leaning to 3). Societal conditions that enable a woman to be comfortable cause her to be less sexual. When she is able to, a comfortable woman chooses comfort, i.e. betas and cats virtually100%of the time, and seldom if ever bothers choosing the poolboy/son’s friend.
November 6th, 2014 at 5:14 pm
Anyone even slightly considering any validity to @High-Ball please save yourself the disallusionment.
Those comments are masking for gross insecurity and probably a mortal gagging on the red pill. There is far too much truth here cross verified by numerous sources from a significant range of ages and a large geographical area as well as varied professions, ethnicity, and back grounds. Do not ignore this truth.
Ignore @High-Ball bullshit.
November 6th, 2014 at 5:35 pm
It’s just Princess sock-puppeting for Giggles’. She just mentioned how we’re all old fat and balding men with our dicks in hand over at the hen house.
Which is funny because last month we were rapey rapists, and the month before that, neckbeard gamers living in our mom’s basement, and the month before that…
aww you get the picture.
November 6th, 2014 at 5:51 pm
Everyone just ask yourselves:
Is there evidence for AFBB? Have you seen it?
If it’s not AFBB, what else explains it? Do women have sex with more attractive men when younger, then seem to shift strategies when they get older if they have not locked in commitment from a sufficiently attractive man?
And why is this mentioned online? Why is this mentioned in fora where the participants are men who have seen this?
Why is it so vociferously opposed in other fora where the participants are
1. a combination of women of around age 30 (married and single) and married women over age 45; or
2. overwhelmingly traditional conservative “Man Up And Marry The Sluts” types?
November 6th, 2014 at 6:05 pm
@Deti: When these woman tell Stephen to go with the flow because these woman have “matured” and “grown,” don’t these female mouthpieces know that both of these verbs equate to time ticked away? Does maturing not require time? Does growth not require time? So they admit these girls have grown and matured, but refuse to admit that time itself has grown with them, i.e., these girls are approaching the time wall. Simple logic hurts and that’s why they are name calling. Much easier that way.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:18 pm
Time’s Up
http://therationalmale.com/2012/10/18/times-up/
November 6th, 2014 at 6:19 pm
deti – “Why is it so vociferously opposed…”
Because of this:
http://therationalmale.com/2014/04/08/preventative-medicine-part-iii/
And this:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/12/03/saving-the-best/
And the very real possibility implied therein that the entire notion of commitment is a long con. Combine that with a very nebulous understanding of how commitment benefits the man who pays for it and there is of course going to be suspicion that the calculated goal of the lane changer is to suck resources out of a man she doesn’t care to have sex with, but who is fool enough to commit to her and her deluded belief that she is doing him a great favor by accepting his commitment.
In other words the opposition is rooted in the need to maintain the previously agreed upon lie that all women are looking to settle down after the party years and will give the best of themselves to their husbands and that those husbands are the real winners in game of life.
Some men are asking “if that’s winning what does losing look like?”
November 6th, 2014 at 6:42 pm
Big Mike disagrees with the hen house…
November 6th, 2014 at 6:48 pm
Women are so good at lying that they are even lying to themselves.
This has a foundation in the fall of man.
How The “Thou Knowest Not” Problem Began
http://www.maranathamedia.com/resources/authors/robert-wieland/179-the-knocking-at-the-door/2808-4-how-the-qthou-knowest-notq-problem-began
November 6th, 2014 at 6:48 pm
I simply want to point out that all that has been done here is to take Stephen’s correspondence at face value, take the advice given by others at face value, identify the issues in Stephen’s letter, critique others’ advice, and offer our own respective perspectives and “takes” on the letter.
I have made no personal attacks on anyone. Asserting that another person’s arguments, points, premises and/or conclusions are wrong, incorrect, misinformed, and/or incomplete is not a personal attack or “taking shots” at anyone.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:57 pm
Being serious, I posted this not just to address Stephen, but to illustrate the kind of direction many guys this age get from the generation of women who are well beyond the Epiphany Phase and know damn well what transpired when they themselves had to formulate their own rationales to explain why they were now ‘getting themselves in the right place’ after their own party years indiscretions.
The sisterhood uber alles aside, there’s a want on the part of post-menopausal women to reaffirm for themselves that they ‘did the right thing’ back then in spite of themselves in their 20’s.
They want a hypothetical Stephen of today to buy the same rationale in order to confirm that it was all for the best.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:58 pm
I also believe that the illuminati takes advantage of this “Thou Knowest Not” veil in the mind . They use this to do project monarch programming.
