Category Archives: Case Studies

December 26, 2012

Too Hot

By Rollo Tomassi

too_hot

Over the Christmas break I had Dalrock and several SoSuave members alert me to a recent story about the firing of a dental assistant for “being too attractive”. I’d thought it was pretty laughable at first glance, but there’s a lot more going on in this situation than just what’s on the surface here. Naturally the fem-centric media starting point is the egregiousness of the all-male Iowa high court unanimously agreeing that a woman could be fired for something other than her job performance. It’s always interesting to observe the legal twistings when when the feminine imperative smacks into a law it hasn’t yet distorted to its own purposes (like right-to-work laws). I’m sure the case will be taken up the chain to even higher courts, but the operative will be the same – women don’t want to be beholden to general laws that conflict with the feminine imperative. Give it time and new definitions of what constitutes sexual discrimination, and you’ll see how fluidly the imperative achieves its ends.

Beyond the indignation prompting social fallout, there’s an interesting illustration in Game theory here. Melissa Nelson, a semi-attractive 32 year old dental assistant has her 10 year employment stint terminated by 53 year old Dentist, James Knight for representing too tempting a  potential lover and too potential a threat to his marriage. This is where it gets interesting:

Nelson, 32, worked for Knight for 10 years, and he considered her a stellar worker. But in the final months of her employment, he complained that her tight clothing was distracting, once telling her that if his pants were bulging that was a sign her clothes were too revealing, according to the opinion.

Well, considering all she wore were standard issue medical scrubs it would appear that it didn’t take much to arouse the good dentist.

While her former boss claimed her clothes were so tight he couldn’t look at her without being aroused, Nelson said the only outfit she wore to work was standard scrubs worn by many nurses and assistants in dental offices.

Think about this for a moment, when Knight hired her 10 years ago she would’ve been 22 and he would’ve been 43. Looking at the more recent pictures of Nelson, I can see she’s followed the standard SMV curve, and while I wouldn’t rate her higher than maybe a cleaned up HB7, no doubt Knight was privy to watching her progress from her SMV peak at 22, to the inevitable two child, postpartum “chop it short” mommy-do at 32. After watching this and enduring the slow-burn, sexual pangs for a decade I suspect that Knight probably spent in inordinate amount of masturbatory energy on her mental image.

He also once allegedly remarked about her infrequent sex life by saying, “that’s like having a Lamborghini in the garage and never driving it.”

No doubt about, we’ve got a beta here. Blatant and obviously telegraphed sexual interest ham-fisttedly delivered  as a compliment not only belies the beta, but no woman in human history has ever responded positively to it. In all my time counseling in the manosphere I’ve heard some derivative of this line constantly used by beta orbiters hoping that their ONEitis will get the message that she’s not being treated as well as she should be, and he’s uniquely qualified to appreciate her for her rarity. What chumps like Knight don’t get is that genuine desire and sexual impulse cannot be negotiated.

All a long-married beta like Knight is doing is falling back on his adolescent social skill set. This is the hallmark of a chump who’s never developed his Game beyond what it took to convince his wife to marry him.

Knight and Nelson — both married with children — started exchanging text messages, mostly about personal matters, such as their families. Knight’s wife, who also worked in the dental office, found out about the messages and demanded Nelson be fired. The Knights consulted with their pastor, who agreed that terminating Nelson was appropriate.

Once you see the pictures of Mrs. Knight all of this crystalizes for us.

mrs_knight

Now we add in the element of Mrs. Knights suspicion and a healthy dose of parochial shame from their pastor (most likely at Mrs. Knights behest) and we see the good dentist moved to terminate “just an ordinary mom”.  Here we see an all too common theme of the feminine imperative; using men to settle a score between women. My guess would be that had Mrs. Knight not discovered said texts, Nelson in all her ‘hotness’ would still be employed.

Knight is a very religious and moral individual, and he sincerely believed that firing Nelson would be best for all parties, he said.

I generally reserve my interpretations of the religious ramifications of Game to blogs like Dalrock’s, but at the risk of encouraging the moralist commenters on my blog, I have to draw attention to how the feminine imperative influences religious perceptions. This very religious and moral individual in all likelihood had been devising scenarios in his head about how he might engage in some kind of sexual tryst with Nelson through out her peak SMV years. He watched her progress through a relationship, watched her get married, gave her maternity leave when she had two kids, and still he pined. That pining only ended when Mrs. Knight demanded Nelson’s termination. Once again, biology trumps conviction, and did so for a decade, but once his back is to the wall he makes necessity a virtue.

Knight fired Nelson and gave her one month’s severance. He later told Nelson’s husband that he worried he was getting too personally attached and feared he would eventually try to start an affair with her.

When you compare James Knight to David Petreaus’ situation you can’t help but notice some surface level similarities. Both married to well-past the Wall wives and open (at least ideally) to getting with younger, better looking women. Their stories are an all too common theme in today’s SMP. Just based on what I see from the pictures, Knight strikes me as that archetypal mature guy who married young (well before fully realizing his true SMV), played by the rules, and probably only woke up to his SMV when a hot 22 year old made him realize his past potential. When a guys like this make sexual allusions comparing undriven Lamborghinis to the objects of their sexual desire, the real message is their own sexual dissatisfaction with their wives. Harboring that angst for 10 years while your ‘too hot to work with’ ONEitis is only infrequently getting banged is a special kind of beta hell.

When I wrote about the redefining of men’s mid-life awareness, Knight’s circumstance is the uglier side of that.

The truth about men’s mid-life crises isn’t about recapturing youth, it’s about finally understanding the trappings they’ve been sold into through their 20′s and 30′s and coming to terms with that often horrible truth. Some men do in fact buy the sports car, get the new hottie wife or act in some fashion that appears reckless and irresponsible. This isn’t due to infantilism, but rather new understanding of their own position as men. They’ve “lived responsibly” for so long and for so little appreciation that when that true realization is made they feel the need to move. They’ve become respected, put in the hours, the sacrifice, the censoring of their own views. They realize now that they’ve sold off true passions in favor of maintaining what others have told him was his responsibility – whether it was his choice or not. And all for what? A fat wife? A shrew? Maybe even a fantastic marriage and a wonderful family life, but also a nagging doubt about not seeing enough of the world by 40 because of it.

Now, before it gets said, I’m not suggesting that Knight have gone ahead and got after it with Nelson (if that was ever a consideration), but I do understand his predicament and the motivators behind it. If anything Knight serves as yet one more warning for men in realizing their SMV too late. The real tragedy here is that for a brief moment Knight was becoming aware of his (waning) SMV only to reinsert himself back into the Matrix with the aid of his wife and pastor. The real damage will be dealt in his new need for constant repression of this knowledge every time he bangs his wife, every time she nags, every time she gives him that doe-like thousand yard stare; he’ll understand the oldest manosphere proverb – once you know about the Matrix there is no going back.

122 Comments | posted in Biomechanics, Case Studies, Idealizations, Sexual Market Value, The Feminine Imperative, The Matrix

December 13, 2012

Dreams of the Future Past

By Rollo Tomassi

Untitled from Where the Dreams were Growing Wild

For about the last two weeks I’ve been conferring with a good friend about a situation I’ve yet to address since becoming red pill aware.

My friend James is an interesting fellow. Now at 56, he’s had a life of ups and downs, and varied experiences. He’s travelled extensively both in his impoverished youth and now in his affluence (and relative celebrity) he still makes trips to location most people wouldn’t have on their vacation destinations list. He’s insightful, mature and what I’d call a lesser Alpha.

James has been through two tumultuous marriages – one from an idealistic phase where he pedestalized not just his young wife, but the institution of marriage itself, and one from his 30’s after not having learned his lessons in idealism. He’s been on the receiving end of the divorce industry, but thankfully he didn’t come into his money until after these were settled. He is presently on his 3rd marriage and this is the “one that stuck” for him. They compliment each other well, but considering they were in their late 40’s and he’d finally come into some marked success when they married I’m hardly surprised.

