Girls on the Side

 

Not to be outdone by the tired ‘Man-Up’ tropes begun by Kay Hymowitz, nor the upstart success of Kate Bollick – who’s managed to parlay her chronic, unconsolidated hypergamy into a career and a new TV series – we again hear the feminism triumphalist wailings from Hannah Rosin. Apparently it wasn’t enough for Hannah to allow her End of Men article to fade into the annals of feminine primacy on the pages of The Atlantic, no, she’s extrapolated her tales of anecdotal misandry into a new book of the same title. And here I was concerned about compiling the better part Rational Male into book form (*eye roll*).

I would generally pass off of Rosin as I would the ‘concerns’ of any long post-Wall, solipsistic yenta, however in her book advertisement article Boys on the Side (h/t Aunt Giggles) there was so much feminine primacy tunnel vision it made me wonder if she’d ever read the word ‘hypergamy’. When I read the complaintive screeds of neo-feminists I expect to read a certain degree of self-confirming, self-important concerns for the female condition all reinforced by anecdotal evidence, and Rosin doesn’t disappoint. Her entire article is filled with op-ed personal vignettes of how the brutality of the contemporary sexual marketplace has reduced ‘dating’ (for women) to a series of passing fuck buddies until such a time that a (westernized, upper middle class) woman feels ‘complete’ enough in the professional realm to want to shift into marriage and mommy mode.

For all of her analysis Rosin simply doesn’t grasp the totality of feminine hypergamy and the social influence it has effected upon men and women. I can’t imagine Hannah would be ignorant of the dynamic of hypergamy, but from reading this article, it’s apparent that the feminine imperative makes acknowledging hypergamy’s influence an inconvenient truth that needs to be danced around, all while complaining that men are ruthlessly capitalizing upon it and enjoying some new boon for their own sexual strategy.

I’ve brought this up on Susan’s echo chamber more than once, but what Rosin (and really any woman) doesn’t get is that from the mid 60’s to 2012 we’ve been living in a social reality defined by feminine hypergamy. Since the sexual revolution and the advent of exclusively female controlled birthing, men have progressively become ancillary to the female reality. So when women run headlong into the negative social consequences of their own unfettered hypergamy – such as the evolution of hook up culture – the reflexive response is to presume that the downside of that hypergamy must necessarily be the results of men refusing to play by the social rules they constantly and conveniently rewrite for themselves.

Hypergamy doesn’t care about the rationalizations of the feminine imperative.

Every observation, every personal account of frustration, in Rosin’s article can directly be attributed to a modern sexual marketplace (SMP) that was formed by women’s unrestrained hypergamic impulses. The college women she interviews don’t mention ‘hooking up’ with average betas, they mention banging the hot guys on Ivy League lacrosse teams. In reality, there are likely far more average frustrated betas lining up to get with these ‘poor girls’ who are more than willing to take them out “for frozen yogurt and a $3 date.” Hook up culture or not, these aren’t the guys women are motivated to fuck. Frat guys, cads, indifferent Alphas, PUAs, incarcerated murderers, these are the guys that get the reflex response from a 23 y.o. girl.

Hannah’s mistake is in presuming, in classic feminine-primary myopia, that hook up culture is the result of men sexually exploiting women’s new life schedule for career with a side of family later. Never is there an afterthought that it is in fact women’s innate predisposition to fuck and secure commitment from the best male her sexuality can afford her has  almost singlehandedly created the environment which developed the hook up culture she and her poor college girls lament. As I’ve said before, Game is the logical countermeasure to evolve under the condition of unrestricted hypergamy. This in turn contributes to creating a new socio-sexual environment that changes the rules of engagement for how men and women relate to each other.

 

67 comments

  1. I shared this with Ms. Bolick, Rollo. As an aside, I know quite a few high-status females who seems quite excited about her TV show (even though I don’t think there’s that much information on it).

