Dalrock gave me something to chew on recently:
In my first post of 2014 I introduced the topic of the ugly feminist. As I explained at the time, this is an old charge but is typically aimed at the superficial instead of the core problem. Feminists are ugly because the philosophy of feminism is ugly. It is based on avoiding caring for others and being miserly with love. Several commenters pointed out that this is a devastating charge against feminism, as they could see no viable counter argument for it.
I’m not going to try to offer a counter to Dal’s assertion because in essence I think he’s correct. However I will suggest that this ugliness is the result of a commodification of love (and with it sexual access) that’s resulted from the unfettering of women’s Hypergamy. Love and caring is the commodity women’s Hypergamy uses to fulfill their dualistic sexual strategy.
To this day my most contentious post (and chapter in the book) on RM is Women in Love. This is primarily due to first time readers taking my assertions to their literal extreme. Women’s concept of love stems from opportunism, men’s concept stems from idealism. Most women and Blue Pill men take this to mean that women cannot actually love a man, and absolutist men angry with themselves for having never understood it think much the same thing, “My God! I knew it all along, women cannot actually love a man.”
I assert neither of these positions (really the same position) in that post, nor any of the followup post (that no one seems to want to read once they make up their minds), but what I do assert is:
Men believe that love matters for the sake of it. Women love opportunistically.
Iron Rule of Tomassi #6
Women are utterly incapable of loving a man in the way that a man expects to be loved.In its simplicity this speaks volumes about about the condition of Men. It accurately expresses a pervasive nihilism that Men must either confront and accept, or be driven insane in denial for the rest of their lives when they fail to come to terms with the disillusionment.
Women are incapable of loving men in a way that a man idealizes is possible, in a way he thinks she should be capable of.
In prior posts I’ve also made the case that men’s idealistic perspective of love stems from an unending need for performance to merit a woman’s opportunistic love. It’s not that men want an unrealistic, unconditional love, but rather they want a woman’s love to be a refuge from having to perform up to, above and beyond the requirements of satisfying an unending optimization of her Hypergamy. It’s not unconditional love they idealize, it’s a love that’s not predicated on their burden of performance.
What frustrates this love idealism is that men are popularly sold the idea that women’s love is based on a mutually similar model. From Disney movies to romantic comedies, to Shakespeare and epic stories, to popular music and the daily talk shows, the message is that love (if it’s real love) is omniscient, conquers all and overcomes all odds. It’s a very seductive message of hope for men whose lives and existences are evaluated on constant performance.
“Could she really love me despite all of my glaring inadequacies?”
“Does she love the real me or is it my money and the lifestyle I provide for her?”
The fact that these themes are a constant in human history illustrates the subconscious, peripheral awareness we have of the differing models of love each sex bases their understanding of love on.
The Commodity
What this selling of idealistic love does for men is keep them in a state of perpetual hope that this idealism is shared by both sexes and they can realistically achieve that ideal goal of a love not founded on his performance. It’s important to note here that this performance isn’t necessarily something a man must make a constant effort to maintain (though this is the usual case), but rather what he represents, not who he is personally. It may be that his effortless looks or inherent status represents a cue for a woman’s optimal hypergamous satisfaction, or it may be the result of years of dedicated performance effort – either way it’s what that man represents; remove the factors a man possesses that satisfy a woman’s Hypergamy and her opportunistic model of love will reveal itself.
Feminists are ugly because the philosophy of feminism is ugly. It is based on avoiding caring for others and being miserly with love.
Dalrock’s observation here is profound in that it illustrates exactly the state of opportunism on which women base their concept of love. On some level of consciousness women understand the inherent value their love, concern, attention and caring has for men. It’s repression or expression is a commodity that has reward value for men who also have an awareness that their performance is what merits a woman’s love.
The popular criticism is that this want for an idealistic love is really a man’s preoccupation with his need for sex, but this is to be expected from a fem-centric culture that needs women to ration love and caring for men in order to ensure its social dominance. And God forbid a man express his desire for a performance-less based love and caring; he’s ostracized for wanting a mother’s love (Freudian), being necessitous (thus powerless) and revealing his deficiency in performance.
As Open Hypergamy becomes more proudly embraced and normalized in society, so too will women’s sexual strategy be laid more bare. And in laying that strategy bare, so too will women’s opportunistic model of love become more apparent to men. This new apparentness is already conflicting with the old-order messaging that kept men hopeful of realizing their idealistic love state.