For the most part, and by my own estimation, James is a successful, well-intentioned Man – his only delusion in being still firmly entrenched in his blue pill understanding about women and the greater game that’s influenced his life thus far. He’s resisted my efforts to educate him in Game-awareness for a while now, and since he’d married a woman who complements his personality so well I didn’t see the harm in just letting him be and focus my efforts elsewhere. James has a demonstrated predilection to white knight and his somewhat Alpha attitude has made him one of the more vocal opponents I’ve had in explaining red pill truths to him or others involved in our past conversations. He has a knack for baselessly rejecting or sidestepping red pill truths that just don’t fit into his personal narrative, or he feels in someway invalidates how he’d handled the women in his past.

The Mentor

One thing James was never able to do situationally (not biologically) with his past wives was to have children. He makes the convenient declarations about how he “never wanted to be a father” most successful childless men do. Once he’d met his 3rd wife they were both at an age where kids were impractical for them. Remarkably his present wife was childless when they married and both of them didn’t want to run the risks of pregnancy at such a late stage in life. Neither did they feel any compulsion to adopt since James’ success came to him at a later stage in his maturity, however that didn’t stop him from wanting to, at least indirectly, be a father to someone.

Almost six years ago James became a mentor to a relatively impoverished boy of 12. Over those six years, he’s filled in for the father role of this boy who’s own father left his mother when he was 5. Whether it was from a sense of wanting to pass on his wisdom or an unachievable need to be a father in some respect, James admirably took Michael under his stewardship.

Over the years James played the role reasonably well considering the demands of his job and personal life. He payed for Michael’s schooling needs, encouraged him in sports, made attempts to motivate and inspire him, and gave him opportunities to experience things he would never had the chance to without his mentorship. He was certainly a great father figure for a kid who had no father.

The years went on and like most father’s James had to deal with his ‘son’s’ teenage misbehaviors. Nothing criminal occurred, but the requisite delinquency and sometimes truancy that boys will engage in was off-putting for him. In actuality Michael’s personality was a lot like James’, a lesser Alpha when he wanted to get his way (or ignore other people’s ways), but a confirmed beta when it came to deference to women. Michael has the predictable ‘promise keeper’s‘ Oedipus beliefs about his biological father, as a result of his having been raised by a single mother’s predominantly feminized influences.

The Perfect Storm

All of this investment and third hand discipline has come to a head now. James is currently dealing with a 17 (soon to be 18) year old boy who’s entered into the perfect storm phase of his life. He’s gotten himself a girlfriend, and is struggling with what to do with himself after high school ends in June. Michael has no interest in planning for a future beyond graduating from high school. He’s become increasingly disconnected with James – which is really putting James off for having invested himself in his adolescence – and essentially disregards anything James has to say about his interests in his future.

Recently James footed the bill for Michael to take the SAT and ACT exams for which he never showed up for, and this set James off. His understandable reaction was to lecture him about the necessity of a good education (something James himself only came to after ‘exploring’ on his own for the first 3-4 years after his graduation) and was met with simple ambiguous disinterest in his ‘fatherly advice’. Michael claims to have a plan, but say “college isn’t for him”.

James’ next step was to seek advice himself on how to deal with his ‘family’ crisis from other fathers he knew as well as anyone he thought might have more insight than he. He’s only been doing the father thing for six years as it is, so logically he needed some outside advice from other parents. Most predictably sided with his indignation. The kid is just ungrateful and doesn’t realize the advantage he’s been given to him from people truly invested in his future success. The tough love route was suggested and James is no longer going to be paying for certain bills he’d assumed for Michael while he was in high school.

James says it’s not a punishment, but a learning occasion to teach Michael the necessity of having a job in order to pay for things, but it’s difficult to believe coming from James who’d had high hopes for future appreciation; for doing good in some young man’s life – it’s almost a Savior Schema. Only now that expectation of a shared association of Michael’s future success is looking more like a dead end.

Revelation

About a week and a half ago James asked me for my input. I’ve been familiar with Michael and James’ commitment to being a good surrogate father with him for about 4 years now. I wasn’t sure that James really wanted to hear what I was going to tell him, because it was going to require that he listen to the red pill reason he didn’t like.

Having been raised by the feminine imperative, Michael is now making the transition into dealing with the insecurities that come as a part of that conditioning. He’s finally having sex with his first girlfriend and everything revolves around ensuring a future where he can perpetuate it. His girlfriend is one year behind him in school so his greatest ambition at this point is finding a way to guarantee they will be together once she graduates and moves on to some college of her choosing. His plan for his future is to follow along with whatever plan is her future.

Asking Michael to abandon her, in his own best interests, is to ask him to be selfish – much in the same fashion that he associates his biological father as being selfish. Michael can’t think past this because focusing on himself would be aligning himself with his real father. Beyond this, the reinforcement of semi-regular sex cements the certainy of his duty to making his future her future.

As expected, James didn’t like this revelation. He was a white knight, and to a degree so is Michael, but the point of contention was too obvious to ignore – Michael’s dependency on what the feminine imperative had conditioned into him (really both of them) was now at a loggerhead with the financial, personal and emotional investment James had committed himself to, and expected appreciation for, over the last six years.

James went into denial. He wouldn’t accept that what I’d been telling him for years was the source of his frustration with Michael. Out came the standard boilerplate platitudes, “Ah kids, they never appreciate anything you do for them! He’s just at that age. Who really knows what they want to do at 18? I didn’t.” I thought his words were ironic, not because he’d only been a parent for 6 years, but because of how similar his own experience was with Michael’s. It was almost a surrender for him. He wanted better for Michael, but that desire was conflicting with his own ego-investment in the feminine imperative.

So I find myself at an impasse here. I’m attempting to simultaneously unplug a soon to be 18 year old kid and a 56 year old man, both suffering from from the same infection. James, like I think most men do, had hopes of directing his ‘son’s’ path towards a brighter future by avoiding the pitfalls he had to endure. Only now he’s being cruelly reminded of how his own social conditioning began by re-experiencing it through Michael.

For his part Michael isn’t going to have any ambition for himself until he has nothing left to lose, including his girlfriend. He’s not going to join the military, sees no point in taking the SAT and will most likely only do just the bare minimum to sustain himself until such time that his girlfriend’s ambition supersedes his own and she moves on, or worse, he knocks her up. Even James’ framing the possibility of his girlfriend leaving him due to his lack of ambition doesn’t register for him because Michael’s feminine conditioning has ‘taught’ him that she’ll inherently appreciate his investment in her.

80 Comments | posted in Case Studies, Idealizations, The Feminine Imperative

November 14, 2012

Case Study – Inspire Her

By Rollo Tomassi

My good friend Greasy Pig from the SoSuave forum needed some Game analysis.

Damn, Rollo! Now I’m starting to second guess myself. lol
One of my plates sent me a topless pic, so I responded very positively. I didn’t gush compliments, I just told her it was an awesome pic and she had nothing to be ashamed about with her body.

I was using the `reward good behaviour by giving her your attention’ philosophy.

Interestingly, she hasn’t sent any more pics. I’ve subtly suggested she should send more but she just laughs it off.
Maybe I shouldn’t have been so quick to respond? But how do you know when and what to reward with your attention?

Context is King.

The deductive (beta) response for a guy receiving a topless pic is to applaud it, encourage it and reinforce it in order to get more and / or confirm for himself that he’s “in there” with this girl.

The problem is that the attention you give her is in the context of your approval. Your approving of her topless pic satisfies her reason for sending it – male affirmation of her attractiveness. Once satisfied there’s no reason to send more, or really any reason to pursue a guy who will default to giving her unearned approval. Strippers know this dynamic well.

