While the manosphere and the femosphere endlessly debate the personal merits or collective atrocities of ‘casual sex’, the so called hook-up culture (newsflash, people were hooking-up long before the last decade), and/or the sex-positive feminist definition of it, I’m starting to think that neither are really seeing the overall context within which both sides have agreed to debate – the context of the feminine primary, feminine imperative social norm.
The declared feminists, their uncommitted proxies and their sympathizers can all understandably be acquitted of this blame since they thrive in discussions that ignore the dominant feminine social context they help to create. You can hardly fault pigs in shit for their love of discussing the finer points of shit with non-pigs in the same shit. However, an integral part of a Man’s red pill maturation should include a broader understanding of the feminine primary social normative we live in today. And with that understanding it should also follow that, given time and red pill enlightened observation, a Man will begin to see the code in the Matrix and know that, win or lose, such arguments only serve the feminine imperative.
Soaking In the Matrix
I wish I could credit the quote, but I once read that “Feminism is the mistaken idea that a society can create gender equalism by focusing exclusively on the benefit of only one sex.”
As Mark Minter’s now sphere-famous comment illustrates, any debate Men have, without considering the social context of the feminine imperative, ultimately, only serves to reinforce the ends of that imperative. For example, if we engage in discussions about how best to personally or socially conduct our sexual lives (exploits or noble pursuits) and all we consider of this proposition is how best to ensure a feminine-optimal reality, it doesn’t account for a true male-primary perspective. For over 60 years, men have been so conditioned to believe that there is no context other than that which benefits the feminine that they internalize the correctness of the feminine imperative as their own.
This is the scope of the feminine Matrix; you’re literally born into it, and as Mark Minter discovered, usually only experience and/or trauma can jar a man into an awareness of this social condition. So as you can see, debating whether casual sex or ‘meaningful sex’ is more significant in the Matrix is akin to discussing which style of clothing best accentuated a particular woman. The feminine end is the same and men are never a consideration under such auspices.
Letting go of his prior contexts is often the most difficult thing for newly Game-aware Men to release. Letting go of the Fallacy of the ONE, letting go of an expectation of a mutually idealized love with women, letting go of prior concepts of how women are in most respects, are all very difficult transitions for men whose best understandings about women and how society operates have been conditioned for him from a feminine-primary origin.
A good example of becoming aware of this is illustrated in how men’s attitude towards sex has shifted from pleasing himself towards pleasing a woman. There is a silly, but ironic internet meme that states “Nice Guy’s finish last, because their women finish first.” implying of course that Nice Guy’s are more concerned with their women’s sexual pleasures than their own, and it’s just this ‘niceness’ that makes them better and preferred lovers. It’s only after she gets off that he’s allowed to indulge himself in a simple orgasm. Nothing epitomizes the feminine primary social normative than this base consideration. This is the root of feminisms ‘sex-positive’ referendum – she cums first.
It hardly seems fathomable that there could’ve been a time when a woman’s sexual experience wasn’t considered the end-goal of the sex act. The carefully feminine designed Beta-Game idea being (as always) that the more a man identifies with the feminine the more attractive and acceptable he will be to a potential mate. Be sensitive to her needs, find out what she likes, do what she asks, cater yourself to her sexual pleasures and you’ll be the unique man who really understands women and therefore will be a high value man to all women.
“Do what she says and you’ll be a high value man”, became the common sense Beta wisdom. Essentially this was the bedroom doctrine of a larger social whole, only ‘do what she says’ wasn’t enough. Legions of men were all too eager to please their women first, so much so that the woman-pleasers became the norm – When everyone’s special, no one is. I should pause for a moment here, because not only does this axiom destroy the heart of most Beta chump’s concept of how their own Game should operate, but it also illustrates a larger point in that the ‘special’ guys of today are the ones who stand out by not ‘doing what she says’ and placing themselves, and the male imperative above her wants. In a world full of women-pleasers, women will sing “where have all the cowboys gone?”
However, as I stated, it wasn’t enough. As every man became special, the request of “please me” became the expectation of “please me”. The sensitivity to her needs transitioned from making him unique amongst men, to being his liability and a prerequisite of her fidelity to him – get her off or else she’ll find a ‘normal guy’ who can! The courtesy became the expectation which became the demand. This progression can be applied to every social dynamic within the feminine imperative’s purview.
There’s an interesting conflict that arises for men when presented with thinking about sex from a more selfish perspective. Most men begin their sexual maturation with this ‘her first’ mentality preprogrammed for them. I was fortunate enough to have a very sexually experimentative girlfriend (see; slut) when I first got laid at age 17. I learned a lot about women’s pleasure by doing rather than explaining, and while that relationship had its own liabilities, this situation set me up for a very selfish approach to sex that would follow with the consecutive women I banged. I honestly didn’t think about whether a girl got off with me or not, and in fact I discovered it was really immaterial for the women who kept coming back to me.
I’d have guys (serving the feminine imperative) tell me “you gotta fuck her right or you’ll lose her” in my single-man-sex-life, but then, I often didn’t care whether I lost them thanks to my nascent plate spinning of that time. In fact, the only time it ever was a concern was when I became invested enough in one woman to actually be concerned with her pleasure, and even then it was because her pleasure enhanced the sex act for me, not due to some threat of infidelity if she didn’t get off. The girl’s genuine desire for me was present whether or not she got off – sometimes I’d make a point of making that happen, but most times it was simply a byproduct of her own desire. In either respect I didn’t view it as my responsibility, and I found that women still enjoyed coming back for sex with some regularity.
One of the few conflicts I’ve observed with Roissy/Heartiste is in this approach to ‘owing a woman an orgasm’ for her continued fidelity. The 9th commandment of poon states:
XIV. Fuck her good
Fuck her like it’s your last fuck. And hers. Fuck her so good, so hard, so wantonly, so profligately that she is left a quivering, sparking mass of shaking flesh and sex fluids. Drain her of everything, then drain her some more. Kiss her all over, make love to her all night, and hold her close in the morning. Own her body, own her gratitude, own her love. If you don’t know how, learn to give her squirting orgasms.
On the surface of it, Roissy is agreeing with the feminine imperative’s notion of the sex debt – “own her gratitude, own her love,..learn to give her squirting orgasms.” I wouldn’t insult Roissy by inferring for him what I think he means here, but there’s more to it than this. Love, gratitude, a strong emotional bond, are all byproducts of ‘fucking her good’, but it’s the point of origin of why you want to ‘fuck her good’ that is at issue.
I think the operative word here is worrying. I wish I had the link available (I did search), but Roissy once had an excellent post and third party study outlining the proclivity of women to fake orgasms with high value, Alpha men, more so than lower value Beta Nice Guys. Naturally the “nice guys finish last, because their women finish first” chumps fired off their comments assuming this was some kind of validation of their Beta Game. Because they still subscribe to the ‘her first’ feminine primary doctrine as being the normative, their default presumption is that women would fake orgasms with Alpha Men because they were sexually unsatisfied with them. However, as the study indicated, the harsher truth was that women’s tendency to fake orgasm with high value men was the result of a desire to secure that man for commitment and breeding prospects – not as some feminine courtesy for a bad lover.
Naturally this is the socialized narrative women follow themselves – a bad lover gets a fake orgasm, nyah, nyah, try better next time – but when you look under the hood, why would a woman be bothered to fake an orgasm with a bad lover? You might argue that it’s to end the act, and you’d be right, but a faked orgasm is really an indictment of the Beta mindset, because he’s not worth the courtesy of faking one.
In the end hypergamy doesn’t even care if the woman is sexually satisfied or not – that’s up to her – all that matters is optimizing the best mating that her attractiveness can afford.
*Final Note: Since I know the comments will explode about the importance of a woman’s orgasm from a biological perspective, I’m not saying that a woman getting off isn’t important. I’m fully aware that a woman’s orgasm prompts her cervix to dip and ‘scoop up’ a man’s sperm to facilitate fertility. I’m also aware of the oxytocin and the chemical cocktail release post-orgasm. The point of this post is to outline the social aspect and primacy the feminine imperative has acculturated into men regarding the female orgasm.