The Burden of Performance

performance

 

From Love Story:

Men are expected to perform. To be successful, to get the girl, to live a good life, men must do. Whether it’s riding wheelies down the street on your bicycle to get that cute girl’s attention or to get a doctorate degree to ensure your personal success and your future family’s, Men must perform. Women’s arousal, attraction, desire and love are rooted in that conditional performance. The degree to which that performance meets or exceeds expectations is certainly subjective, and the ease with which you can perform is also an issue, but perform you must.

One of the most fundamental misconceptions plugged-in men have with regard to their intersexual relations with women is the issue of performance. Back in late March of this year I read an interesting article from Roosh, Men are nothing more than clowns to the modern woman and it struck me that although I certainly agreed with him in the context he presented it, there was more to the ‘entertainment’ factor than simple amusement on the part of women.

Women don’t seek out comfort or stability in men anymore—they seek entertainment. They seek distraction. They seek hedonistic pleasure. This is why provider men (beta males) are so hopelessly failing today to secure the commitment of beautiful women in their prime, and this is why even lesser alpha males fail to enter relationships with women beyond a few bangs. Once the entertainment or novelty you provide her declines—and it inevitably will—she moves on to something or someone else. In essence, the only way you can keep a girl is if you adopt the mentality of a soap opera writer, adding a cliffhanger to the end of each episode that keeps a woman interested when being a good man no longer does.

After reading this I tried to imagine myself being a recently unplugged man or a guy just coming to terms with the uncomfortable truths of the red pill and learning that all of the comforting “just be yourself and the right girl will come along” rhetoric everyone convinced me of had been replaced by a disingenuous need to transform oneself into a cartoon character in order to hold the attentions of an average girl.

That’s kind of depressing, especially when you consider the overwhelming effort and personal insight necessary in realizing red pill awareness. Roosh later tempered this with How to be a good clown and Clown Game vs. Good Man Game, and although he clarifies things well in Game terms, the root of the frustration most guys will have with the ‘clown factor’ is that, in these terms and in this context, their performance isn’t who they are.

In this environment it’s easy to see why the MGTOW option seems like an understandable recourse for red pill men. It’s a very seductive temptation to think that a man can simply remove himself from the performance equation with regards to women. I’ll touch on this later, but what’s important here is understanding the performance game men are necessarily born into. Like it or not, play it or not, as a man you will always be evaluated on your performance (or the perception of it).

I think what trips a lot of men up early in their red pill transformation is sort of a sense of indignation towards women that they should have to “be someone they’re not” and play a character role that simply isn’t who they are in order to hold a woman’s interest. I covered this idea in Have A Look and developed how women are like casting agents when it comes to the men they hope will entertain them.

This was really about a sexual context when I went into it, but as I read Roosh’s original article I began to consider that women’s “character” role they expect men to perform changes as their own phases of maturity dictates and their SMV can realistically demand for that phase. In other words the “characters” they want performed in their Party Years will be different than the ones they want after their Epiphany Phase, which may be different than the character they want for their mid-life years.

How realistic it is for men to be that character becomes less and less relevant as women are socialized to expect disappointment from men actually living up to the characters they’re conditioned to believe they should realistically be entitled to at various stages of their maturity.

Living Up

Right about now I’m sure various male readers are thinking, “fuck this, I’m gonna be who I am and any girl who can’t appreciate me for me is low quality anyway.” This will probably piss you off, but this is exactly the blue pill mentality most ‘just be yourself‘ Betas adopt for themselves.

It’s actually a law of power to despise what you can’t have, and deductively it makes sense, but the fact still remains, as a man you will always be evaluated by your performance. So even with a ‘fuck it, I’ll just be me’ mindset you’re still being evaluated on how well ‘you are just you’.

The simple fact is that you must actually be your performance – it must be internalized. In truth, you already are that performance whether you dictate and direct that, or you think you can forget it and hope your natural, undirected performance will be appreciated by women (and others), but regardless, women will filter for hypergamous optimization based on how well you align with what they believe they are entitled to in a man in the context of their own perception of their SMV.

Looks, talent, tangible benefits and other core prerequisites may change depending on the individual woman, but to be a man is to perform. Even if you’re a self-defined man going his own way who enjoys escorts to fulfill his needs, you still need to perform in order to earn the money to enjoy them.

It Doesn’t Get Easier, You Get Better

For Men, there is no true rest from performance. To believe so is to believe in women’s mythical capacity for a higher form of empathy which would perdispose them to overriding their innate hypergamous filtering based on performance.

Women will never have the same requisites of performance for themselves for which they expect men to maintain of themselves. Hypergamy demands a constant, subliminal reconfirmation of a man’s worthiness of her commitment to him, so there is never a parallel of experience.

Women will claim men “require” they meet some physical standard (i.e. performance) and while generally true, this is still a performance standard men have of women, not one they hold for themselves. There simply is no reciprocal dynamic or prequalification of performance for women, and in fact for a man to even voice the idea that he might qualify a woman for his intimacy he’s characterized as judgmental and misogynistic.

Social conventions like this are established to ensure women’s hypergamous sexual strategy is the socially dominant one. Expecting a woman to perform for a man is an insult to her ‘prize status’ as an individual.

From a humanistic perspective there’s a want for a rational solution to this performance requirement, but as I’ve outlined in prior posts, appeals to women’s reason are no insulation against the subliminal influences of hypergamy.

I read many a ‘dating coach’ who’s approach is complete honesty and full disclosure in the hopes that a like-minded, rational woman will naturally appreciate a man’s forthrightness, but this presupposes a preexisting equal playing field where subliminal influences are overridden by mutual rationalism.

The real hope is that women will drop their innate hypergamous performance requisites in appreciation of this vulnerable, inadequate honesty.

What they sweep under the rug is that you cannot appeal to a woman’s reason or sentiment to genuinely forgive a deficit in a man’s performance. Love, reason, both demand a preexisting mutual appreciation in a common context, but neither love nor reason alleviate the necessity of performance for a man.

Women simply are not motivated to compromise hypergamy on their own accord. They will not be reasoned into accommodating a situation of mutual needs by overt means.

It is a Man’s capacity to perform and demonstrate (never explicate) higher value that motivates women to accommodate mutual needs in a relationship – whether that’s a same night lay or a 50 year marriage.

Demonstrating Higher Value

I get the impression that DHV tends to get a bad rap both from blue pill critics as well as red pill aware men. A lot of that gets wrapped up in technique and practice. It’s easy to dismiss this concept as posturing or bluster, but DHV, as a principle isn’t defined by egotistical measures or how well a guy can ‘showboat’ himself around women.

A lot of DHV is unintentional. In fact the best most genuine forms of DHV are exhibited when a Man doesn’t realize he’s actually performing in a way that demonstrate his higher value. This can be as simple as walking int a room in the right context or environment. Even humility can be DHV in the proper context.

What I’m driving at here is that after reading all of this you might think I’m saying you need to be superhuman to qualify for women’s performance standards, and again that’s kind of depressing – that’s not what I’m getting at. A woman’s performance standards are dependent on many varied contexts and according to the priorities she places on the type of character she finds both arousing and attractive and according to what her conditions dictate for her.

It’s not how you perform so much as that you perform. Ambition and personal drive to perform and be the best and most successful you you can be may have absolutely nothing to do with your intention of attracting a woman, but you are still performing and you will be evaluated on that performance.

DHV or DLV is performance whether intentional or not. You cannot remove yourself from this performance equation. You can cease to direct your part in this performance, but until you die you cannot exit the game.

 

 

 

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
trackback

[…] the remaining minutes, the purpose of his talk is to re-affirm to the audience what Rollo calls men’s burden of performance. A man must work hard to earn his right to intimacy. Every day. Sustained every day as a process […]

trackback

[…] this male-space your son needs to learn about his eventual burden of performance.I’d also advise you institute some kind of rite of passage for him from being a boy to being […]

trackback

[…] there comes a point where that Beta wants, sometimes adamantly insists, for his own burden of performance to be replaced, or at least handicapped, by a woman meeting him half way. This want is rooted in […]