They abuse people and create split personality disorder aka multiple personality disorder.
This is how women’s hamster of rationalization is able to disassociate their true motive from what they are doing.
Men can also have this, but this disassociation thing is strongest with women. Their motives are not as pure as that of men in all that they do because of this.
This link provides more on that:
http://www.maranathamedia.com/resources/authors/robert-wieland/179-the-knocking-at-the-door/2808-4-how-the-qthou-knowest-notq-problem-began
Because females are not as pure with their thoughts and motives, the bible says that they are doubly impure of that of males. This includes but is not limited to hypergamy.
That is why the bible says women are double impure as that of men:
Leviticus 12:2-5King James Version (KJV)
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
November 6th, 2014 at 6:58 pm
re: vociferous opposition.
The FI’s life suport system upon the inflation of women’s SMV at the expense of men’s SMV.
November 6th, 2014 at 7:03 pm
http://www.womeninthebible.net/bad-women.htm
November 6th, 2014 at 7:28 pm
Red pill for one year. The more I read the more simple and obvious these truths become: basic truths that can be distilled to fit on one laminated 3×5 card with font large enough to be read in the dim light of both bars and churches.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:19 pm
@NNJ
DING DING DING DING!
DING DING DING DING!
DING DING DING DING!
You have just entered theTwilight Zone……
November 6th, 2014 at 9:29 pm
@NNJ
Think about this question very honestly and carefully. Do not jump to a conclusion (if you can help it).
Did God issue the Ten Commandments because they are good or are the Ten Commandments good because God issued them?
November 6th, 2014 at 9:54 pm
Psalm 19:7King James Version (KJV)
7 The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
Psalm 119:65King James Version (KJV)
65 Thou hast dealt well with thy servant, O Lord, according unto thy word.
The fact the Jesus, the Christ (Anointed one) had to die demonstrates that the law is immutable.
None of the 10 commandments and the approximately 600 laws have been abrogated. If they have to do with atonement, they have been fulfilled.
If they have don’t have to do with atonement, they remain in the new testament.
If Jesus specifically cancels a law (because of the atonement and new covenant) it is fulfilled.
I believe women remaining separate when menstruating is not a matter of atonement, and therefore should be practiced.
For the same reason, I support women wearing full length skirts and head coverings.
Such a law is the stoning of adulterous women.
God will punish such. I have seen it. It is not up to us to punish.
Everyone’s thoughts words and deeds are recording in heaven. Every single one of them.
All of our motives are recorded in heaven. Including hypergamous and selfish motives, and evil dealings with one’s husband.
The bible says:
Ecclesiastes 7:26-29King James Version (KJV)
26 And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her.
27 Behold, this have I found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account:
28 Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.
29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
I have personally experienced God saving me from wicked women. I have escaped because of the favor of God.
3-10 incidents or more in my life. I can’t keep count.
If you marry someone, make sure it is not a mistake.
The bible says those that worship idols will have women and children dominate them, and the wives and daughters will commit adultery and fornication against them with no penalty.
If you worship money, TV sets, cars, jewelry , celebrities , the trinity, the pope, statutes of Mary, statutes of Buddha, leprechauns , and Vishnu; you are an idolater. You are committing spiritual adultery against God.
The spiritual law says you reap what you sow.
God will cause or allow the wives of such to commit adultery against them.
This is so they know how it feels what it is like to have adultery committed against them.
God is returning unto them what they have sowed.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:55 pm
@Razorwire great post. I am in a similar situation as you but the women I now rotate are all in their 20’s with one exception of 31. All are great when we’re together but then sort of disappear into wherever. Sometimes they’ll re-engage or I will. In my Blue Pill days I would fret over how to pursue them. Now I’m more interested in how to pull away just enough to stoke the hamster.
However…I have never seen a woman who I’ve been involved with and backed away from not come back.
In some cases the fact I’m seeing several women…far from making me less attractive seems to spark even more attraction and curiousity–as long as it’s COVERT…maintaining the mystery of “are they really together???”
I would never have thought this possible without the understanding of game.
November 6th, 2014 at 9:58 pm
I forgot, about the stoning thing.
Jesus cancelled that in the new testament.
He said let the first one that did not sin cast the first stone.
He is basically saying that in the new covenant, that it the job of divine power to perform executive judgment.
Stoning and capitol punishment would fall under executive judgment.
This is separate than investigative judgment. Investigative judgment is investigating and determining the facts of a case.
That is why the bible says, “Judge not lest you be judged.”
When someone does open sin, there is no investigative judgment to be done.