The counterintuitive (Alpha) response is a measured disapproval, or casual indifference. That disapproval shouldn’t be a negative rejection of her, but rather an invitation to try harder with the next one. This is exactly why short text-long response time Game is effective – it provokes imagination in women. Neg Hits are based on the same premise; redirection of qualification. Most of women’s shit tests can be circumvented or turned to your advantage by keeping your focus on redirecting her qualifications of you into her qualification for you.

Shit Tests (revisited)

The subconscious understanding is that a man with options (a presumptive Alpha) will be preoccupied with more important issues than a topless shot of some new girl he may or may not be interested in, and, is so flush with other potential women who are interested in him that hers may be one of many women’s boobs he’s seen previously or even that day.

Try to imagine the process of what went on in this girl’s head. She had to think about taking the shot and what it would prompt in you. She probably wore something she thought was sexy to cover the rest of her, looked herself in the mirror, posed, took the shot, reviewed the picture to make sure she looked good, then pressed ‘send’ and sent it to you. It may not seem it, but that’s a lot of complex decision making on her part.

The suspense, the imagination of what your response would be, all serve to stimulate that chemical rush she finds thrilling. You might think, “well duh Rollo, that’s the principle of ‘gina tingles”, but it’s really different because she is the one self-stimulating that rush, not a guy, not you. She may get tingles from your response, or her imaginings of how you’ll respond, but it’s the uncertainty that prompts the rush. Now think about the millions of ‘self-shooter’ girls doing exactly the same thing, for exactly the same reason.

When you immediately respond in the affirmative it ends the rush she wants to savor. Conversely, when you prolong that rush (and maybe add a bit of playful indignation) you stoke that Alpha fitness uncertainty in her even further. In a sense this puts you into the position of being her drug dealer – you’re the guy who gives her that rush. And like the junkie she is, she will pursue you to get it.

Right now this girl is laughing off your suggestions to send you more topless pics because you failed her shit test. A lot of men think that a shit test always comes in the form of bitchiness or sarcasm, but women test more often with lures of access to their sexuality as a measure of men’s Alpha fitness. And the more you suggest that she send you more pictures of her tits, the more certain she is that you aren’t the Alpha who gives her that rush.

You must inspire a woman to acts of sexual spontaneity, you can never ask for it. When you ask a girl “show me your tits” and she does, it’s great, but when she flashes you without asking, it’s inspired.

97 Comments | posted in Biomechanics, Case Studies, Inter-gender Communication, Positive Masculinity

October 31, 2012

Case Study – Adam’s Lament

By Rollo Tomassi

 

The following dialog is from a recent consult (published with permission) from a young man, Adam, who’s becoming red pill aware in the wake of a breakup. I’ll let his quotes tell the story here:

 My girlfriend broke up with me last month due to her want to find herself and her self-imposed reasons to remain single (she just turned 22 and I just turned 24).

The first consideration I’ll make is that both of you are far too young for a monogamous relationship. Your 20s should be a period of learning for both sexes. Unfortunately it’s becoming more common for guys to hear this and take offense due to this socialized romantic notion that an LTR ought to be some idealized goal state, but the truth of it is that an LTR in this period of a man’s life more often than not becomes debilitating in his maturation.

What young men raised on Disneyesque romantic ideals fail to consider is that a mature LTR requires responsibility, liability and accountability that limit a young man’s potential and paralyze him in the prime years of his life. These are the years that should be devoted to ambitions and passions that will lead to financial and personal success (i.e. college, career, etc.) and contribute to his peak SMV later in his life.

Too many men lament later in life that they should’ve done more in these years preparing for their own successes rather than becoming saddled in dead end relationships. They lament their lives that could’ve been once they realize that their SMV maturation happens after  women’s peaks. Time and the freedom to maneuver within your interests are a man’s most valuable resources. As a Man on the other side of this I can tell you that there are few material things I have a want for now, but time for myself and my passions, that is constantly adjusted by my career, my wife, my daughter, my commute in traffic etc., is the most precious thing I can think of. Why young men who would otherwise fiercely defend their own independences would so readily and voluntarily give this up in order to secure the intimacy of a single woman is one of the greatest crimes perpetrated on men by a feminized, romanticized society.

Also understand that your Ex is going through a similar phase as well. Between the years of 18 and about 26 are the prime years for a woman to weigh her hypergamous options. I call these the “party years” for attractive young women. Generally they include college, but it’s during this period that women explore the benefits afforded to them by their peak SMV and looks.

The hard truth is that most women on some level understand that this period represents the peak of their sexuality and attractiveness and this is their best chance to explore sex and relationships without consideration for limiting the conditions they place on their intimacy. All women have an innate understanding that the older they get the less sexually marketable they become.

This frustrates young men (particularly plugged-in betas who internalized an ideal that an LTR is a goal state) until they come to the realization that the older a man gets, the more sexually marketable he becomes since this generally implies he has attained a certain amount of confidence, professionalism, status, affluence and a list of other conditions women value in trading their intimacy for long term security. At 22, these principles go unrecognized in women, yet their behaviors are predictable enough to prove that these conditions and understandings are in play later in life.

She complimented me when we dated for the 5 month relationship that I was the best catch she had found so far, but the timing was off in that she met me at a time where she was trying to force herself not to be co-dependent (she broke up with her last b/f of 1.5 years so she could find herself and remain single) it didn’t last long because she found me 2 months later and dated me for the second half of this year.

You were flattered by her compliment because it affirmed your ego-investment in LTRs as a goal state as correct. Your frustration is that her behavior and her stated reasoning for it confounds this ideology. Lets also consider that if she had a year and a half “relationship” with a previous boyfriend, a half-year with you, and she’s now 22, her relationship experience has been limited to adolescent socializations. She still uses whatever behavioral skills she learned in her adolescence. Not a good benchmark for validating you as the “best catch she has found so far” to put it mildly. Rather, this is a convenient way of “letting you down easy” in order to preserve her own ego and hopefully make you feel better for going off to do what she really wants to do anyway.

She was my first g/f in nearly 6 years and also the girl I lost my virginity too.

And here’s the rub. I swear, basic math skills are all a red pill advocate needs to pick apart situations; If she was your first girlfriend in 6 years and you are now 24, this would mean the last girl you considered a girlfriend was back when you were 18. Again this implies that you yourself are employing an adolescent social skill set in evaluating what course you think inter-gender relationships ought to follow. There’s no shame in this, I’m not pointing it out to put you down, but understand that this is how you and she are operating even if you’re unaware of it.  

You also lost your virginity to her. Stop thinking of it in these terms, this is what I’d expect to hear an emotional girl say. Only women”lose” their virginity, this is part of the feminine imperative’s controlling of the language. When women ‘lose’ their virginity it perpetuates their vaginas as the precious prize while also continuing the narrative of default female victimhood.

For you it was the beginning of opening a new part of your maturation process since sex (even casual sex) always implies new responsibilities that must be compensated for. However I do understand your attachment to her due to this and the fact that you’ve internalized monogamy as goal state myth. We all have a life long affinity for our first sexual partner since they are the ones with whom we share this life experience – you never forget your first.

 I matured a lot and unfortunately didn’t find your blog until too late. I’ve read all the articles online and now started reading the DJ Bible at SoSuave so I won’t get so screwed next time and be able to walk away sooner instead of dragging it out.

Good.

Do you really think she broke up with me because her reason?

No, I think she’s obeying her hypergamous biological imperative that the phase her life is in is dictating for her.

Personally, I think it’s a copout and she’s afraid of commitment.

This is, to the letter, exactly what I’d expect a girl to say about a guy when she is 30+ years old and ready to cash her chips in on marriage. The irony of a guy using the same jingoisms (“commitment phobic”) women use to describe the men they want to coerce into monogamy with them is an indictment of the power of the feminine imperative. Stop thinking like a chick and start thinking like an adult man with a firm understanding of his own masculinity. You MUST unlearn the idea that an LTR is the key to life’s happiness; it is not.