    Lately, I’ve been getting a lot of friend requests on social networks from women who were formerly high status and unfulfilled, but met a Red-Pillish male who took the reins with strength and finally brought them some fulfillment. It’s curious to watch these formerly heavy sharers online sort of drop away and disappear somewhat. It’s tragic, because if they continued to share, they may be able to show younger dames that there’s power in domesticity and redemption in taking advantage of their own progesterone powers that truly bring joy to the high-testosterone Man.

    “This in turn contributes to creating a new socio-sexual environment that changes the rules of engagement for how men and women relate to each other.”

    If anything, it will likely cause an excessive counter-balance as the few fortunate men who learn game will have even greater access to women for the short period of time that it takes other males to acquire their masculine back. It’ll also be curious to watch if this ever actually changes in my lifetime: will women realize that high status overeducation is an SMV decreaser, or will they “fight back” and try to become even more powerful?

    My biggest fear: watching politics sway to become female-heavy, even a majority. Can you imagine the fall-out society will feel if that comes to pass?

    Imagine a female Ben Bernanke…

  2. We had a topless protest here this past Sunday. And who was being called out in the letters to the paper? Men. The meme wasn’t so much about women exposing themselves and the consequences. It was about the perverted men leering at them as if they are responsible that it happened.

    Damn if you do and damn if you don’t.

  3. Female hyepergamy is breaking relationships. Women don’t know how to relate to their men. When they start feeling things that make them vulnerable, they walk. They move on to the next stud. We aren’t supposed to be men with feelings. We are supposed to satisfy their need for feeling good about themselves. My parent’s generation has destroyed any hope of normal, healthy relationships with women. I suspect it doesn’t get better for my sons. I will have to teach them to be way more cautious than myself.

  4. @ AB

    “will women realize that high status overeducation is an SMV decreaser”

    Indeed. However, it is also a necessity in many situations.

    As for you fear that politics will become female-heavy…as far as I am concerned, ONE female politician is too many. (Keep in mind that if I was of the femiNazi type, I would be their poster-girl. ‘Just sayin’)

    As Roll points out, “…from the mid 60′s to 2012 we’ve been living in a social reality defined by feminine hypergamy.” Yep, and look at the sorry state of affairs that the feminist brainwashing has brought us.

  5. ladysadie: overeducation is NOT a necessity. It’s a power play.

    As more women, through feminist-Marxist pressures, entered the work force, you had an overabundance of labor available. This, as we economists know, causes a downward force on wages. Mothers leaving the home to work caused wages for the working father to plummet. Over time, this forced two parents to work since one parent could not earn enough to afford the consumer lifestyle sold to families by Hollywood.

    The proper solution: a man works hard in his teen years and 20s to save up enough to purchase a small home. 2 bedrooms and 2 baths is enough for him, his future wife, and 2 children. If a man can save just $10,000 a year from 16 to 32, he will have more than enough to purchase a nice, small home almost anywhere (minus LA, NYC, etc). Once his biggest expense is covered, and protected from divorce law, he can marry and his wife will NOT have to work a job until the kids are grown and she wants to.

    A 35 year old man can and should marry a 24 year old. When the kids are of teen age, she can easily decide to start a business, learn a trade, or go to college if she wishes. She won’t even be 37!

    How many 37 year old women have done the opposite? How happy are they? What do they have to show for it? Working in a cubicle does not make the world a better place.

  6. We need Game to survive in this society that is so given to the feminine imperative. Todays feminist society will chew up and spit out the gameless man. The only way I can see to fix such a society is for all the males out there to take the red pill and be men that stand up for themselves and don’t cower before womankind.

  7. @alpha mission. Game doesn’t change anything. The courts will spit you out just as fast with or without game. It may provide a temporary shield to the effects of this, but to engage women at all puts you at risk. Knowing game and understanding the risks helps protect you, but it is not shield enough to stop the juggernaut of the law from being used against you.

  8. Here’s something I’m curious about. Does Game need above average IQ to learn? I mean sure few bad experiences with women will teach every-man a lot.By game I mean true positive masculinity life changing mindset not just PUA tricks.
    If this is true and the statistics quoted by the femi-nazi in her article are true then the pool of men able to learn game goes down as most men are dropping out at high school? Or can you just get it by repeated trial and error?

  9. @coy game doesn’t require much. Understanding the psychology and sociology that game has been derived from probably does require a decent IQ, or at least a thoughtful mind. This is also what will provide you with the insights to engage the modern culture with knowledge and as much power as a man can have. Having game allows a lot of thugs to walk themselves straight into jail. Its not hard to have game, but it is hard to understand what happened and why.

  10. HeligKo: “Once you have kids the house is in the deal. You are not protected by having bought that before the marriage.”

    Sure you are, if the house is in an irrevocable living trust (transfered to the names of your children upon your death), or if you’re really wealthy, you can put it into a blind trust REIT sort of deal. There are many options available for a man to protect his assets in marriage, he just has to learn them and plan for them.

    If I marry (doubtful, but who knows?), all my assets, investments and incomes are provided for external to my control. I decide how much I bank and how much I don’t. I’ve threatened the tax collectors with a double Dutch Irish sandwich if they keep fucking with me in audits. If I go that route, a solid 40% of my income can be funneled as intellectual property license to my on-shore businesses. I could probably funnel even more if I took advantage of IP loopholes. An ex-wife couldn’t touch one cent of it, and I would let her know this before she committed to an engagement.

    A man controls his domain, his kingdom and his castle. The penalties for violating his trust are poverty.

  11. It will never cease to amaze me how these empowered, independent, strong women want to force men to change to better their own lives. Isn’t that the point of being empowered, so they can do for themselves?

  12. Sure, there’s a lot in here to worry over, but schadenfreude over these damned fools’ self-imposed misery is a nice counterpoint. Roisin’s wailing desperation warms the cockles of my blackened heart. Inasmuch as I have warmth. Or a heart.

  13. Yeah, the book advertisement was the key. What’s missing sometimes in this community is the understanding that this article was meant to help her sales on the End of Men book. Sadly, that will probably perform well.

  14. It’s tragic, because if they continued to share, they may be able to show younger dames that there’s power in domesticity and redemption in taking advantage of their own progesterone powers that truly bring joy to the high-testosterone Man.

    Some of us are trying AB Dada (though I can’t claim to be a high status woman, I really don’t even know what that means). Check out On the Rock and Barefoot in the Clearing on the side bar if you have any interest.

    My take on “taking advantage of [my] progesterone powers”. Hopefully some of the other posts also do a good job in explaining ways to bring joy to a “high-testosterone man”.

    Rollo, too much promotion? If so, feel free to delete this.

  15. @heligKo sure Game will help such a man deal with women in this system. Game will teach him a. Don’t get a woman pregnant, and b. Don’t cohabitate with one.

  16. Stingray: I don’t think Rollo worries about self-promotion here if it aids in the discussion.

    Reading it all now — I’ll try to comment over there for clarity.

  17. I’m often left with the impression that if it was not for sex, my ability to
    conceive their children, be a replacement for their mother, a symbol of status or a pastime to fill the day when they having nothing else better to do most men would have little use for women.

    To intuitively feel this because no man ever seems willing to admit this directly to my face leaves me feeling like I’m a replaceable part manufactured in a factory.
    [The first one to do so will be the Alpha you can’t get over. Women would rather be objectified than idealized.]

    I think there is also a male hypergamy at work as well.

    There are good reasons for the anger each sex has toward the other and it
    comes from treating people as goal fulfillment through hidden agendas.

    I may be insulted by the blunt honesty of being nothing more than a sexual object or baby maker but at least I know where I stand in the persons value
    hierarchy and can than make the best choices for my own welfare.