Women cannot sell Open Hypergamy and the love-conquers-all ethereal ideal love at the same time.
Dal is correct, the philosophy of feminism is ugly, but it’s important to consider that feminism is just the current social operative of the Feminine Imperative today. For the moment women can be miserly with love and caring. They can even express resentment for having to be so with men who they doubt are meritorious of it, or for those who don’t measure up to the rigors of an increasingly open and increasingly demanding Hypergamy.
They can do this because they understand that the hopeful, idealistic love they have men convinced can be achieved is still a commodity to men.
Before I close, I’m going to give you a bit of Red Pill hope (again). Men and women can and do love each other intensely and genuinely. They can and do see past each other’s deficiencies and their love endures. My point with this essay is to reveal how this love develops and the conditional environments it comes together in. In spite of the strongest bonds, there is a threshold at which men’s loving idealism and women’s performance requirements can test, stress and break that bond.
Men’s idealistic love can be strong, as can women’s opportunistic love – the two models are not mutually incompatible, and it’s my belief that the two are even complementary to each other. Neither is a right or wrong way to love, and neither is the definition of real love. Bear in mind these are models that predicate a condition of love, what happens after that is up to the individuals.
Where these models become incompatible is when one commodifies and exploits the condition of love that the other holds. In an era of unapologetic feminine primacy and unignorable open Hypergamy, this commodification undeniably rests with the feminine.
For further reading see the Love series of posts:
Women in Love
Men in Love
Of Love and War
Burden of Performance
Love Story
January 4th, 2015 at 7:37 pm
Softek
January 4th, 2015 at 6:10 pm
May I suggest “Surely You Are Joking, Mr. Feynman” – the chapter “You just ask them”. It fits in with what Glenn just posted. Never pay in advance. That in a very small nut shell defines A vs b.
January 4th, 2015 at 8:45 pm
jf12, about that woman – I’m not sure if there’s a good way to drive a person that desires you away from you quickly, while still retaining the desire. Using brutal logic and straight no’s will work with some people, if they aren’t over-used to manipulation or getting their way, but that’s about it.
January 4th, 2015 at 9:09 pm
Softek, I understand what you mean well. A large part of the RP for me has been a continuous realization that there are actually a lot of dysfunctional scripts I was holding on to, in spite of being a pretty stable, functional, and happy guy. You and a few other commentators have helped me discover a few new tools to help the re-learning process along.
I started out on this path trying to salvage a relationship that meant a lot to me. But too little, too late. I’m in no mood to write out a sob story today, and I only would if I thought something about it would be helpful, but suffice it to say I’ve been rather less happy lately. It has been confusing to me how two people could share real closeness, and how that could make no difference to her wanting a continued relationship. But like I wrote about in a comment above, it all starts to make more sense now. It still doesn’t feel right, but at least it’s not so fucking confusing. Women can love, but obstacles in the relationship are seen as obstacles too the relationship, whereas an idealistic man sees them as hurdles to be overcome together.
But I’m getting sidetracked, I’m getting to saying that this has become preventative to me as well. I’ll be better prepared in the future. I’m going to make the world a place I want to be in from now on, not wait for good things to just strike me. If people can help me do that on the way, well, they can come along for the ride.
I’m still internalizing that. I’m not sure you’re there yet, my general impression is that you’re following a similar path to myself but a few months behind, though I could be wrong. But this is, I think, what Rollo means when he talks about being your own mental point of origin.
So I think you’re doing good work. I do think Glenn has an important point – what you’re lacking at this point isn’t more thinking about this, you have that in spades. Try getting out there more, take a course that will push you, even just talk to strangers in line if you must start there. A year ago, I found myself still falling apart in flesh-and-blood sexual contexts. I needed the internal work, and the barrier reading gave me against the vividness of the world, to start that work. Now, I’m finding much more to gain throwing myself out there a bit. I’m strong enough now to deal with real-life sexual circumstances, and so I’m sure cracks will begin to show more obviously there now when something strikes a nerve – like what happened with you when that girl belittled you. For myself, for example, I’ve found I still have great difficulty talking to random girls in public – still some stuff to work on there – but I can interact with people just fine on the dance floor in a club, and it’s teaching me a lot about sexual signalling – my own and hers – and early-stage escalation.