I think that she’d rather be able to have one night stands where she lives (bay area) whereas I live in San Diego.

Of course she would, she’s in her party years and it is what it is – so long as she’s mature enough to acknowledge and accept responsibility for her actions (doubtful). Also, this isn’t a statement on yourself, stop interpreting it like it is. She’s not a worse person for not subscribing to your romanticized conditioning of how women ought to want commitment. On some level of consciousness she understands the hypergamic opportunities this period of her life presents her with and her behavior is the result of this. 

Will she regret this part of her life later? Most likely. Will she look back to you as someone significant to her during her 20’s when she’s 30 and ready to cash her chips out? Probably not, but this isn’t your concern. This episode represents a point of departure for your life – departure from your old adolescent self into a mature, Game aware Man. You’re unplugging.

What’s more concerning to me is that after all you’ve described to me, this half-year “relationship” is long distance. Are you kidding me? How often could you have had sex with her while you’re on opposite ends of the state? You’re pining over an LDR and my take on this is that there is no such thing as an LDR; you do not have a relationship with her, nor did you ever really have one.

One or both parties in an LDR are going to “cheat” – though I can’t really call it cheating since it’s simply behavior manifesting itself in conditions that aren’t conducive to what our natural impulses are. Adam, this girl hasn’t hurt you, she’s helped you. By breaking it off she’s given you the freedom you need to grow beyond these silly adolescent ideologies that an LDR should ever have been an option for a mature Man.

She’s an atheist whereas I am a Christian and that kind of bugged her even though I dropped some values to date her…



For men, sexual impulse will almost universally trump moral conviction when the opportunity presents itself. Again, no shame here, but it’s telling that you’d expect her to appreciate your having sacrificed some (loose) convictions for doing what you wanted to do anyway. You’re not a martyr for dropping any values for having sex with her and it doesn’t place you on some moral high ground that she should change her mind about entertaining an LTR with you.

She said even if I moved up north to be with her or her down here she’d still break up with me to “find herself” because of her major need to be single.

They very fact that you considered altering the course of your young life to better accommodate your idealized relationship with this girl by relocating to San Francisco ought to scare the hell out of you. Are you so optionless that a girl 600 miles away is a better prospect than exploring other women in your own area? I can’t tell you how many men I’ve counseled who’ve irreparably damaged their lives, made career choices they’ve regretted for decades and voluntarily killed any hope of genuine ambition they may have had by doing exactly what you considered here – changing their address to better facilitate a ONEitis hope that the one girl who ever fucked them would eventually become their soul-mate wife.

I just don’t get this girl. After a month of blackout and breakup now she’s really trying hard to be friends. I suspected her screwing a guy before she came down to see me, so maybe that’s why she called it off when she did.

So what? Spin more plates. If you had other potential women interested in you it would make no difference whether she wanted to play “friends” with you or screwed some other guy.

I was an AFC then, but I still spoke up for myself and stood my ground. Basically, I gave her an ultimatum.

Sorry Adam, but you still are and AFC or at least an rAFC. Ultimatums are declarations of powerlessness; by doing so you’ll kill any interest a woman may have had for you as this is the last resort of a lack of confidence. This is the kiss of death. You get points for manning up and speaking your mind, but it’s not what you said, it’s how you said it.

I said if we have sex then we need to be exclusive. It’s all or nothing and if she doesn’t then she needs to be out of my life because I couldn’t trust her with all the guys I knew that were trying hard to sleep with her.

For as noble as your intent, she will only interpret this as a supreme insecurity on your part. You’re not going to talk her off the cock-carousel, neither should it be your responsibility to do so.

Adam, you need to let go of this notion that you require exclusivity in an LTR, particularly at your age. It’s self-defeating.

You have to unlearn this misguided idea that exclusivity is a necessity at your stage of life. All the Game skills in the book wont help you get past this basic idea. You will only settle for the first girl to respond to them. My advice to you is to NEXT this girl and get out into the field and sarge. Stop it with this LDR crap, they are fundamentally flawed and are only exacerbated by the ONEitis you have for this girl and will fluidly develop for the next one because it fits your old paradigm.

101 Comments | posted in Case Studies, Communication, Hypergamy, Plate Theory, The Feminine Imperative, Unplugging

September 19, 2012

Kill the Bunny

By Rollo Tomassi

New Case Study today. Reader JAS at SoSuave wanted help with his most recent target (edited for length):

I am 42. So here is the deal.

I moved to a new city a year ago and started a new job. There is a 35 yr old, hot woman there who I will call D. D is hot- about a 7, very smart, cool etc. From the beginning we hit it off and we have always spoken and interacted with some flirtatious undertones.. but we work together. Much as I liked her, I was up to my neck in pussy all this year. Little by little we would talk about our dates etc. and just generally were cool.. but we never spoke outside of work or anything. I liked her but not so much that I felt the need to pursue.

About 2 months ago I noticed a change in her that coincided with a change in myself – we were upping the stakes mutually. She would come around and talk more to me, lingering, lots of eye contact. I started feeling the need to do the same. Things went on this way until eventually until 2 weeks ago I asked her to get a drink. She jumped at the chance. We met up that Friday and hung out. I was still unsure if I was interested enough to pursue her, but by the end of the evening it had all clicked. I LIKED her.. in a keeper sort of way. We ended our hanging out with a peck on the lips.

We met up at a work function the night after and weren’t able to do much, but we snuck some hand holding and another short kiss. She wanted to do brunch the next day, but I had a  birthday party for family Sunday and had to say no.

So back to work on Monday and due to our schedules wouldn’t be able to meet for a bit. Wednesday we both walked up to each other and she literally stamps her feet an says “I really want to see you!”. I said me too and that I would call her that night to meet up. Its was do or die, because she had a trip out of town and would be gone until this week. So I get home, text and …..nothing. No response until 10 pm saying she went jogging without her phone and met her sister for some errands. I was like WTF?

I played it off and said no big deal, but that I did find that confusing, could we meet tomorrow? she said she had tentative plans and wasn’t sure, but knew I wouldn’t hang around waiting so probably not. I didn’t respond.

Next day she is texting me and asking me questions all the time.. I responded late and only curtly as I sensed she was fishing to see if I was angry.

She went on her trip and when she got back on Tuesday, I played it cool and didn’t say much at all. I was polite but never brought any of it up. But I didn’t flirt much either.. Just being neutral.

So yesterday I was talking to her and decided to force her to either drop it or go for it. I went to her and said “go out with me”. She kind of hemmed and hawed but said she wanted to and Friday might be best. I said fine, but then she said that maybe she had to check on something to make sure. I remained cool and said, contact me and let me know.

I haven’t heard from her yet, but its still Thursday, so I decided to just leave the ball in her court.

What are my next steps? If she doesn’t call at all, I plan to not remind her about our plans at all. If she is interested, she will contact. If she doesn’t I plan a freeze out. But not sure what else to do.

This was JAS’s set-up situation. Later he developed a bit more:

I get to work today and she is walking in early. She comes to where I am and starts talking about the weather etc, as she talks I continue my trajectory towards the spot I sit at outside during my break. She realizes I am continuing on my path and starts walking and facing my direction. I am not overly talkative, but not acting all butthurt either, just chill. She eventually breaks and goes inside.

Later on, during the day she is insinuating herself into my conversations. Again, I am not being rude, or any different than usual, except I cut out the flirty vibe we always have and thats all. I notice her trying to read me throughout, kinda like “is he really ok, or is he secretly mad?”, but that may be projection on my part. Who knows what thoughts are in there.

