Controlling Interests

controlling

I realize I dropped this quote last week, but it provides us with a unique illustration of the prevailing feminine psychology that’s been evolving since the sexual revolution.

“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”

― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead

In last week’s post I made note that Sheryl Sandberg was blissfully ignorant of her blatant admission of feminine hypergamy, but I felt her ‘advice’ to women here represented so much more than just a display of her solipsistic ignorance.

For as long as I’ve butted heads with many obstinate deniers of hypergamy’s influences, on women personally and society on whole, I’m not sure I’ve read a more damning indictment of hypergamy from a more influential woman. Sandberg’s advice to the next generation of women essentially puts the lie to, and exposes the uncomfortable truth about, women’s efforts deny the fundamental dynamic of female sexual strategy – Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks.

Even if you want to argue the evolutionary (psychology) and biological origins of women’s pluralistic sexual strategy, the fact is now socially evident; women have come to a point where they’re comfortable in openly admitting the truth that Red Pill awareness has been drawing attention to for over a decade now.

Courtesy of Sheryl Sandberg, the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks basis of women’s sexual pluralism is now publicly recognized. It’s kind of ironic considering that what the manosphere has been trying to make men aware of for years is now being co-opted, embraced and owned as if women had always practiced an open sexual pluralism – incredulous to any man’s shock over it.

However, the truth is that a feminine-centric social order can no longer hide the increasingly obvious fallout and consequences of a society restructured to accommodate women as the predominant sexual interest.

Last week I speculated that Sandberg was ignorant of the feminine-primary implications that her statements draw attention to – and I’m still of the opinion that an innate feminine solipsism motivates more and more women to this admission – but it’s impossible to ignore the new degree of comfort in which women feel in laying bare their dualistic sexual strategy.

To some significant extent the Feminine Imperative no longer needs to keep the ‘Good Genes’ / ‘Good Dad’ dichotomy ugliness a secret from men.

In last week’s post I mentioned that a new ambient sense of an assured long-term security in the feminine mind was predisposing women to prioritize the ‘Best Genes’ (Alpha Fucks) side of feminine hypergamy. Sandberg’s ‘advice’ is a vital confirmation of this, however, she tacitly acknowledges a window of  opportunity during which women possess a better capacity to pursue this side of hypergamy:

The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner.

In these two sentences Sheryl (and by extensions the Feminine Imperative) essentially confirms women’s pluralistic sexual strategy, my (now infamous) sexual market value graph depicting women’s peak SMV and decay, and the first half of the time line of women’s phases of maturity I laid forth in the first two installments of the Preventative Medicine series.

Selling the Beta

With regards to men, I believe the most salient part of Sandberg’s admission is found at the end:

These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.

For the better half of the time since the sexual revolution it was necessary for the Feminine Imperative to convince a majority of men that their eventual Beta providership for women was not only their duty, but also a prime aspect of feminine attraction. As I mentioned last week, under the (pre-sexual revolution) old-order attraction model this may have been the case to a large degree. However after the revolution, and as women’s hypergamy prioritized towards ‘Good Genes’ short-term sexual partners, the ‘Good Dad’ (Beta Bucks) men needed an ever increasing ‘sell’ of their own attractiveness by women.

This persistent sell was a necessary element of ensuring a future long-term security for women while pursuing increasingly more short-term breeding opportunities as feminine-primacy expanded into society. The future ‘Good Dads’ would need to be patiently waiting out women’s “indiscretion years” during their SMV peak, so the sell became an ever-evolving definition of what women found attractive in men based on that old-order model of dependability, patience, industriousness, and every other characteristic that defined a good provider.

Quoted from Why Muscularity is Sexy:

According to strategic pluralism theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value on the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.

From a woman’s perspective, the ideal is to attract a partner who confers both long-term investment benefits and genetic benefits. Not all women, however, will be able to attract long-term investing mates who also display heritable fitness cues. Consequently, women face trade-offs in choosing mates because they may be forced to choose between males displaying fitness indicators or those who will assist in offspring care and be good long-term mates (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). The most straightforward prediction that follows is that women seeking short-term mates, when the man’s only contribution to offspring is genetic, should prefer muscularity more than women seeking long-term mates.

Strategic pluralism theory is a pretty good definition of feminine hypergamy, but what this theory hadn’t yet accounted for (at the time it was published) was the necessitousness of women with regards to short-term mating strategies and long-term parental investment opportunities over the course of the various phases of maturity as they aged.

The Beta investment sell was necessary because it ensured male parental investment at a later (usually just-pre-Wall) time in a woman’s life. Thus, Sandberg’s praise of men “who think women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. [Men] who value fairness and expect or, even better, want to do his share in the home” will eventually be sexier than the Alpha “bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys” she encourages women to fuck earlier in life is an excellent example of this sell.