Anyways, I’m rambling. Kudos on the BJ. Try to get out there, then analyze results.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:14 pm
So you mean like this guy?
http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-43847.html
January 4th, 2015 at 10:17 pm
Feminist mothers start training their young sons:
“I am now pregnant with my second son. As a feminist and a mother, a survivor and an activist, a human and a writer, I have discovered that my job in preventing sexual assault is even bigger than it would be if I had a daughter. Because every rapist is someone’s son. We have the chance to fix that, one little boy at a time.”
http://www.yesmagazine.org/happiness/after-steubenville-to-end-rape-we-must-raise-our-boys-to-be-kind?fb_action_ids=10200918284828899&fb_action_types=og.likes
January 4th, 2015 at 10:23 pm
@ M. Simon – “They’re all whores” – Why does this kind of thing come up in the manosphere so much? First off, I have no problem with whores. In fact, as I’ve digested the Red Pill, I see prostitution clearly as a straight up provisioning exchange for short term Beta sex. Fair enough – and more guys who can’t get laid should perhaps go this route. In fact, I believe it’s a more honest exchange than many relationships I see guys involved in.
As well, I don’t think it’s necessary to denigrate women in that way. I do find the hidden motives and the fact that men have been brainwashed into believing a bunch of nonsense hugely problematic, but I have no problems with women selecting men who make them wet. I also could care less how many men a woman sleeps with. I’m not angry a bit with them, in fact, I’m much happier with women now than ever because I get them.
Of course, I’m no longer chivalrous (still hold doors sometimes, it’s just reflexive, my mom drummed that into me as a young boy) and won’t get married and never intend to be monogamous or faithful again. I don’t provision without reciprocation, and have also dropped being the provider/protector to a great degree. My new MO is to be a selfish prick. But I don’t think all women are whores.
At the end of the day, the most profound revelations for me from the Red Pill came from two simple truths that I had never really contemplated carefully before. Women choose and have a dualistic mating strategy. There is simply an innate power imbalance between men and women with regards to sex that none of us can change. We’re bio-programmed to operate this way because it’s been successful for humanity as a species – not because it’s “fair” or fun for men (or women). Sexual selection may in fact be the one of the biggest contributors to the rapid development of our minds and language and social abilities. It serves a greater purpose than getting Softek blowjobs.
Fair has nothing to do with it. Nature doesn’t consider it. So why be angry? And to me, calling women whores reeks of anger. I mean, if all women are whores, then men are all “johns”, right? Nah, I’m not down with that. Another thing I’m trying to do more is look at all this in a positive, optimistic light, and look for my opportunities. This kind of thinking helped me see how some young women are very into short term mating and that as an older guy, that’s all I’m a candidate for with them anyway. Perfect, for me that is. You married guys, well, I think that the world looks very different post Red Pill if you are single.
@ All – How many of you married guys would do it all over again if you had the chance? Or would you have stayed single if you knew what you know now?
And oh yeah, don’t accuse me of white knighting. I’m not trying to “defend” women here. I truly find this insistence on referring to woman as whores in the manosphere as destructive and unnecessary. It’s also quite reductionist. This strikes me as a space where we can do better than that.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:25 pm
@ Beeker
And I’ll bet that cunt loves her son unconditionally. She loves him so much she’ll intentionally, and with forethought damage him psychologically.
Too bad she survived.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:38 pm
Rollo Tomassi
January 4th, 2015 at 10:14 pm
and
Beeker
January 4th, 2015 at 10:17 pm
I am happy to report that all 3 of my sons are RP. My daughter is a 9.5 equalitarian age 24. Se does know about the wall. As far as I can tell she does not ride the carousel. It is interesting to watch.
She has a ChemE degree (near the top of her class – she and I can discuss thermo) but she has embarked on a modeling career.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:40 pm
Glenn – “I believe it’s a more honest exchange than many relationships I see guys involved in.”
I agree, and the honesty and certainty about the nature of the transaction is very appealing.
The “all whores” meme is a recognition and judgement of the opaque, and ambiguous fee and service schedules attached to all non pay-for-pay relationships. It’s also a realization by the BB half of AFBB that they’ve been conned.
Actual prostitutes have more honor and respectibility in this sense.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:42 pm
@M Simon, re: “There was a science fiction story I read on that topic a long time ago.”
I recall it too. Probably late 60s, early 70s, maybe Harlan Ellison or imitator.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:47 pm
Glenn
January 4th, 2015 at 10:23 pm
I did not mean it in the usual pejorative way. Just a fact of life. Perhaps an alternative title for this thread. If they are all whores then none of them are “whores” – i.e. whore as a special category. As in “good woman” vs “whore”. And like you I am not bitter about it any more than I’m bitter about the melting point of copper or the mass of an electron.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:49 pm
jf12
January 4th, 2015 at 10:42 pm
I was thinking a little earlier but I could be wrong. And maybe Kornbluth,
January 4th, 2015 at 10:55 pm
re: love vs fear
Her submission is the key for a woman to love a man properly. Dominance actually only strictly *induces* submission through intimidation. Although “there is no fear in love”, nevertheless the wife is to “see that she reverence her husband.” It is far more important, even Biblically, for the wife to submit than to love, evidently.
January 4th, 2015 at 10:55 pm
re: Kornbluth? Was it about killing a replica of his mother, repeatedly?
January 4th, 2015 at 10:58 pm
So, what is a wife’s opportunistic conditional “love” worth?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, …
January 4th, 2015 at 11:02 pm
Re: love vs. fear
Love is fear.
Love, and obedience, and submission derive from the fear of losing the object of that love, and the uncertainty of unfulfilled needs associated with that loss.
Or not.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:06 pm
Glenn
January 4th, 2015 at 10:23 pm
How many of you married guys would do it all over again if you had the chance? Or would you have stayed single if you knew what you know now?
It is to laugh. But I would. For the children. #2 son is such a pleasure to be around. And everyone feels that way about him. And best of all? He knows GAME. Well. He seems to be in a MGTOW mode. But it is hard to be sure at this distance. He is living in Russia.
I told him (the fm was listening) – two women or none. He laughed. As did the fm.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:08 pm
jf12
January 4th, 2015 at 10:55 pm
I don’t think so.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:19 pm
So what is a wife’s submission worth? Plenty.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:22 pm
@M Simon, re: story.
I read it once, 40+ or as you suggest maybe 50+ years ago. What I seem to recall most is the guy feeling gypped becaused of getting addicted to killing a replica of a particular woman and spending all his money on the experience.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:34 pm
@ Rollo Tomassi
So you mean like this guy? http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-43847.html
A) After reading what that guy wrote I’m not entirely convinced he is heterosexual.
B) This guy is at least 500% better looking than I am. Yet somehow my wife is still better looking than his.
C) Point B further reinforces point A.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:37 pm
jf12
January 4th, 2015 at 10:55 pm
I’ll do a blog post on it and see if any of my readers remember.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:42 pm
jf12
January 4th, 2015 at 11:22 pm
I think you are correct about that. It was the ending. It was an “entertainment” world designed to separate you from all your cash. A carnival.
The initial premise for the protagonist was that he didn’t think that you could buy “real” love. The salesman guaranteed it. I think some one warned him that it wouldn’t make him happy.
January 4th, 2015 at 11:53 pm
[…] I’m trying to find the title and author of an old science fiction short story. It came up in this discussion. […]
January 5th, 2015 at 12:21 am
@ Glenn
I just found the videos I got from a PUA course I bought months ago. They’re embedded online. I was having problems viewing them because the pages wouldn’t load but that seems to be okay now (knock on wood).
And yeah, “Deserving” doesn’t come into play. I don’t know why I worded it like that. Remnants of a dysfunctional operating system.
I’m not doing the approaches. That’s all there is to it. If I want something different I need to do something different. That girl at that party was a start. Honestly a lot of my anxiety stems from the fear that I’ll have completely consensual sex with a girl but she’ll back stab me and make some kind of rape allegations, or something similarly bad will happen. That was actually one of the reasons I had a panic attack that night, she’d been drinking, but she wasn’t drunk, and she was reassuring me over and over that she wasn’t drunk, but I wasn’t sure if I believed her and it was really scaring me.
And when she went into the bathroom to wash her mouth out I started freaking out that she was taking the come and shoving it up her pussy — my friend knew some guy that happened to. I don’t want to say “women are crazy” but….
….so there’s that. So completely removed from the approach and the pickup and having sex I’m just reminded of the modern climate we’re in.
It’s important to be careful but I’m careful to the point of avoiding it completely. Obviously that’s not my only hangup, but it’s a significant one. And I didn’t realize that until I made out with that girl and she blew me. ESPECIALLY after she started crying BEFORE we did anything, because she was all upset that I pulled away when she tried to kiss me. She actually cried and seemed ridiculously upset with and pissed off at me.