As I get ready to head home, She corners me in the hallway, this is, more or less, the convo as I remember it

Her: I feel I’ve fucked this up. I should have called you but I’ve really been a mess lately.
Me: its cool, I had a feeling you weren’t feeling it and made other plans
Her: really? I mean, should we talk about this? Its always so weird talking here at work, I feel strange.
Me: I’m not sure what you mean. What is it you want to talk about exactly?
Her: this, us. I don’t know whats going on.
Me: if you like we can
Her: I give up, I don’t know what……..
Me: for me its simple, we are either feeling it, or we’re not. By your behavior my assumption is you are not. Or you would have made more of an effort. And if that is the case, Its ok.
Her: Are you feeling it still?
Me: are you? Look, we’re being crytpic, So let me show you how its done: Yes, I would like to get to know you, I made that clear by asking you out. I expect, if its mutual for you to follow through. If not, well..
Her: it is. We do need to get together. Cant we get together tomorrow? Doing things here at work is just always confusing. I feel weird here, its confusing.
Me: I have plans (I really do)
Her: this is ridiculous. Wednesday?
Me. Wednesday is fine.
Her: I can’t read you. You give me this look, I don’t know what it means. I give up
Me: grabbing her hand: It means I like looking at you. So wed? set?
Her: yes.
Me:good
Her:good!
We both walk away smiling.

This is the first stage for JAS. He gets a B- for performance thus far. The first exchange was weak – a peck on the cheek, hand holding, etc. sound like an episode of Hannah Montana. This is not how adults date. If I had to guess, it was his hesitancy to consolidate on getting more intimate with her that’s what gave her pause. When the green light’s on brother, drive the friggin car.

However, his recovery is what’s saved him. She is qualifying to him and in a big way, this is exactly how you want it. He handles himself maturely and with amused mastery when he’s not ‘on a date‘, he needs to transition that into getting intimate with her. Notice how she accepted his direction here:

Her: I can’t read you. You give me this look, I don’t know what it means. I give up
Me: grabbing her hand: It means I like looking at you. So wed? set?
Her: yes.
Me:good
Her:good!

This is the dominance a woman is expecting from you when you’re building up to having sex with her. He owns it when he’s not on a date, but needs to own it when he is. Hesitate and thou art lost. Go timid on her on Wednesday, play nice and don’t escalate to making out (or more) and she goes off to find the next Alpha she thought you were.

Thus far JAS had been Alpha at work and Beta on the date. Her confusion comes from initially ‘reading’ him as Alpha, but he didn’t close the deal.

This is what women mean when they say they “can’t read you”
Translation: “You’re sending me Alpha cues, but you pull back like a Beta when it’s time to get physical.”

Also, have a plan. You lead. Tell her where you’re going and what you’ll be doing. She enters your world, you don’t enter hers – from his last conversation this is how she wants it anyway. Be fearless. She wants a whirlwind, you need to be that whirlwind.

After the Wednesday ‘date’ JAS gives us an update:

Well, we got our coffee today. I think it was good and bad… not sure if it was more of one or the other.

We got a coffee because lunch was impossible for both of us. As we walked we talked a bit about BS, until I stopped her and said “lets talk about what we came here to talk about”
So we started in. She gave me the “I’m not sure about what to do” thing. “I like you- obviously- and I’m attracted to you, but this is really complicated for me”
Me: yeah I got that vibe.
Her: so I don’t know, some days I wake up and say I want to pursue this, and other days I wake and think “fuck it, I cant deal with it”. I know I’m going to regret it if I don’t”

And so I pulled out my favorite move. I LJBF her. I said “look, whatever we do we’re good. Lets just be friends then”.
Hit the mark, “really?” she asked looking disappointed. In short, she didn’t let it drop there. She started saying she was attracted to me, and felt a deep connection to me and that I really understood her, probably more than anyone.

By now we’re back within eyesight of our hosp. co-workers are in and out. We go back and forth talking about it all, and she says “I’m sad” I asked her why. She said she didn’t know. I tell her “I’m a little sad too” she asked me why. I said “for the same reason you are probably. There is something here” We go on like this for a bit.

This where I think I got one bad thing- and I immediately thought of Rollo. She says “but you’re not very aggressive”
OUCH. I let it pass, mostly, but then it occurred to me “you make sure to keep us surrounded by people and never alone enough for me to do anything. You have your shields up, and you know it”
Her: yeah, your right. I’m scared of you, I think.

So I LJBFd her again. Basically I’m push pulling here, using the LJBF as a push every time I get something I don’t like.
Eventually, I say I have to go.. that I am leaving town. She says “tonight?” arent you driving?” I say “yes” she says I should wait until morning.

Is this an invitation to invite her out tonight? I’m still in LJBF mode with her. I say that was the plan, but I’ll see how I feel.
I then pulled her to me and kissed her, mind you, within view of potentially the entire hospital. So it wasn’t a major kiss, but it was on the lips and risky. Now she looks a bit confused – to be honest I am as well, since I am not sure if this is all good or not. Weird.
She then tells me again “I’m sad”
Me: dont be
her: no? why not?
Me: this isn’t over.
her: its not?
Me: no

So some good and bad here. The “your not aggressive” was a blow. I think I fended it off well though. I got her to admit alot, while maintaining frame, but its not where I would have wanted to go with this. Its about what I suspected. She is still scared to have a relationship, after what happened with her ex. I got her to tell me more about it all. etc. So I need outside imput here.

I also am of two minds of how to go here. I can try to get her to meet up again tonight- tell her I want to see her again before I go, etc. Or I can use the next two weeks vacation as a reset. Use it as an opportunity to work her via texts and having her miss me.

I believe she is being sincere as far as she can tell. Rollo is right she wants me to lead, but all the while making sure I can’t by blocking me out at every opportunity. I think I revealed alot of herself to her. I think she is being sincere when she said that I am a mystery to her, that she has never met someone like me. She says I am dark, and deep, and complex and she feels connected and attracted to me. And scared.

JAS, read what I’m about to write here carefully because it might help you with the next girl you meet after this one.

YOU NEED TO KILL THE FUCKING BUNNY!

Up to this point you’ve just been batting her around and confusing her with this coffee house, “safe-date shit. You’re not Gaming her or push-pulling her, or preempting anything with a LJBF.

“lets talk about what we came here to talk about”

Learn this now, you cannot negotiate desire. This is exactly what you’re doing here. You wanna fuck this woman? You wanna get some kind of relationship started?

STOP BROKERING THE DEAL.

Sexuality is spontaneous chemical reaction between two parties, not a process of negotiation. It’s sex first, then relationship, not the other way around. Genuine desire cannot be negotiated. Once you get past a certain point in the waiting game, what once had the chance to be an organic, sexual desire becomes mitigated negotiation of a physical act.

I feel like I’m reading a script between two kids from High School Musical. Take her on a ‘real date’. Go to a lounge, have cocktails, be indirect. Up to this point you’ve been overtly telegraphing your intent – this is the kiss of death. It’s like you’re writing up a proposal for a speculative relationship you might have if she signs the papers.

She is still scared to have a relationship, after what happened with her ex.

Yeah, my guess is this guy was the decisive Alpha you haven’t been with her, or if not she was hoping to find after the breakup. My advice to you is to chalk this one up to experience and NEXT her (workplace affairs are always a bad idea as it is). My readers will probably tell you she’s damaged goods, but if you insist on following through with this train wreck, stop being the PG rated JAS and start being the R rated JAS. Presume you’re dealing with an Alpha Widow and standing in her ex’s Alpha shadow.

48 Comments | posted in Alpha, Case Studies, Game

August 14, 2012

Flushing the Nest

By Rollo Tomassi

Esteemed SoSuave member HITHARD relates a recent flushing of a nest:

It must be an attitude shift or something. But every time I come back to the SS forums my relationships blow up. I don’t notice myself doing anything different but if I’m with a girlfriend they must notice a change and purposely start pissing me off. Perhaps it’s a good thing, a wake up call that I’m not with the right girl and I should go back to FB for a while. My now ex started getting bitchy last week and it just escalated from there. I’m pretty laid back – but arc up if someone tries to stand over me or dictate terms. Her jaw dropped when I told her to pack her things and leave. She hasn’t been living here on a permanent basis but had managed to horde a bit of her stuff over here in the past three months. She was a really nice girl, very pretty good with money. But she started to not so much nag, but nitpick at me and I’m over that at this stage of my life. It’s either something she has managed to hide for all these months or I bring it out in her. Either way it’s a no go from here. Am I being selfish over this?

So perhaps SS is bad for me short term but a deal saver long term. Or it’s a subconscious thing of ‘relationship is already over time to go on SS’
After all the FB, plates and relationships, I do look around and am just not impressed with the quality of the women out there.
I do worry I’m starting to form a trend of breaking it off with women when I get bored or irritated though. My longest LTR was with what I think was a BPD chick long before what I knew what BPD or the SS forum was. I sometimes worry if that has left a lasting effect.

There’s always going to be a contingent of guys – mostly White Knights, but some well meaning red-pill men too – who’ll presume you’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater when ever they read a situation like this. A Scarcity Mentality is one of the hardest mental schemas Men deal with in transitioning over to becoming Game-aware. For most, the better part of half their lifetime has been spent in a psycho-social condition that’s taught them women are to be prized, and her intimacy is a rare and precious gift, rewarded to only the man who can prove himself worthy of it.

It’s a hard schema to unlearn, and even the most unapologetic of PUA still feels that twang of doubt about a decision to NEXT a girl he thought might be of LTR potential. So it’s no shock that to NEXT a woman for what appears to be some minor infraction of nitpicking seems like a wanton overreaction – like stomping on a flower before it has a chance to blossom. Necessitous men, and men recovering from being so, will often adopt the same mentality women will when they hear about situations like this, and call it callous, or selfish, maybe even vindictive of past hurtful experiences. The reason for this is because these men, and women by default, still view monogamy from the perspective of the feminine imperative. Monogamy is meant to serve the feminine, so any action that controverts that, no matter how justified, is by definition selfish.

In the time I’ve been writing in the manosphere I’ve read more stories about how Game saved an LTR more so that the reverse, but that isn’t to say there aren’t breakups that result from a new Game-awareness. Hithard’s self-evaluation about his NEXTing isn’t unexpected. His story isn’t the first I’ve encountered about “Game destroyed my LTR” – that Scarcity Mentality self-doubt needs a scapegoat and Game is an easy foil for this, especially for guys who’ve just unplugged, pushed the envelope back against the shit they were accepting up to that point and the LTR imploded. In virtually everyone of these instances where a man reclaims his balls and the result is a breakup, inevitably the guy realizes what a tough, but ultimately good decision it was to rid himself of a toxic woman, or a woman too insecure in herself to want to relinquish frame after having been in control for so long.

Often enough, a breakup is the red-pill solution.

Flushing the Nest

However, I know Hithard (virtually) well enough to know this isn’t his case. He’s been unplugged for a while now, so my guess is twofold:

First I think there’s more to the ‘nitpicking’ and the nesting that this girl was initiating than he’s going into detail about. I think he’s trying to be more judicious about this because he’s seen (or is subliminally aware of) behavioral cues and attitude cues that are familiar to him from his prior (BPD) LTR, and wants to give her the benefit of that doubt.

He’d hit the 3 month point, and this is usually the time when a woman starts to get comfortable enough with a guy to attempt a frame grab. The obvious tell was how she was semi-permanently establishing a nest at his place. Never a good idea, but entirely expected of a woman who feels the urgency of sex decline with her competition anxiety. I don’t know for certain that this is Hithard’s experience, but it follows a very consistent pattern. At the very least she’s reached a stage at which she feels comfortable enough to make demands of behavioral change (nit picking, nagging, complaining).

On a basic, relational level these are shit tests, but these are now the variety of shit test that qualifies for LTR frame control, as opposed to the types of shit test a man receives whilst dating when the urgency of competition anxiety mediates a woman’s delivery. For example, while single, only the most vapid, self-absorbed women will feel comfortable in making the demands most other women will commonly expect of their LTR man. When single, the art of the shit test is in its nuance and subtlety, when monogamous the shit test is overt and unmistakably direct.

Secondly, after a certain age (SMV), and after some degree of prior relationship chaos there’s a want for some sense of stable normalcy. Most guys are all too willing to compromise what seem, at the time, like small concessions to their women’s demands in exchange for keeping the peace and the legs open. The problem is that this progressively becomes a situation of death by a thousand paper cuts, or frame control by a thousand conceded nitpickings. For beta men, frame control is ceded as part of their wedding vows, but of the Alphas I know who were “fixed” by their women, their backsliding into beta-dom was the result of an incessant etching away of that Alpha dominance by a steady stream of small shit tests and concession of frame by little compromises.

Dumping a woman is DHV (demonstrating higher value) of the highest order. True or not, It implies you had other, better options than her. Dumping a woman is the antithesis of the Scarcity Mentality and it broadcasts this not only to her, but her girlfriends as well as any other girls in her (your) social periphery. Dumping her implies you’ve just gone from a comfortable, familiar beta to the indifferent Alpha that she never realized you had a capacity for. My guess is Hithard will hear from her again. At first it will be desperate and crying, later it will be casual with feigned nonchalance – don’t take the bait.

Whether or not Hithard takes her back or bumps her down to fuck-buddy status, the message is now clear for her – he will control the frame. She will enter his reality or not at all. Most freshly unplugged guys have a very tough time owning this, because for most of their lives it’s been endlessly bashed into their heads that they don’t deserve it. This is the conflict Hithard must resolve.

52 Comments   |  tags: | posted in Alpha, Case Studies, Idealizations, Relationship Game, Unplugging

July 23, 2012

Case Study – Wanted: New Daddy

By Rollo Tomassi

I love Post Secret. Anytime I have humanitarian doubt about hypergamy or the twinges of sentimental wishes for a kinder, gentler, fem-centrism all I have to do is read the current week’s offerings of anonymous ‘secrets’ and, without fail, all doubt fades away to callous certainties. Ahhh, le sigh...

I’ve delved into the single mother cottage industry topic before, but in light of a recent PM and last week’s Wall discussion I thought I’d entertain this comment:

Wow. I have read some very interesting posts. I need some help and since most of you seem to be honest and not out to hurt anyone, here goes…

The Facts: 29, Female, Divorced mom of two toddlers, works full time, working on building self-esteem, being happier. Not seeking permanent relationship; however, not interested in whoring out.

I have met several men I am interested in and we talk and possibly hang out. What I am scared of is them thinking I am daddy shopping. I also don’t want to be left and laid. I am willing to “buddy up” but I do expect a friendship beyond the sex. How do I approach or have a discussion with a man telling him my time is rare, but still communicate my expectations of casual hangouts and fooling around? I am a woman and yes there are nights where he would need to engage with me in mind blowing sex. There may be a bad day at work where I just need a beer buddy. It is difficult for a woman with self respect to blow and go so thats not my intent.

I tried the honest approach, but never heard from him again. I gave it one more shot (different guy) and time will tell. Ive never been in this type of relationship before. I respect myself too much to engage in a one night stand only. Any ideas?

From what I read ut sounds like I am pretty much screwed. Im not single resulting from some kind of feminist movement crap. I like a guy to challenge me etc. I am a single mom because I am divorced from a bad person (cheater, abusive). I don’t seek a relationship because I know the majority of men don’t want the “baggage” of my babies. Additionally, I don’t want to risk hurting my kids. They are first. I am all they have and in a way they are all I have. All I want is an adult. If it progresses to more so be it. If not then that’s cool too. I don’t want to be viewed as just a piece, that is where the honesty comes in.

A lot of what gets offered for women in her position is usually the standard fare about single mommies and how guys perceive them. Baby-daddy issues, scheduling, substitute father interviewing and how single guys are “supposed” to react to them. All of this is valid of course, but after reading her own take of her own situation, I’m not so sure she’s really aware of (or is in denial of) her own conditions.

This woman is a textbook example of what I call Proactive Infidelity. According to her longer account she’d knocked it out with the Bad Boy (abusive, cheater) who was a “challenge” and got her excited. I’m going to do her the favor of assuming both her children were by him and if one is now 4 y.o. this would mean she was at oldest 24 y.o. when she became pregnant. Now that the Bad Boy has proven himself unreliable in sharing parental investment responsibilities, the guy she does end up in an LTR or marriage with necessarily MUST assume the Bad Boy’s responsibilities and liabilities.

New Daddies and Independent Women®

It’s essential to the single-mother rationale that they convince themselves they aren’t shopping for a “new daddy”. The fem-centrism of today’s social structure already has a long and well established framework ready to enable the most predictable of hamster spins. She’s an “Independent Woman®”, she “makes her own damn money” and ‘walks like da boss, talks like da boss,…” etc. The Independent Woman® brand is one of the most versatile social conventions because it covers so many situations. Blanket rationales like epithets of ‘Misogynist’ or ‘Homophobe’ pale in comparison to the usefulness of the Independent Woman®.

The Independent Woman® is unassailable and any contrary deviation from it leads back to the circular argument of patriarchal men’s selfish oppressions – feminism’s favorite trope. She “don’t need a man”, but she needs a Man. The real tragedy is the desperation apparent in the false pride. The truth is she needs a Man, her children need a Man, in spite of the pretentiousness fem-centrism has conditioned into her. But her decisions have left that Daddy position open to the lowest bidder.

The undeniable, unavoidable truth is that whether or not this is a conscious effort on her part, this is what the next guy, usually the Nice Guy, MUST deal with. Mr. Dependable, Mr. Loyal supporter/provider has no other choice but to assume parental investments that were never his. She bred with the Bad Boy and the Nice Guy raises her children. Any woman who can pull this off hits a bio-evolutionary jackpot.

The good news for her is that there are countlessly reinforced social conventions specifically designed with the latent purpose of making such a Nice Guy (essentially a proactive cuckold) think he’s a martyr and held to be in the highest regard of manhood for “looking past” her situation and “loving her for who she is.” Rest assured she’ll eventually attract a beta so conditioned to forgive her past indiscretions (essentially justifying and rewarding them) in exchange for the sexuality he’s been deprived of for so long. Her marginal intimate acceptance will only affirm his AFC beliefs and his “stepping up” to parent her kids will make him tolerable when he’s not as exciting as the Bad Boy was.

Now all that may sound harsh, but it’s important to understand just how tough a road single mothers have to hoe. If laid out in harsh realistic terms, most women don’t willingly want to be saddled with an AFC marriage of convenience, and neither do they want to be locked in with an abusive Bad Boy, so what do they do?

First, they need to understand where they’re at and how they got to be who they are now. They’ve hit the Wall by default.

Own your indiscretions ladies, own your mistakes. Being a single mother, despite the feminized social conventions, doesn’t make you a hero; it makes you a statistic. As I stated originally, any guy that accepts you intimately MUST deal with you as a single mother. This means he MUST accept your schedule, your children’s schedule, their father’s schedule, both family’s schedules, and the emotional fallout from all this. The feminine imperative has taught you to believe you’re entitled to expecting him to want to be with you (even if this is just as a fuck buddy) in preference to a single, childless, generally younger and more sexually available woman. She’s your competition. And in spite of all this he’s expected to still be the Man, by denying his sexual predilections in favor of your circumstances.

Your fundamental acknowledgment and showing a constant genuine appreciation for the sacrifice he makes to accommodate your past is essential to any LTR you have in the future. I’m not saying that your kids shouldn’t be your first priority – they absolutely should – but it is imperative that you know and demonstrably appreciate ANY guy who’d make the concession to still entertain you intimately after knowing this.

A lot of women love to gnash and wail about how they’ve become undateable after they’ve acquired single-mom status. Actually, no. There’s a whole modern world that’s teeming with AFC providers, with Cap’n Save-a-ho Martyr Mentalities just itching to get at the reverent pussy they missed out on for most of their 20’s and are more than willing to follow the feminine meme and convince themselves that single mommies are just victims of the Jerks they knocked out their kids with.

Daddies & Buffers

Understand, single mommies are another form of Buffers. The deductive logic is that they’re ‘easier’ due the their conditions and the risk of rejection lower (particularly when rejection-phobic or in a dry spell), but the potential long term ramifications are never worth the effort incomparisson to childless women. Rejection is better than regret.

The problem with actualizing your fantasy encounter with a MILF is in the ‘M’ part of the acronym – ‘Mother’ – ergo, a single mommie with all of the very “real world” baggage that goes along with that. I’ve tapped my share of older women when I was in my 20s and I can tell you that the sex was no more or less extrordinary than the younger women (at least in terms of performance) I’ve been with. The only major difference? I never had to worry about 22 year old single girls finding a babysitter for a night or had to be concerned with her making too much noise during sex so as not to wake up her son in the next room. Nor was I concerned about it being “her weekend” to have the kids.

It’s very easy to assume single mothers are victims by default – some are, most aren’t. Trust me, a majority of single mothers are single for a reason – and it’s not always because of their Jerk BFs or deadbeat husbands. The common belief is that MILFs encourage an idea that they are more sexually available; you’ve got to ask yourself, why would they be motivted to be more sexual while single than when they we’re married or in an LTR? They become motivated to be sexual and hit the gym when single, but wouldn’t make the same effort when married, why? Because the guy wasn’t worth it OR because she became comfortable, he lost interest, became fed up, and she’s prompted to be more concerned with all that in order to achieve a long term security with another man that necessitates she do so?

Don’t get me wrong, there are attractive women in their 30s & 40s but these are uncommon exceptions to the rule. The social reinforcement of the MILF fantasy is just a modern extension and evolution of the “she’s still got it” social convention with the latent purpose of leveling the playing field for 30-40 something single mothers unable to sexually compete for the same calibre men with 18-28 y.o. women. The harsh truth is that a beautiful, sexually available, single woman in her mid 20’s is at a decided advantage for sexual selection than a single mother entering her 30’s who’s encumbered with all the responsibilities of being a parent. Schedules of Mating issues aside, even when both women are equally attractive and equally sexually available, the childless woman is still at an advantage because she comes with less liabilities and represents a “fresh start” in comparison.

Women’s sexual value naturally declines as they ages – it serves an older woman’s purpose if she can redefine sexuality as her conditions change through life, and convince herself and society that she’s correct and genuine. Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore may epitomize this fantasy, but in reality, there are thousands of women filling gyms across the country for every Demi Moore convinced that they “still got it” while every year a new crop of 22-24 y.o. hotties commands the attention of the same men they’re competing for. This is just the natural extension of the ‘Have It All” lie that women have been sold for the last 50 years. Men only too eagerly buy this convention as well because it facilitates a Buffer for them and (presumedly) presents an easier route to getting laid. Therefore it is also in their interest that the myth and the Buffer be reinforced.

74 Comments | posted in Case Studies, Hypergamy, Operative Social Conventions, The Feminine Imperative

June 11, 2012

Case Study – Creative Intelligence

By Rollo Tomassi

Below I have posted descriptions of 4 men from a case study I was involved with as part of a graduate study for personality psychology. Before you ask, no, this wasn’t an original study, however it was a measures experiment we performed to see how the results matched with our own university.These descriptions are excerpts from that case study comparing female mate selection. They were presented individually to 101 university women between the ages of 18 and 36. All were single/unmarried and none were aware of the intent of the experiment. I’ll present more details of the experiment after you have chance to respond so as not to spoil your genuine responses. Here are the descriptions:

––––––––––
M is an art student. M has always had a passion for painting and plans to pursue a career in art. He creates paintings of people and complex landscapes. His paintings are so lifelike that they are often mistaken for photographs. The consensus amongst his art professors is that he is, by far, the most talented student they have seen. One professor, an expert on lifelike paintings, says he believes M is one of the most talented artists ever to produce these paintings. To make extra money to support his schooling, M has sold a few of his best paintings. They have sold for between 100 and 200 dollars. One professor lamented that M’s paintings are worth far more, but like so many other artists, he will probably never make very much money selling them.