trackback

[…] the one who turned it into this, not him. You’re the one who has saddled him with the burden of performance like he’s a mule. He has no say-so over how any of it works. He either conforms to what you […]

trackback

[…] Alpha ‘fix’ by working among higher status men who haven’t abdicated on their burden of performance by adopting the feminine support […]

trackback

[…] while back I was asked why the Burden of Performance should be called a “burden” at all. Should it not be a “challenge” or a […]

trackback

[…] of displays of weakness, but what they ignore is that Hypergamy demands men that can shoulder the burden of performance. When a man openly broadcasts his vulnerableness he is, by definition, beginning from a position of […]

trackback

[…] In my post (and book chapter) Of Love and War I quote a reader who summed up this want for relief from men’s inherent Burden of Performance: […]

trackback

[…] need for women’s defense predictably gets couched in men’s Burden of Performance, and now that shit’s gotten real we see this dynamic laid bare in women’s shaming of […]

trackback

[…] mutually share their concept of love for love’s sake (and free from the conditions of their Burden of Performance), women are mistaken in believing men’s sexual strategy is synonymous with the female […]

Vallin
Guest
Vallin
Offline

As you can see from my thumbnail icon, I am by nature an entertainer. I have various forms. It’s Neptune-ASC-Venus-Mercury (in SCO opposing a TAU Moon). No-one can ever call me dull–even when I’m describing A Prairie Home Companion. If I have a fault, I’m overwhelming. And just TO-O-O-O SEX-X-X-XY };)!

rugby11
Guest
rugby11
Offline
trackback

[…] that men and women are functional equals in some way exempts him from his uniquely male burden of performance. On some level of consciousness, even the Beta men who are comforted by equalism still realize that […]

rugby11
Guest
rugby11
Offline
trackback

[…] to feminine-primacy. As you might guess, this coincides with the Male Catch 22, men’s Burden of Performance and men being held to old order social contracts while also being expected to respect new order […]

ollieoxenfree1
Guest

What Roosh describes is the consequence of lacks fiscal standards. Social engineering from world governments, bent on keeping everyone happy. Women haven’t been seeking comfort or stability because those needs have been met. All that remains is pleasure for pleasure’s sake. 12 years ago a man I knew was able to get a £40,000 unsecured loan. He had no savings (having blown through the £7,000 he had) and no collateral. The debt this man has incurred through various failed ventures is north of £60,000. He confided in me once, it had gotten to a point where the stress of it… Read more »

ollieoxenfree1
Guest

*laxs not lacks

and *uncertainty

Why on earth is doesn’t wordpress have an edit feature.

trackback

[…] The Burden of Performance […]

trackback

[…] The Burden of Performance […]

trackback

[…] I would argue that a comfort test comes from women’s deep need for security in a chaotic world. A comfort test, and I would include complaining and nagging in this, is rooted in a woman’s Hypergamous need of certainty and consistency in provisioning. A persistent complaint is really a cry for security and confirmation of a man’s competency. Male dominance will always require a superior competency in virtually all matters. That may not be realistic or pragmatic, but it is the expectation, and this need for competency finds its roots in men understanding and accepting their Burden of Performance. […]

peter
Guest
peter
Offline

So a few weeks ago we (me and missus) got a dog. A labrador. I’m a first time dog owner, so this was all new territory for me. Luckily there is a lot of material out there. (As a side note, even dog training can be view through a red pill lens. That also explains – to me- why guys like Doggy Dan and Cesar Millan are given a bad rep, they subscribe to pack leader and follower view of dog, which means you have to work on yourself to get the dog’s respect, not just use toys and clickers).… Read more »

trackback

[…] Dr. Peterson briefly details in this clip, it is primarily men’s performance burden (and a man’s capacity to share the fruits of it) that has historically been the basis of […]

trackback

[…] This was a great analogy. It’s also one of the primary reasons I believe the egalitarian equalist narrative is a deliberate lie with the hoped-for purpose of empowering people who cannot compete, or believe they have some plenary exclusion from competing in various aspects of life. One of the primary selling points of egalitarian equalism for men is the idea that they can be excluded from the Burden of Performance. […]

joejoeseph
Guest
joejoeseph
Offline

When I read this all I see is blue pill dogma.