Ironically it’s exactly with this sell that women encourage the very transactional nature of sexual relations with men they’re screeching about recently. It’s the Choreplay fallacy on a meta scale – do more around the house, play into the equalitarian schema women think they need in a provider, support her ambitiousness and opinionatedness and you’ll be considered “sexier” and get her Best Sex she’s been saving just for a guy like this.

Building the Beta

The problem the Feminine Imperative runs into with selling the Beta is that as women’s “independence” expands this sell becomes less necessary and less effective. Less necessary because women’s personal, social and legal long-term security insurances have become almost entirely disconnected from men’s direct (not indirect) provisioning. Less effective because men have become increasingly aware of their disenfranchisement of the old-order provisioning model as being something they might equitably be rewarded for.

As the consequences and repercussions of women’s hypergamous priority shift to Alpha Fucks become more evident and real for men; and as their capacity and comfort with connecting and relating these experiences with other men becomes more widespread, the less effective the sell is for Beta men awaiting their turn to enter into a pre or post Wall monogamy with the women attempting the sell.

Throughout the 70’s, 80’s and most of the 90’s, the sell was effective because men were isolated socially and technologically from each other’s relative experiences. From the late 90’s onward that isolation has diminished while the societal results of feminine-primacy have become more glaringly, and painfully, evident to men.

In its ever-reinventive fluidity, the Feminine Imperative found it necessary to transition from selling men on being later and later life long-term providers for women into building a generation of men who would expect of themselves to fulfill that role when the time came. These men would be raised and conditioned to be the patient Beta providers women would need once they had followed the Sandberg model of hypergamy.

These would be the boys / men who would be taught to “naturally” defer to the authority of women under the auspices of a desire to be an equal partner.

These are the men raised privately and created socially to be ready for women, “when it comes time to settle down, and find someone who wants an equal partner.”

These would be the men ready to expect and accept a woman’s proactive cuckoldry of him in the name of being a pro-feminine equal.

These are the men raised to accept an open form of hypergamy in place of the selling to an old-order Beta provisioning model.

The Hypergamy Schism

The problem this creates for women becomes one of dealing with the men they need to sell a secretive hypergamy to and the men they build to accept an open form of hypergamy to. The increasing comfort with an open admission of hypergamy is relative to a woman’s capacity to get away with it.

A woman like Sheryl Sandberg has the means to decisively ensure her future independence and long-term security (at least in the financial sense) whether she’s married or not. She could very well return to the Bad Boys she found so arousing and advises women ‘date’ and never rely on a man’s direct provisioning. As such she’s very comfortable in publicly revealing the ins and outs of post-sexual revolution hypergamy without so much as an afterthought.

While she publicly affirms the build model of Beta provisioning (under the guise of equalism) and expects “those guys will be awaiting you” this doesn’t hold true for a majority of women. Women with affluence enough, or a physical attractiveness sufficient to virtually ensure their future provisioning are much more comfortable with the build a better Beta model than women who find themselves more lacking in this assurance.

The more necessitous a woman finds herself in the sexual marketplace, the more likely she is to deny the mechanics of her own hypergamy.

A woman less confident in consolidating on her future long-term security (and / or cooperative parental investment) has a much more personal investment in keeping the truths of hypergamy a secret from men. As such, these women will be more predisposed to misdirecting the men becoming more aware of this truth and relying more on the selling model of Beta provisioning.

Needless to say this split between women comfortable in open hypergamy and women reliant upon secretive hypergamy is a point of conflict between the have’s and have not women in the sexual marketplace. The more men become aware of women’s hypergamy and strategic sexual pluralism, through women’s open embrace of it or the manosphere, the more pressure the ‘have not’ women will feel to also embrace that openness.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Softek
Guest
Softek
Offline

@ Glenn The Sedona Method has been compared to Faster EFT. The methodology is similar, and I highly recommend both of them. As I mentioned before, “Monsters and Magical Sticks: There’s no Such Thing as Hypnosis?” is a great read and complements both methods really well as far as background knowledge and belief systems goes. Anyway, what you just wrote about reminds me of a zen koan that’s making a lot more sense to me now: *~*~*~*~*~*~*~* A Mother’s Advice Jiun, a Shingon master, was a well-known Sanskrit scholar of the Tokugawa era. When he was young he used to… Read more »

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@Rollo, all of the women exhibit no pity for men. All.

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

@Kate – ” I don’t follow.”

Obviously.

trackback

[…] most recent post, Controlling Interests, got me thinking about two different things. The first is how brazen many women now are when it […]

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@Rollo, for various reason aj is blocked for me but here is the paper.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/06/17/peds.2013-4182.abstract

The current official guidance from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Medical Genetics is to tell patients about the issue of nonpaternity but to not to disclose nonpaternity if found. They now want that to be strengthened, so that the official guidance to all American medical personnel involved will be *mandatory* nondisclosure if nonpaternity is found.

Kate
Guest
Kate
Offline

Whatever. Now you’re just being rude. I don’t have time for that. Anyway, my job is done, I see. Men can always be counted on to join together against the enemy wink

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Non-disclosure of non-paternity? Mandatory?

That would seem to be ripe making a 14th Amendment case. After All compelling, at threat of violence,or loss of liberty, child support from a non-adoptive, non-biological father would be no different than taking a man from his home and forcing him to work at labor, uncompensated.

And what then would stop the courts from simply assigning direct financial responsibility to any random man? Before you it won’t happen look where we are with gay marriage versus 30 years ago.

Tam the Bam
Guest
Tam the Bam
Offline

I used to live a few minutes walk from John “Logarithms” Napier’s house. The old boy had a bit of a rep locally as a near-warlock, due to his nerdskillz, which he did not strive to dispel. One time the silver from the dinner service went walkabout, and the help were in the frame. What to do? Put them to the Extraordinary Question? Fire the lot? (there were a lot, and servants were hard to engage, especially if they were crapping themselves with superstitious fear at the interview (no washing machines or drycleaners in them days). Our John was a… Read more »

D-Man
Guest
D-Man
Offline

Mandatory nondisclosure of nonpaternity? Sickening. How about collecting some of the newborn’s drool and sending it off by yourself? Let’s say you find out you’re not the dad before the kid is 6 months old… you haven’t had the time to bond yet, how can they hold you to anything??? http://www.canadiancrc.com/newspaper_articles/Globe_and_Mail_Moms_Little_secret_14DEC02.aspx “Based on a 500-year-old common law, most states operate on the presumption that a husband is the father of any child born to his wife during a marriage.” How many centuries-old laws have been scrapped at the behest of feminism? Why can’t we do that with this one too?… Read more »

D-Man
Guest
D-Man
Offline

Yeah if I were the guy in the Washington Post article, I would nope the fuck out of that situation too. This is a lot like the one a while back with the guy who discovered his wife’s sex tapes. The irony is, let’s say the guy just lets her unload all her slut-shame on him (and she must be ashamed of it on some level, otherwise why won’t she do the same stuff with him?), let’s say he’s the perfect supportive boyfriend she thinks she wants… 1000% guaranteed she’ll start to see him as a doormat and dump his… Read more »

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@D-Man, we need a clip of some characters shaking their heads and saying “nope nope nope nope nope nope nope”, instead of “yip yip yip” like this

D-Man
Guest
D-Man
Offline
Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

LOL… Dear Carolyn: After multiple relationships not working out because both parties were dishonest in one way or another, I decided to use a new approach to my current relationship. I am 23, met my current boyfriend (also 23) online, and decided to be COMPLETELY HONEST. This was meant to mostly cover my feelings, as I tended to hold things in unhealthily, but I let it fold over to all aspects, including the disclosure of my sexual history. I have now learned this was a mistake. This man is all I’ve ever wanted in a partner, we live together, we’ve… Read more »

LiveFearless
Guest

“If I was a man, I’d love to have a woman who is…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOEEDfqtTPU

M3
Guest
M3
Offline

@Jeremy “Women seem to just ooze solipsism as if it were sap coming out of a tree, they just can’t f-ing help it. They consider their sexuality their own prized possession, and any and all inference that they should share it with someone who commits to them is regarded as evil.” The level of narcissism and entitlement on display here by women surely ranks right up there with Elliot Rogers level mentality. What always chaffes my nuts after reading something like this is the fact that it is the female who wrote in for advice on how to keep they… Read more »

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline
M3
Guest
M3
Offline

““When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”” When looking… Read more »

M3
Guest
M3
Offline

@JF12

From the linked article:
“He needs to be able to support the children he already has when he gets out,” she said, adding that Herald and the state both benefit from the deal, first reported by the Northern Virginia Daily.”

One wonders why such a requirement isn’t enforced against women?

http://youtu.be/RBqjZ0KZCa0

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@M3, re: “On a side note, the problem could certainly be ameliorated simply by the girl helping wingman the guy into [what she won’t do with him]”. Correct. The correct answer to the question in the Hax article “How can I help him get past it?”, if it is not merely a pretend question, a rhetorical question, is that her “make me do it” dare from “I won’t try something with him in the bedroom that he knows I did with someone else” is completely defused if she helps him get it from someone else. But she doesn’t *want* to… Read more »

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

“Just get it” is code for “Just smack me.”

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Jf12- “One wonders why such a requirement isn’t enforced against women?”

Because only women have reproductive rights, and men only have responsibilities?

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Jf12- “But she doesn’t *want* to help him; she wants a fight.”

Actually, I think she simply doesn’t want to have sex with him because: icky. As well giving herself to her beta completely, in exchange, for commitment would make her a whore. That’s bad feels.

cryo
Guest
cryo
Offline

Softek has to be woman…even the most neutered man could not be so tenderly emotional.

Tilikum
Guest
Tilikum
Offline

@Glenn

when confidence crosses into hubris…..you become a target.

because its in the differential of your escalating behavior vs. someone like myself where your girl gets taken.

not because I want her, but because you offer a quasi-challenge and a method for calibration.

in your specific case, I’d use the fancy house and car against you. in the words of Sir Mix a Lot:

“Your man is a trick and his game is weak
I can pull you in a Benzo with a broke down jeep”

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@Badpainter, re: “I think she simply doesn’t want to have sex with him”.

Yes but no. You may have noticed I was leaning in this direction, but have now definitely crossed well over the line. She is daring him to *make* her do it. “How can I help him get past it?” is the same as “Why won’t he just “get it” that I want him to make me do it.”

For the record once again, I am not advocating it. I’m saying *she* is asking for it.

D-Man
Guest
D-Man
Offline

“It’s simple ladies. Accept your number loud and proud, and only get into ‘relationships’ with men who can accept your real number.” Yyyeeeaah, those chicks will get nowhere with me. There is no correct answer, but to me, the closest is to never, ever mention it. I won’t ask, and I won’t bring up mine. Nicely compartmentalizes things. I don’t know where popular culture got this idea, but people don’t need to know every last detail about one another. In this case it’s like battery acid to a relationship. Whether it’s becuase she’s secretly proud of it and wants to… Read more »

D-Man
Guest
D-Man
Offline

Dammit I sound so old-fashioned and k-selected. Get with the times, right? Well OK then ladies, if these are the times, fine, go ahead, bang away. But do not expect me to do ANYthing for you aside from dump a fuck in you once in awhile. You might be fun to hang out with but it will never go beyond that. I’ll be like DeNiro in HEAT: “don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat” You won’t get my sympathy, you won’t get my faithfulness, and you won’t get… Read more »

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

@Jf12

She wants the fight to justify her underlying desire to fully collect his resources without the requirement of giving him full sexual access. The fight and the drama serve a higher purpose for her.

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@Badpainter, re: “higher purpose”. Women *like* to fight. With me, anyway. The same way they like to scream with their neck-veins bulging. I guess it feels good.

I’m going to try to remember to apply my interpretation from now on whenever it seems to fit. IOW “just get it” is to be interpreted as meaning “molon labe”.

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Jf12 “IOW ‘just get it’ is to be interpreted as meaning ‘molon labe’.” In addition to being defective I am also a bad person. I had a girlfriend many years ago with whom I fought, or bickered with all the time. Minor trivial stuff. Several times it was serious relationship ending type stuff. I know this because the aim for me was to 1. Win the fight even if it ended the relationship 2. Draw real tears rather than blood. The best part was after it was over denying her make up sex. I hate fighting. She enjoyed it, unless… Read more »

Acksiom
Guest
Acksiom
Offline

Why is there no mention here by Rollo or anyone else of Vasalgel’s impact on all this? I don’t understand why something that is likely to have massive consequences for everything you’re discussing isn’t being addressed. And this silence is endemic across the entire manosphere. It’s everywhere. Why? Vasalgel is a One Deft Move that would significantly improve almost every issue of interest to almost every one of you, and yet not a single one of you ever mentions it, even when its fundamentally integral to the topics of discussion. . .as it is here. What happens when both the… Read more »

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Acksiom- “WTF? Why are you all ignoring this so consistently and conspicuously?”

1. It’s not commercially available.

2. There’s no guarantee it will be commercially available.

3. There’s no real pricing associated with it so cost benefit analysis is impossible.

4. It is yet to be established as an affirmative matter of law in the US that men have reproductive rights to include the right to not reproduce.