L is an art student. He paints abstract paintings. L came into art by chance. He took an art class as an elective because it fit well in his schedule. For his midterm project, he produced an abstract painting after an hour of “fooling around” with the paint and canvas. The majority of the painting actually consisted of paint he accidentally spilled onto the canvas. A very wealthy man who was looking for art for his home discovered L’s painting in the student art studio. He paid L $5,000 dollars for the painting. Some of the man’s other wealthy friends liked L’s painting and commissioned a total of $100,000 in paintings from him. L and his art professors were shocked at the success of L’s paintings, because, in the words of one professor, “he has no real talent, just some good luck.” L continues to capitalize on his success by selling his abstract art.

L and M are considered highly desirable by other women on campus and very attractive. Friends of L and M say that they are dependable, kind, and generous friends.

J is an entrepreneur who had great success in his first business venture. He started a small software business in a friend’s garage. His product was a new kind of software for improving factory designs to radically increase the profitability of manufacturing. Within his first year, J secured contracts with Ford, General Electric, and Boeing. In the next three years, J sold his software to most of the top manufacturing companies in the United States and several of the top companies in Asia. After 5 years in business, J’s company was valued at 120 million dollars and had 250 employees. The Wall Street Journal credited the success of J’s company to the “brilliance and novelty” of J’s product and to J’s “sheer genius as a businessman.” However, J’s company fell victim to misfortune the next year. After J rejected a take-over bid from Microsoft, Microsoft filed a lawsuit claiming that J’s software infringed on some of their patents. Although most experts agreed that the suit had no merit, the cost of defending himself against the lawsuit created huge cash flow problems for J, which drove the company into bankruptcy. Although J has very little money left, he has recently begun a new business venture to sell another of the software products he has invented.

R recently inherited 20 million dollars from the couple who had adopted him when he was a year old. They died in a car crash, having made their fortune in commercial real estate. Before they died, R worked as a sales person at a computer company. Although R worked at the company for several years, he had not advanced past his starting salary or rank within the company. He went to a community college, but after graduation he didn’t feel sure what to do with his life. A friend who was working at the computer company suggested that R join him and work there. In R’s words, “I guess I’m just not very good at this job. At least now I won’t have to worry about money any more.” R and his adoptive parents were very close, and he was deeply saddened by their deaths.

J and R are both attractive and in their mid-twenties. They were recently nominated as two of the most eligible bachelors in Los Angeles.
–––––––––––

Bear in mind, these guys a theoretical archetypes, how they relate to women is irrelevant. How the subject women percieved them is what’s being assessed. Of these 4 men, which do you suppose was rated the highest in desirability with which to have a short-term sexual affair with by these women? And which man was rated the highest in desirability to enter into a long-term relationship with?

This study was done to determine comparative priorities in women with regards to male ‘creative intelligence’ vs.‘provisioning ability’ in female mate selection. I would’ve titled this thread as such, but I wanted to get some unbiased and impulse responses from readers here to see what the perceptions of these archetypes were from men and the reactions guys expected from women to these archetypes.

You’ll notice that care was taken in these archetype descriptions to balance out the physical attractiveness of each man (i.e. both artists were considered equally attractive by peers and both businessmen were ‘eligible’ bachelors). What was at issue wasn’t their extrinsic characteristics – comparative physiques or obvious Alpha presence – but what women chose in regards to these men’s intrinsic characteristics. The theory being that Creative Intelligence is of a higher mating value in the short term while a better Provisioning ability is more desirable in the long term. Bear in mind that hypergamy influences the decision making process for both of these sexual strategies. Also added was the caveat that legitimacy of provisioning ability, and the potential for future provisioning in it’s absence (i.e. the down on their luck men), played a factor in this mate selection.

Creative Intelligence

So what exactly is “Creative Intelligence”? Although there is no firm consensus on how to define it, we often know it when we see it. We also know a bit about it from a century of creativity research. Within humans, creative intelligence is closely associated with the highly heritable general intelligence, and creative intelligence seems to rely on the generation, selective elaboration, and skillful implementation of ideas and strategies. In other words, creativity represents a strong capacity for successful improvisation, thus it became a desirable, selected-for species survival trait.

The problem is that creativity sounds desirable, as does intelligence, so “creative intelligence” can become a vague term that seems useful for solving any behavioral problem, whether technological, ecological, social, sexual, or cultural. Many plausible adaptive functions explain the origins of human creative intelligence. These include: tool-making and tool-using, hunting, foraging, and food preparation methods, social strategizing within and between groups and sexual courtship dynamics (i.e. hunter-gatherer proto-Game).

Sorry for the psych lesson, but we had to be specific.

Trade Offs

As I elaborated in Schedules of Mating, most women face trade-offs in mating. In selecting a long-term mate, it makes hypergamic sense for women to put greater weight on traits that advertise ability and willingness to invest in protection, provisioning, and care of the woman and her offspring. This will favor the evolution of ‘good dad’ indicators – reliable cues of paternal investment ability and willingness to participate in those responsibilities. In our past, women of very high mate value (HB 8 and above) had the luxury of attracting a long-term mate who has both good dad potential and good genes. Fast forward through the ages and women have progressively had to settle for a committed partner who is not ideal either paternally or genetically. Then add to this the increasing complexity of men adapting to mimic these cues in order to facilitate their own breeding strategy. Consequently women are, by order of degree, incentivized to secure better genes or better paternal care from short-term or extra-pair partners, while simultaneously seeking long term provider males. Either would help at any time.

In this study, the idea was that, issues of relative attraction and arousal being satisfied, women will prefer a male possessing a higher capacity for Creative Intelligence in short-term sexual encounters to ensure the best possible future options for her offspring, while choosing a mate with better Provisioning ability for long term parental investment.

Art and business were chosen as two contrasting domains of work. Each requires distinct styles of creative intelligence, but both demand combinations of practical and theoretical skills, individual effort and social interaction. Hence, merit-based success in either domain may function as a mental fitness indicator. In each domain (art or business), one vignette described a man who showed high creative intelligence in his work, but who was poor due to bad luck and adverse circumstances. The other vignette in each set described a man who was average on creative intelligence, but who was wealthy due to good luck and beneficial circumstances. All vignettes made clear that each man’s creativity level was largely endogenous, reflecting natural (and presumably heritable) talent, but that his wealth level was largely accidental, gained through no merit or fault of his own.

Results

Each woman completed two forced-choice questions: (1) “Based on these descriptions, who do you think you might find more desirable for a short-term sexual affair?”; (2) “Based on these descriptions, who do you think you might find more desirable for a long-term committed relationship?” (L or M in the artist vignettes, and R or J in the entrepreneur vignettes). Next, participants rated the desirability of each man as a short-term mate and as a long-term mate on two 9-point scales (where ‘1’ = not at all desirable, ‘5’ = average; ‘9’ = extremely desirable). The rating questions were as follows: “Overall, how desirable would you find L [M, R, or J] as a long-term partner?” “Overall, how desirable would you find L [M, R, or J] as a short-term partner?

In this study M was overwhelmingly chosen as the short term partner. 89% of the participants chose the naturally talented, but out of luck artist for a short term sexual encounter. 7% chose L the rich artist, 3% chose J the poor/talented businessman and 1% opted for R the wealthy/untalented businessman.

J was rated highest for a long-term relationship, but not as significantly as M in the short term. 67% of our subjects chose J, and surprisingly 17% chose L (rich artist). R was rated at 12% and M took 4% for the long term choice.

35 Comments | posted in Case Studies, Foundations, Hypergamy, Idealizations

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,282 other followers