    Gaming is done by both sexes reducing relationships to nothing more
    than trying to sift through the lies to find the truth.
    [This is a false equivalency. One sex is the social gender dominant at the moment. Look no further than to the authors of books like The End of Men to figure out which gender that is. They’re quite proud (and vocal) about it]

  18. “I’m often left with the impression that if it was not for sex… most men would have little use for women.”

    Only true for hot alpha guys.

    “To intuitively feel this because no man ever seems willing to admit this directly to my face leaves me feeling like I’m a replaceable part manufactured in a factory.”

    Beta guys care about your individuality and your feelings, and know how special you are. That dweeby guy that gave you flowers on the first date said you’re his soulmate!

    Lulz at the apex fallacy.

  19. Kelly, I understand your despair about the harsh truths I put forth with the rest of the manosphere, but understand it’s not about retribution or even anger really. When you’re saturated in beliefs conditioned by what you think the rules everyone is playing by, and find out that it’s not the case, it can be depressing.

    It sounds a lot like hate, because we’ve been so dog-whistle conditioned to recognize anything counter to those beliefs as hate. I have a connection with Mrs. Tomassi that goes far beyond the mere utility you’re so afraid of becoming to a guy. There’s much more to it than usage or objectification, but none of that is appreciated until you understand the real functionality of that utility. When we met I didn’t see Mrs. T and think “wow, what a great gal, I’d really like to build a deep spiritual connection to her and mingle our souls” I thought, “damn, I wanna hit that!”

    Don’t be so offended by objectification, it’s the necessary foundation upon which to build a relationship. Men see women as sex objects, women see men as success objects – we both have our priorities.

  20. “there are likely far more average frustrated betas lining up to get with these ‘poor girls’ who are more than willing to take them out “for frozen yogurt and a $3 date.””

    Shoe doesn’t realize that these guys exist because they’re totally invisible to women.

  21. One of the overriding messages that I get here (the site in general) without even reading into great depth is: “Ladies, get married between 22-24 or else you are fucked”.

  22. The Rosin article is interesting even if she is a feminist. Looking at this from a historical perspective, something like this was bound to happen. We live in an advanced industrial society that has generated alot of wealth. What were women going to do in such a society? Stay wives and moms forever? That wasn’t realistic. An advanced economy made women’s careerism inevitable and it made the 1950s “Father Knows Best” model obsolete. It also made social Conservatism obsolete. But here are some other points to consider:

    * The welfare / regulatory state has had significant affects on the SMP. If there were no Title 9 and no government subsidized loans what would the university system look like? I bet less than 1/3 of the people currently enrolled in college would be there. The government’s banning of IQ tests had forced employes to use college and graduate degrees as proxy’s for intelligence.

    * Without the welfare state there would be self-responsibility forced on everyone especially women. Would they be able to have out of wedlock kids from asshole alphas? Only a small few would be able to afford that. Women would by necessity have to chose who they sleep with more wisely. A greater degree of discipline would be incentivized.

    * Also, what effect would legalized prostitution have on the SMP? A huge one. Women would have to compete with hookers. Yes, they will still fuck Alphas up to the age of 26 but after that they would not be able to find husbands unless they offered genuine value beyond their vaginas. Legalized prostitution would play a role here.

    * Ending all the egalitarian marriage laws would also be huge in SMP dynamics. If there was assumed joint custody of children and pre-nuptials were honored as written instead of constantly rewritten by Feminist oriented judges, men would regain upper hand and female hypergamy would be restrained.

    My basic point is that the lack of true liberty is what is destroying the SMP and inter-gender dynamics. Yes, I’m a libertarian and I consider the libertarian politics as indespensible for establishing a functioning and healthy SMP. But Feminism and the Left are really only partly to blame for this. A radical change in the sex market was bound to happen with an advancing capitalist economy; something Adam Smith and Ludwig Von Mises never considered.

  23. S:

    A woman needs to learn, preferably early on, that her SMV peaks when she’s young, 22-24 in the vast majority of women.

    Once she starts declining, it can accelerate very quickly. When her SMV falls, her ability to “catch” the strongest man she can will also decrease, but unfortunately her forebrain will not accept that fact. Also, her single women her age will constantly reiterate to her that she’s still a catch.

    So, yes, a woman is best suited to marrying at 22-24. That way, when her kids are 13 or older, she’s still in her 30s and she can go after that education or career or small business that she dreams off. Her procreation is out of the way, so her biological goals are complete.

  24. Don’t be so offended by objectification

    I had a conversation with a friend of mine not too long ago:

    Her: Do you think it is wrong for a husband to objectify his wife?

    Me: Hell no. The minute my husband stops objectifying me is the minute I start to worry.

    Her: Good. That’s what I thought, too.

    Objectification starts the whole attraction and will keep things fresh and fun as I think it is where a great deal of the visceral attraction comes from. Your personality, demeanor, care of him, and so forth will mean so much more to him than any sex object could. The key is to be both.

  25. Classic examples of “hawt girls” iving it up in their 20s. I wonder where they’ll be in 20 years?

    http://elitedaily.com/elite/2012/girls-married/?fb_action_ids=10101257703009938

    Guys, stop playing beta provider to these women later in live. Make them wonder where all the good men are so they can be met with answers such as “in your 20s where you left them”. Maybe then we can break the cycle and get women to wise up and leverage their youth and fertility to land a quality guy instead of waiting until it’s too late. Maybe then we’ll drop the illegitimacy rates and reliance on Uncle Sam as a surrogate husband and father of their children.

  26. I do disagree with the notion of waiting until 30s before thinking about settling down..the the man should be sought in the twenties. But the idea that well, if she hasn’t married by 25 or whatever she must pay for her mistakes is a bit absurd. I know that isn’t the exact message that is attempting to be delivered here but it is one that does come across.

  27. There’s more than enough science and anecdotal evidence that younger women are healthier mothers — plus plenty of women harm their bodies in their 20s partying and catching STDs, etc.

    Believe what you want, but there’s a biological imperative (ever hear of the biological clock?) that most hormonally-healthy hetero women have, and if they satisfy that imperative young, they truly are free to do what they want after.

  28. @Dean
    An exclusively male form of hormonal birth control (the male pill) would set the present SMP on its ass. The primary reason for the SMP as it is today is largely due to women being afforded unilateral control of their birthing (and ultimately provisioning), entirely excluding men from determining when they will have a family, and with that the control of male sexual strategy.

    Exclusively female hormonal birth control for women has had a more significant impact on humanity than the advent of nuclear weapons.

    Hypergamy is the only game in the SMP. When a woman wanted a family prior to the pill it was up to the man to deliver on her sexual imperative. Once that prerogative was implicitly put into the control of women, the balance of both gender’s sexual strategies listed entirely over to feminine hypergamy.

    This is exactly why you will see feminists and soccer moms, along with their mangina enablers, fight tooth and nail both legally and socially against the development and distribution of a form of birth control that uniquely grants men the power to once again allow men the prerogative to deliver on the female sexual imperative. In some states doctors cannot perform a vasectomy on a married man without his wife’s written consent without facing the possibilities of legal repercussions. That is how important maintaining the control of birthing is to women’s power dynamic.

  29. A.B. Dada,

    I get your point and I said a woman should be looking to find a man to settle with whilst still in her 20s. But 22-24 is a short window and women are still attractive, fertile and capable of attracting a quality man for at least a few years beyond that point. I’m not saying this to reassure myself either (I’m dating someone), I’m saying it because it’s true.

  30. Also S,

    The more partners a woman has the less likely she will be able to pair-bond with a male for the long term as she will constantly be comparing that partner to all previous partners that she slept with and ultimately become discontent, aka “unhappy”. There are numerous studies out there that prove the more partners a woman has, the divorce rate increase dramatically with the man she “settles” for.

    Not only that, but men will not marry a woman that has been around a few times because of the risk of her being unfaithful to him and because simply men don’t want to marry a whore. It’s just not in good taste.

  31. @Team-Red, churches have fixed that. The whore is reformed, and good guys need to marry them. I fell for that crock. I had one sexual partner before getting married. I knew my wife had quite a few more. I had no idea until we were married (never slept together) just how many. I can’t walk in a church without cringing at the number men being duped by these lies. Jesus forgives, but that does not mean that these men should overlook the past. They need to live with their consequences. These men who save themselves because of their beliefs deserve to have a run at an equally dedicated woman. Too bad there are very few women in the church who haven’t slept with every long term boyfriend they have had, even when they are religiously dedicated. Many others are “reformed” whores who slept with every guy who made them tingle. Its sad, and the men seem to have to pay the price.

  32. S: I’m planning children with a woman who is late 20s now myself. I can and have dated younger women but never for kids.

    It’s not a rule, just a reality to be aware of.

  33. @ S

    I’m not saying sleep around, but over time of let’s say a decade or so of multiple short to mid-term relationships, that partner count really adds up. With every new partner she reduces the ability to bond with a single man and slowly becomes an Alpha Widow in the process.

  34. Well, that’s why a single woman should avoid forming emotional attachments until there’s a solid reason to do so. Not having sex is the main way to do this.

  35. @ Rollo,

    I don’t disagree with the fact that the pill has changed human socio sexuality drastically. But my point is that this was inevitable. Assuming the continuation of industrial civilization, which granted given today’s Left and weak Conservatives and Islamic expansionism is a shaky assumption, there was going to be the pill and there will be male birth control no matter what the Left does.

    My point is that the political development of modern collectivism; ie the Left, the Progressives, the Cultural Marxists, the Socialists or the Fucking Commies – whatever you want to call them – has ALSO dramatically affected the SMP. Even with the pill, do away with the welfare state, the ENTIRE anti-discriminatory paradigm and legislation, the preventative law agencies, the central bank, and public education and watch society realign drastically. Yes, it won’t happen. I know.

    The West won’t change course until something drastic happens and maybe not even then. It may be too late and we all have to realize that the culture we were born into is one heading for collapse and its sexual dynamics is not going to change unless there is a major conflagration. Although I do admit, male birth control will give man the upper hand. But still in a decaying civilization.

  36. “In reality, there are likely far more average frustrated betas lining up to get with these ‘poor girls’ who are more than willing to take them out “for frozen yogurt and a $3 date.”

    If you just add ‘alpha male’ after everything a woman complains about in the dating scene, it explains everything.

  37. Interesting read, as always. And congrats on the first year, million views, etc…

    This is somewhat off topic, but I was curious if any readers or you, Rollo, have any experience with, or know anything about “Swingers Clubs”?

    What’s the “manosphere’s” opinion on these “sex club” places.

    I recently received an invite to one of these “sex parties” and may or may not tag along. Seems kinda strange, but I’m curious.

    Lacking any idea what these were, I did some research, and despite there being little helpful information, I did find a bunch of local (or within a reasonable driving range) “venues”, if I may call them such, which host these Swinger/Sex/Naked Festivities or Sex Party things.

    Website’s, directions, phone numbers, calendar of event’s, hours of operation, and all. I mean publicly available, easy to find. Not secret society Eyes Wide Shut status sex cult clubs; just ye olde local Sex Club that one can find through basically the Yellow Pages – and from the reviews (mostly written by younger females), it is actually a sex club, not a bar/grill/club, but a house where people go to bypass the bar/club scene and take picking up women to an even more direct level, cock & balls & all. It looks like usually there’s a cover charge, they allow single females, & couples; though most places rarely let single men attend – however a fairly popular one (with reviews on Yelp, for christ’s sake) allows men & women, single or couples to attend, as long as they RSVP at least x-hours ahead of time.

    I mean just coming to terms with hypergamy requires a great deal of altering ones perception, I just wonder what experiencing a “sex club” would do…

    Rules seem pretty simple: RSVP, pay cover charge, get naked (if male), get naked or wear lingerie (if female), follow the simple rule that “No” means “No” (unlike the hilarious “No means Yes. Yes means Anal,” quip from one of the linked articles), and do your thing. Some of the places have bartenders (or bring your own alcohol), jacuzzi’s, pools, private rooms, public rooms, dance floors, stripper poles, pool tables, freshly cooked to order meals, etc…

    I guess I’m just curious if anyone has been to one of these sorts of deals and enjoyed it, or if it ended up becoming one of the various nightmare’s I can envision these places providing ample opportunity and free-for-all services to induce.

    As for the content of this article, and the articles you linked, I find it fascinating how blatantly obvious the hypergamy theory is, and how I have yet to find a single female that admits to it – except for when, reluctantly, my own mother sort-of admitted to it, certainly didn’t deny what I was saying, after we had a long talk over a birthday dinner a few weeks ago; just pointing out examples I’d seen in her own life, but mainly explaining to her how women my age are nowadays…how are women my age? Same as you, mom. Hypergamy incarnate.

  38. Blackbird, there is some good info on swingers clubs in PUA forums. I still find it highly lacking though. Athol also has written some about what he suspects goes on with couples who get into swinging. David Shade is a well known PUA that is also a swinger. He might have written something useful about it.

    I`ve never been to a swingers club and don`t know any swingers.

    One thing mentioned by a PUA who has gone to Swingers clubs is that there is a lot of very subtle eye contact and flirting signs sent by women to guys that their husbands do not pick up on but guys with good game see fast.

    Many clubs have mostly unattractive members but there is supposed to be some attractive in the mix and there are more select clubs that only allow attractive pre screened people to attend.

    One PUA attended a club that had a ton of attractive couples (although it was not a club that screened). He said that people, especially the guys, where very nervous and people did not approach each other all that much and when they did they did so horribly. Because he knew how to approach women and groups and because he knew how to attract fast he could go up to all the most attractive women, talk to them confidently, attract most of them and try to make the boyfriend/husband comfortable. Making the man feel comfortable with him was the hard part.

    If you come with a woman (especially an attractive one) everything will be way easier. Single guys are often allowed, and many couple look for an extra man for mmf threesomes. THe numbers of willing single men make the odds of getting laid for a single man attending small but after reading swingers forums it seems the percentage who do get laid in an evening is way higher than the percentage of single men who would get laid in an average club where most clearly do not get laid most of the time. If you have game and learn how to make the men comfortable I think swingers clubs are a potential endless supply of sex if you want. I doubt I would enjoy the setting but I have not ruled it out and have always been curious and will take a look once.

  39. Kellytaddea, read a bit on Stingrays blog. It will make you feel better about things. Maybe evolutionary speaking the benefit of the things you mentioned are what men derive from relationships but they are not all we FEEL about relationships. THey might be the cause far back for our emotions but they are not our emotions. I certainly value the feeling of LOVE very highly as well as the feelings of intimacy, connection and companionship. I am also very picky about the personality of the woman beyond her looks and not just in the sense of being wife material in terms of personality but how much do I like her personality. I did read a guy on Rooshs forum say exactly what you said being true for him. That beyond what you mentioned he saw no other benefit in women. For me that just seems weird and cold and I doubt it holds for other men and it does not match my experience of how other red pill men or PUAs think about relationships with women. You should also not that men really, really like to sacrifice for their women (the right ways). When we talk about sex being the real value it is more about sex being the foundation that allows the other stuff to be there and if taken away or reduced to much eventually dries it up rather than sex actually being the only value we feel. Do stick around, I promise you that you will feel much better about all this eventually.

  40. “The proper solution: a man works hard in his teen years and 20s to save up enough to purchase a small home. 2 bedrooms and 2 baths is enough for him, his future wife, and 2 children. If a man can save just $10,000 a year from 16 to 32, he will have more than enough to purchase a nice, small home almost anywhere (minus LA, NYC, etc). Once his biggest expense is covered, and protected from divorce law”

    A.B. Dada,
    I would not rely solely upon ownership of an asset prior to marriage to show that asset belongs solely your own. I’ve heard of prenups being ignored in order to favor the woman, so that if the woman and children are thrown out on the street so to speak, that’s not gonna fly, and the judges consider the house community property and gives the man the boot. Perhaps men will have to start looking into trusts or LLCs to protect themselves – I’d sooner fight a grizzly bear than marry so I haven’t bothered to look into those things.

  41. My bad, for my previous post. A.B. does cover the topic of protecting your assets in a later post. I should have finished all the postings before replying.

  42. I just thought of this but I do believe it’s true – feminism is a major reason that anxiety disorders are on the rise. Read any article on the increase on anxiety disorders and you’ll know that they have been on the rise for about 50 years as well. More divorces because of unrestricted hypergamous nature, more cunty women at work, etc. Also, with equal rights, what man likes being bossed around by a hot chick at work because she’s been at the company longer than he has? Fuck that, no man wants to be below any woman, especially a hot one. With proper game it is true that you can flirt with the girl and turn around this kind of relationship but as we know, most men do not have game (though, obviously, this is another reason to go out and learn it). I haven’t fully thought out this theory but I would like to hear other opinions on it.

  43. Not to mention that I would assume a relationship where a type A (masculinized, Westernized) woman ends up gaining more status and money than her husband, thus putting her out of her female defined role, probably causes plenty of anxiety for women as well. She goes out searching for other men who may or may not fuck her and her family over, if other men even consider her in the first place given her aging looks. Roissy’s blog once pointed to women being happier in a traditional woman role, but I can’t find the link and I don’t remember if it mentioned anxiety or not. Regardless I would assume that it would include anxiety levels.

    This came up to me this morning because I was reading a PT article on anxiety levels. I can’t even find that link right now either..

  44. Rollo
    “An exclusively male form of hormonal birth control (the male pill) would set the present SMP on its ass. The primary reason for the SMP as it is today is largely due to women being afforded unilateral control of their birthing (and ultimately provisioning), entirely excluding men from determining when they will have a family, and with that the control of male sexual strategy. ”

    Could the same argument be made except with condoms replacing male hormonal birth control? In that case, condoms do exist so it’s not entirely accurate that men are excuded from deciding when to start a family. Why does your assertion depend on hormonal birth control rather than condoms?

  45. True, but a condom is an immediate mediary between a man and a woman at the time of the sex act. Yes, it serves the same function as feminine birth control but hormonal birth control still has the element of trust associated with it. In other words, you’re taking a woman’s word that she’s on the pill whereas a man can’t pretend not to be using a condom.

    In an immediate, spontaneous sexual encounter (ONS) a prudent guy with his wits about him would see the utility of protecting himself with a condom, but put that same guy into an extended relationship with a woman who “accidentally” got pregnant because he got comfortable with going bareback with her and you’ll see how the dynamic shifts.

    Most ‘accidental’ pregnancies are the deliberate results of a woman’s concerted effort to lock down a guy in commitment / provisioning, not a one time careless bang. If a man were on the pill, and covertly insured himself against that sort of predation it would change the SMP dynamic.

    There’s an internet story about the guy with the vasectomy who’s girlfriend explained she was pregnant by him, only to have her infidelity and her plot to saddle him with her child exposed and her shamed. Imagine that story being commonplace enough to upset women optimizing the unfettered pluralistic sexual strategy they enjoy now because their form of birth control is a covert form of birth control.

  46. To blackbird.young:

    So, how was it?

    I was also quite surpozed never to read anything about swinging here.

    We actually do play that game, my wife and I, from time to time. Either 4 (2 couples) or 3 (ourselves + a girl), mainly privately.

    It’s a (very) good thing to do…as we say here in France, if your couple is happy, it will be even more…if not, it’s going to be worse. We are happy, so that is only positive. No need to explain why…noone dislikes some alpha overdose from time to time.

Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s