In that case, “Judge not lest you be judged” need not apply.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:16 pm
@ The One Reason: “Ie. knowing that he’s largely buying the social front of her commitment and desire. Often these men do put up a confident-looking front, but sometimes the competition anxiety can manifest itself in semi-aggressive, semi-weak mate guarding actions.”
I wasn’t generally denying the type of phenomenon you’re describing. But I might have been mistaken (due to the “Hollywood A-list” reference) in thinking you had in mind a place like Los Angeles, specifically, the westside.
The men I was describing seem truly to not GAF: there’s no indication they take themselves to be buying their woman’s desire (she often looks bored, not sexually attracted), and they don’t seem to care. Part of the game with such men seems to be that–almost despite her relative lack of desire–he’s got the goods to land her…and you don’t, no matter that you’re much more attractive.
In short, he’s buying her prudential commitment and is satisfied with generating enough desire for her to be willing. My point was that in this type of (non-standard) situation, the woman might be neither “settling” nor (conveniently) “attracted.” It’s “an arrangement.” Dumpy-ish major Hollywood producer guy might not be an alpha–but I’m in no position to dismiss him as a beta as he and his woman zip off in his Ferrari for his pad off Mulholland.
November 6th, 2014 at 10:54 pm
Stephen, my brother, you have not changed that much, but you have to admit that you are “better” objectively than you were years ago when these same girls were rejecting you. At some point you crossed the threshold and you become “Alpha” enough to activate the tingles in more women. SOME of the women you are pulling are actually attracted to you, sexually. Fuck them, literally. Do it hard. As for the women who are looking for your Beta bux paycheck. Fuck them also, if you can, literally. While I am at it fuck off your Hamlet level whining and just screen out the girls who are actually sexually attracted vs. “interested” (in settling). Jeez, I need another one hit.
November 7th, 2014 at 2:42 am
One does not need to be a Christian to follow these words in the bible:
(To Eve as punishment for disobeying God): Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you. Genesis 3
This is God’s punishment to Eve, but it’s more than a punishment. It shows clearly the nature of a woman and a man. If he is ruling (governing/leading) over her, then she will have desire for him. If she rules over him, then she will not have desire for him. Again, you don’t have to believe in God or the bible to recognize this principle.
If you ever do enter an LTR or marriage, great advice from Rollo as usual, then my advice would be to remember that she will try and rule over you. The moment she does, her desire for you will be gone. She will not be happy unless you are the one that is ruling. Not easy for a beta, but just recognizing this principle is the first step.
I learned this at 41. Your life will be totally different if you recognize this at your age.
I wish you well on your red pill journey~
Adam Man
http://takenoutofman.blogspot.com
November 7th, 2014 at 8:29 am
Having now read “The Pet” chapter I do understand Rollo’s PoV better:
“I can understand the want for practical applications of this field of study, and while in my line of work I have done my own ‘field testing’ with the majority of what I explore here, I have neither the time, opportunity or resources to develop practices beyond what I offer here. At least not to the degree of which the majority of my readers are able – and that’s the good news.”
So I guess that’s a fair point and I certainly appreciate the awareness this blog has offered me so far.
November 7th, 2014 at 9:04 am
@NNJ
Are you hoping (pretending) Jesus will make everything better for you by destroying those you envy and altering human nature?
Abbra-Ka-Dabbra
November 7th, 2014 at 9:26 am
@Adam Man
She will attempt to rule over you in an LTR only if she knows she can. By the time an LTR is being negotiated, she will have shit tested you more than enough to determine if you are a wuss or not. She will not even considering such an LTR unless she has finished “sowing her wild oats” and you have failed enough shit tests to prove to her you are suitable.
Clinging to religious dogma in an attempt to “control” life or manage your realm is exactly one kind of mentality being promoted for you. It leads you to exactly the opposite of what you need and are instinctually driven to do. It helps to motivate you to dig your hole of frustration and depravation deeper, and incubate you for when the time comes to further fool yourself so you will gobble the rotten spoiled serving of sloppy 200ths you are being prepared to eat.
November 7th, 2014 at 9:30 am
@NNJ
Are you a white knight or are you wearing a white robe?
Better keep a supply of bleach on hand for the masturbation cum stains.
November 7th, 2014 at 10:35 am
re: clarification from the Cathedral.
The defense of Dunham’s incestuous molestation is anti-YMY. The defense is based on these following ideas.
1. The mindset of the perpetrator is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if the perp knows (s)he is doing something wrong and is sexually gratified by the wrongness.
2. The consent of the victim doesn’t matter. All that really matters is that the victim didn’t mind it, at least not enough to say “no.”
3. The victim wasn’t really harmed by it, and may have enjoyed it, the attention etc.
November 7th, 2014 at 10:53 am
There are only two rules pertaining to how men should behave with women. Just these two rules alone are all that’s needed. All other rules become superfluous when these two are not violated. In fact any additional rules serve to produce undesirable results and support negative conditions. Any additional rules only confuse and distort the real nature of women and mans natural relationship with her. Any more rules than these two rules are beta conditioning imperatives. Rule number one: pump. Rule number two: dump. That’s it. No more rules necessary. If you find yourself thinking you need more, it is because you are being fucked and you are looking for more “rules” to bail you out of the fucking you got yourself into.
November 7th, 2014 at 11:13 am
Oh yeah, I forgot one. It’s Ok If You’re A Lesbian. I predict, follwing this testing of the waters, that IOKIYAL will be increasingly invoked in 2015.
How did it happen that lesbians are in the driver’s seat of cultural norms?
November 7th, 2014 at 11:45 am
If it hasn’t been said before, one other piece to Stephan would be not to participate in the game of dangling the sex carrot for commitment that I believe has been discussed about women at this stage.
And if he chooses to go out, spin plates with them, only spend your money on things you want to do, not on them. He doesn’t need to start with the wooing and romantic dates, when before with these women it may not have needed to be a date for them to do something with a guy.
November 7th, 2014 at 11:49 am
Just glanced at the post at HUS and there are zero comments. Did somebody try to direct Stephen over to this blog and make her shut all comments down?
November 7th, 2014 at 11:50 am
never mind, looking at something else.
November 7th, 2014 at 12:01 pm
There is a single question – what do you expect from a woman. What do you need from her? What is her role in your life?
I agree with what has been already mentioned here – woman are creatures between an animal and a man.
I realized this years ago. It took me quite a time to fully digest it and to find out a way how to interact with them, given this reality.
After many trials and errors, I realized the following:
1. They are not my equals, they have no sense of responsibilty, justice, goodness, no higher soul. They have lesser value than me, as a consequence of which, all their interests, happiness, life, whole existence have less importance than mine.
2. I can not merge with them, ´cos they inevitably drag me down to their level of an emotional semi/animal without consciousness. I do not want to live and die like an semi/animal neither I want to provide/sacrifice for, live with or produce children with, one of them.
3. I can use them for pleasure, joy, art. My body gives me pleasure when I fuck beautifull woman. Moreover they can be a good company sometimes. So it is possible to use their bodies, energy, emotions. They still have something to offer.
4. I can enjoy their energy, give them my body, energy, emotions – in a limited mode, under control, in return. But I shall always deny them my soul.
5. I shall have my life, my happiness, my freedom and my mission. This is what is important, this is what my happiness stems form. Of course, women can sometimes make my life more enjoyable. Btw: they are great in this role.
6. I can not allow them to have any power over me. I shall reserve all the power in relationships with women for myself.
7. I can´t take them seriously, neither I can give their existence more meaning than to serve for my pleasure.
8. I shall not cause them unnecessary harm. Caveat – sometimes it is necessary to cause them some pain to protect my interests.
This is what made a good job for me for many years.
November 7th, 2014 at 12:31 pm
Stephen’s intuition — that he is in the box labeled ‘Beta Chump’ — is correct. Big risk. What’s ignored most places is the lie that lane-changing is one-directional: from Sandberg’s “have fun in your twenties” to “find a neat guy who offers safety and security and potentially a condo at Crested Butte, provided he will help you get off with your vibrator if need be.” Sandberg is ignoring the “And then …?” part. Frankly, in my opinion, so do most red pill discussions. We usually discuss AF-BB, and focus on the unpleasant conditions of being BB-guy.
These women are alpha widows and they never lose the taste for strange, for powerful, or for new. After the children-and-home merit badges are earned, what’s the next merit badge? “I’m a mature woman and I have needs that my husband cannot satisfy.” So it’s AF-BB-AF. Look out below, Stephen, you’re unlikely to enjoy the fruits of stability and comfort, because once the children are established, or graduated to prep school or college, the wife (if she remains reasonably fit and attractive) will be bombing you with her unmet needs. Feelings justify anything to a middle-aged woman with options.
I have been the AF, the BB, and I have been both at the same time. Civil marriage requires a man, as Deti notes by inverse example above, to commit to permanent Game. Permanent Game rarely involves true intimacy. This is the reality of the Plan B Nice Guy in marriage.
Example: my buddy, a ‘scary’ sort with a shadowy job involving three-letter-agencies, has been involved in an illicit affair with a married woman. It’s her second marriage. She was a nine in her youth; she remains so now, adjusted for her age, of course. She’s as hot as Molly Shattuck, though about 10x as smart. The terms of their affair were: no marriage, no disclosure, a separate place outside her social structure (he is not married).
Well. After four weeks with my buddy she asked her husband to move out and asked my friend “Can’t we be together like normal people?” She has no children at home, and her life arc was AF (first husband), BB (drippy, but a very reliable Plan B) — and now, apparently, it’s time to be validated again as a hawt thing with a new class of AF. (Plan C.) She told my buddy that she had never gotten off with husband #2 without deploying the vibrator simultaneously, but with him, it’s orgasm city. Therefore, goodbye Mr. Nice Guy, your expiration date is in the mirror.
Social, moral, religious constraints used to constrain this behavior. Now the culture celebrates the primacy of female self-expression. Stephen is correct to be skeptical, and as I read the comments at the other site, which are dominated by the four or five same women who appear to be in LTRs, it appears that some decision science is in order. Just because some vociferous, married women deny the contradictory tensions in female sexuality, hypergamy, and abstract thinking ability, it does not mean that the numbers are not the numbers. The numbers say that *any* man who commits to a girl — be she good, bad, racy or boring — has a material probability of having the State dropped on his head. All in the service of her “evolving needs”.
There is no finer AFBB optimal figure than Milo Shattuck. The guy’s a charming, brilliant billionaire. (Alex. Brown was my bank for a while.) But Molly and Milo didn’t make it. Who among us has more and better attributes than Milo? Why didn’t Baltimore question her many accolades as a woman of means ‘giving back’ to her community?
(Now Molly is revealed for not just being an appalling attention whore on the sidelines of Ravens’ games, she’s really revealed as an aggressive, self-pimping, child-dick-hungering sexual aggressor.)
Who wants to bet she does real time for raping a 15 year-old?
I won’t. Our culture will ‘forgive’ her, while celebrating her tiny waist, reconstructed boobs, and immaculate dye job. She’ll do some penance, and probably wear an ankle bracelet for a spell in her mansion in Roland Park. After all, she was just following her feelings, on her journey to self-expression heaven, as she migrates to Act III of the drama of her life. First she was the marketing gash who lands the investment banker as Wife 2. Then the beneficent ex- who buys her way into polite society, joins all these boards, and gets social ribbons for doing so. And now, Act III, where a ‘mature’ woman pursues her reality, said reality being sex on demand to validate her special specialness. Any woman who changes lanes retains the option of changing lanes again. Men are destroyed, in American culture, should they attempt same.
We get one life. If you want to tell yourself “it will never happen to me”, that’s fine, but if it does, you will not recognize your life, and probably not your children.
November 7th, 2014 at 12:41 pm
BV you should probably read this series:
http://therationalmale.com/2014/03/16/preventative-medicine-part-i/
http://therationalmale.com/2014/03/26/preventative-medicine-part-ii/
http://therationalmale.com/2014/04/08/preventative-medicine-part-iii/
http://therationalmale.com/2014/04/13/preventative-medicine-part-iv/
November 7th, 2014 at 12:44 pm
Princess’ comment about men — those willing to discuss these matters — being fat, rejected, bitter, hirsute losers, is amusing. If she’s over 30, such women will bang or blow you on the first date, so charmed by any red pill man of accomplishment who isn’t fat, bitter, hirsute, etc. And she’ll brag on her divine sexual power to her girlfriends.
The stridency of her remarks just proves that her lifestyle of roving sexual affirmation is primary. The lifestyle is affirmed by her selection of men to off who are not fat and bitter. To wit: “I attract charming, dominant men; therefore I am empowered, I’m a great catch.” O—kay fine, if you say so, sister. But the bar to attraction and desire is mighty low with you.
November 7th, 2014 at 12:50 pm
Thanks, Rollo. Did not intend any aspersion of this blog.
I admit it would be hilarious to read a HUS discussion of how a “I finally know what I want” woman, who’s locked down her Plan B Nice Guy, deals with her ‘sexual needs’ after the two children have been produced, and a suitably comfortable home has been secured in both names. The current convention in the culture is that such women never pine, again, for AF strange. Hahahahaha.
November 7th, 2014 at 12:52 pm
^^^
You just described Susan’s marriage.
Why do you think she started HUS?
Catharsis.