That and being worried that if a girl wants to be in a relationship with me and I don’t want to be in one with her, she’ll make up some story to tell the cops or something and get me in trouble.
Are Alphas punished for being Alpha in this day and age if the slightest thing goes wrong? Women obviously want to sleep with these guys — Alpha Fucks — so what’s the deal with all the rape allegations?
I’ve always been SUPER cautious, NEVER a risk taker, very anxious…which is probably another reason I’ve struggled so much with girls. I was never the kind of guy to go speeding down the highway or do anything risky.
Isn’t maximizing female sexuality maximizing Alpha Fucks? It made me even MORE anxious remembering something I read on here about girls changing their minds and deciding the guy was a ‘beta’ and then accusing them of rape because they regret having sex with them….and I was thinking of how this girl got so upset with me for being a pussy, so then I spent half the night with her sleeping on my chest having a panic attack thinking “Oh fuck”…
The only reason I stayed and slept over was because I was terrified she’d call the cops or something if I just left and went home after the blowjob. Thinking back on it now I feel sick.
That also goes back to the fact that I have had the cops come into my room at 3 in the morning while I was sleeping on the floor, a couple of times actually, and had me strapped down in the back of an ambulance to take me to the mental hospital. Ever since the first time I’ve had panic attacks if I ever see a cop car, especially with the lights flashing —
— so even the thought that that was a possibility, I just freaked out. I just stayed there with her head on my chest afraid even to move and just laid back slouched uncomfortably on the couch for a few hours before I couldn’t take it anymore and got up and slept on the floor.
So anyway, this would definitely explain some of my anxiety around sex. Not to mention getting molested by a doctor at a physical and one of my relatives making me suck her tits when I was 10 years old —
— it’s not funny, but I’m actually laughing right now. I’ve been through all that and this girl that night was crying telling me “you don’t understand how hard women have it in our society.”
Lady, trust me…actually, you know what, nevermind. I’m not even going to bother. Meanwhile, while I’m listening to that, I’m thinking back on the 9 years I went after puberty without even HUGGING a SINGLE GIRL ONCE —
— oh yeah….tough being a girl in this society. You had to wait until you were 16 to have sex, and the guy just did a wham bam thank you ma’am because he was a hot jock that just wanted to have sex with you —
OH, THE HORROR!! THE HUMANITY!!
I actually enjoy not getting into pissing contests and I’ll just listen to people’s grievances and let it roll off my back.
My mom was SCREAMING at my dad the other day. Literally screaming. Like a banshee on cocaine. What did my dad do? He laughed. And then he made fun of her. He said the same thing right back to her in a hilariously offensive witch voice.
How did my mom respond? She calmed down. It was like she was never even angry in the first place. That’s kind of always how my dad handled her. He never took any of her outbursts seriously, and would either ignore her completely or make fun of her.
He also threw in “I think you need a tranquilizer. I’d shoot one in your ass but I don’t know if it would be able to penetrate deep enough through the fat to actually get into your bloodstream. Might have to shoot it into your shoulder.”
Again…that was seconds after she was screaming at him at the top of her lungs. I forget how many years they’ve been married but it’s close to 40.
I love it.
January 5th, 2015 at 12:32 am
Softek
January 5th, 2015 at 12:21 am
Here is something to try once you get a girl far enough along.
“Sleep with me naked. No sex. I like the body contact.”
Sleep wit her naked. No sex.
About 3/4s will come back gagging for it. The other 1/4? You got to sleep with them naked. Also watch their eyes. When they agree to do it they ALL expect to get f*cked. A man with the self control not to do it is a wonder to them. What goes through their minds? “Is there something wrong with me? Is he gay?” The first part gnaws at them.
January 5th, 2015 at 12:44 am
Badpainter, bf12 and whoever: On the consciousness of female Shit Tests. There is no doubt in my mind it is fully conscious in a PUA situation. Do you guys think it is conscious in the typical LTR/Marriage Shit Test?
January 5th, 2015 at 12:47 am
A woman’s opportunistic love:
Her: There’s just something about you I can’t give up
Him: whys that
Her: Because you’re BreakingBenjamin
Obviously a man’s name is “who” he is, but it is also “what” he is.
—————————–
This is my first post here; I’ve been reading for a while. I’m always impressed by the grammatically conveyed intelligence around here.
I’m younger (22) and I didn’t arrive here without a lot of emotional (self-inflicted) hardship. I’m still working to get things in order and move beyond the awareness of my programming to internalizing game and the truth. I’ve relocated and am completely recreating myself to what I want to be.
But my past is rearing its ugly head from my worst days of oneitis; a woman who’s genuine attraction helped me get over my oneitis for a different girl. I was in such a bad state that I didn’t even dominate her like she expected. Wrong time, wrong mindset, wrong desires, and I chose not to sleep with her out of shameful respect.
Her words: “I didn’t think I was good enough”
Left me high and dry four years ago.
My shirtless pictures last week sent her to the gym for hours. She brings out my natural game, pure arrogance, and passion. The thought of dominating her super charges me, but distance and logistics prevent any interaction.
She knows what I am to her but she is not keeper material and is slightly unstable. It needs to be sexually dealt with so I can move forward, but I am impatient.
It’s been in the air for years and I haven’t seen her for as long. I am detached and indifferent to the outcome, but I wish to deal with this on my terms. She will step into my world to do it.
Anyone who tells you focused oneitis can’t get you laid is lying. I never had more attention and hookups from HB8 and 9’s than when I was obsessed with just one.
Just wanted to share, and say thanks Rollo. Always well presented, interesting, and insightful.
BB
January 5th, 2015 at 12:57 am
re: “Do you guys think it is conscious in the typical LTR/Marriage Shit Test?”
Yes. In *exactly* the same way, her irrational raging at her husband during her PMS periods are 100% consciously deliberate.
January 5th, 2015 at 1:47 am
@forgethesky re: “Using brutal logic and straight no’s will work with some people”
I guess. I’ve never had to dissuade interest before.
January 5th, 2015 at 1:51 am
@BreakingBenjamin
Anyone who tells you focused oneitis can’t get you laid is lying. I never had more attention and hookups from HB8 and 9’s than when I was obsessed with just one.
It wasn’t the oneitis that got attention. It was ignoring other chicks for the oneitis. Oneitis is always bad for you. Always. Ignoring a chick is always good for you in her eyes.
You’re getting some of the ideas right, but you need to pay attention to cause and effect more closely.
January 5th, 2015 at 2:24 am
@Sun Wukong
Thanks, but we are on the same page here (bad context).
It is certainly bad but my implication is that it is possible for oneitis to circumstantially get you laid. However, for 95% of guys it likely would not.
January 5th, 2015 at 2:26 am
@ Bluepillprofessor
Why would shit test be conscious act in the case of a STR and an unconscious act in an LTR?
Either shit tests are conscious acts or they aren’t. I believe they are conscious acts even if they might not be fully reasoned out before hand. There is still a matter of making a conscious choice about whether or not to execute the test.
January 5th, 2015 at 4:16 am
As evidence that feminism counter indicates the presence of reason a is therefore child abuse to raise a boy to be a feminist I submit this:
http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2014/12/why-bodily-functions-are-feminist-issue
…and this why men think women, especially feminist women, are our intellectual inferiors.
January 5th, 2015 at 4:27 am
@ Seraph. I think you miss the point of the book in “The 5 Love Language”. Even if it was written for married couple. I believe it applies to any group. People do have different ways of experiencing love and loving them in their own language makes them feel loved. What is complicated about that? For example I hate your typical Walmart boring dress shirt. Yet every year some relative who barely speaks to me during the year would send me a shirt like that even though I’d rather just talk to them over the phone during the year. This will make me feel loved but I’m almost sure in their mind they feel sending me those shirts during Christmas time is an expression of love (or perhaps away to ease their guilt).
January 5th, 2015 at 7:16 am
@Softek
I would advise you to move where nobody knows you. Alone, with a clean sheet and no negative background your anxiety will drop drastically. And as a start don’t be picky, just fuck. Than the ego boost will slowly drop your anxiety even at your own territory.
January 5th, 2015 at 7:44 am
@glenn
In general I agree with you but these 2 points I must constructively disagree:
Of course, I’m no longer chivalrous (still hold doors sometimes, it’s just reflexive
I think women respond very positively to chivalry and can be a game changer (for me it was) if you know how to use it. But you must not make it from a place of need and qualifying yourself to her, you must make it to show your dominance. Before Red Pill I never used chivalry, I was ashamed/didn’t know how to make it and when I was using it was in the wrong time and as a serf. Chivalry is a way of establishing your frame of dominance since the beginning and chivalry must be ALWAYS conditional. Conditional of her submission to your frame, of her respect, her loyalty, her lust. If she doesn’t enter your frame you should just stop chivalry and next her, right there.
My RP “mentor” was the most “chivalrous” guy I ever met (even with man!). Then or they submit (enter his frame) or interaction is over. Giving up chivalry is giving up your frame and you can consider yourself defeated.
But I don’t think all women are whores.
I think they are (especially regarding beta males) and we must deal with it. By definition, if their love is opportunistic it means that their “love” is dependent on some reward. That’s what whores do. “No money, no funny”, like one girl told me once.
January 5th, 2015 at 8:01 am
@glenn
Still about chivalry. Chivalry is optional but for recovering betas can be a easier implementing winning strategy, once they need to make less adaptations on their current mindset.
Winning strategies:
– You don’t give a shit – The girl sees you as dominant, you are above from what the others think of you. Alpha sliding to jerk.
– You are (conditionally) chivalrous – The girl sees you as social (smart) but still dominant once you’ll not make it unconditionally and NEVER leaving your frame. Not afraid to be a jerk if needed. True alpha male mind set in my opinion. Smart betas (most readers here) can edge their intelligence.
– Mixed – You’re a needy beta that adapts to other’s frames, trying to qualify all the time. I was here (and sometimes) still slide to here.
January 5th, 2015 at 8:09 am
correction:
Winning strategies (continuation):
– Mixed – You’re a politician that pretends to adapt to other’s frames, pretending to qualify. Dangerous territory, use it at your own risk. If you are great on this, Politics wait for you.
Loosing strategy:
– Mixed – You’re a needy beta that adapts to other’s frames, trying to qualify all the time. I was here (and sometimes) still slide to here.
January 5th, 2015 at 6:42 pm
Re my
M Simon
January 4th, 2015 at 4:43 pm
The story is “Pilgrimage to Earth” also “Love Inc.” by Robert Sheckley.
January 6th, 2015 at 12:03 pm
@xxxxxxxxxx Sorry, but a woman uses her conditional love and acceptance in a selfish sense ( in her own interest), or in a more altrusitic way (in in the interest of her children, community and even in the interest of the man himself). As a mother, I certainly catch myself withholding love from my sons if they did not try to push or better themselves.
I would much much rather that my sons hate my guts but survive and thrive, rather than to wallow in my motherly love while dying in a ditch.
Thank God I am not your son. By some twisted leap of logic, you think withholding love will keep your sons from dying in a ditch? Men may except this from their wives, but not their mom? Jesus. Do yourself and your sons a favor and love them always; push them but love them.
“A woman uses her conditional love and acceptance in a selfish sense”. That is not love.
Between this and the ugly Jenine Bufi “How I know I’ll Break Your Heart”, I become more certain that women are incapable of love.
January 6th, 2015 at 8:41 pm
The best representation I know of Mans idealistic love can be found within Ted Hawkins song, ‘Crystal Chandelier':
“…make sure this is what you want, while you’re still free … because all I have to offer you is me … there’ll be no mansion waiting for you on the hill … everything I have is standing here in front of you to see …”
Anyone care to offer a feminine critique of this song?
January 14th, 2015 at 12:07 am
[…] Commodifying Love […]
January 23rd, 2015 at 2:58 pm
“Before I close, I’m going to give you a bit of Red Pill hope (again). Men and women can and do love each other intensely and genuinely. They can and do see past each other’s deficiencies and their love endures.”
No. This is giving women a free pass. You’re subconsciously referencing the sitcom example. In all cases where it appears that a woman has “seen past [her husband’s] deficiencies” and their love endured, the man WAS STILL PERFORMING, at a minimum slaving away every day working and putting a roof over the family’s head, food on the table, usually being a great dad to the kids.
You might say, “Yeah, I didn’t say otherwise.” But I’m saying your quoted statement above implied that some women are able to look past the “nonperformance” you write about elsewhere. Some women are able to resist the feminist onslaught today and stay married to a decent boring beta even though she’s bored and unhaaaaaaaaaaaaaappy, and she’ll be miserable, not love him, but yeah not ALL women initiate divorce. But that husband is “performing” more than the miserable wife ever does.
March 7th, 2015 at 10:16 pm
[…] expression of a man’s desire to have a woman love him unconditionally. Rollo talks about it here and here. My words are heartfelt, vulnerable, and utterly clueless. It didn’t change a damn […]