There are times I’m typing away on a particular topic and I get scooped by my own comentariat.
Quote from BadPainter (emphasis mine):
George – “She prefers a dual pluralistic feminine sexuality where she can express and enjoy greater sexual freedom and an artificial feeling of control and dominance.”
Because giving herself sexually to a man who is a provider either makes her a whore (trading sex for material goods), or a slave (giving up power to submit to a dominant man). By chasing Alpha Fux she can submit in that moment and maintain the illusion of independence. By accepting commitment from Beta Bux she gets the very highest price for her sex and can aintain the illusion that’s she is not a whore. Combining the two, Alpha Fux and Beta Bux means accepting a submissive position to a man who provides with an expectation of sex.
This is antithetical to entire feminist paradigm of equality with, and independence from, men. To achieve this ultimate feminist goal women achieve equality, and equality of outcome by political policy, and they achieve independence by becoming lesbians.
George’s response:
Well put, agreed. I wonder how many women really are successful with this plural hypergamy and how many really aren’t. We are seeing many media examples of this and examples of young girls in traditionally masculine leadership fantasy roles (hunger games, etc.). However, I personally know very few real females who are successful with “open hypergamy” and none who characterize real leadership traits. The ones attempting to practice this plural hypergamy expose themselves as the untrustworthy sluts they are, divorced, etc and no man worth a shit wants anything to do with them. They end up extremely insecure bitter hags in short order.
Again BadPainter:
George – “They end up extremely insecure bitter hags in short order.”
This seems to be the case amongst all women who hold to the feminist notion of equalitarian relationships. And I think generates similar results amongst women who don’t actively subscribe to feminism but willingly accept the benefits of feminism. And I think it’s the career track reality that does it.
A woman working outside the home must submit to the hierarchy of the work place. The workplace is the Alpha of her existance because it can and will dispose of her as soon as she is unwanted/not needed. The workplace is dread writ large. When she goes home she can’t as easily submit to her beta husband because she knows he can’t and won’t dispose of her so easily, especially if there are children involved. This is a source of disrespect, she gets away with it because she can. She resists because she has been playing that submision game all day and refuses to simply give in at home.
Likewise a man having to walk the tightrope of workplace politics being both a good follower and showing initiative, and leadership irrespective of rank and position, has little desire to fight those same battles at home. So he gives in out of exhaustion what he wants is a moments peace where his way is the only way because he’s the king of his own castle at least in his own mind.
Both man and woman are ultimately played against each other in this situation. The woman is more resistant to submit, the man more reluctant to dominate because he now has to be more dominant than the woman’s work place without the benefit hard dread sans consequences. In the past the practiced amount of domestic dominance required would be reduced or mitigated by the economic reality of the woman’s dependence on the man for her material standard of living. Not so today when divorce law favors the woman, and domestic violence laws, and standards for defining abuse only apply to men. Today those influences plus the nuttiness of feminism makes a challenging situation worse as the the gender roles are now competitive instead of complimentary and collaborative
I realize I may raise a few hackles with today’s post. And while I wont apologize for what I’m going to propose here, just know that my intent isn’t to offend or injure, but rather to strip away a degree of what I think is a very pleasant, but sugar coated fiction.
Whenever I read or hear a man consistently refer to his wife as his “bride” it alerts me to his Blue Pill state of mind as well as his conditioning. This is a relatively new colloquialism for the Christian set (“christianese”). Generally I hear and read this from Evangelical Christian men because their context (or domain) is one of a self-enforced reverence for their wives. Usually it’s meant to be a not-so-veiled attempt at pedestalizing their wives in casual conversation with people they think will appreciate it (and hopefully earn cookie points with the wife), but what it reveals in my Red Pill lens is a guy who believes his “voluntary” deference to her makes him more respectable to her.
Before you think I’m unfairly highlighting “Christian Beta Game” there is a similar, but more pervasive dynamic in the married-man set of the manosphere. Whenever I read a man (I’ve never heard a guy verbalize this) refer to his wife as the “First Mate” or “First Officer” it similarly sets off the same sensitivity I get with the “brides” men – and for much of the same reasons.
Any man with a cursory experience in the manosphere recognizes this buzz-term from Athol Kay’s Married Man Sex Life. The principle of the term stems from the idea that a husband needs to be the ‘captain’ of his marriage, his family and the director and decision maker of where that unit will go, what their goals are, etc. On the face of it, this male headship positioning stresses what men (and wives) interpret as an old-order conventional complementarity between the sexes.
A strong male leadership role is very appealing to both men and women, and I’ll be the first to cosign the need for a man’s ‘captaincy’ as it were in his marriage and his life in general. This ‘Manning Up’ into a headship of his relationship hits the right buttons for a man predisposed to Beta complacency (not to mention it gives him a faint hope for resolving a sexless marriage), but also for women who are encouraged by the ‘new’ Alpha-ish husband they hope will take the lead (usually from her) and potentially generate the tingles he’s never quite been able to do for her.
Unfortunately, this push for ‘captaincy’ is self-defeated by the equalist-mindset compromise of allaying a woman’s inherent insecurities by giving her assurances that she will be the “first mate” in this new arrangement. Even in a position of instated headship (relinquished or otherwise), men predisposed to an egalitarian equalism still want to ‘play fair’ and offer an appeasement for being allowed to be the head of the home.
Her voice will be heard, her input will be considered, because he just “loves her that much”; this is the self-satisfying rationale for being allowed to direct the course of his marriage and family. The problems inherent in this are rooted in the compromise of his assuming all accountability for the failures of that arrangement while still granting her his magnanimous assurances that he’ll always have her best interests in mind.
Father Knows Best
I overheard a young woman explain what amounted to open Hypergamy to a Beta kid I know over the holiday. At one point she said, “It’s women’s job to get away with everything they can in life.”
Then the kid asks, “So what is men’s job to do in life?”, “Not to let ’em” was her reply.
I’ve always stressed that the Frame in which you begin a relationship will set the overall tone of that relationship. That’s not to say the predominant Frame can’t be altered (indeed many men fall victim to their own Beta backsliding in marriage), but that tone, that predominant directorship of who’s Frame will set the course for where it goes and how it develops is set before you sign on to monogamy in its various forms. It is either your reality into which a woman must enter, or hers that you must enter. Their may be compromises, but these will be colored and characterized by whose Frame is the dominant one in the relationship.
Know this now, your wife, your LTR girlfriend, doesn’t want to be your “First Mate”.
While you may think you’re flattering her with your self-styled magnanimity, this compromise only reflects your Blue Pill equalist hope that she will genuinely appreciate the sacrifices you make in considering her Frame. The dominant Frame (hopefully yours) is what matters. While a wife’s input may present you with insight you may have overlooked, she must ultimately acquiesce to your Frame’s primacy.
When you consider her a co-equal actor in what you believe is a mutual Frame (or what you’ve convinced yourself is really your Frame to maintain that relationship) you will own your mistakes and failures, but she will share in, and at times take an equal credit for, your successes.
There’s a reason that the cliché is “Behind every great man is a woman” and not the other way around. Any man claiming a supportive responsibility for a woman’s success – or even being graciously acknowledged by her for it – is perceived as a coattail rider. When it comes to a comparison between Sensitive New Age Guy® and Strong Independent Woman®, a woman is always a support system for a man’s success. Men’s genuine support is emasculating because ‘support’ is a feminine role in either an egalitarian or a complementarian relationship.
Down with the Ship
While it may be comforting for a woman to believe her opinion is valued, or that what passes for her newfound submission to his direction is guaranteed by his considerateness, very few ‘first mates’ are willing to go down with the ship once it starts taking on enough water. The ‘first mate’ notion is really a win-win situation for women who are already virtually guaranteed of long term support whether her ‘captain’ sinks the ship or not. With so many reassurances of social, emotional and financial support women can always reserve the right to jump ship should her husband’s fates and fortunes not live up to his headship.
When she goes home she can’t as easily submit to her beta husband because she knows he can’t and won’t dispose of her so easily, especially if there are children involved. This is a source of disrespect, she gets away with it because she can. She resists because she has been playing that submision game all day and refuses to simply give in at home.
In other words, the ‘captain’ is really on his own regardless of his ‘first mate’s’ input.
She’s absolved of his failures and shares in his successes – which are made all the better when he convinces himself that the directives of her Frame are really his own. Any consideration for real mutual input will always be mitigated by this foreknowledge of a relatively ensured support should he not live up to the performance demanded of a ‘captain’.
Forgetthesky from last week’s comment thread:
I think George and Badpainter bring forward an interesting hypothesis above: the idea that women are pursuing an AF/BB strategy so relentlessly not only because a man to exemplify both sides are so rare (though they are unusual), but because women would generally avoid such a man – because she would have no power over him, he would command all spheres. And modern women fear submission greatly, they’ve been trained to. And they’ve often enough never experienced it positively, with so many absent and beta father’s around.
A Man needs to command all spheres to genuinely be the ‘captain’, and ultimately this disqualifies any validity of his woman’s considered influence on him.
The idea of a needed balance of including a wife or LTR in a man’s decision making process is not just the result of an equalitarian mindset, it also serves the Feminine Imperative. While equalism is the root belief, the notion of a mutual (though nominally lesser) inclusiveness works on much the same level as Choreplay. If a man “plays more fairly and evenly” the expected reciprocation should be a reward of more of a woman’s love, respect and pussy. In fact this is the sell for both equalist Purple Pill inclusivity and doing a feminine defined set of equalized chores.
The problem then becomes one of the observer effect when a woman is constantly aware of the inclusivity, captain-first mate Game that she and her husband are both overtly playing. Observing the process will change it, so any assuming of ‘captaincy’ and any presumption of a roleplaying legitimacy on his part become suspect of both he and his wife’s genuineness. Truly submissive women want a decisive, unapologetic man with masculine determination and ambition for his life, who doesn’t need to be told he needs to be so. He ‘Just Gets It‘, and so much so that his Frame is the dominant one from the outset of the relationship without any back and forth about captains or first mates. She enters his reality, or she doesn’t associate with him.
Women don’t want to be overtly reminded that they’re “being included”. This is pandering to women who already know they have the blameless option of abandoning or jumping the ship. This overtness then inevitably script-flips to male ridicule.
“I’m the king of the castle. My wife told me I could be” is how the joke that men tell themselves goes, but the self-observation is really one of abdication to a woman’s Frame while he lamely grasps at an authority he doesn’t believe he’s ever earned.
No one laughs at his joke.
December 30th, 2014 at 5:45 pm
@ Mentats
I understand what your saying, and have said exactly the same thing right here myself many times. While I think we’re correct In our superficial observations and conclusions. I also think we’ve missed something, something very important. And that is the idea that we, WE control the rewards. Confusing us about that is an intentional goal of the FI. For we who are recently unplugged the lingering Bluepill bullshit has defined for us the rewards we are allowed to seek. As well the fucked up notion that we are responsible for the feelz of women, as though those matter, places limits on our ambitions, and desires. We must individually define our own rewards and own terms of success.
For me if looks like work I’m not doing it without a paycheck. So in addition to defining the rewards I have to redefine the process to be rewarding in and of itself. For example if my hobby is wood working and making furniture that’s a craft that involves serious work, not to mention capital inputs, the reward for doing that work is my own satisfaction with the process and results. It’s not work because I can choose to do something else with my time and energy. But I do it because I enjoy it.
Applying that to women is similar. You define the reward, and you grant it to yourself. For me, because I loathe the process of game, I had to redefine the rewards and motivations for practicing game. And it is a game. What I do is take various game tactics, scripts, whatever and apply them as though it’s all big experiment. The question I have for each experiment is “does this work?” and “are the results repeatable/predictable?” In this case the reward is satisfying my own curiosity which amuses me to no end. And since satisfying my curiosity is the reward I am not in the least concerned with reactions of the test subjects; outcome independence. I’ve also discovered that my attitude indifferent objectification when doing these “experiments” gets results in and of itself: frame.
December 30th, 2014 at 5:50 pm
“It’s women’s job to get away with everything they can in life.”
Then the kid asks, “So what is men’s job to do in life?”, “Not to let ‘em” was her reply.
-Simply GOLDEN!!
Cannot be more true!!!!
Who said that?What age was that girl? teen? Tweenzzz?
Pretty mature and straightforward – seemed like it came from a worn out cougar who has had a lot of experience
(not that teen girls these days don’t have a lot of experience)
but still..
and by the way
wait for this article on the 31st, I have included this one on our new year’s Testosterone-filled linkfest
Happy holidays, brother!
December 30th, 2014 at 6:00 pm
That sounds tedious. Women sound tedious and untrustworthy. I’ve heard the story of the frog and the scorpion. I refuse to get stung halfway across.
December 30th, 2014 at 6:00 pm
LOL I always refer to women a mine, my girl, my woman, my darling and often my property. Girl#1 is now my brood mare or my breeder & when ever one of them tries to get an “I love you” out of me I will tell her I love all my property equally, my dogs, my car, my bike etc all equally beloved. LOL that makes them cranky.
I have never received good advice from a woman on any issues beyond her technical field of expertise. I have gotten good advice from a lady dentist about dental care but not on the more important issues like how to order my life properly. I rarely get good advice from other men, as in the worst mistakes in my life came from listing to other dudes and not my gut, so I am not real sure why men would seek out a woman’s opinion on anything of importance. And Rollo nailed it, follow others advice and if it doesn’t work out its because you are the dumbass who.listened to it. Rather be my own man, win,lose or draw.
The idea women help men doesn’t match with reality. Ideal world? Sure…. here on the ground….. not so much.
My experience is the more high powered the woman, the more quickly she wants to shed those responsibilities when she gets home so the more submissive, differential etc she is.
Fair certain Buddha had a wife, kids etc. Though that class was a long time ago and I cannot take a fat dude serious any which way.
Tilikum crushed it up.there.
There is no equality in my dealing with women. I call the shots. She is free to follow or leave, but either way my self respect and pride remain intact. I don’t explain or discuss. I lay down expectations and will clarify when needed and delegate tasks but past that it’s be good or be gone. Half measures like her being your first mate or executive officer in the army, is likely to be no more effective then any other half measure.
December 30th, 2014 at 6:23 pm
I never felt the Captain / First Officer model was a good one to describe any masculine / feminine relationship, let alone a marriage. My reasoning is a bit different. First, masculinity and femininity is about polarity. Chain of command is about linearity. You cannot use a straight line to define a circle. Second, subordinate officers do not shit test superior officers, nor do they open defy the chain of command. The punishment for mutiny is death. Third, the first officer can step up to take the position of captain if needed. Femininity can never take the place of masculinity.
One final note, I I frequently see this used by husbands as a way to sell their wives on the idea of feminine submission. You should not have to explain anything to your wife. You just act. If you are masculine enough, her feminine submission will kick in without any need for an explanation or justification.
December 30th, 2014 at 6:58 pm
“I’ve become better at detecting subtle IOIs,”
Can someone recommend a good resource (book, article, etc.) for explaining IOI’s from women, especially the subtle IOI’s?
Thanks,
BrianS.
December 30th, 2014 at 7:09 pm
Rollo, I’m not sure how you made the leap where First Mate is on Equal footing with the Captain. In my mind, the First Mate role is for the purpose of wielding the man’s authority vicariously in regards to the kids.
Beyond that it is an honorary title, not a working one.
Like an honoary doctorate. They aren’t *really* a doctor. A first mate title would have to be decorative because the woman does not have any actual authority to act beyond what the Captain has authorized.
Neither can she ever hold her own true authority, because of her known inherent leadership flaws. I’d give my sons all authority over me in the event of my incapacitation before I’d give that to a wife. Easy.
For me to give the First Mate title to a woman is more like when your boss gives you some bullshit fancy title in order for you to feel better about your bullshit job. Works wonders with women, as long as it sounds statusey. No substance needed.
Unfortunately, that is all theoretical, since I am not married, and marriage does not exist in this land.
Fasciinating point about how the woman’s job-dread throws her husbands total practical inability to dominate into such sharp focus. Especially if the household is counting on her income, and it usually is.
December 30th, 2014 at 7:22 pm
Brian, Google “list of IOI’s”. Hundreds of links. Recognizing them actually becomes a right enjoyable game in its own right but they are never foolproof. Sometimes a filly twirling her hair is really just twirling her hair.
December 30th, 2014 at 7:22 pm
@ Johnycomelately
One thing I’ve noticed about the married alpha types is that they often didn’t enter the relationships as alphas but that their wives helped build them into alphas.
When I married my wife 20 years ago I was a college dropout that delivered pizza. I was in most ways the absolute furthest thing from an Alpha. But all I ever wanted to do was run my own business and I worked very hard toward that end. My wife was a public school teacher and so between the two of us we scraped by. I did the hard work but she did support me in the sense that I can’t remember a single instance of personal criticism, even when we had nothing. Which was always. The only personal criticism I receive today is from my employees or customers. Never from my wife.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:02 pm
@Mentats
I would suggest you for now turn away from the “getting chicks” part of TRP and focus instead on only the self improvement part. Use the frustration with the reality of other human beings to instead engage in introspection and improvement. Build self-esteem, self-interest, physical fitness, and happiness on your own. That’ll take a lot of time probably, but it’ll change you a whole helluva lot as a person.
Once you feel like you’ve ironed out a lot of the bad things your old bluepill self got you in to, approach the female angle with with a new mindset. For now though, it’s fine to just regard women as bullshit and work on you. You need the self-improvement to see a new perspective. At least do that for yourself.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:04 pm
Glenn
December 30th, 2014 at 9:09 am
I show an tell. Each message reenforces the other. Think of it as a form of NLP. I give her mantras to say to herself. Things to say out loud to me. I tell her things. Especially I point out, “Now didn’t what I just did make you feel really good.” After some particularly outrageous transgression. I’m not just trying to get her to behave in a certain way. I’m working on making her WANT to behave that way.
Or to put it another way – I’m teaching her how to be a woman. Too funny.
Think of it as me trying to make game less work. Getting her to submit sooner. The next level. I haven’t seen anything about this in the manosphere. Ever. It may not work. In which case you can chalk it up as a failed experiment. But no matter what something will be learned.
If we are not going to do politics, we might as well make submission popular. If we can.
OK. Now I’m just going to read the rest of your comment.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:12 pm
I frequently see this used by husbands as a way to sell their wives on the idea of feminine submission. You should not have to explain anything to your wife. You just act. If you are masculine enough, her feminine submission will kick in without any need for an explanation or justification.
You know, up until now I missed a connection between masculine leadership and ideas I’d heard before in my life. In social theory, there’s and idea that hierarchies in groups will naturally arise if not explicitly assigned. No one will even say “I am the leader”, instead the members of a group will just naturally fall in behind the most natural leaders who simply lead through action.
It stands to reason that even without the masculine/feminine dichotomy even considered that you’re correct. If you want to lead, simply act with confidence and others around you will pick up on that energy and fall in line. No explicit statements needed. If someone fails to fall in line, either your leadership needs improvement or you need to excise them from your group whether it be 2 or 200 people.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:28 pm
Although with that couple I mentioned, I did get the girl he’s with to talk to me very openly about her sexuality. She says how he’s more passive, isn’t imaginative, she wishes he would take control more and was more aggressive, and she also mentioned how she’s bisexual but he doesn’t like that because he gets jealous of her wanting to have sex with other girls.
The first mate is situationally bi. If another girl gets in bed with me and can handle it the FM will interact with her. Hasn’t come up in a LONG time. But I still tease her with it and she gets hot. But she has no interest in other women on her own.
A very long time ago I was dating a girl and her lesbian girlfriend. Eventually a good time was had by all. The lesbian took a while to get used to me. I liked to play with both of them. And they both enjoyed it. I only f’ed the girlfriend though. The lesbian and I loved making out while the gf was sitting on my lap. The gf was the bridge between us. Some fun.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:37 pm
Rollo Tomassi
December 30th, 2014 at 11:40 am
No worries. I got it that you were describing a Frame rather than singling out words. And to tell the truth I was amused because of the confusion it has caused and the sly digs I got. But I have been blogging for 10 years (a century in ‘net time) and it all rolls off. I have been praised, kicked, and trolled. All fun.
December 30th, 2014 at 8:49 pm
BuenaVista
December 30th, 2014 at 12:33 pm
I was just involved in designing an aircraft cockpit for an entrepreneur who was very light on clues. I have done some of that in the past and know the design side very well. Thanks for hipping me to the operational side. Very helpful. I’ll look up CRM and see about learning more.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:06 pm
The game going on with this planet is far bigger and reaching than most have noticed.
1) reincarnation is a part of the game. This whole amusement park called Earth wasn’t constructed for you to go on one ride just once. You’re here to try all of it, and to keep trying the parts you prefer over and over again. MGTOW isn’t just men walking away in anger or frustration, it’s part of the greater experience… sort of, “I’m not interested in riding the Tilt-A-Whirl anymore, I’ve done that enough times. I’m wanna play Whack-A-Mole.”
2) forgive me Christians but you’re missing a big piece of the puzzle. Jesus didn’t come to save you so you might get into heaven. You already have a free pass into heaven (everyone does, you’re carrying it around this very moment). Jesus came as an example of what’s possible, and what you’re capable of as a being on Earth. That’s the end zone…. attaining that level of understanding about your true nature. To reach that end zone you will at some point have to find a whole lot of truth on the way, and dump the parts of the experience that no longer interest you.
Feminism hasn’t been a blanket suppressing you. It’s an alarm clock, timed to wake you up when you’re ready to find truths far greater than gender relations. It’s God’s game, he made the rules, and has a pretty good idea how to find the desired outcome.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:37 pm
A question for Rollo and everyone (this is a very serious question and not a joke, and it has been really bothering me):
If a woman (who is not your girlfriend or wife) calls you “sweetheart”, is this considered to be an IOI? This happens to me occasionally, but I think it is actually quite condescending, and feel that she is talking down to me (God, I hope it’s not – I’m in serious mental trouble if it is, I will be very depressed). When they say this, I never respond back, and I just assume that they don’t like me in a personal/romantic way. Or am I being paranoid and completely misinterpreting this? Keep in mind that I have not flirted with the woman or given her any indication that I was interested in her before her saying this (For example: women at the gym, women coworkers, stewardesses, waitresses, female bartenders, etc., say this to me). If it is in fact an IOI, does this mean that the woman is actually really interested in me, and this is her way of flirting with me? How should I proceed (escalate)? Or is she just being nice and polite, and there really is nothing going on here, and I’m worried about nothing? By the way, I live in a southern US state if it matters.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:43 pm
@Glenn
I hear yah, I went the opposite way, started out jumping straight into all the PUA material I cant get my hands on and read every article I could find. Once I found the material starting to get redundant I stopped and kind of just coasted. After a brief break I stumbled on RP and it just opened a whole other area that I am now immersed in.
I personally believe all a man needs is RP, its the purest form of game. I see the distinction as PUA for kids and RP for adults, its like learning martial arts and then ascending to a master zen level, I see it as end game. Im 29 and spinning plates currently with ease, looking to build my career/wealth but also on the look out for prospective females that will best fit the RP criteria for long term mating.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:46 pm
Mentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)
December 30th, 2014 at 4:55 pm
You are not working for her affection. You are working for her devotion. Temporary or permanent. A whole different order.
You are not the supplicant. She is.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:53 pm
Rollo Tomassi
December 30th, 2014 at 5:16 pm
@Mentats, you can never leave the game. Despair is not an option.
Don’t wish it were easier, wish you were better.
Oh yeah. And a student of thermodynamics I see.
The three laws of thermodynamics:
1. You can’t win
2. You can’t break even
3. You can’t quit the game
It is our lot in life. I relish it. There is considerable advantage to be got from even so unfavorable a set of rules. If you know how to work them.
December 30th, 2014 at 9:59 pm
I can’t fathom how anyone can expect a man (no matter how alpha) to override two decades of her formative years conditioning.
I’m working on it. With some success. But it is a long hard slog. I’m not sorry one bit.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:05 pm
@BrianS.
If you are serious about your post regarding being called “sweetheart” you have a lot of reading to do in regards to basic tenants of game… Don’t go by what they say, watch how they act. There are ton of resources online for all the different aspects of basic starter game including IOI’s, how to approach, etc.
On another note, not to take away from any religious people on here, I find adding religion into the mix of RP just adds another layer getting in between natural female biology and todays world. I am an atheist and since I don’t have any kind of religion to refer to, I see RP in its purest form, pure biologically based on science. I see females transform from centuries ago through societies to current times without any outside forces but just natural female phycology changing within the FI.
Again, I’m not trying to take a jab at religion, I respect everyone’s beliefs and reading some of the Christian folk pulling references from the bible in terms of how men should be only helps our cause.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:09 pm
BrianS.
December 30th, 2014 at 6:58 pm
Listen to your gut. Feel your heart. Watch her move. Esp. the eyes and mouth. If she licks her lips – very good. Don’t expect to get it all at once. It is like learning anything new. There will be a lot of confusion until you get some understanding and comfort with the situation.
The trouble wit most humans is that after about age 30 they HATE looking stupid. It ruins their self image. And they hate that. I don’t mind looking stupid at all. I don’t care what other people think. I’m learning all the time.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:39 pm
@Brian S. re: “Or is she just being nice and polite, and there really is nothing going on here, and I’m worried about nothing? By the way, I live in a southern US state if it matters.”
Yes it matters. Besides the overall Southern environment, the individual environments you’re (nearly) describing seem to me to indicate that the women are telling you, as straight as can be, that they like the fact that you’re being a sweetie pie. In fact they might call it attractive, in the sense that a cute puppy is attractive. But not arousing.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:43 pm
@sfcton re: “Half measures like her being your first mate or executive officer in the army, is likely to be no more effective then any other half measure.”
Yep. It falls to me to say it. All Chiefs No Indians is a terrible way to run things, and it matters not if some chiefs are more equal than others. An officer requires an enlisted member to be official over.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:47 pm
@SunWukong re: “If someone fails to fall in line”
This is where all political theories’ rubbers meet the road. The fact that someone is leading doesn’t make him a leader: it’s the fact that someone is following him that makes him a leader.
December 30th, 2014 at 10:58 pm
re: Christian dominance vis-à-vis husbandly authority.
Old Testament dominance is, as I said, boot on neck. That’s what the word literally means: stomp on. But in the New Testament, the pattern is submission without dominating. The wife is supposed to submit just because she’s supposed to submit; the husband is NOT supposed to have to dominate, and if he does than there is a problem (and the problem is her).
December 30th, 2014 at 11:05 pm
@Thoroughbred
‘Giada de Laurentiis divorce’ … Look at the more than 11,000 comments through the link you posted. They answer the “Why are men opting out of marriage” question.
December 30th, 2014 at 11:57 pm
Smoking hot Giada de Laurentiis is getting divorced?
A) It is always a bad sign when a woman doesn’t take her husband’s last name. That would be a deal killer for me. However I understand she built a brand around her name so maybe she kept de Laurentiis as a stage name only.
B) Statistically speaking around 70% of divorces are initiated by women so she probably left him.
C) If Giada is like most millionaire women she is not interested in remarriage.
http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/marriage/why-wealthy-divorced-women-dont-remarry-and-men-do/
“According to a survey of 5000 members of MillionareMatch.com, 83% of divorced men would consider marriage in the next five years, while only 32% of divorced women would do the same.”
“Female millionaires – despite being equal to their male counterparts – have a huge block against dating a man with less money. Where men take delight in picking up dinners and vacations for their lower-earning spouses, women become resentful that their spouses can’t carry their weight.”
December 31st, 2014 at 12:04 am
Some women simply cannot be lead, ever, nowadays it’s probably most women.
Even the ones who can be led may end up being turned. When I met my girlfriend she was a sweet, thoughtful, considerate 21 year old finishing up her undergrad. Fast forward almost six years later she is a PhD student who has turned into a bitter, unpleasant selfish bitch. The competitive nature of grad school caused her to adopt an obnoxious caricature of masculine competitiveness in order to stand out from the crowd and at this point I think it has broken our relationship beyond repair. I discovered TRP too late to avoid the mistake of cohabbing, most of the time our home life resembles the DMZ between the two Koreas. I will never concede the frame and she won’t either so every day is just a war waiting to break out.
December 31st, 2014 at 1:06 am
jf12
December 30th, 2014 at 10:39 pm
Southern women are especially brutal. They evaluate men strictly on carrying capacity. I had an opportunity to watch some in action 20 years ago and it was most interesting. And the men? Couldn’t wait to be put in harness and whipped up to speed. All vying for the woman who would whip them the hardest. Heck of a culture.
December 31st, 2014 at 2:29 am
@M Simon
In the 18 years I’ve lived in Texas, I’ve banged 18 different women. Only 3 were born and raised here. We have one of the worst percentages of fat chicks in the country, and one of the worst rates for single moms. In my anecdotal experience the attitudes here are also horrendous. Like facing the worst of conservative and feminist culture all rolled in to one hissing snarling bitch of a creature. The cheap cost of living is all that keeps me here now. Southern women are shit.
December 31st, 2014 at 2:57 am
@Rollo and M. Simon
Sure I can leave the game. Not date/fuck women. It’s that simple. Their evaluations of me mean little if I’m not trying to date/fuck them.
December 31st, 2014 at 4:34 am
@zdr01dz
You’ve posted words credited to E.M.K. below this work of word art mastery Mutiny by Rollo Tomassi.
There was no ‘chewed-up’ bubble gum stuck onto the base under the David statue by Michelangelo.
December 31st, 2014 at 4:45 am
Mentats – “Their evaluations of me mean little if I’m not trying to date/fuck them.”
You’re half way there. The other half is when the evaluations mean little when you are trying to date/fuck them.
December 31st, 2014 at 5:01 am
@Rollo
Great article but I see a LOT of commenters desperately twisting reality to fit a desired outcome in the comments. Perhaps a function of male sentimentality and nostalgia around the holidays?
Statistically, drop a “badass” Navy Seal and an 8 YO out in the forest from a plane crash, send em in different directions, and the 8 YO walks out while billy badass eats it. Whys that you ask?
The 8 YO takes every day as it comes and adapts to whats in front of him, and the tacticool “operator” defines his reality based on what he is supposed to do and supposed to know. Many lost hikers found sitting at the base of a tree with full backpacks….. Weak minds.
*(great book called “Deep Survival”, written by a NatGeo photog named Gonzalez)
Seems like the same twist of logic going on here and focused weirdly on the taxonomical definitions and proper categorization, instead of the desired outcome. It’s fascinating to kinda watch but can be cringeworthy.
Thoughts?
December 31st, 2014 at 6:09 am
Hey RationalMale, first time poster here, long time fan. Some red pill wisdom from the Islamic world to compliment your point. In a sermon on women, Imam Ali said:
“…Be on your guard even from those of them who are (reportedly) good. Do not obey them even in good things so that they may not attract you to evils.”
There are also hadiths in which the Prophet Muhammad would ask his wives’ advice and then do the exact opposite. There are also hadiths where the Prophet Muhammad asks his wives’ advice and then acts in accordance with it.
The lesson here is like you said, frame control and not to be dependent on a wife’s input, and never to be “obedient” to a wife (i.e. to always maintain the dominant position.)
The one piece that I disagree with is that the basis for a man doing “feminine” chores must always be equalist. It could just be compassion. For example, the Prophet Muhammad used to help the wife he was staying with that night with some household chores. For example, he used to sweep the house, or help grind the flour or things like that. Imam Ali used to do the same although in a hadith the division between Ali and his wife Fatima was explicitly that things within the house were the woman’s responsibility and things outside the house were a man’s responsibility. Nevertheless, sometimes Imam Ali would sweep or grind the flour. Obviously these two are some of the most alpha of men in all of history, so I do think these things can and should be done as long as it’s with the correct frame.
December 31st, 2014 at 7:05 am
‘Jesus didn’t come to save you so you might get into heaven.’
It is because of Jesus and belief in Him that eternal life is possible for you and me. There is no other way to get into Heaven.
You are right…He did come to show an example and testify the truth, the other part was to show God’s great love for us so that we could have the possibility of spending eternity with Him.
December 31st, 2014 at 7:08 am
The common manosphere theme of the alphaness of Islam and the obedience of their women is a crock of shit.
I’ve lived in an Islamic neighborhood my entire life and I can tell you from personal experience they are no different from Western women, they just keep it on the down low to hide it from their families. About 90% of my Muslim buddies are divorced, even the ones that married cousins.
Ever wonder why so many Islamic men import wives from dirt poor villages?
December 31st, 2014 at 8:20 am
@ctt2 – Your only move is to induce massive dread. If I am hearing you correctly, the relationship is fucked anyway, right? So what do you have to lose. Try the following, and please, other guys on this thread chime in if you have good dread inducing advice. Rollo has done great work on dread – http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/27/dread-games/ among others.
Here are few dread inducing things you might begin doing:
1. Get in better shape.
2. Go out for the evening and simply don’t mention it to her. When she starts texting like mad, just respond, “Yeah, I’ll be home later.” The key here is not to bite when she goes crazy. Ignore her and don’t respond to any of her other texts while you are out.
3. Make plans that don’t include her. Take a trip with friends. Go away for the weekend without her.
4. Spin plates – If you are monogamous and think that helps your relationship, you are wrong. She’s always evaluating her options. A recent study showed the vast majority of desirable women have a “Plan B” guy in the wings all the time. The only way you will be able to deal with her with equanimity and within your frame is if you have options. She will sense it subtly. Also, make sure your phone and computer are completely secure and that she can’t access any of your digital life.
5. Nuclear – She may need the shock of a lifetime as you have let this get way out of hand. Tell her that if she doesn’t step being such an argumentative, dominant bitch all the time that you are going to move on. Don’t get into an argument about who’s fault it is – just tell her you’ve had it and she can either straighten up and act like a woman who loves you and wants to have a good relationship with you or she can get the fuck out.
Nuclear requires you to mean it. Nuclear requires that you don’t argue about it. When she starts telling you how you see everything in a fucked up way, escalate and tell her that this is the kind of behavior you are talking about. That she thinks she can tell you how to think and feel and that you simply aren’t going to put up with it anymore. It’s best if you spend a lot of time out of the home after going nuclear, to give her a chance to marinate. It’s also crucial that you give her the choice to straighten up – don’t just say “I’m leaving”.
You see, what she’s really saying to you is that she doesn’t need you – but she does, she just takes you for granted now because you let her do so.
If she leaves, she was never “your’s” to begin with and is probably just killing time with you until the next phase of her life so good riddance. But if she stays, you will have re-framed the entire relationship.
I did it from instinct with my exwife and got 2 months of good behavior out of her. This was pre RP for me, so I didn’t manage it well. But I simply told my nasty, denigrating, hot wife that I didn’t want to be with someone who treated me like shit and unless she did a 180, I was gone. She cried and fought and screamed and stayed with her mom – and 3 days later was a new woman – it shocked the shit out of me. Sexual, very attentive to me, very sweet and taking care of her end in terms of the house etc (she was a stay at home wife/mom). I used to always think it was an act because she eventually reverted to form – what I didn’t see is what I was doing to let that happen. She really needed a strong man to keep her in line, but I was uncomfortable being that guy. Not these days though…
December 31st, 2014 at 8:27 am
Mentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)
December 31st, 2014 at 2:57 am
That does not get you out of the game. You are playing it. Note your very well expressed PAIN and ANGER.
December 31st, 2014 at 8:36 am
earl
December 31st, 2014 at 7:05 am
Jews have a different view.
You might find this of some amusement:
http://classicalvalues.com/2011/09/hebrew-etymology/
December 31st, 2014 at 8:46 am
Glenn says:
When she starts telling you how you see everything in a fucked up way
The first mate still gives me that one from time to time. I ignore it and remind her that if she goes into a snit that all the nice things I do for her when she is submissive will not be done. That usually is enough to crash that train.
In the early days I had to cut her off for days and weeks to prove I meant business. Women are very difficult to train. But they can be trained. Well some of them. Maybe.
December 31st, 2014 at 8:55 am
‘The common manosphere theme of the alphaness of Islam and the obedience of their women is a crock of shit.’
I’ve lived around Muslim territory…and I agree with this. The only reason their men are seen as more alpha than westerners is because they’ve at least stuck to their traditions.
December 31st, 2014 at 8:57 am
‘Jews have a different view. ‘
No kidding.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:28 am
Great post there, and a capper for a truly outstanding year in posts.
@Softek; relationships, sex and lobster Newberg are all the same; they’re better in your mind than in reality. Full stop. Don’t envy that guy for being in an LTR with the hot girl; the fact that she’s mocking him publicly give you an idea of what his beta ass is putting up with privately. Think of it this way; if you had to go through all that to get a new set of snow tires, we’d all be taking the bus…and loving it.
And when you DO tap that ass, do so fully and unapologetically drop it afterward. Rinse, shower, repeat.
@Sun Wukong: great point there. I’ll second that by saying Power grants nothing it can’t take away in the next breath, and the awareness that it’s always ON LOAN, never given and to do the bidding of the powerful is ever present.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:31 am
earl
December 31st, 2014 at 8:55 am
The only reason their men are seen as more alpha than westerners is because they’ve at least stuck to their traditions.
In terms of sticking to traditions you might want to look at the link I left up thread. It also has some bearing on the performance of healing miracles.
Here is one I wrote to specifically address the healing issue.
http://classicalvalues.com/2014/02/christians-oppose-healing-the-sick-on-moral-grounds/
If the comments are closed on that one and you would care to comment. Leave your comment on any of my posts. We don’t care about thread drift. Or OT. No registration required. You can even use a fake name and e-mail.
Just leave a link to or the title of the thread you are commenting on so it makes sense.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:38 am
@M Simon
How am I still in the game?
December 31st, 2014 at 9:44 am
BrianS.:
You’ve gotten good responses from most other folks. Watch what she does; don’t listen to what she says. And, consider regional customs.
Women in southern states use terms of endearment with everyone: “sweetheart”, “honey”, “darlin'”, etc. A woman in, for example, Alabama, Mississippi, or Georgia using this term with you in everyday conversation doesn’t mean anything other than politeness and common courtesy, and it isn’t an IOI. Now it would mean something quite different in the upper midwest, where I’m from, and where women just do not ever address men as “sweetheart” in everyday conversation. It just isn’t done here.
Now, if she is saying “sweetheart” while batting her eyes and brushing her boob on you, that’s something else.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:45 am
@Mentats!
Seems you have made up your mind on the topic even though everyone posting is trying to convince you other wise and help you. I am not really sure if you are too stubborn but as Rollo put it your always in the game no matter what you choose, only your performance matters. I am not sold on the whole MGTOW movement as to me it shows an acceptance of defeat. Also, the more people that do take your stance will just cause a better playing field for others that are excelling at game, I find it as personal benefit as there is less competition. As selfish and bad as that sounds, but its survival of the fittest.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:52 am
@ Muslim Theist – Now I’ve got to hear from Muslim dingbats too? Wow, just wow. Let me just say this. Keep your barbaric, pre-modern dogshit religion to yourself if you don’t want to be taken to task here for it. Here’s a little preview of what I have in store for you if you breathe another word about your ridiculous, reactionary, pre-modern mythology on this site.
Last week their were 40 Jihadi attacks around the world (not counting their wars – just the attacks on innocents). 409 people were killed and 239 were critically injured – and that was a slow week for Islam.
If you persist, I will then post a list of all the tens of thousands of innocents killed by your Jihadi bretheren just this year (mostly killing fellow muslims). Turn your attention to fixing your own fucking shithole of a society. I have nothing to learn from Islam – unless I want to start slaughtering innocents intentionally that is…
December 31st, 2014 at 9:53 am
@ M Simon
If you are basing your claim off of Protestants, they are no where near the true church anymore.
I’m Catholic…anointing of the sick is still done.
December 31st, 2014 at 9:56 am
@ LiveFearless
You’ve posted words credited to E.M.K. below this work of word art mastery Mutiny by Rollo Tomassi.
Maybe I’m a little slow (always a possibility) but I have no idea what you are talking about.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:02 am
@Mentats
“How am I still in the game?”
I’m sure others might be able to explain it better but how I see game is the basic interaction of males and females in a society. Down to animistic nature we men are made to procreate with females, its biological and hardwired into our brains to mate with females. When you are voluntarily removing yourself from this natural state you are essentially accepting you are too weak to perform your male role and mate with females. No matter how females act today or how hard it is to mate with them, men must adapt and sharpen their skills and overcome all barriers to mate with them. It is all up to us. We must essentially raise to an amused mastery level above all females. When you are sacrificing your natural male instincts to mate with females, you are just being ignorant to the fact, you are still in the game but just automatically losing.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:02 am
“Combining the two, Alpha Fux and Beta Bux means accepting a submissive position to a man who provides with an expectation of sex.
“This is antithetical to entire feminist paradigm of equality with, and independence from, men.”
You say it like it’s a bad thing. To a woman, this is Utopia, the unicorn, the relational jackpot. This is Alpha Bux. Alpha provider. A badass dude who kicks ass at work, leads at home, fucks her good, and yet loves her, loves her kids, rubs her feet, and takes out the trash. The hunky handyman millionaire. Dennis Rainey/James Dobson on the inside; Mike Rowe/Bruce Willis on the outside.
I know at least two women who post in and around the manosphere who married their Alpha Bux, and couldn’t stop talking about them. One of them still does talk about him. These are women who are so sexually attracted to their husbands they can barely see straight. They willingly, achingly give up sex to these men and can’t wait to submit to their men. This is what women want – the Alpha Provider.
I’m being totally serious here. The Alpha Provider is what women want. The thing is that most men are not both; and cannot be both. The two halves of that – Alpha fux and beta bux – tend to work against each other. A guy who concentrates on being a decent alpha fux does so at the expense of being the provider drafthorse. And the guy who works hard at pulling the wagon has a very hard time of being perceived as sexy fun badboy. It’s kind of difficult to be Fuckbuddy Drafthorse, but at least a few men manage to pull it off.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:05 am
[…] Rollo Tomasi – Mutiny […]
December 31st, 2014 at 10:07 am
Also, I think we need to keep religious references and discussion out of this discussion section, it only causes us to go off on a tangent and cause religious flame wars.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:21 am
Mentats:
You’re still in the game and you will be until you draw your last breath. If you’re a functioning human being, you’re “in the game”. If you have a pulse, you are a participant in the sexual marketplace.
The only question is whether your being “in the game” and a participant will be based on the blue pill rules, or the real rules—the ones that actually govern human behavior. The only question is whether you will participate on your terms, or on everyone else’s terms. The only question is whether your participation will be from your frame, or someone else’s frame.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:23 am
Power only comes when it is given from above…it doesn’t come by appeasing below.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:37 am
earl
December 31st, 2014 at 9:53 am
But using the only plant oil known to heal a great variety of maladies including cancer is forbidden by the RCC. You might want to ask your Pope about that one. Assuming you can get an audience.
A little video for you. About 9 minutes.
And you really should look at my Hebrew Etymology link. It discusses true vs false anointing oil. Just rubbing some oil on a person is not the real deal. Read about the people in the old days who rubbed the oil on their whole bodies and went into a trance. Now what kind of oil available back then could produce such an effect?
December 31st, 2014 at 10:39 am
earl
December 31st, 2014 at 10:23 am
Power only comes when it is given from above…it doesn’t come by appeasing below.
Power is available to who ever takes it.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:45 am
Bromeo
December 31st, 2014 at 10:07 am
Well religion is a game full of so much misinformation detrimental to humans. It is also, as practiced, almost everywhere detrimental to m/f relations. The little good advice proffered is seldom put in practice.
December 31st, 2014 at 10:45 am
‘Now what kind of oil available back then could produce such an effect?’
Was it the oil or the power of God?
December 31st, 2014 at 11:01 am
thedeti
December 31st, 2014 at 10:02 am
I know at least two women who post in and around the manosphere who married their Alpha Bux, and couldn’t stop talking about them. One of them still does talk about him. These are women who are so sexually attracted to their husbands they can barely see straight. They willingly, achingly give up sex to these men and can’t wait to submit to their men. This is what women want – the Alpha Provider.
The first mate showed signs of that when we were first dating. They do go nuts. It is rare for a guy with outlaw MC gang experience to go on to become an aerospace engineer. I did it. And she has no interest in other men either by expression or evidence. How does she rate my financial performance? “Barely adequate”. Which has been enough to keep us together for 40 years. Of course I had game well before I met her. That did not preclude the usual difficulties. But her interest and my game has kept it together so far.
The very first requirement for a LTR is a woman who wants you so bad it hurts. You qualify them by making them go after you. She must jump your bones. Never you her. And she must keep chasing you. And disqualify the competition (make sure there is plenty) by wanting you more. If she tries to do it by screaming – disqualify her.
==============
And Rollo – sorry about the video on the thread. I forgot you have to turn youtube links into html links.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:01 am
@M Simon re: “And the men? Couldn’t wait to be put in harness and whipped up to speed. All vying for the woman who would whip them the hardest.”
Describes me to a T anyway. I grew up completely in the American South (VA, GA, LA). What defined a man, to me, was who could take the most unwarranted guff off of women while remaining polite.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:04 am
Badpainter FTW!
http://therationalmale.com/2014/12/30/mutiny/comment-page-2/#comment-77552
Yes, one way to avoid the negative affects of mutiny is to have no crew. But another way is to stock the lifeboat with all the goodies from the entire ship, then blow the ship up remotely when they cut you adrift.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:07 am
I agree with Deep Strength about something. In Christianity “This is why sovereignty of the husband means nothing in marriage: you can’t force someone to submit.”
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/12/30/headship-is-authority-in-marriage-part-4/
The submission of the woman CANNOT be predicated on whether she feels her husband is a good leader. Period.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:12 am
earl
December 31st, 2014 at 10:45 am
‘Now what kind of oil available back then could produce such an effect?’
Was it the oil or the power of God?
I can get the same effect today with the oil and without God. Every time. God is not nearly as reliable. It is my experience that people compelled to talk about God rarely have any. The person you are most trying to convince is yourself. If you had God you wouldn’t need religion. Or a Pope to give you orders. Your orders would come straight from the Head Office.
Give me the oil with the correct assay and applied for a sufficient length of time and I will heal you. Prayer is not near so effective.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:21 am
I’m going to agree and amplify myself here. It is NOT the case that women automatically follow good leadership. I contend the opposite is true: being meanly evilly dominant towards women, knocking them on the head and dragging them off to do bad things, works a whole lot better.
Even by *wanting* to say that women “naturally” want to follow good male leadership, you are indulging in White Knighting.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:24 am
jf12
December 31st, 2014 at 11:07 am
The submission of the woman CANNOT be predicated on whether she feels her husband is a good leader. Period.
Yes. Ordering the woman to submit doesn’t work. Whether the man is doing it or her religion. She has to WANT to submit. Religion is only of some little use in backing up that desire which must be innate in her and aroused by your game.
As I like to tell my sons. Two women or none. When ever the first mate gets wobbly I remind her of the two women periods in our life. And keep reminding her of that ALL the time. “The only reason you kept me is by wanting me more. The only way that can continue is by making that desire permanent. I have options. Still.” The occasional 20 something getting nuts in my presence helps. A lot. She has seen that sort of thing our whole time together. Keeps her on her toes.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:25 am
jf12 – “The submission of the woman CANNOT be predicated…”
That’s all that needs to be understood.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:28 am
No True Underling would bother talking back to the Cap’n since he would have to walk the plank. Hence, it follows that no woman is a True Underling.
http://illimitablemen.com/2014/12/14/the-shit-test-encyclopedia/
Q.E.D.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:30 am
jf12
December 31st, 2014 at 11:01 am
I hate to say this but I was most amused by the display. It was an “after the debutantes ball” after party from what I could tell at a restaurant in Knoxville, TN. I was there on contract doing EE work during the day.
Glad to see you have come out of it. And are alive to tell the tale.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:34 am
@M Simon, re: “She has to WANT to submit.”
I think, instead, she has to submit anyway regardless of her feelings. And if she whould choose to actually submit to a nice guy, a beta to whom she *wants* to be dominant towards, she would be ultimately happier than if she submitted to a bad boy who makes her want to submit.
Naturally, of course, she will not so choose.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:36 am
@zdr01dz, E.M.K.’s marketeering is little more than Purple Pill pablum. Actually he’s not even that, he’s a Blue Pill apologist who markets to post-Wall divorcés and never married spinsters (and the Betas who love them).
Have a look at his Alexa.com demographic stats, tells you all you need to know. Actually, just have a look at “Michelle” who ‘found love’ in his membership pitch video that jumps up after 45 seconds being on the homepage.
Again, EMK is only c&p’ing the obvious, but his consistent
mistakemisdirection is foisting the idea that only wealthier women have less desire to remarry. It’s actually ALL women:http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/11/14/four-in-ten-couples-are-saying-i-do-again/
And again I’ll repeat “wants” got nothing to do with it. Men’s slow burn SMV and Beta romantic natures make remarriage a far more likely proposition than for a woman like, say, Robin Korth.
EMK just wants to make women’s necessity a virtue, and why wouldn’t he? They pay his mortgage.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:38 am
‘I can get the same effect today with the oil and without God.’
Thanks for answering.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:39 am
@Muslim Theist
That’s fair, I’ve also seen wives who help their husbands with yardwork and home improvement projects. However, I have never seen the husbands “expect” that women will share these tasks equally. In the U.S., and much of the western world, “equalism” has turned into, “You men *WILL* do half or more of the housework, no exceptions.”
Compassionately helping your spouse is fine.
Expecting your spouse to work harder than you (i.e., come home from career, and then do half the housework after career) is evil.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:40 am
I’m not sure wanting to submit results in actual submission with any substantially greater frequency than not wanting to submit.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:46 am
Shit testing has a fairly solid evo-psych understanding, i.e. for a woman to ascertain social Dominance, Compliance, and Fitness in a man she’s NOT SURE should be mating with her. In other words it makes rational sense for a relatively strange woman to try to push you away, a little; it also probes *your* attraction, e.g. you bothering to stick around even after she shit tests you.
But a woman shit testing her own husband is supremely messed up. It’s wrong, it’s bad, it’s sick, it’s evil, and it ought to stop yesterday.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:47 am
The fundamentally fail is presuming that intergender relations should ideally exist in a goal-state of egalitarian equalism and / or a reciprocally equal state of mutually supportive interests.
Hypergamy doesn’t care about equalism and reciprocity.
The sexes evolved to be complementary to each other for the betterment of the species. Why do you think women form the most secure emotional attachments to men 1-2 SMV steps above themselves? Why is masculine dominance such an attractive male aspect for even the most feminist of women who’d otherwise plead for equality among the sexes?
http://groupthink.jezebel.com/traditional-masculinity-and-sexual-preferences-1614373452
Sex differences, biologically and psychologically, didn’t evolve for hundreds of thousands of years to be co-equal partnerships based on humanistic (or moralistic) idealism. They evolved into a complementary form of support where the aspects of one sex’s strengths compensated for the other’s weaknesses and vice versa.
For every behavioral manifestation of one sex’s sexual strategy (hypergamy), the other evolves contingencies to counter it (mate guarding). The ideal state of gender parity isn’t a negotiation of acceptable terms for some pollyanna idea of gender equilibrium, it’s a state of complementarity between the sexes that accepts our evolved differences – and by each individual gender’s conditions, sometimes that’s going to mean accepting unequal circumstances.
Feminists, humanists, moral absolutists, and soon the MRM, will all end up having their ideologies frustrated and confounded by the root presumption that egalitarian equalism can ever trump an innate and evolved state of gender complementarity.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:55 am
@Badpainter re: “I’m not sure wanting to submit results in actual submission with any substantially greater frequency than not wanting to submit.”
What a remarkably perceptive assertion, camouflaged as an admission! There are two or three PhD theses in there.
Question 1. Including only people who tend to exhibit much more frequent submissive behaviors than other people, do these Submitters *want* to submit more than other people?
Question 2. Even in Sub/Dom situations, doesn’t the submitter want to (pretend) to be forced to submit unwillingly?
December 31st, 2014 at 11:56 am
Mr. Elam would ban you for speaking such blasphemy.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:56 am
@jf12
“But a woman shit testing her own husband is supremely messed up. It’s wrong, it’s bad, it’s sick, it’s evil, and it ought to stop yesterday.”
It may very well be to us rational RP men viewing this dynamic from the outside but its just an extension of the shit-testing that started when you first met her. Male dominance/frame is not an absolute, it must be maintained, when she shit tests the husband she is doing him a favour by exploiting any chinks in his armour as a safe guard not only for her own protection but that of the husband also from the outside world.
December 31st, 2014 at 11:57 am
@Mentat!,
Did you pick out your clothes, dress yourself and comb your hair this morning? You’re in the Game.
Did you talk with your mother, sister, aunt, niece, girl “friend”, a female boss or co-worker, or the girl who made your soy latte at Starbucks this morning? You’re in the Game.
Did you snap one out to porn this week? You’re in the Game.
Did you read a Red Pill blog, watch TV, look at a news site, listen to a morning talk show or hum along to any top 40 song on the radio? You’re in the Game.
Did you go to a ‘mainstream’ church last Sunday? You’re in the Game.
You’ve been unplugged Mentat, there’s no going back. You’re just puking on the deck now because the truth is overwhelming, but it’ll pass.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:02 pm
re: “Hypergamy doesn’t care about equalism and reciprocity.”
Moreover, I think women resist society evolving to any static polyanna equilibrium. Think Eve and Eden.
Women have much more children during stressful times, during economic hardship, during war, during social turbulence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic-economic_paradox
December 31st, 2014 at 12:05 pm
Glenn,
Dread has not worked. I got laid off earlier this year and went back to school to change careers. I am surrounded by 18-22 year old girls and game them with ease. If anything that has only made her worse.
She grew up with an overbearing “alpha” mother and her dad is completely at her mercy. Between that childhood model and the SIW influence in her office she regresses to that same behavior any time she is stressed, which is pretty much all the time when school is in session. The strangest part of it, from my rational perspective of course, is that she KNOWS that her bad behavior is detrimental. She has been home for Christmas break and called me the other day to tell me how terribly her mom treats her dad and that she hates recognizing the same thing patterns in her own behavior. When she comes back I can almost guarantee she will act right until she goes back to the office and falls back on old habits under stress and peer influence.
Even going nuclear has failed, there have been a few times I have told her if she doesn’t like something she can get the fuck out, she didn’t leave of course and shaped up temporarily only to regress later. I can’t push the matter any harder right now by leaving, I have too much money tied up in the house and a side business that I could not easily move with me (small nursery), finding another place where I can take my greenhouses and such and actually coming up with the cash to make it happen is impossible right now. The last thing I want to do is undercut my own dominance by making a threat that I can’t execute. I just don’t see any viable options until I am done with school and back to work. The lesson here for anyone reading is NEVER fucking cohabitate, it limits your options severely when things start to go down the shitter.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:07 pm
Rollo – “The sexes evolved to be complementary to each other for the betterment of the species.”
…And quite possibly to the detriment of most individual members of the species.
I guess we gotta take the good with the bad.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:08 pm
@Mentat – MGTOW is not practical. You are bio programmed to want to fuck women. You can’t turn that off and in fact, asexuality is quite unhealthy for men. Regular sex has all kinds of beneficial effects, including getting your attachment needs met.
My guess is that you are a big Stardusk and Barbarossa fan. Barbarossa fucks women and Stardusk is a lonely loser who games 60 hours a week and works in a warehouse in South Korea. Almost everything he claims about evolutionary biology is horseshit. He’s recently gone on a rant about how “epigenetics is bullshit” – giggling. I mean, of course I expect that kind of garbage from an angry, delusional man-child who pretends to be a scientist on a YouTube channel – but others listen to him and don’t know any better.
Try reading The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. Or Sex at Dawn by Chris Ryan and you’ll realize just how full of shit MGTOW YouTubers are.
Essentially, you are turning surrender into victory. That’s okay – you can kid yourself, but you can’t kid us. You are in a sexual marketplace all the time – you cannot exit it. And our intersexual social norms and behaviors have been evolving for 500 million years – what you think you can just decide to turn all that off? It’s an absurd thing to say, let alone design your life around.
I get it – you can’t get laid. But your reality is very limited. You don’t have to put up with much BS to get laid these days – but you do have to do one thing. Be attractive to women. I find most guys who are MGTOW are losers in the mating game and essentially MGTOW is a type of “rage-quit”.
You can indeed improve yourself for your own purposes and also learn how to deal with women more effectively. I’d also be careful about all the characterizations you make of female behavior, they seem very limiting to me. They are not all lying, cheating whores or sociopaths. They just want to fuck guys that make them wet. And they have the power over choice over whether men have sex or not – hence they have an innate advantage in this power game that you simply have to deal with.
Last. Why don’t you stop talking and start listening? Just a thought…
December 31st, 2014 at 12:10 pm
@Bromeo re: “when she shit tests the husband”
You got that “when” part right. No “if” there.
re: “she is doing him a favour”
Nah, it’s antifavor to him AND to the relationsip. To the extent that he has to bother responding to her, he is wasting time and resources that could be used for conquering other parts of the world for himself and for them as a couple.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:10 pm
@jf12
Indeed. There’s a great quote from Game of Thrones, it’s been said in other fiction…
Hypergamous behavior seems to work around the fact that chaotic times are the most efficient at maximizing hypergamy.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:20 pm
@jf12
“Nah, it’s antifavor to him AND to the relationsip. To the extent that he has to bother responding to her, he is wasting time and resources that could be used for conquering other parts of the world for himself and for them as a couple.”
Being married doesn’t change shit, its just a term, why then would the female hive mind stop shit testing beyond that point? Its programmed into them.
Now in terms of if it is infract a benefit to the male, I can not say 100%, but from what I have read and know, there are positive take aways from it, hell if anything if she were to leave you would need to start battling shit tests again with a new female, atleast the time spent with the previous kept you on point.
If it is true that there zero benefit from it (your take on it) then we stop at it is just the way they are, and all we can do it use RP tools to overcome them. We cant change it, we must adapt.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:21 pm
ctt2 mentioned “she will act right until she … falls back on old habits” and “she … shaped up temporarily only to regress later”.
Women’s default behavior is to (very soon, after a honeymoon period) sexually drive away men who are close to them; men who are nice to them; men with whom they cohabitate. It’s usually chalked up to incest avoidance, which is surely part of it.
But probably the major part is the drive for serial hypergamy. Even supposing she had a couple kids in a couple of years with a guy, she could have a couple more kids in a couple more years with a *different* guy, if she doesn’t have a couple more kids with *this* guy.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:28 pm
@Bromeo, re: “if anything if she were to leave you would need to start battling shit tests again with a new female”
Wow! Every thought, every statement, about this issue is fraught with more and more discoveries! I’m lovin’ it.
But, really, (? I’m asking, seriously) can it be possible (evolutionarily) that her anti-mating behavior is designed (partly) to make him more likely to mate with another woman? Brain … hurtz … so the stench of confusion means we must be getting close to a truth.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:30 pm
Re: serial hypergamy
Serial hypergamy, open hypergamy to function at full expression in a resource environment where the woman doesn’t need to work to keep a man in order to avoid starvation. Also helpful if the social/cultural environment forces the man to fight the battle of the sexes with both hands tied behind his back, gag in mouth, a gun to his head, and referees chosen by the FI.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:31 pm
jf12,
The strangest part is that while exhibiting bad behavior her shit tests have started to center around marriage. Hardly a week goes by that I don’t hear about one of the girls at the office getting engaged, having a wedding coming up, having babies, etc. It is so schizophrenic, I just can’t wrap my head around the mess of conflicting thoughts and feelings that go on in a woman’s head.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:33 pm
Badpainter
December 31st, 2014 at 11:40 am
I’m not sure wanting to submit results in actual submission with any substantially greater frequency than not wanting to submit.
You have to have game to close the deal. And I was speaking in terms of LTR. If you are just looking for a f’buddy it doesn’t matter if she WANTS to or is just giving in to your game.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:36 pm
@jf12
“But, really, (? I’m asking, seriously) can it be possible (evolutionarily) that her anti-mating behavior is designed (partly) to make him more likely to mate with another woman? Brain … hurtz … so the stench of confusion means we must be getting close to a truth.”
I have never heard anything on female evolutionary shifts to anti-mating behaviours to make the male mate with another women…. Is there any RP article you can reference? Or is that your own general theory due to the consistent shit-testing?
December 31st, 2014 at 12:36 pm
@ ctt2
Have you told her that her behavior contra-indicates marriage as a positive life choice for you? Or have you asked her what she thinks it is you would receive as a benefit of marriage?
December 31st, 2014 at 12:39 pm
Badpainter,
I have been clear from day 1 that I have no desire to marry and see it as a raw deal for men. Even before finding TRP I had enough sense about me to recognize that.
December 31st, 2014 at 12:40 pm
ctt2
December 31st, 2014 at 12:31 pm
First off – I just noticed your avatar – nice. Second. Get another girlfriend and see if her desire for you increases or if she is offended. If the latter don’t ever commit to her.
G.B. Shaw put it well and if you get the gist it is a useful tool. “A woman would rather have 1/10th of a first rate man than all of a second rate one.”