5. If DNA testing to determine paternity is forbidden why should we believe this won’t likewise be forbidden or stopped before it is commercially available?

water cannon boy
Guest
water cannon boy
Offline

Guy named Andrew Stern, married but about to split from an Amer. Next Top Model contestant Katie Cleary, could have been help by red pill.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/katie-cleary-husband-commits-suicide-article-1.1842582

Acksiom
Guest
Acksiom
Offline

1. Why does it need to be commercially available first? VR pr0n and sexbots are much farther away, yet they get far more address. Checkmate. 2. Why does there need to be a guarantee it will be commercially available first? I’m already working on backup plans to *make* it commercially available in Mexico if necessary. Checkmate. 3. Why does cost-benefit analysis have to be available first? We already know the basic costs from all the RISUG work establishing its validity and safety. Checkmate. 4. Condoms and vasectomies. Checkmate. 5. The belief that it might by outlawed (“forbidden” or “stopped”? Why… Read more »

Acksiom
Guest
Acksiom
Offline

It amuses me that I didn’t even notice the 2nd & 3rd pages of comments before posting. All this Paternity Testing Nondisclosure / Vasectomy stuff? I didn’t even know you’d gotten into it before I started busting your chops about Vasalgel.

There’s a unique pleasure to mistaken observations that nevertheless end up being correct predictions. And IME, they’re also an excellent signal that someone else is worth listening to and drawing out to one’s own benefit.

Badpainter
Guest
Badpainter
Offline

Acksiom, Vasagel has been discussed previously. It doesn’t come up with great frequency because as a practical matter it doesn’t exist. It might in the future but not today. Almost all of the discussions I’ve encountered in the sphere that address possible future outcomes are established based on existing tools, not tools that are in development. The fact that Vasagel is likely to reach market before sex bots doesn’t change the discussion much as both are based on presumption of tools not yet in existence. Hence the lack of frequency of the discussion, and the corresponding intensity. To my points:… Read more »

water cannon boy
Guest
water cannon boy
Offline

Kinda over dramatic with the checkmates. Feel free to start, or direct the flow of the conversation to that yourself. Instead of just saying why isn’t somebody else doing something, The current flow of the conversation dealt with the dynamics of male/female interaction. Broader topic than contraception. And anybody else correct me if I’m wrong. But when he/she said they didn’t want to accuse anybody of being afraid of talking about it, did he/she then just passively say everybody is afraid of talking about it? Like if somebody says I don’t want to make it seem like you’ve put on… Read more »

Ice Berg Slim
Guest
Ice Berg Slim
Offline

I laughed so hard at this:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/anonymous/2014/06/i-thought-my-boyfriend-and-i-were-having-fun-threesomes-until-i-found-out-he-was-pimping-me-out-to-guys-he-found-on-craigslist/

A girl thought she was fulfilling her guys cuck fantasies when in reality, he was pimping her ass out. After finding this out, she feels horrible and dirty. Oh but she didn’t feel that way before, lol.

The comments on the article by the women are gold, too.

Clarence
Guest
Clarence
Offline

Anything to say this, Rollo?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/24/myth-trophy-wife-inaccurate-demeaning

I’ll preface by agreeing that this study doesn’t really disprove the “Trophy Wife” because it doesn’t take into account second marriages and the age range is restricted to those 35 and under.
Also it seems to be taken as a sort of disproof of female ‘hypergamy’.

And while I do support that concept, I sometimes think you guys and gals on blogs like this tend to overplay the concept just a little too much.

But in any case, your thoughts would be illuminating.

Retrenched
Guest
Retrenched
Offline

Just one more thing…. Whenever a woman says ‘X is sexy’, you can bet your last dollar that X is certainly NOT sexy. Can you imagine Sandberg telling women that Channing Tatum is sexy? Can you imagine her telling women that Brad Pitt is hot, or that George Clooney is really handsome? No, of course not, because women already know that those men are very desirable and attractive. No one has to tell women who’s actually sexy, because women already know that. So if she’s trying to sell the idea that equal partners are ‘sexy’, it’s because everyone [or every… Read more »

jf12
Guest
jf12
Offline

@D-man re: k-selected. It seems important that I point out that hamsters are the epitome of r-selection.

caprizchka
Guest
caprizchka
Offline

@Kate, of course. Women have their own form of “game” as described in the next article (http://therationalmale.com/2014/06/25/balancing-act/). If one is going backwards however, it helps to have enough resources to transform one’s appearance convincingly.

George Meeks
Guest
George Meeks
Offline

I hope to remove yet one more layer of bullshit with this and expose the raw ugly truth we all hide from. Security is a myth. Life is inherently insecure, unpredictable, risky and fraught with uncertainty. The illusion of security can only be temporarily indulged. Let’s be completely honest. If women were the weak helpless creatures in such dire entitlement of mans constant protection and provisioning, as they are insidiously and fallaciously depicted by the feminine imperative of lies, then the human race would have gone extinct long before recorded history. Concerning hypergamy, the word “security” should be universally replaced… Read more »

George Meeks
Guest
George Meeks
Offline

Get ready to laugh your ass off if you haven’t seen this one…

http://www.break.com/video/ugc/my-new-philosophy-f-ck-it-455116

George Meeks
Guest
George Meeks
Offline

Mans significant contributions to human life:

The telephone, airplane, light bulb, pasteurization of milk, penicillin, electrical generation, combustion engine, automobile, atomic energy, computer chip, metal refinement, hydrocarbon extraction, refinement and synthesis, space exploration, geometry, calculus, general theory of relativity, universal law of gravitation, laws of physical motion, heart surgery, pregnancy contraception, Archimedes Principal, concrete……the list is extremely long and significant.

Women’s significant contributions to human life:

Prostitution and hypergamy.

Ladies feel free to add anything you can honestly and verifiably add to women’s list.

George Meeks
Guest
George Meeks
Offline

Many are trapped in what should have been a fuck and dump (FAD). This is for all beta males and those who have swallowed the red pill, especially those who are choking on the red pill. As you escape enslavement and take action to disconnect, send her this song. Pay very close attention to the last five lines. They are sooo true. You only live once. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRTXnAxlxTc I’m going fishing I got me a line Nothin’ I do’s gonna’ make the difference So I’m taking the time And you ain’t never gonna’ be happy Anyhow, anyway So I’m going fishing… Read more »

equilibro
Guest
equilibro
Offline

@Glenn – June 22nd

It’s not a big deal for me Glenn but I’ve been in Mensa for almost 50 years now, and my IQ when occasionally measured for various reasons has consistently been in the 155 – 165 range.

equilibro
Guest
equilibro
Offline

@heyjay – June 22nd

Your comment about intelligence is way off the mark.

I know a plethora of smart men, and if there is anything other than their self-evident brain power which singles them out it is there superior ability to make and sustain relationships of all types, including the male/female kind. I’d back an intelligent so-called Beta to “beat” an unintelligent so-called Alpha any day of the week, no matter what the arena is.

I repeat, forget “Alpha” or “Beta”, they are just artificial labels. Ultimately, smart always triumphs over dumb, and these are real victories not just pyrrhic ones.

trackback
Trophies |
Offline

[…] I got this comment on Hypergamy Doesn’t Care a little while ago. It’s about what I’ve come to expect from women who find revealing the secret of hypergamy offensive. These of course are the women who’s sexual strategy relies on men’s unawareness about hypergamy in order to consolidate on long-term security, but I find it entertaining that when a Man exposes that truth there is a ready social convention to shame him with, rather than the prideful embrace of an ‘empowered’ woman revealing exactly the same truth. […]

trackback

[…] and women were women. Pimps, porn, prostitutes, etc may be seen as bad morally but truth is truth. Love will conquer all is slowly becoming mere words only used for later when women want to settle, and the men they would of looked passed back in their early twenties now become attractive. Not […]

trackback

[…] situation represents an illustration of the great schism between the old order social contract of marriage, wherein a man had a reasonable expectation of sex with his wife, and the new […]

trackback

[…] I wrote in Controlling Interests, the secrecy previously necessary for hypergamy and women’s pluralistic sexual strategy is […]

trackback

[…] last week’s post and it struck me that along with the societal emphasis on a more overt and open hypergamy comes a need to reconcile it with equalism. This is proving to be a tall order as articles of this […]

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

Flip June 18th, 2014 at 8:06 pm “I think in most cases, the woman ends up having children who are the beta husband’s rather than the alpha bad boys’ she dated, so it is not really a case of getting alpha genes and beta provisioning. Of course there are single mothers who had already had the bad boys’ children and get a hard up beta to be the step-father, but that’s not usually the case. I personally am quite grateful for reliable DNA testing so I can’t be fooled (and will check if I ever have children).” Flip, good that… Read more »

trackback

[…] Controlling Interests […]

M3
Guest
M3
Offline

Just thought i’d drop this here… cuz open and flagrant hypergamy is official.

“The saying that “the grass isn’t always greener” clearly isn’t deterring women of today. They understand that anything can happen and are ensuring they have a solid back up plan should things go sour with their current man’

‘With sites like Facebook and Twitter, it’s easier than ever to stay in touch with an old flame.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2769593/HALF-women-fall-partner-standby-fancied-case-current-relationship-turns-sour.html

trackback

[…] with what really amounts to their participation in their own hypergamous cuckoldry – which women triumphantly crow about in as public a manner as is practical […]

laissezblu
Guest
laissezblu
Offline

u know in my perfect world this is how it would play out….u would get to sleep around w/ any and all sexy, alpha dudes, the ones who plays exquisite mind-games that all women crave since we never get enough and are never satisfied….we could do anything and everything and not even get pregnant unless we really WILL ourselves too, and unless we’re married which is for the best of the child…we could sleep w/ these dudes but after we’re done, we forget them, our bodies, minds, souls forget them and we can truly move on (no oxytocin bonding chemicals… Read more »

Anon Y Mous
Guest
Anon Y Mous
Offline

I know a solution that would eliminate the hypergamy problems entirely, end the gender war, and potentially alter the course of human history for the better. A men’s sexual revolution. Affordable, widely available, reliable, NON-RISKY cosemetic surgery, and legalized, widely available anabolic steroids, under the care of a physician, coupled with a solid fitness regime. A society where male beauty is the norm, and the stigma of cosmetic sugery/steroid use was removed, would eliminate almost all the game playing on both sides. Yeah, yeah, crazy, but hear me out on this, and i promise you, it actually makes a lot… Read more »

trackback

[…] develop contingencies for the YMY threat point in their own sexual strategy? In an age when Sheryl Sandberg is openly telling young women to fuck the Bad Boys, and settle down with the Nice Guy before her SMV decays into non-competitiveness, when open […]

trackback

[…] from rollo’s site: […]

trackback

[…] consider that Mr. Dependability (Beta Bucks) gets to accommodate the symptoms of menopause while Bad Boys enjoyed her sexual best before he arrived on the […]

TuffLuv
Guest
TuffLuv
Offline

The answer.. Marry a 19 year old hottie, one who believes in love, before she figures out her power (small town girls are great). Have some kids.. be poor so there’s nothing to gut you for, and ride it out. When it craters later in life, at least you’ll have your memories, your kids, the knowledge your girl was not a carousel rider, and some twisted pleasure watching her speed toward the wall, knowing she will never ‘have it all’, because you foiled that plan for her, AND GOT YOURS. There.

trackback

[…] Open Hypergamy and the Sandbergian embrace of women’s sexual pluralism becomes more normative, so too will Red Pill awareness become more mainstream. Men aren’t […]

trackback
Estrus |
Offline

[…] the recent embrace of Open Hypergamy and “Sandbergism” of the last two years has set this narrative on its head, and the empowered women who found […]

trackback

[…] You see, it’s was a useful trope that men cheat more than women when Hypergamy was more socially concealed, but in an age of unrestricted, socially mandated Open Hypergamy the only question that remains is whether a man will choose to be cuckolded before or after he’s invested himself personally, emotionally and financially in monogamy with a woman who’s looking for an “equal partnership” (now that she’s less able to arouse the Alpha bad boys she’s happy to tell him about). […]

trackback

[…] are the men Sheryl Sandberg describes […]

John
Guest
John
Offline

The main culprits in all of this are the Betas, the weaklings, the Uncle Tims, and feminist lapdogs that sold out there own gender for at taste of some mucus lubricated meat. And this is what happens when you let betas breed… personally, the whole cuckoldry is a good thing, this way the useless betas can pay for superior Alpha genes. Had this been a few thousand years ago, we’d be still in packs, with Alpha mating every single female, and betas knowing there place. Females are now simply circumventing the terrible position we are in due to having let… Read more »

trackback
Anonymous
Offline

[…] […]

trackback

[…] Unless men have a moment of clarity or a Red Pill initiation of their own prior to this, what they don’t accept is that this expectation is a calculated conditioning of the Feminine Imperative to prepare him for women like this; women who can no longer sexually compete for the Alpha Fucks they enjoyed in their Party Years. The Feminine Imperative teaches him that he can expect a woman’s “real” sexual best from the “real” her – why else would she agree to a lifelong marriage if he weren’t the optimal choice to settle down with? Why wouldn’t she be… Read more »

trackback

[…] red meat for my younger readership, but it does illustrate a point I made about women following the Sandberg Plan in their party years. Young man, remember this clip when your Quality Girlfriend® comes back to […]

trackback

[…] almost a reversal of women who follow the Sandberg plan of Hypergamy and make disclaimers of how different they are now from how they used to be in college. The […]

trackback

[…] by men’s provisional support. For the first time in history women could largely explore a Sandbergian plan for Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks and, at least figuratively, they could do so at their […]

trackback

[…] was that the long-term needs of Hypergamy could be postponed in what would eventually become a Sandbergian sexual strategy. The more Alpha men of the time – ones in touch with the visceral nature of women […]

trackback

[…] only is the Sandberg stepdad supposed to be a just-in-time dad to fulfill the equalist needs of the post-wall (and in […]

trackback

[…] see the Sandberg quote, I hear it all the time from women in one form or another, and then my wife says similar shit. Like […]

trackback

[…] difficult task to identify an acceptable guy for your Epiphany Phase necessities. What with ‘dating’ ALL “the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys“, it can be a daunting challenge to remember the characteristics that made all of the Nice […]

trackback

[…] social order, institutionalized Hypergamy and the soft polygamy that results from the Sandbergian sexual strategy, soft cuckoldry becomes pragmatic in optimizing Hypergamy for […]

Josh Schneider
Guest

I think the same holds true for most men. when hooking up guys like easy girls, who don’t require investment and aren’t needy, girls who aren’t jealous, girls who put out on the first date. We don’t really care about how many guys they’ve been with in the past. Why? Because its for sex and hooking up and having fun and those types of girls not only are easiest to get sex from they’re the easiest to be with while having other girls as well, that’s it. However, when we start getting ready for a LTR or marriage, the game… Read more »

trackback

[…] Cuckoldry is already in its developmental stage in a social respect. When you consider the Sandbergian plan for Open Hypergamy, the logical implication of this is what’s described here – prioritizing the sexual […]

trackback
Plan B |
Offline

[…] As Open Hypergamy becomes more embraced among women the usefulness of drawing attention to ‘slut shaming’ actually becomes a hinderance to justifying women’s Hypergamous priorities (AFBB). When a high profile woman like Sheryl Sandberg suggests,… […]

trackback

[…] own Hypergamy. It’s one thing to make Hypergamy ‘open’ in a commercial or in a book by an empowered woman, but let a man reveal it in his perspective and he’s “bitter” or it’s an […]

trackback

[…] Controlling Interests – I think in most cases, the woman ends up having children who are the beta husband’s rather than the alpha bad boys’ she dated, so it is not really a case of … […]

trackback

[…] Controlling Interests – “Courtesy of Sheryl Sandberg, the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks basis of women’s sexual pluralism is now publicly recognized. It’s kind of ironic considering that … […]

Cuck-Beta-Slave
Guest
Cuck-Beta-Slave
Offline

Let me tell you a joke. “When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. the things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over… Read more »

trackback

[…] be socially normalized and not factor into her long-term capacity to optimize Hypergamy (see the Sandberg effect). Women’s opportunistic concept of love is informed by Hypergamy, so it feeds into the […]

trackback

[…] in an era when the likes of Sheryl Sandberg encourages women to fully embrace their Hypergamous natures and expects men to be equally accepting of it, it takes a lot of psychological gymnastics to […]

trackback

[…] plan is not simply to end the Sandbergian plan for Hypergamy with the “Equal partner, someone who thinks women should be smart, […]

trackback

[…] plan is not simply to end the Sandbergian plan for Hypergamy with the “Equal partner, someone who thinks women should be smart, […]

cnc_machined
Guest

There seems to be a huge emphasis on becoming an Alpha male. I think there is a trade off though… The trade off being a shorter lifespan. Please read the following article about this trade off:

http://www.businessinsider.com/alpha-beta-male-stress-study-2011-7

Is being Alpha worth it?

Novaseeker
Guest
Novaseeker
Offline

Is being Alpha worth it?

It’s always worth it. The years you live are much more valuable and enjoyable than the perhaps more years of being an average frustrated chump.

trackback

[…] On a side note, I think it should be recognized that even ostensibly conservative thought leaders often toe the line for the Feminine Imperative more effectively than the progressives they attempt to disparage. I’m not going to riff on this video as I think most of my readers will understand the subtext being communicated here, but it’s an interesting exposé of the old books expectation of “doing the right thing”. Granted, it’s the same message of shaming men for exactly what I covered in Are You Experienced?  Only this time the shame for men comes from another man (we’re supposed to… Read more »

MR. YOUR ERROR IN JUDGEMENT; A.K.A. SIR DEPLORABLE PUSSYGRABBER
Guest

Reblogged this on Site Title.

trackback

[…] condition us to expect that once women, “get it out of their systems” (by following the Sandbergian sexual strategy) she’ll realize the errors of her youthful indiscretion and magically transform into a […]

trackback

[…] On a side note, I think it should be recognized that even ostensibly conservative thought leaders often toe the line for the Feminine Imperative more effectively than the progressives they attempt to disparage. I’m not going to riff on this video as I think most of my readers will understand the subtext being communicated here, but it’s an interesting exposé of the old books expectation of “doing the right thing”. Granted, it’s the same message of shaming men for exactly what I covered in Are You Experienced?  Only this time the shame for men comes from another man (we’re supposed to… Read more »

trackback

[…] Party Years at least to sample as many ‘bad boys, wrong boys, commitment-phobic boys’ as the Sheryl Sandberg plan for Hypergamy has convinced her Ego she has the time to work her way […]

purplewords1969
Guest
purplewords1969
Offline

Hi Rollo.
I have always been irritated by feminist nonsense, but reading your articles has opened my eyes to the subtler effects of their propaganda! This inspires me to be a better woman. Thanks!

%d bloggers like this: