On several occasions I’ve gone into the pro’s and cons of marriage. I tend to get a couple of standard reactions to my take on marriage; the first is usually the binary, all or nothing response that virtually all women, and a significant number of feminized men, will throw at me after having only a cursory skim through a few of my articles. It usually goes something like,
“WTF?!! You misogynist asshole! So ALLLLLLL marriages are one-sided affairs for men, doomed to failure once a woman gets fat after pregnancy, greedy or bored and her hypergamy kicks in? My folks, grandparents, aunt & uncle et. al. are still together after ___ years so that proves that love can conquer all and you’re fulla shit.”
This is the usual response I get from deep blue-pill men and women still relying on their, feminine conditioned, ready dismissals so as not to have to actually dig any deeper into what I’ve written about the truths of contemporary marriage and have their precious (and fragile) idol of a loving marriage challenged, and possibly destroyed.
Frames of Reference
The other reaction I get is the one I covered in Fidelity, which usually goes something like,
“Dude, how can you be a red pill Man and be married? It’s contradictory to everything you write, fuck you charlatan, I’m going back to (insert URL of PUA, MRA, MGTOW, christo-manosphere, etc. etc. site) and read up on the latest approaches.”
Again, this is usually the result of a guy without the patience to really read what I’ve posted here for the past two years, and developed in my writing over the past ten. If it seems like it’s TL;DR material it probably wont resonate with an attention deficient reader.
Obviously in both these instances the responses come from a lack of understanding the totality of my personal history, life, Game and female experiences – which of course is what I hope readers will get a better grasp of when the book is released. I’ve had sex with over 40 women in my past, during a time when there was no such thing as formalized Game. I apply elements of Game in my line of work – the liquor, nightclub and gaming industries to be specific – and use it to my professional advantage with the women I work around and who work for me. I use aspects of Game with my daughter (Amused Mastery) and set myself as an example of the type of Man she should associate herself with – of the boys she likes we both make a point of distinguishing the chumps from the more confident and dominant guys. I observe elements of Game while reconditioning greyhounds. I’ve even recently used an AMOGing technique to get a better interest rate and price on a new car I purchased this year – and I only did it to see if it would work.
The Measure of Game
There is an element in the manosphere that will tell you that the only real form of Game, the only legitimate, measure of Game is how many women you’ve successfully banged in your pursuit of perfecting Game for yourself.
I agree with this assessment.
The real measure of Game is only truly tested by how well it gets you laid. You can use your understanding of Game to improve your life, your career, your family interactions, etc. You can use your grasp of Game to destroy a feminist’s arguments and you can use it to literally save a man from suicide, but the real test is in how well it provably functions in getting you to intimacy with a woman.
Roosh recently had a series of articles and tweets regarding the present legitimacy of Game. Among his concerns is the claiming of Game authority by men who have never really used Game to get laid. A couple years ago Matt Forney had a similar post on the old In Mala Fide site titled something like “Never trust the advice of guys who aren’t getting laid”. In the years I’ve spent on the SoSuave forum I’ve seen this concern come and go; it’s interesting to see these sentiments get recycled, but the concern is the same. When late-term virgin men feel they have the Game savvy to authoritatively give other virgins (self-inflicted or not) Game advice it delegitimizes Game as a whole.
On the internet we are who we say we are. I’ve been getting laid (and for the better part the old-fashioned way) since I was 17. I’ve also been married for the last 17 years. Both my sexual and relationship past, as well as my marriage have benefitted me with a comprehensive understanding of Game principles. Furthermore my studies in behavioral psychology and over a decade of involvement in the manosphere have made me a pretty good connector of dots when it comes to behaviorism, sociology and psychology with regards to gender dynamics. I’m not trying to prove my pedigree here, what I’m driving at is that while Game has more to it than just getting laid, if you aren’t getting laid (or laid more with your wife) then your Game is untested and not as legitimate as someone who has put their own Game into successful practice.
The New Monogamy
I recently got a PM from a reader, Emperor Lu Bu, wanting some input from me on a blog post he’d written contrasting the modern ‘horrors’ of marriage and the white knight apologists’ rationales for endorsing marriage:
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on that piece, primarily because I seem to recall you saying that you were yourself married (employing some sort of complicated “marriage Game” to remain so).
I must admit, I’m curious as to whether you found an Eastern wife, or whether you just rolled some particularly dangerous dice and took a Western one for yourself.
As I stated in Fidelity, I’m not anti-marriage, I’m anti- uninformed, pollyanna, shoulda’-saw-it-coming, ONEitis fueled, shame induced, bound for bankruptcy, scarred my children for life, hypergamy’s a bitch, marriage. I could very easily detail the aspects of my 18 year relationship with Mrs. Tomassi that would sound like my marriage is a one-of-a-kind white knight miracle, but it will only come off as some naive rationale similar to the social conventions Lu Bu lists in his post. However, I assure you Mrs. Tomassi is a pretty, thin, blonde American, any Game I do run has long passed the point of being a very uncomplicated subconscious part of who I am, and I’m well aware of how hypergamy, the feminine imperative and western matrimonial laws collude to make marriage a dangerous prospect. Caveat emptor.
In contrast with this, Dalrock had another post from the other side of the divorce spectrum this week in quoting an interview with Kate Bollick:
…for people who want to have kids and raise them with someone else, I wonder what the next alternative for love/sex/reproduction is. Because it seems like for women there’s currently two options: Option A, which is dating, marriage, kids (and divorce and remarriage, etc.), or Option B, which is every other nontraditional alternative, where it’s everyone for him/herself, trying to figure out what fits. Option A being pretty clear, and Option B being wide open.
As you can see the future looks pretty bleak for anyone rooting for team marriage. From the extreme manosphere perspective marriage is akin to Russian roulette with 5 rounds in a 6 shot revolver. From the Jezebel / Bollick side of the equation, the SMV navigation plan is no longer in need of any pretense or concealment; women are now comfortable in admitting the plan actually is to cash out of the SMP casino between 27-28 years of age and to take the beta provider schlub to the cleaners for future cash & prizes. Even for Athol Kay, his MMSL is an effort in after-the-fact marriage damage control.
As Good as it Gets
So where does that leave us? Back in 2003 Tom Leykis once had a great rant about how being an unmarried man, spinning plates in his mid-twenties to mid-thirties, was as good as it gets. I’m beginning to think this was more than a bit prophetic. I’ve written six individual post about the various aspects of Plate Theory, and although I presented the options for both a continued plate spinning plan and a path, at least, towards monogamy from plate theory, I’m starting to wonder if a continued, indefinite, commitment-ambiguity isn’t simply as good as it gets for men today.
For as much as Aunt Giggles would have anyone believe that both men and women want to be married – “want’s” got nothing to do with it. A desire to be married and live in an idealized and secure state of mutual love and respect with someone is really a no-brainer. The whole Minter affair (literally and figuratively) in July superimposes the idea that even the most anti-marriage guy still wants to be married, but it’s not the getting where the problem starts, it’s in the having.
I have no doubt that the idealization of marriage, enduring companionship, mutual love and respect are very strong desires for men, but as I stated in my love series, men love idealistically, whereas women’s love is rooted in opportunism. Women get very upset at this proposition because they tend to conflate an unrealistic desire for unconditional love with a love based on a man’s performance for her in order to earn and keep it. It’s not that men expect some childish form of unconditional love, it’s that a man must continue to maintain that love through performing and meriting it – this is what I mean by women loving opportunistically.
Whether a man comes to terms with how women love them, they still want to get married because they believe in the dream. Despite all the risk, despite every red flag a woman waves, and even despite the bitter disaster of his previous marriages, men still want to be married – they desire the ideal union.
But what if as good as it gets is simply entertaining a succession of non-committed, non-exclusive relationships? In essence, a sustainable plate spinning until such time as a woman demands committed monogamy, and then she’s replaced with a new plate and the cycle continues. I’m sure this would seem manipulative and horribly selfish to women, and furthermore it might contradict what I’ve just written about men’s general want for marriage (or at least an idealized union), but contrast this perpetual plate spinning strategy with the perspective extremes of both the raw deal men and women I mentioned in Lu Bu and Dalrock’s posts.
Rather than a deliberate or unintentional “marriage strike” perhaps the direction we’re headed is a sustainable series of modular monogamy or perpetuated singleness? Maybe that’s as good as it gets?
People say to me, “Well, if you’re unhappy, why don’t you just divorce?” That’s easier said than done. Ironically, these are the same people who complain that men can’t stay committed. Some of us are fulfilling our commitments while planning for divorce in the long term. For some people, it’s impossible to understand the complexity that divorce brings to the table, and they want to make it sound like it’s a piece of cake and doable in all circumstances. Immediate divorce is not the best solution for all couples, and sometimes it’s best to set aside some selfishness for the… Read more »
@Lion Only someone going through this can understand it. Marriage, Divorce, Separation, Staying Together (for reasons) – it’s a complex dynamic when inside – but it’s always an easy answer when looking in from the outside. But these are also people that I turn around to and say “hey, you’re a bit over weight, it’s pretty simple to get in shape — quit putting bad food in your mouth and get active (sometimes a bit more blunt than that)” Potentially a simple solution, but that doesn’t mean it’s easy. Keep your chin up – everything in life is transitory, including… Read more »
Rollo says – “This is the usual response I get from deep blue-pill men and women still relying on their, feminine conditioned, ready dismissals so as not to have to actually dig any deeper into what I’ve written”
And now we have this – http://www.policymic.com/articles/54105/the-one-thing-all-men-feel-but-never-admit
eon: I understand your suspicion of my circumstance. My ex-wife wasnt/isn’t perfect but any breakup is hard to get over. I’m human, what can I say. Luckily I didn’t lose anything in my divorce.
[…] As Good As It Gets and yes this refers to Aunt Giggles. Let’s hope that WFM with Suzanne Venker, Dr. Helen Smith, Warren Farrell and company do not become another ‘Aunt Giggles’ imprint. […]
[…] should surprise no one, really. While one doesn’t necessarily have to agree with Rollo that men love idealistically (and women don’t), men are the same now as they have been throughout recorded history. We […]
[…] a sense of duty is immoral while arguing for marriage, while Rollo is not only less strident but logically consistent by arguing that it is better for a man to keep a rotation of women in order to maximize the […]
I still don’t agree with the idea that men are the more romantic. What I’ve seen in the world is that countries where men have more relative power the women are the most romantic. Where women have relative power the men are the romantic ones. Romance seems to come down to hope on the part of the least powerful. I think a lot of these strategies in history adjusted depending on difficulty of survival, and warring with surrounding tribes. If most men were killed off in a war a woman had to be on her best best behavior to get… Read more »
[…] As Good as it Gets […]
You have to believe that actions have consequences. If any of your Game theory has any value whatsoever, then the current “cash out early with income and prizes” model has to have negative consequences for both men and women. Some women may *think* they’re winning by being enabled to indulge their worst inclinations but to accept this at face value is almost as big a mistake as indulging one’s own worst inclinations and pretending to oneself that there will not be correspondingly negative consequences. So, and therefore, if you are looking to get married in the West, and particularly to… Read more »
[…] explored this in detail in Beta Fucks and As Good As It Gets, but what I find ironic in light of Dalrock’s assertions about romance-primary intergender […]
Reblogged this on 254MGTOW and commented:
Food for thought….
Emperor Lu Bu wrote: “I must admit, I’m curious as to whether you found an Eastern wife, or whether you just rolled some particularly dangerous dice and took a Western one for yourself.” I married an Eastern wife with an accent and recently talked to another such woman who also married a college educated American man who like me ended up withdrawing from the marriage. These women have the same instincts as any other women and expect men to perform and be dominant. An American man who has been feminist imperative conditioned in college and expecting reciprocation of good will,… Read more »
Sisyphus: Yes, we did. We’ve been together over three years now 🙂 Since I have been the breadwinner, Mark is hardly a slave. There could be no one more worthy of what I had to offer. He warned me he was a stray dog. But, I’m sure you’ve seen the bumper stickers: who rescued who 🙂
What surprises me is no one suggests the current laws will be reformed again. They will. It may take some time. I did see that two big changes happened this year. The feds removed imputed income from child support through a federal rules of civil procedure change and several states have brought fourth default shared custody. I think this change is slower in coming because of the generational change occurring in our government. The establishment is failing, thus major changes are tough until a new unity government is formed. However, I think over the next 10 years, major changes will… Read more »
[…] yourself to a kind of slavery. Under our present social conditions, staying single might be as good as it gets for […]
Very few people are actually managing to keep up the marriage. Most of those who do, are in my opinion not very happy with each other.
Many of those who I looked very happy and were suspected to be in the league of people who would manage, are now divorced.
I’m buying into the idea, that todays western ideal for a marriage, is that of a coorporation. An agreement of some sort where two people use each other for a common goal, and then split up when that goal is reached or there’s too many complications involved.
Matt Forney [wrote] “Never trust the advice of guys who aren’t getting laid”.
Never trust Matt Forney’s advice about getting laid! He is a fat, bald, unemployed English major schlub who lives with his parents.
In today’s United States of America – any man – who marries any woman – for any reason whatsoever – is a complete and total blockhead. If you have to game a woman after you get married, it proves how much of a dumb ass you are. What a joke. You should be chillin’. She’s a human being with a wet hole between her legs. Kick her to the curb. Until the divorce laws are rewritten to reflect the marriage vows (pre 1970’s) – the institution of marriage is dead. Guys that have to game their wife are idiots. You’re… Read more »
Wake up. It’s all about the cash. Here’s some advice for ya. Get ripped and get yourself loaded with cash. Then flaunt your cash with all the material shit you can get your hands on, and flaunt your ripped ass and you won’t have to do anything. No games required. Women will throw themselves at you. I’ve been doing it forever and a day. Works like a champ.
Here’s a good game for ya. Play this one. Take my advice in my previous comment about getting ripped and loaded. Then walk around for the rest of your life pretending to be a dumb ass that wants to get married. That one works real good too. All the 9’s and 10’s that want your money will become instant porn stars.
Bottom line. If you’re married – you’re Blue Pill.