trackback

[…] Performans Yükü yazısında, erkeğin feminen tarafından kabul görmek için performans göstermesi gerektiğini ele almış ve erkeğin idealist aşkının koşulsuz sevgi merkezinde değil, kadınların hipergami dürtüsünün dayattığı fırsatçı performans isteklerinden azat edilme merkezinde odaklandığını anlatmıştık. Yukarıdaki alıntı, idealist aşkın nasıl da kadının aşkı ve kabulü için performansa gerek duymadan, sığınabileceğin bir liman olması hayali üzerinde kurulduğunu özetliyor. […]

trackback

[…] burden of performance is always at […]

trackback

[…] superior competency. A woman just is, a man must become is the first maxim of a man accepting his Burden of Performance. Part of this masculine competency involves strength, know-how and determination; all things that […]

trackback

[…] superior competency. A woman just is, a man must become is the first maxim of a man accepting his Burden of Performance. Part of this masculine competency involves strength, know-how and determination; all things that […]

trackback

[…] Çeviri : Burden of Performance […]

trackback

[…] redefining the terms of the Game to also breed and pair (mostly breed) with women that their own Burden of Performance would merit them. This is why transvaluation (vulnerability is strength, etc.) features so […]

trackback

[…] redefining the terms of the Game to also breed and pair (mostly breed) with women that their own Burden of Performance would merit them. This is why transvaluation (vulnerability is strength, etc.) features so […]

trackback

[…] skierowane do mężczyzn reklamy Protein World, nie doznają wandalizmu. Przesłanie jest jasne – to mężczyźni powinni działać, zmieniać się, doskonalić i walczyć o najwyższy standard fizyczny, żeby otrzymać kobiecą […]

trackback

[…] hat aber einen „Burden of Perfomance“, also eine „Last der Leistung“, wie Rollo Tomassi bereits 2014 schrieb – d.h. er muss auch etwas bieten und kann nicht nur fordern. Fordern und nichts anbieten ist […]

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

Just saw one of the worst movies of the last year “The Shape of Water”. Bad as it was, it did contain a nice little gem summarizing the male burden of performance: STRICKLAND: I need to ask, Sir… respectfully. GENERAL HOYT: Then go ahead, Son. STRICKLAND: You’ve known me for how long? GENERAL HOYT: Thirteen years. Battle of Pusan. STRICKLAND: Yes, Sir… and in all that time, I… I’ve never once… This is… what happened here is… A man is faithful, Sir… loyal, efficient all of his life. All of it and he is… useful. And he expects… He has… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Yep… your loving woman absolutely is General Hoyt.

Not. Even. For. A. Second.

Get out of here with that pedestalizing, blue-pill junk.

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

Strickland is the blue piller wondering if his one failure negates all the successes that came before… hoping it doesnt.

Hoyt is society/employers/wives etc red pilling him by saying “Yep… thats pretty much the way it works”.

That is the whole idea behind the burden of performance… it is never ending and you are only as good as your last success.

I think you may have misunderstood something.

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

I got your analogy, I understand it. It simply fails because you didn’t think it all the way through.

HINT: A General Officer has sufficient authority to order a subordinate’s execution in some situations. “Firing party at dawn, burial afterwards” is total authority, is it not?

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

True.. the analogy is not perfect… if it were, it would not be an analogy… it would be the same thing.

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Perfection doesn’t enter in, your analogy is false so it completely fails. It’s at best purple pill, mostly blue, and is the sort of junk that leads betaized men further into the slough.

Just admit that you didn’t think it through and withdraw it. Or not, if reason doesn’t matter to you.

boulderhead
Guest

Movies may or may not represent reality,AR is correct “perfection doesn’t enter in” and deserves have nothing to do with it.
Use game in an LTR ,she feels in the now.

https://therationalmale.com/2012/05/21/relational-equity/

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

“A General Officer has sufficient authority to order a subordinate’s execution in some situations. “Firing party at dawn, burial afterwards” is total authority, is it not?” I think perhaps your analysis is the one that is flawed. Supposedly the analogy fails because of the total authority (the ability to execute) of the general. But this is silly. Yes the general COULD do this, but that is really not on the table here… he knows it and Strickland knows it. Its not a firing squad he will face but a zeroing out of his career. And even if the firing squad… Read more »

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

Yes Boulderhead… relational equity. Perfect.

That is essentially what Strickland is saying to Hoyt. “But I have succeeded EVERY OTHER TIME! I have relational equity with you… dont I?”

And Hoyt answers “No… I need someone who succeeds ALL the time.” (AKA… hypergamy doesnt care).

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

CFGauss I think believe perhaps your analysis is the one that is flawed. FIFY. Supposedly the analogy fails because of the total authority (the ability to execute) of the general. It is obvious that you do not understand elementary logic. Therefore you cannot construct a proper analogy. You should stop digging the hole of this failed analogy deeper. NOTE: Movies are not reality. Nobody here is disagreeing with the fact of “burden of performance”, but movies are not reality. You can contort words all you want, but movies are not reality. Question: should a man give unlimited authority over his… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

CFGauss
I stand behind the analogy between General Hoyt and a woman you are in a relationship with.

Facepalm.

How old are you?

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

“CFGauss”
If other posters on here weigh in and can articulate why my reasoning is flawed, I would definitely love to hear their thought process.

Another fallacy? Cool.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Argumentum_ad_populum

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“If other posters on here weigh in and can articulate why my reasoning is flawed, I would definitely love to hear their thought process. But you have failed to do so. Request for withdrawal denied.” I fully accept the analogy. It’s simply Briffault’s Law. It is always in place in LTR’s. I can see why AR is in non-acceptance in non LTR’s. Especially with children. I don’t have a problem with it. I put that shit in my pipe and smoke it every day. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulling-the-rubes/201610/briffaults-law-women-rule Briffault’s Law: Women Rule Why can’t a woman be more like a man? Posted Oct… Read more »

boulderhead
Guest

“And Hoyt answers “No… I need someone who succeeds ALL the time.” (AKA… hypergamy doesnt care).” Ya don’t we all need assured success. Not gonna happen. Take a game dog for instance,it will hunt,run,fight,fetch whatever no matter what the situation.It could be thirsty ,starved,guts ripped out across the ground full of dirt and it won’t quit,quit isn’t in it’s vocabulary. The dog doesn’t know game,it literally is game. Say a man fucks up,he’s done good up to this point,but now his guts are ripped out and he’s laid up bad. If he is game he will plan forward and not… Read more »

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

“Another fallacy? Cool.” Nope… Its not as if I am going to take a vote and then adjust my opinion based on the outcome. I am simply inviting others to join in so that maybe I can hear from someone who does a better job of articulating a coherent position… even if it conflicts with mine. Hint… that is not you… at least not yet. Keep giving it a go though. Practice makes perfect “Movies are not reality.” True. I disagree, though, that movies and literature cannot be used to illustrate concepts and principles. “Should a man give unlimited authority… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

No, he should not. Why not? That is what is required for your failed analogy to work. I suspect you and I agree here. This scene illustrates precisely why you should not do this. This is DEFINITELY one of Strickland’s errors. In this fictional scene, the subordinate is required by military code to obey the orders of the superior. The subordinate has not made any error in “relationship” terms. The subordinate is required to submit, by force if need be. The subordinate can be disciplined, imprisoned or even executed for such a failure. Your analogy fails because military general officers… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Again, no one here is denying the burden of performance. You attempted to illustrate the concept with an analogy that fails, and are perhaps too ignorant to understand your error.

“General is to subordinate as woman is to man” is false, but you insist it is true.

That is your problem with reality, not mine.

CFGauss
Guest
CFGauss
Offline

“General is to subordinate as woman is to man” is false. Yes… ideally this SHOULD be false… but it frequently is not… often it is quite TRUE… to the detriment of the man in this position… and the woman for that matter. Which is why this comment is so wrong: “military general officers have authority over subordinates, while girlfriends / wives do not have that kind of authority over men.” You bet your butt they very often do… I dont want to put words in Rollo’s mouth but I would guess that one of the main reasons for his work… Read more »

boulderhead
Guest

Any relationship where the man is subordinate to the woman is doomed to fail. Sure it can happen but both will be miserable and confused. This subordination isn’t the burden of performance, the BOP is a mans obligation to set frame and lead,also to protect and provide. I include the protection and provision because I like procreation and those three P’s go together as BOP.

The feminine primacy is trying to shift the game to absolute power,trouble is when you allow it they are not happy still. Complying with her as boss isn’t burden of performance it is failure to perform.

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

“General is to subordinate as woman is to man” is false. CFGauss Yes… ideally this SHOULD be false… but it frequently is not… often it is quite TRUE… to the detriment of the man in this position… and the woman for that matter. Ah, it was just about time for you to start shifting goal posts around. In any event, the analogy is false by inspection. In the US the Uniform Code of Military Justice is clear on the relationship between general and subordinate. Despite the Duluth Wheel, VAWA and other legal constructions, there is no equivalent formal, legal structure… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Janet Jackson from the previous century asks the question:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9uizdKZAGE

Maybe this vid should be permalinked?

Yollo Comanche
Guest
Yollo Comanche
Offline

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyFZFQI-cmI

The proper response to the question.

NewGuy
Guest
NewGuy
Offline

My problem with the BOP is that women don’t value the performance. Women’s minds are so fickle that you can never figure out what they value. One day she is lusting after Steve in Sales because he’s a strong leader, then the next week she hates him because he is so ambitious and didn’t agree with her. It’s always about them, this is why the the term “clown” is appropriate. We have been brainwashed to entertain and serve their imperative. Men are given this burden since birth, study hard, get a good job, work hard, create a business, get rich,… Read more »

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Offline

Sorry, you’re misunderstanding the burden of performance a bit. You’re still linking it to societal expectations. That’s an easy way to stress out and fail. Burden doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with studying, or earning life of money or any of those specifics. Your burden is to be unapologetically a man, and to perform< i/> as such, meaning you will lead and you will strive and you won’t look for sympathy or ( much ) help. You will stand on your own and get shit done. It’s got nothing to do with anybody’s expectations besides your own. Burden has… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

@NewGuy Blax: “You’re still linking it to societal expectations. “ Which means you are seeking external validation for yourself. What you are saying is that you want a deep and profound relationship with a girl and you envision a bottomless pool of unconditional positive regard, trust, security and acceptance by that girl. It doesn’t work that way. 90% of the regard for you has to come from you. The other half from her. You need to be able to stand on your own two feet, strong, and then by nature relationships and parenting require giving of yourself, the extra excess… Read more »

NewGuy
Guest
NewGuy
Offline

@Blaximus – @SJF I understand the definitions and expectations of what it means to be a man. We live in a completely different world then women. Both of your comments explain very well what it means to be and act like a man. We strive to act this way because of our nature. To be self-sufficient and be in control of our own destiny. The power comes from within and not given to us by someone else. My point is that we get used and abused for these qualities. Women are always looking for a “good man” once they reach… Read more »

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

“What I’m mad about is gratitude and appreciation.”

Because you expect them.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“I have become angry with the behaviors that I observe.” Of course you have. That’s a Kubler-Ross grief stage. Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, then Acceptance. Being in the stages prevents a certain moving forward. “My point is that we get used and abused for these qualities. Women are always looking for a “good man” once they reach their epiphany phase. A “good man” is one that exemplifies all of those qualities, yet once they find that man, they ultimately take him for granted. If he’s not able to maintain those qualities, then he is easily disposed of like trash.” You… Read more »

palmasailor
Guest
palmasailor
Offline

@New Guy

“Her behavior is disruptive and exhausting. Much like the forth child in my house.”

That’s because you’ve lost frame and so she is shit testing harder and harder which you’re failing repeatedly.

The situation can probably be retrieved, and you can probably get the life you want.

But do you know what you want?

NewGuy
Guest
NewGuy
Offline

I want to deal with less unnecessary drama. Women cause more trouble than they are worth. Instead of helping solve problems they create more. My favorite is the lack of accountability for their actions.

palmasailor
Guest
palmasailor
Offline

I take it your sex life is dead then

%d bloggers like this: