Last Minute Resistance

LMR

Many PUAs have at one point encountered and considered what’s commonly known as LMR, Last Minute Resistance after they’ve successfully moved through the various phases of seduction and had a girl reconsider fucking him and ultimately reject him at the zero hour before sex was in the offing.

LMR is the acronym PUAs gave to the tendency, but you don’t need to be a PUA to have had the experience of pleading your case for sex while spooning on the bed with a girl you’ve been trying to ‘make comfortable enough’ to want to fuck you using your best Beta Game for two months. I’d say blue pill men are much more familiar with LMR than most self-styled PUAs.

I’ll admit, I did this in my younger Beta days.

This was long before I realized that sex was about urgency, anxiety and tension, not comfort, familiarity or rapport, or proving how much better a boyfriend I’d make than the Jerks she’d enthusiastically spread her legs for because they naturally created that urgency.

It wasn’t until I’d hit my sexual stride in my semi-pro rock star 20s that I realized that striving to make a girl feel comfort and trust was anti-seductive.

Eventually I got to the point that I could get laid predictability enough with girls who were enthusiastically down to fuck, that I no longer felt the responsibility to endure the blue balls I had in trying to behave according to how girls ‘told’ me I should go about being intimate with other girls.

It was then I realized I had been attempting to Game girls according to the advice other girls had given me (or even some of the girls I wanted to get with themselves). I realized how adolescent this really was; these are games teenage girls played with guys who’s attentions they enjoyed, but couldn’t bear the thought of fucking someone they were so familiar with. I figured out that when a woman says, “I don’t think of you in that way. I think of you as a brother.”, what she’s really saying is “I’d consider sex with you to be incest”.

I didn’t know it then, but this was an important lesson in my red pill education.

I’ve never been an advocate for pushing past last minute resistance with a woman. From that point on in my life if there was any hesitancy on the part of a woman becoming sexual with me, and certainly once clothes were about to come off, I knew something else was affecting the needed sexual tension and urgency. Something else was mitigating genuine desire and I knew it wouldn’t be the kind of sex I wanted to have, or couldn’t already have had a better experience with another plate I was spinning at the time.

I get that for a lot of guys, “pushing” for sex – really trying to wait a girl out for sex – is the only Game they really have to speak of. However, I’d gotten to the point where I realized that any sex a woman makes a guy wait for is negotiated desire and mitigated sex, and the experience was never worth the wait.

I learned how to do very effective takeaways during this point in my life, but not because they were practiced to perfection from a want to bang a particular woman. Rather, and unintentionally, I had what PUAs termed a very good ‘push/pull’ technique due only to the fact that I knew if a new girl I was with was hesitant to get sexual I was wasting time I could’ve spent with another girl who was a proven commodity.

Women pick up on cues like this. Men are often oblivious to them, but there are subtle differences in our behaviors, indifferences to women’s expected behaviors from us, and subtle attitudes we sub-communicate which women are attuned to thanks to an evolved psychological understanding of when they have a sexual competitor for our attentions. Women who have a genuine interest in a guy, rarely confuse that guy with “mixed messages“.

I didn’t consciously process it then, but an overt attempt to overcome last minute resistance broadcasts a perception of ‘pussy begging’ in an obvious way. While I realize there’re sometimes situations that call for a need to be sexually assertive to promote a dominance women are testing for, if you’re in a position of what amounts to pleading or “c’mon baby” convincing a girl to fuck you, you’re negotiating (really compromising yourself) for her unenthusiastic desire.

When you overextend yourself in getting past LMR, you risk sending the message that “you just don’t get it” with regard to how women need to be seduced, and how the men they do want to fuck organically behave. By being too self-effacing in convincing a woman to fuck you, you present the perception of being optionless with other women, and thus a non-sexual Beta and she can deal with you, or not deal with you, accordingly.

It was really simple pragmatism for me to walk away from a sexual dead end girl – I had other options – but in doing so I’d unwittingly, but organically, passed a shit test. And more often than not I got laid a week or two after “bumping into” her again; after she’d had time to process it.

Game 101

Now, why am I going back to Game 101 here?

Likely this is something I should’ve included in the book, or come about to in the early posts of Rational Male (I have actually, but not in depth). Well, it’s because of a pathetically brief throwaway post from Lindy West praising the recent Yes Means Yes law on California campuses.

West usually wrote feminist agitprop before she was surreptitiously let go from Jezebel a few months ago, and rest assured this is the first and last time I’ll ever quote her on this blog, but in her giddy sputtering over the YMY law she did manage one coherent point:

“Why would you want to be tolerated when you could be desired?”

Following along in the wake of the Yes Means Yes social initiative, many a feminized blogger has gone through a good deal of mental contortions in order to rationalize why they support it. The problem they encounter is that in supporting YMY they have to explain away more than a few previously, and publicly, held stands they made in the past about gender relations to align with YMY.

One such inconsistency stems from women’s dubious want for comfort and rapport prior to sex that conflicts with what, essentially, amounts to negotiating for their genuine desire. Thus, I agree with Lindy, why would you want to be tolerated, when you could be desired?

What Lindy is oblivious to (no doubt from a lack of experiencing male attention) is that genuine desire cannot be negotiated for. Many a hapless Beta suffering in a ‘tolerance’ relationship is all too familiar with the lackluster experience of ‘duty sex’. Women will bemoan some fanciful epidemic of misogynists who think they’re entitled to, or owed sex, but the fact of the matter is the same women actively contribute to that belief by (legally now) requiring a checklist of terms necessary for men to have sex with them.

When I published Iron Rule of Tomassi #3 I received (and periodically still receive) a rash of criticism from the femosphere for insisting men excuse themselves from, and not wait for, compromised, mitigated and I daresay now, unenthusiastic sex.

Iron Rule of Tomassi #3

Any woman who makes you wait for sex, or by her actions implies she is making you wait for sex; the sex is NEVER worth the wait.

When I wrote this it was an effort in illustrating a pragmatic approach to save men the time and resources of investing in a less than optimal sexual experience. In essence, it’s a rule to help men avoid negotiated, unenthusiastic sex with women who feel obligated to fuck him. Whether it’s ostensibly from pity or duty or some other pretense the outcome is still the same.

I also wrote a follow up to this rule in Three Strikes:

Risk & Reward

In Game, there is a subtle balance that needs to be recognized between risks of over-investing in a particular woman with regards to practicality and not throwing the proverbial baby out with the bath water and losing on a potentially rewarding opportunity. Women, as is particular to their own Game, will naturally come down on the side of casting doubt on a man’s valid assessment of a woman’s potential value, both in long term perspectives and potential sexual satisfaction. This presumption of doubt is a built in failsafe social convention for women; if only you’d been more patient, if only you invested a little bit more, you’d be rewarded with a great mother for your children and the best pussy of your life – don’t blow it now!

The short version is that it’s not in women’s best sexual-strategy interests for a man to have sexual options. Women’s sexual strategy is very schizophrenic – ideally women want a Man that other women want to fuck, but in order to assess his sexual market value to other women he’s got to have exercisable options for her to compete against, or at least display indirect social proof to that effect. So, she needs to limit his options while simultaneously determining he has those options. Now add to this the hypergamous necessity of maintaining  a reasonable pool of suitors suspended in doubt of her own SMV in order to determine the best one among them for short term sexual provisioning and long term security provisioning.

As ever, the intent here is to determine the potential for genuine enthusiastic sex – if there’s no interest, or hesitant acceptance: NEXT.

At the time of my writing these posts I was castigated for exactly the same rationale that femosphere bloggers are now endorsing Yes Means Yes with today. The (now scrubbed from certain blogs) criticism then was one of how terrible it was for Men to punish women by not playing along with feminine-primary Game.

Only two years ago the criticism was, “What? You just want some whore who gives it up on the first night?”

However, under the Yes Means Yes initiative, this Three Strikes pragmatism is flipped and endorsed by the women who were previously outraged by it. YMY fosters a social environment which actively promotes Pump and Dump sexual encounters, since the furtherance of that sexual relationship into an LTR increases the risk and liabilities that are the result of the YMY threat point.

Commenter jf12 from last week’s thread:

YMY makes a good case for men abandoning what women consider to be their assortative equals, i.e. women who are older, crankier, and more likely to say no, for women who are younger, nicer, and more likely to say yes. YMY is a total green light for men to push for sex immediately if not sooner.

So the question becomes one of how men will most pragmatically 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 hypergamy is not only embraced, but proudly preached in the media, what logical choice do men have but to push for sex immediately and go their own way?

YMY combined with Open Hypergamy promote a sexual marketplace based on enthusiastic consent for Alpha Fucks, and mitigated, ambiguous consent for Beta Bucks. Now add to this environment the effects and behaviors inherent with women’s Ovulatory Shift on a monthly basis and we can begin to see the latent purpose behind Yes Means Yes – insurance against regrettable sexual behavior.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

259 comments on “Last Minute Resistance

  1. The only resolution for men in mass is for every male to realize his masculinity or trust and follow “the iron rules” living alpha if he is not already naturally and learn this reality. This alone would stop the feminine imperative in its tracks and eliminate most of the damaging cultural bullshit. There is absolutely no good reason for any man to place any woman in a position of power over him in his mind no matter how hot she is. Doing so, always leads to misery for the man. It is pathetic and never leads to the sex a man needs. Masturbation sex fantasies are a pathetic substitute for the real thing when the she wants you with uninhibited desire. The greatest enabler of the feminine imperative and feral hypergamy is weakling males who would rather subscribe to pathetic hero sex for chilvery fantasies than be a man. It is a weakling cop out. There are numerous movies, songs, TV shows, etc that promote this mentality. One I found especially representative and repulsive was The Karate Kid….weakling dork going to get pussy by “beating” bad boy. Soooo fucking stupid and unrealistic, that kid would have had his ass handed to him in reality. The weakling “beta” males who subscribe to the “hero chilvery for sex” fantasy deserve everything they get…wives and girlfriends who fuck around on them and treat them like the pathetic pussies they are. They are a disgrace to the male population.

  2. The larger purpose of “remove all limitations on women’s sexuality while maximally restricting men’s sexuality” is to make “women want sex just as much as men do” seem more true. Women have always had Freudian male-libido envy.

  3. @Badpainter, re: “In other words this is no longer our problem, at least not collectively.”

    I think probably YMY was intended to induce the exact opposite feeling in men. It goes to show you how little women understand men’s feelings. It is possible that the weird shadows, formlessness, fogginess, and shimmering vagueness around this law that all we men can so easily discern were not supposed to have been seen by us. We are, correctly, saying “It looks like it’s enveloped in a Someone Else’s Problem field” (whether that someone else is loose women, or lawmakers, or whoever), but I think we were supposed to be induced to saying “It looks like It’s On Us.”

  4. Yes.

    All this seemingly futile effort to logically parse this law is in fact futile.
    The only logic that makes sense is that it serves to “remove all limitations on women’s sexuality while maximally restricting men’s sexuality”. That and advancing female supremacy and hatred of men.

    But I do appreciate the analyses of how this will play out in practice, and the take homes of how to navigate the SMP with the policy in place.
    As usual the conclusion is up the alpha.

    I wrote before about the benefits of menopausal women as lovers. To that I will add that they are less likely to have been brainwashed by women’s studies and have a high count, more likely to have traditional values and appreciate a man’s attentions. And there is something to be said for emotional maturity. Of course there tends to be a trade off in physical attractiveness. Pick your poison.

  5. According to the science, what works to get your way is acting mean and showing anger in your face. Otherwise they won’t think you’re credible.

    Reed L, DeScioli P, Pinker S. 2014. The commitment function of angry facial expressions. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1511-1517.

    Sell A, Cosmides L, Tooby J. 2014. The human anger face evolved to enhance cues of strength. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(5), 425-429.

  6. A question for the genuine players out there.

    How much more difficult is to garner enthusiastic consent compared to simply breaking down resistance?

    I might be wrong but from my take there are three levels to the game:

    Enthusiastic consent – Uber alphas who instantly create attraction.

    Breaking down resistance – The skilled practitioner who understands the game.

    Supplication – The average guy who buys his way via investing resources (time, gifts, dinners, employment status etc.).

    Seems to me YMY is aimed at locking out the ‘resistance breakers’ (PUA and betas learning game) as these guys have found a backdoor hack to the FI and don’t fit in the Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks spectrum.

    The feminine imperative loves alphas for the cock and they certainly love betas for the resources but there is no love for the middle ground as they’re seen as undeserved ‘free riders’ (cads). They’re neither alphas nor resource providers and they’re seen as robbing women of their beta bucks option.

    To me ‘regret sex’ means the man wasn’t alpha enough or sufficient resources weren’t exchanged.

    Alphas – good
    Cads – bad
    Dads – good

    So YMY is simply the FI’s attempt at correcting the market imbalance as too many betas were getting free sex.

    Of course the law of unintended consequences simply means prolonged sexlessness for women will increasingly drive them to alphas while more betas will simply drop out.

  7. Professional muckraker rakes up muck, is shocked, shocked I tell you, to find herself immersed in muck. Then she tells you she just wanted to play more Mario Kart after all.

    Mario Kart folks are not “gamers” in the real sense of the word. At least not *most* of them. The reason why certain games are considered to be more “core games” than others is because of the market share they have. Warcraft and CoD have a huge, huge marketshare, such that they are “core” games. Diablo, Starcraft, Civ, etc. People who have played games know what core games are, and what core gamers are, and they aren’t people playing Depression Quest or Farmville or generally spending much time with a Wii.

  8. I had women call the cops on me twice. One was last summer, one was about two weeks ago.

    In the summer incident, I talked to her, and barely a sentence came out.

    She then called the cops on me.

    When the cops came to the park, I thought that they were coming to inspect a blown transformer.

    As I continued about a little less than a mile around a track, then the police stopped me. They asked, “Do you know this woman?”. I said “No.” There was no crime for them to press charges on me. They let me go.

    The only “crime” was being a beta male, and talking to a female when here brain chemicals weren’t in balance on one of her off days.

    Another time was when I was at a supermarket. I talked to her outside, and went through some basic talk. She then got around to saying that she had a boyfriend. I lost interest, went back into the supermarket, purchased groceries, and left the shopping plaza.

    As I was exiting, I saw 3-5 police cars with lights on in the same spot I last saw the woman. I drove right past , and they did not notice me. They were joking amongst themselves (do they get many nuisance calls like this from scatterbrained females?) Again, my only “crime” is being a beta male trying to make basic conversation.

    Just as a side note, I pray to the Lord for every road trip a, and when I go about my day and do transactions.

    I think the LORD protected me on that one.

    Please note the bible has been warning us about women all along. They are a greater threat than standing armies.

    http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible7.htm

    The bible says women are doubly impure of that of men!!!!

    “Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.” (Leviticus 12:2)

    “But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.” (Leviticus 12:5)

    Comment

    A woman who gives birth to a child must undergo a purification ritual lest her “uncleanness” contaminate others. This not only entails her isolation, but also payments to priests for the ritual acts. Thus the male dominators had even made birth dirty.

    Notice here that if a woman bears a female child, her isolation must last twice as long as that if she gives birth to a male child!

    (See also Psalms 51:3-5)

    “The Bible and the church have been the greatest stumbling blocks in the way of woman’s emancipation.”

    –Elizabeth Cady Stanton

    Women are not as pure because of hypergamy and all that other wonderful stuff.

    The bible also says women and children will run the household of those who worship idols:

    Hosea 4:12-14King James Version (KJV)

    12 My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth unto them: for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused them to err, and they have gone a whoring from under their God.

    13 They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under oaks and poplars and elms, because the shadow thereof is good: therefore your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit adultery.

    14 I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredom, nor your spouses when they commit adultery: for themselves are separated with whores, and they sacrifice with harlots: therefore the people that doth not understand shall fall.

    Again women and children rule over those God is punishing for their wickedness:

    Isaiah 3:11-12King James Version (KJV)

    11 Woe unto the wicked! it shall be ill with him: for the reward of his hands shall be given him.

    12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.

    one in a thousand men are upright, but not even one in a thousand women!

    Ecclesiastes 7:26-29King James Version (KJV)

    26 And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her.

    27 Behold, this have I found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account:

    28 Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.

    29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

    The LORD, I see, retroactively with 20/20 hindsight HAS spared me from many of a wicked women.

    Many women claiming to be Christians are not! They are counterfeit!

  9. With a worldview like the one NNJ just graced us with, I think this is beyond the scope of what mortal men can set straight. Perhaps it may be true that only professional female sex workers can save civil society at this point. That would be the only remedy I could ever see to this poor guy’s bumbling, religious, quasi-psychopathic frustration.

  10. As rigthly stated above, there is no legal way for sex to happen under the YMY law.

    1) consumption of alcohol or drugs makes your consent null and void, but if you’re accused and did drink it doesn’t matter, cause still you were supposed to rightly interpret the accuser’s non-consent.

    2) Without recording your every intimacy, not only sex you simply cannot prove you had consent.

    3) the obligation for “ongoing consent” cannot be met just by signing some paper, because that only happens once and is therefore not ongoing.

    See, I’m a good guy or beta, meaning I don’t get in conflict with the law ever. To me the only option you have is to opt out entirely.
    I’m not living under the jurisdiction of CA laws, however it will get very interesting when the YMY law is being integrated in national law.
    I don’t think women will be very happy with this either once they figure out how this law will affect them as well. Yet this wn’t be the last irrational law that we’ll have to endure concerning rape, sexual violence, financial violance, domestic violence etc.

  11. No one mentioned that when a new law passes, there’ll be new quotas imposed on the law enforcement officers?

    A beta male’s reputation and a law enforcement officer’s salary advances and promotions are at odds.

    Guess why the beta male goes to jail…

  12. Deti

    The judge and lawyers likely graduate from the same law school.

    For every court room drama, there are at least 3 lying lawyers.

    The judge (aka 3rd lawyer) can ignore any evidence at his perogative, making the statute wording irrelevant.

  13. Clearly, there isn’t ever any LMR when the woman is convinced it’s her job, her role, to please the man. The only time there *can* be LMR (sit up straight and pay attention, this is extremely important for you to grok) is when the woman thinks her role is to make it difficult for the man to please her.

  14. Nah, LMR can also just be reputation-polishing, phony ‘good girl’ window dressing. As in, “[Fluttering eyelids] I can’t believe I’m doing this, this is so unlike me I think we should stop …”

    I don’t know why a man would waste his time with a “woman who thinks her role is to make it difficult for the man to please her.”

  15. @BV, I agree that LMR can be phony, but even then it still comes from her mental place of him having to prove himself to her.

    As for the big, big question “why a man would waste his time with a “woman who thinks her role is to make it difficult for the man to please her.””
    1) I was raised to believe the manliest role was drafthorse. I was taught that the bride is groomed by, tended by, the husband.
    2) As a beta my entire life experience of interacting as a man with women is that they go out of their way to be difficult to me (and most other men too).
    3) And, of course, there are the ties that bind i.e. because I said I wouldn’t leave her.

  16. Lesbian bed death is an extremely well documented phenomenon. Closely related is lesbian relationship death. Now that the statistics are better, it can be seen everywhere in the world lesbians get divorced at more than twice the rate of gay men. I believe the *causality* is the same as for hetero women filing for divorce at more than twice the rate of gay men: the women’s flightiness being catered to.

  17. re: projection.

    In all the normal i.e. nonrapey situations we’re discussing, LMR, whether phony or not, whether a shit test or not, is an attempt at DHV by the woman. The most amazing hall-of-mirrors ideas (no, this isn’t narcissism) come from realizing that the sexes tend to be projecting the behaviors they want/need in the other sex. In this case, LMR isn’t precisely a plea from the woman for the man to get reluctant, but for him to DHV to her. And naturally, of course, all the foot-kissing and petting and panty-removal services etc that almost all men *have* to do all the time is exactly what the men want from women.

  18. More big-picture stuff.
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yes-means-yes-opposition-its-about-due-process-not-misogyny/article/2555316

    I think I am sneaking up on a logical inconsistency in SJW policies, so help me thing it through. When we respect the right of a woman to change her mind (be it manifestations of YMY, or LMR, or whatever), we have to insist on the truth that she *changed* her mind. We cannot be forced to say that the way she is feeling right now about what she did earlier is the *same* as how she was feeling earlier, while preserving her right to have *changed* her mind.

  19. Off topic, but I comment enough on topic. The sexual alphaness of a male towards a female is exhibited by her wanting to please him, and the sexual betaness of a male is exhibited by him needing to please her. A man’s alphaness obviously and definitionally does not cause her to more require him to please her, i.e. alphaness does not rub off like that. And also betaness is not transferrable, no matter how much we betas wish that our women-pleasing caused women to want to please us.

    Moreover, the social dominance of a male in a male hierarchy is barely correlated with his sexual alphaness, and certainly not causal. There are far too many counterexamples, such as Bill Gates, Napoleon Bonaparte, Horatio Nelson, and the list is very very long.

    However, and this is a key sociologically empirical point, the social dominance of a *female* human (the best kind!) in a *female* human hierarchy is extremely correlated, in this precise way: A woman to whom women cater to will 99.9999999999% of the time demand to be catered to by her man. This is why women believe man-pleasing women (I admit there are some) are “lesser”. It is also why men (e.g. me) who have tended to be mated to females who are socially dominant in a female hierarchy are invariably betas. It’s simply false that female-dominant women tend to choose men who demand pleasing.

  20. re: Cosby. Bill was a world-renowned hardcore partier for decades. It seems a lot of women feel that Bill’s philandering affected them personally, as if they were Clair and he Cliff living a secret life.

  21. prolonged sexlessness for women will increasingly drive them to alphas
    who, regrettably for the sort of women driving this lead balloon of a “law”, actually have “standards”.
    HB1-10 type standards. And since there are only 24 hours in a day, constraints also.

    Looks like the femfraud push into gaming is wise after all, they’re going to have to entertain themselves somehow when they lurch into LadyOmegaWorld.
    Dumpster-diving is off the table.

    And the licensed trade is going to take a kicking too.
    I’ll bet every burglar in Britain wishes they could take refuge in “well I done that house yeronner, but I was off me tits at the time, half pint of lager tops I swear, so weren’t responsible”.
    Men will find it safer to drink on park benches than place themselves within griping (single “p”) distance of sozzled slags.

    When I started down the Liquid Boulevard to Hades back in the last century, women did not get served in Public Bars. No ifs, no buts.

    Saloon Bar, Hotel, or into a little cell adjoining the mahoganied splendour of the Public, where their milk-stouts, port’n’lemons, gin&Dubonnets, and (covered!, or else) carry-out jugs of 60/- to go with their man’s tea (a meal, no actual tea involved) were passed through a small wicket in the ornate screen concealing the riotous assembly packed standing on a carpet of pork scratchings in a dense waist-to-ceiling pall of tobacco smoke, in the pub. No seats, no tables, and a potman/boy ceaselessly on the prowl to abstract even those modest missiles from festive hands.

    Ostensibly the “snug” was to “protect ladies’ modesty” from industrial language, sexual advances and so forth, but was really intended to prevent pimps filling up valuable drinking space with their wares and harassing the punters. Sound familiar, hipsters?
    Also saved a heck of a lot on plumbing, a not inconsequential factor in tiny city bars. All you needed was a gutter out the back. Often up the “close” where they’d kept the pony, in a better Age. And a key behind the bar for the single kludgie in the building, available on deposit.

  22. @Johnycomelately

    “October 28th, 2014 at 7:09 pm

    A question for the genuine players out there.

    How much more difficult is to garner enthusiastic consent compared to simply breaking down resistance?”

    There is no comparison. “Garner enthusiastic consent” is the same as “breaking down resistance”. Consent Is only given when negotiation is involved. Desire never involves consent. Either she wants you or she does not.

  23. I am amused that someone elsewhere pretended that “those scoring high in psychopathy may devalue kindness in a potential long-term mate in order to create a drama-rich environment” did not apply almost entirely to women. Men try to find kind stable women, and call them unicorns.

    Yes, I’m wearing a suit and tie, btw.

  24. @Johnycomelately

    The further you are from the alpha side of the spectrum (most of it by your inherent value), the more resistance you’ll get from her. Girls do subconsciously evaluate you in an instant, just like a man, from a strictly Alpha Fucks position. Some PUAs will tell you otherwise but this simply isn’t true. I’m a college student surrounded by prime pussy all day. My environment, let alone my experiences, has led me to this conclusion. Sure, some old PUAs who go on the hunt for young pussy do make it happen via game but there’s a reason why they slog through so many women just to find one to bang.

    The only way to truly know your inherent value is by calculating how many new girls you have to meet before you actually bang one. I say all of this because recognizing this is key to understanding why young girls (and the feminine imperative) restrict most men from their most valuable asset in their peak years.

    Rollo mentioned in a post that young women only seek out two values in a man: genetic and material. That’s it. Once you understand that and I mean understand it completely, you’ll begin to see why women will use whatever it takes to have a shot at an alpha male and why his LMR, compared to the beta, is miniscule. For one, he’s rare to begin with and two, he unleashes a primal desire in her that betas cannot.

    A lot of things make sense when you simply review the Alpha Fucks-Beta Bucks strategy in your head from time to time.

    As for your three levels of game, enthusiastic consent and breaking down resistance are one in the same, but it all varies on certain subtleties. Originally, there was only the Alpha-Beta dichotomy (in terms of men getting the most sex) but now, a spectrum exists all thanks to game. What the Feminine Imperative is doing is it’s trying to restrict the “fakers” (those who break down resistance slowly via game) from actually scoring. It’s trying to get rid of the spectrum and revert it back to a dichotomy for their ease of leveraging their sexual appetite. This makes it a lot easier for females to pick and choose who they mate with (alphas) and who they receive provisions from (betas).

    To be fair, in college, a large percentage of the population fits into either the “enthusiastic consent” or the “supplication” category. There’s obviously outliers here and there (from men who have no conscious game) but these are few and far in between.

    What would surprise many older men is just how lopsided the whole market is.

    Understand, in college more and more men are dropping out so there’s already an imbalance of more females, but guess what? Females still aren’t hooking up with the small pool of available men unless he’s an Alpha. That’s how strong their hypergamy is. They won’t settle for a beta, even when there are no alphas available because a beta viscerally makes her recoil in some primal way.

    This whole YMY debacle hasn’t reached my state, yet. But I can see it spreading in the future. I mean, just look at this shit:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/10/29/consent-bro-meet-the-guy-who-teaches-frat-brothers-what-yes-means-yes-means/

  25. There is no comparison. “Garner enthusiastic consent” is the same as “breaking down resistance”.
    I thought the “enthusiastic consent” thing simply meant letting them pack their snouts with coke?
    As opposed to the “overcoming resistance” condition, which means they fill their hollow legs with 40% a.b.v., and you hope they don’t puke.

    Or is the first condition also accounted impaired judgement/unconsensual? And will the judge give a monkey’s, if she’s got the prospect of sending a man up the river?

  26. @Buena Vista re: “It’s charming but also speaks to a lack of curiosity that I find puzzling and occasionally a challenge.” (from somewhere else)

    Yeah, it’s childish for me to do this cross-blog stuff, but I’ve kept it to a minimum, considering (I was averaging 200 comments per day for a long while. My restrictor plates have left me throttled down.). Anyway, sexually “charming” “lack of curiosity” “puzzling”, and “challenge” tend to describe my women for me too. And it’s not that they don’t *like* doing new(ish) things, it’s as if (as if!) the thought had never crossed their mind before.

    I’ve mentioned this before, that both my wives have extremely believably claimed never to have had an orgasm before our wedding night(s). While we were dating, my first wife had solemnly informed me she wasn’t able to sweat. And no, it wasn’t some Jedi mind trick to get me to move furniture for her. She claimed to have some medical condition that whenever she really exerted herself her face just got red instead of sweating, so she’d have to stop to avoid overheating. I guess her telling me was part of full disclosure; the filly showing me her teeth for inspection. On our wedding night she learned how to sweat but good, on our way to tearing up both beds in the motel room.

    And recently in The Womynz Newz department, a womynz was lauded for organizing nationwide events bringing pretty bringing mirrors for womynz to look at their womynz parts with. For more than 20% of the women in their 40s attending the events, it was the first time in their lives that they had ever seen their stuff, and they cried about how wonderful etc.

  27. Tinder Master, when you say ‘lopsided’, do you mean that while there are more women on your campus, they still concentrate their interest on the top 10-20%, revoking the apparent benefit of a 55-45 or 60-40 female-male ratio?

    –older man

  28. ” it was the first time in their lives that they had ever seen their stuff, and they cried about how wonderful etc.”
    lolwut; don’t modern paperless offices even have xerox machines anymore? what did they think those things were for, fanny-tanning?

  29. JF12, a lot of women are still in high school. For them, sex is something many women allow men “to do.” I would make this generational, but have experienced it with 20-somethings. I’m sure in your case its generational, plus the willful ignorance is backed up by Scriptural reference.

    When I was a kid, Our Bodies, Ourselves was all the rage. This precipitated a bull market in speculums and handy mirrors. Whatever. I still don’t know how I ever found a clit under all that fur.

    On occasion, I’m not sure I mind the naiveté in the anatomy department so much. My date on Saturday is with a gynecological oncologist. You want a woman who knows her way around female parts? Here’s one devoid of absolutely any Disneyesque illusions; she’s running robotic devices all day long on 350-pound women with incurable cancers down there. (Some of them are so fat she needs a 36×8″ lap-board to pull the lap-fat away from the drop zone, and one was so fat she didn’t know that the awful smell was a covered up surface cancer. I think we’ll patent that, fabricate it in surgical stainless, and sell them for $4000. There’s a growth market in obesity.) So we have a 6′ amazon surgeon who is extremely comfortable “with herself”, as well as smell mechanical objects that go buzz. And I’m not supposed to bounce the landings in a cockpit 39″ wide at the shoulder.

  30. Walking out like you’re a man with options is the best way to get out of the Maybe Zone quickly. Works so much better than protracted begging and Nice does. Nice doesn’t work for shit, in fact.So does just showing up and without saying more than two words, going to work with a big embrace, huge kiss and being very physically assertive.

    The way the laws are changing though, it really disadvantages men. You’re going to have to be reckless if you want to score like a hero, women bitch that there are no good men but then legislate away all the behaviors that women actually appear to like… I’d probably be reckless if I was 25 right now, that approach will work better and better over time. I wouldn’t do any of this stuff on campus with juvenile women though, no way no how. They’re too stupid and misguided to trifle with, like grenades with shaky fuzes.

  31. @BuenaVista
    Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

    My campus is comprised of 44% of men and 56% of women (I confirmed this via my uni’s current demographics). Even with the abundance of females, their hypergamy still restricts them from “assortive mating” or from abiding by a ratio that benefits men*. I believe that in some way, girls are innately predisposed to seek out the top 10-15% of men on campus (or anywhere for that matter). I’m still kind of new to this whole “redpill” thing so I don’t know if anything else will back me up on this.

    Looking back at one of my own past experiences, I recall me and two of my other friends hitting up some sororities for a party. We spread the message to 3 sorority houses and word quickly got out. We made a huge house party happen in less than 2 days and the majority of those in attendance were females. These girls knew we hosted the party so, and I kid you not, every single girl was dtf(down to fuck). Most women paid no attention to all the other guys at the party. At the time, I didn’t know what was going on so I figured, “Bitches must like party hosts.”

    *It should go without saying, but I’m talking about hot girls here. I’m not talking about average, or ugly girls. Girls who aren’t that attractive do tend to settle but when given the chance for alpha? They will, without a hint of doubt, take it.

  32. Holy Batshit Robin!

    How can Joe Blow immediately above get ithe whole thing so right by “walking out like you’re a man”, while “Consent Bro” in that Post story gets it so wrong?? He was inspired by Emma Watson?? Let’s you and him fight indeed. Fuck me raw with a crazy straw.

    I mean, OK, I guess we need freshman orientation classes to tell guys not to fuck drunk chicks. Guess I’m down with that, apparently because, sadly, too many of us beta cunts will fuck drunk chicks and be gobsmacked why bad things happen. But the rest of it? Why no “obey the so-called LMR talk, get up get dressed and walk, and watch what happens?”

    Bill Cosby will be OK, because a lot of this is old dirty laundry that came up when that other chick tried to blackmail him, his historically youthful horndog ways are right up there with the other Rat Pack guys, so he is somewhat inoculated and the Salon whining won’t go beyond the drum circles.

    Now everyone stand back to watch deti’s head explode after you Google the following now-imprisoned Australian singer’s name: Rolf Harris. Take a gander what happened to him 28 years later!!! THIS is what YMY “retroactive revocation of consent” looks like.

  33. re: ” I’m sure in your case its generational”

    Yes, but actually it is the tendency to lack of curiosity, which isn’t generational.

    FWIW, which isn’t much, of the women who’ve mentioned to me or near me through the years about their preference of a gynecologist’s gender, except for the surprisingly few shy ones (like I’ve mentioned, women have tended to treat me like another woman) who didn’t want a man seeing things, the overwhelming majority have preferred a man doctor, claiming that women doctors were rougher and less interested. The published data suggests my observation tends to be true for older women, i.e. the ones who actually have experience with several doctors, although this article pretends that 42 yr old women are ancient grannies awaiting the lone Man to make the county circuit in his horse-and-buggy.
    http://www.jaoa.osteopathic.org/content/105/8/369.full
    “More specifically, patients who reported a greater level of comfort during pelvic examinations provided by male obstetrician-gynecologists were significantly older (mean age, 42.8 years) than patients who reported greater levels of comfort while women were providing pelvic examinations (mean age, 33.7 years) (t(96)=2.16, P<.05)."

    It similarly makes sense that a woman andrologist, of which there are zero since men don't go to doctors, would be gentler with the goods because of the interest of an interested woman (hospital nurses being ungentle and uninterested, by personal experience, but doctors presumably having more intellectual curiosity). Most penis-behavior publications are written by women, for example. But despite my little pep talk here, I must not be convinced myself because I've insisted my urologists be male, and hetero.

  34. Thanks, TM. While it’s a ‘sphere truism, it’s still shocking to me. And ominous for the social future. At least you’re figuring this out a couple of decades before I did.

  35. My mind is still in the latrines (and all my women readers agree). The nytimes article makes it sound like the men and boys and male dogs are flinging their feces all around the latrines, making the womynz sad.

    The actual study, however, points to “suboptimum use of latrines constructed as part of the Total Sanitation Campaign, particularly by men and children, and for the disposal of child faeces”
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(14)70307-9/fulltext

    The women are too lazy to drag their toddlers including the *girl* toddlers to the latrines, so the main problem with childhood diarrhea is that toddler poop is still tossed in the bucket like it’s always been. Moreover, undoubtedly the women take over the latrines “it’s the one place I can be free of screaming children, and men”.
    “Latrine use was nearly five times higher for women than for men or children. [including girl children]”

  36. Well, JF, you have more references than I have the energy to read in the original. I’ll take your word for it.

    In argument with your disparagement of nurses, during my recent unpleasantness, when I had five tubes stuck in my body, skull fractures, 15 ribs, flail lung, shoulder in 8 new pieces, hosed up with morphine, blah blah blah, one of my nurses offered daily to help me shower. On checkout day, she got mad when I refused her again. So I don’t know that I agree with your disparagement of nurses. I pleaded for the old battle axe to be my night nurse, and she and I related without sexual tension. My anecdote about the female urologist a few years ago will have to wait until I’m either drunk or uncaring.

    I didn’t know any of this stuff about women until two years ago. I’m somewhat alarmed there’s more to learn. Son #1 has a copy of Rational Male, however.

  37. @BV, I have had some very caring women nurses through the years, all of whom were older and dare I say whiter than the uncaring ones. They are memorable because of their rarity.

  38. re: latrines vs lockerrooms. Well, well, J1G is leaving there, because of wishing the place could have had the “highly visible presence of and very active participation of Women”.

  39. YMY and alcohol is an interesting intersection, being taken advantage of while drunk seems to be a form of plausible deniability.

    There’s no denying females need sex and there’s no denying females preferably want sex from alphas but what’s a woman to do when she needs sex but can’t get it from an alpha? Alcohol.

    The immediacy of the need for sex temporarily trumps the alpha desire but doesn’t ameliorate the discust of betas so alcohol temporarily lowers the threshold of beta discust (any wonder the term ‘beer goggles’ came to exist).

    In the cold light of day that discust returns and YMY provides the plausible deniability for her existential angst at not being alpha worthy.

    Interestingly all the married female alcoholics I know (at least a dozen) are married to lowly betas and constantly hit on married men of higher value.

  40. “Girls do subconsciously evaluate you in an instant, just like a man, from a strictly Alpha Fucks position. Some PUAs will tell you otherwise but this simply isn’t true. I’m a college student surrounded by prime pussy all day. My environment, let alone my experiences, has led me to this conclusion.”

    you need to do better research. try this, meet a girl, talk to her tits, talk to the floor, talk about boring shit, see if the evaluation changes. next try game, see how that works. next wear the worst clothes you have, look completely broke, and try game, see how that goes.
    .

  41. @jonnycomelately
    Interesting idea about alcohol and it’s use to accept betas. While I think there may be something to that, I’ve seen way too many women get sloshed to bed the alpha as well. I think the primary driver for alcohol is the same driver to almost all female behavior- in-accountability for her actions and her need to maintain all options viable at all times. Just as AFBB is a way for to have her cake and eat it too, alcohol allows a woman to have as many random sex partners as she likes- alpha or otherwise- while maintaining her “good girl” benefits when it comes time to jump off the carousal and get her provisioning.
    It’s what YMY is all about….it allows her all options.. she can sleep around as much as she likes, and if it ever becomes inconvenient to her, she can claim rape..even if she dropped her pants, bent over and pulled the butt plug out to allow access- she never said her enthusiastic yes, and so she was raped, and not a slut.
    Feminism, remember, is the maximizing of her options and freedoms, while constraining mens as much as possible.
    In this sense I think people in the sphere are getting this all wrong with thinking this is about beta vs alpha. This has nothing to do, in their minds, with limiting betas or maximizing alpha access. It’s simply about keeping all her options and freedoms on the table while avoiding all responsibility or accountability.. even if it means an almost Orwellian ability to change history, if her suits her present needs.

  42. Yes, chicks really dig jerks. And both kinds of solutions to LMR, indifference and pushing through, are jerkish solutions, because that is what works.

  43. And if it were a snake it would have already bit you, but I’m here to point it out. That fact that women don’t want to admit that the jerk part of Game works so well is proof that women know it is a weakness of theirs.

    And yes, it is bad to do bad, but it also is bad that doing good doesn’t work with women.

  44. Alphas are indeed happier, because women try to make them happy. Betas are unhappier because women treat them worse.

  45. If we aren’t going to discuss long-married LMR (which is my experience with it. After 15 minutes of making out and increasingly heavier petting on the couch in our pjs, we moved to the bed. She made a pit stop, and got a text from her sister. She climbed into bed still fooling with the phone “ooh, yeah, right there, ooh. Keep doing that, but I’ve just *got* to tell you about Honey Boo Boo. I know you don’t want to, but listen, please for me, I feel I’ve just got to put it into words. It makes me so mad.” For the next 15 minutes, while my, uh, interest, waxed and waned. And predictably, then, she didn’t want to after *she* got what she wanted. “I feel so much better now! Thanks! And goodnight!” (the “love you” part being obviously a joke)), and since clearly First Minute Resistance is an entirely separate subject (and again, it is my experience), then what about Last Minute Acceptance?

    Is the fact that LMA happens enough reason for a man to keep trying?

  46. Well Deti, I think you are right but a bit off, if this is any indication.

    A hugely popular radio host up here in he GWN, just got fired. The claim is that he is sexually violent. This guy looks like Roosh, is considered hunky by most of the women I know (showing once again that Hartiste’s maxim of looks are not the biggest factor to women is right on). He is an Alphalpha!

    But even he is now going to be taken down. Alphalpha’s may push through the YMY law and get away with it, but only for a while. Eventually, one of his scores is gonna be pissed that he didn’t commit and go after him, and like all true herd animals, other women victims will follow.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/actress-claims-ghomeshi-choked-slapped-her/article21378722/?click=sf_globefb

  47. jf12, long married LMR, like the example you give, is just another instance of the wife just not giving a shit. She’s happy with the oxytocins, so, of course, you should be too. You need to up your dread game, that’s the only tool we have left…..

  48. off topic

    The “catcall” video, where “hello” or the more modern “wat’s up”, is asserted to be full-blown sexual harassment.

    I run every day on the beach near my home. As I gaze blankly ahead of me, half of the women glance at me. If I neutrally glance back at them, roughly half look away and the other roughly half flash me the resting bitch face (google it!) glare. But about one in ten smiles and about one in one hundred says hello, to both of which I respond with a neutral expression and a casual wave of my hand. And I keep running.

    I’d be curious if others experience the same thing….

  49. @bbb, re: “up your dread game”

    I agree. I keep saying that “nice” indifference, to include conciliatory indifference “oh well, maybe next week”, Does Not Work in LTR. The only tool that works is Dread which is necessarily unloving, actually de-loving, and estranging, and therefore bad. Empirically what works is when she thinks there is some kind of threat to her and/or to the relationship, i.e. when she thinks there are actual *negative* consequences to her behavior. Positive reinforcement does not work, at all.

  50. Again I ask. Is the fact that by law a woman’s right to change her mind MUST be planned for by the man, reason enough for him to keep trying after she says no?

  51. re: on the near futility of playing nice with the Feminine Imperative.

    Over to the Dal, they are going on about how the social stigma of a woman losing custody can keep her in line, because it’s so unusual for a woman to lose custody that her losing custody would imply there is something seriously wrong with her. But in accord with the FI, the threat of that stigma is *already* taken care of! The courts bend over backwards to allow way-out-of-line women to keep custody *because* it would be such a stigma. They don’t want to rub salt in the wound etc.

  52. OT still, but important. Getting a college degree for a woman is much less protective of her getting divorced than her getting a gender change. From Table 4 in the good longitudinal study of age 50-ish folks in
    http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/marriage-and-divorce-patterns-by-gender-race-and-educational-attainment.htm
    Already by age 46, more than 35% of married women with degrees had already divorced. But less than 24% of married men with degrees had already divorced.

  53. jf12- “What actually works is requiring competition, i.e. Dread.”

    That might be the most profound thing you’ve ever said.

    There is an underlying implication that is equally profound that being that a male-female relationship is not a friendly partnership, but an adversarial collaboration. The mistake men make is assuming a friendly partnership.

  54. My campus is comprised of 44% of men and 56% of women (I confirmed this via my uni’s current demographics). Even with the abundance of females, their hypergamy still restricts them from “assortive mating” or from abiding by a ratio that benefits men*. I believe that in some way, girls are innately predisposed to seek out the top 10-15% of men on campus (or anywhere for that matter). I’m still kind of new to this whole “redpill” thing so I don’t know if anything else will back me up on this.

    @TM —

    Yes, precisely. In any scenario or setting that is where the interest gravitates. The key is being in the top 10-20% in a given setting, as you learned with your house party. This is also why it’s important for a guy to carefully choose his settings. Settings which are bigger or which tend to attract a lot of “beautiful people” are obviously bad ones for guys who are not in the top 10-20% in terms of the total population — it’s better for these guys (most guys) to find other settings where these other guys are not. Of course, that also has implications for the hotness of the women who will be in those settings (women are not as stupid a some in the sphere make them out to be, and hot women tend to go where the hottest guys are, so won’t be showing up very much in other settings). This is why, by the way, women love social media, tinder and the like — it’s a very large setting, which means much higher likelihood of men in the “overall population top 10-20%”, which lets them select and exclude easily. Tinder is perhaps the best example of this effect, but really any social media and most online dating venues have the same effect.

  55. If I understand correctly, one aspect of hook-up LMR is that it is the last stand, the last gasp of ASD. But if women know they are guaranteed an ex post facto ASD “I shouldn’t have wanted to do that last night”, will there be less LMR in hook-ups?

  56. Ted Rall brings up something.
    “The problem with [YMY] is that it tacitly validates the attempted defense of many accused rapists that women are too hard to read, that if they’d known that their aggression was unwanted, they would have backed off.”
    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-rall-affirmative-consent-yes-means-yes-sex-contract-20141029-story.html

    Jian G: “May I surprise you by punching you repeatedly in the head for no reason?”
    Her: “No!”
    JG: “That’s cool. So, you wanna hang out tomorrow?”
    Her: “No!”

    vs

    JG: says nothing, just starts pounding her, making her cry
    H: “Ow! You jerk! What did you do that for?”
    JG: “B-tch, get outta here. So, you wanna hang out tomorrow?”
    H: “Ok. Thanks for asking nicely.”

  57. @redlight
    “you need to do better research. try this, meet a girl, talk to her tits, talk to the floor, talk about boring shit, see if the evaluation changes. next try game, see how that works. next wear the worst clothes you have, look completely broke, and try game, see how that goes.”

    You’re basing your premise off extreme behavior that doesn’t (or hardly) exist with the average male. I’ve never met a guy who would strictly talk to the floor, or her tits, while conversing with her. Sure some men do talk about boring shit, but you’ll be surprised with just how much you can get away with if already fulfill her Alpha Fucks side (upon first meeting). All a guy needs to do is not fuck things up. Just avoid fucking up and you’ll coast into the bang easily (if you’re high value). I’ve said the dumbest shit (as my bros have too) and we still managed to get the bang.

    Also, I have banged a girl looking like absolute shit when I first met her. Long story short, I was helping my friend paint his apartment and needed more materials to get done. We went to a department store and I see this really cute girl in the parking lot on her way out. I simply stop her and say, “Hey I’m on my way in but I just saw you and I wanted to get your number so we can meet up sometime.” Got the digits and banged her the following week.

    Young girls do evaluate men fast for Alpha Fucks like men evaluate women for quick bangs. It really is as simple as a yes or no for most girls. Can game deviate this? Yes, but probably to a certain point. It’s usually done in time.

    As Rollo suggested, have a look at tinderfessions for the unrestricted sexual acts women do initiate with top bros. As a user of Tinder myself, some of those stories are fake but I can tell many are true. I’ve read some that say something along the lines of, “I bang this new hot guy I met off tinder, right after my boyfriend buys me stuff or takes me out.” In my experience, that is very much true. Some girls do bang guys while they’re with their boyfriend. Hell, even a handful of girls will have pictures of their boyfriends (with the face cut off) in their profile pictures.

    I remember meeting this one girl who was in a 3 year relationship with her boyfriend and banging the shit out of her, as her boyfriend was calling her phone. I shit you not, after we got done, she called him and said, “Sorry babe. I was at (some chick) house watching a movie. Did you need something?”

    She said that without a hint of remorse.

    @Novaseeker
    True. I think this is the real reason why some men move to impoverished countries for pussy. By having money or a completely different look, you’re already elevating yourself higher than the local men. I say, more power to them.

    Also, the main reason why tinder is so popular is because not only does it let girls weed out guys they’re not attracted to at a first glance fast, but it also (as you stated) expands their options beyond those that exist in person. There’s a limit to how many Alphas she can interact with in person, and so she’ll seek it out in many other ways and Tinder is the currently most convenient.

    Nonetheless, after all the shit I’ve experienced and witness, I wouldn’t fault any man for being completely amoral in his dealings with women. Spin as many plates as you can and don’t feel bad for doing so. Do whatever it takes because girls really don’t give a shit about your “code” or “honor.”

    1. I think this is the real reason why some men move to impoverished countries for pussy. By having money or a completely different look, you’re already elevating yourself higher than the local men. I say, more power to them.

      Even Roosh acknowledges this:

  58. bbb, 11:10 a.m. on getting checked out on the beach and getting the hairy eyeball if he returns the glance to half of the women, while the other half duck and cover:

    No, while I don’t run or walk on beaches, I do amble about NYC and DC a fair bit.

    I’ve never been anywhere like Manhattan for straight on eye contact from women on the street or in coffee shops, etc. It’s so straight-on strong I’ve always looked away, like half of the women who check you out on the beach. I’ve not noticed bitch glares from women who were checking me out first. I never feel more attractive than when walking down Fifth Avenue in a good jacket and jeans. I have always assumed that because I’m a nordic/anglo mix midwesterner I ‘show’ better in a place like NYC, where the ethnic mix makes me taller (I’m only 6’1″, but that’s reasonably tall there) and WASP-ier, and where a higher percentage of the mature men just look like shit physically after living 20 years in a work-first, drink-second, eat-third, and exercise four days on vacation-fourth.

    (It may simply be that attached women in Manhattan are ready to go with strangers, and I would love to see comparable stats on infidelity amongst the UMC and UC in Manhattan vs. Topeka. I bet it’s scary.)

    DC is a dreary place, where it seems ugly people go to feed at the trough (and dress badly). It’s also a F.I. work environment, rife with SIWs so street flirtation is about as common as meeting a woman with a La Perla collection.

    Doing the same thing in the airport or Des Moines yields 1/10th the eye contact action: I feel invisible. At 6’1″ I often feel short in MSP or DSM. But even in those places I don’t get the glare. So I don’t know the glare.

    In my current iteration, on my next NYC trip, I’ll probably return the aggressive eye contact and make conversation at the cross-walk; we’ll see what transpires.

  59. The YMY law says that the affirmative consent must be ongoing, and hence the “ensuring” and “ascertaining” of that consent MUST be performed absolutely continuously with no letup and no breaks. You are not merely required to ask “Can I now touch the left one?”, you are required the keep asking, every millisecond of every minute you engage in touching the left one. Ongoing.

  60. It is possible to only love a woman for what she brings into your life (sex,companionship, motherhood, etc.) but it should always be your life and you need to be able to look at your relationship through the same lens as everything else. Devoting oneself to a woman without context is foolishness and she will cheat on you in disgust.

  61. TM, who is quite articulate I think:

    “Young girls do evaluate men fast for Alpha Fucks like men evaluate women for quick bangs.”

    It’s not just young girls. It may be more extreme with older girls. Since I started (jokingly, usually) sexualizing my conversation with any attractive woman, attached or not, the results are staggering, if not unnerving. I get the sense that the older girls are reading the sex-pozzie stuff directed at the younger women, and they feel like they’ve missed out. Anyway, to your point, the go,no-go, “yes you’ll do, no thanks buster” decision cycle is immediate. Yikes. FYI, I have gray hair and and am recovering from a bad, bad accident, so I limp and shit. I’m getting more and stronger responses — by signaling availability in the first 60 seconds — than I have in my life. The married woman I had ‘lunch’ with today was making jokes about my likely ‘second shift’ arriving after she departed. Nothing in my life prepared me for this, and certainly not the 20 years I worked 80 hours a week in support of the greater-beta code of honor. The free-for-all has commenced.

  62. @Buena Vista, re: “Since I started (jokingly, usually) sexualizing my conversation with any attractive woman, attached or not, the results are staggering, if not unnerving. … I’m getting more and stronger responses — by signaling availability in the first 60 seconds — than I have in my life.”

    Cosign; I’ll be Thomson if you’re Hancock. Instant sexualization, as well as “ongoing” escalation, works frighteningly well. I suppose that’s why we were told not to do it.

  63. It is possible that YMY can make nice guys into bad-enough boys. Black Knighting suggestion.

    BK: “We really shouldn’t be doing this.”
    Her: “I know!”
    BK: “For example, I could be thrown into jail for doing this to your left one.”
    Her: “I know! And my right one next!”
    BK: “Heh, heh.”

  64. The big that Ezra Klein, and every other woman, gets wrong about YMY is that men do not respond like women to “a cold spike of fear” “throwing everyday sexual practice into doubt and creating a haze of fear and confusion over what counts as consent.”

    Men will NOT tread more cautiously, timidly, and slowly. Depending on their personalities the men will either accelerate “damn the torpedoes” because DIYDDIYD, or give up entirely.

  65. Dr. Helen makes the point that “sometimes experience is the only teacher”, in regards to gifted kids, but it applies in general. Almost always nobody is qualified to teach a truly gifted child except another truly gifted individual, and hence the gifted kid learns almost entirely by experience.

  66. “men will either accelerate “damn the torpedoes” because DIYDDIYD, or give up entirely.”
    many men even slightly below alpha cruiser class won’t strike their colours, but will definitely scope her out to ensure she’s a prize worth boarding, and not a rustbucket feminist-registered Q-ship, awash with toxic bilge. And then, as you say, full steam and battle stations it is, mister.

    I also foresee a vast ghost fleet of squat, shouty, pouchy-faced women with garish multicoloured hair roaming the social media gulf and the ocean of bars like flying dutchwomen, for many years to come, in vain search of prey.

    “Rape” and “attempted rape” could become the to-die-for status marker for every wanna-be femme fatale with any measure of attractiveness. They’ll be queuing up to place themselves in the line of fire, and become Very Very Angry with men who don’t strip and dip within about 30 seconds. Especially in public, where he cannot deny it after the fact.

    HB10s of course will continue to ignore everyone, regardless of gender. Because they can.

  67. Yes Means ?

    Although Emerson College has an “ongoing consent” standard which all students, male and female, get mandatory training on, Jillian Doherty’s lawsuit is based on her claim that the college should have trained her better and prevented her from getting drunk and climbing into a boy’s bed. “The Defendants’ are ignoring the fact that they knew or should have known that sexual assaults were happening to Emerson students,” the opposition states, “yet they failed to take precautions to prevent them from happening.”
    http://www.berkeleybeacon.com/news/2014/10/30/former-student-opposes-motion-to-dismiss-lawsuit

    All but one of the facts are not disputed. Jillian had been an enthusiastic consenter to the party-hardy ultra-liberal lifestyle of Emerson, e.g. with college-sponsored drag queen strip contests, and in fact that lifestyle was a prime factor in her choosing Emerson. Because of prior lawsuits by lesbian and gay activists, the college has a strict legally mandated hands-off policy as to what happens in dorm rooms.

    Anyway, on yet another of her many freshman hookups, she had been spending the evening partying with this boy, and they wound up in his dorm room for the rest of the night since his roommate was supposed to be gone. They engaged in many consensual sexual activities for extended periods of time, and took many pictures plenty of which depict her smiling and posing sexually for the camera, plenty of others focusing on her utilized hinder parts. The boy claims that after the second anal episode, he was worn out and must have collapsed. The girl claims she did not consent to the pictures, and she did not consent to the first anal episode, even though she may have drunkenly given the “impression” of consenting to subsequent sexual activities.

    Hours later the roommate comes back, and she is still in bed, hours after the disputed activity, still with the boy sleeping, still naked, with her utilized hinder parts still showing. The roommate testified that she looked embarrassed and uncomfortable. She later that morning bragged to her own female friends, and showed them some of the pictures.

    A year later, some of those pictures, from her possession not the boy’s possession, appeared on an Emerson site created to document stories of campus sexual assault, with fictionalization encouraged for the “healing process”. Nine stories were submitted, some clearly parodies written by boys. Jillian then filed a report.

    After the first fact finding and dismissal, almost another year later campus activists who were tired of continually harassing the boy got the boy expelled on a retrial, or whatever, of the same facts, threatening legal action if he was not expelled.

  68. I have to disagree with the tone of Rollo’s OP. 100% of women will throw LMR’s. They will do it to preserve their perceived chastity. They will do it so they don’t feel like a slut. They will do it because they don’t feel like having sex right now but can be convinced.

    You cannot have a Long Term Relationship or a normal sex life with most women if you are unable to blow through LMR’s. They WILL use sex as a weapon and this is a recipe for Deadbedrooms. The standard manosphere advice beats Rollo this time. A taciturn, reluctant woman one minute can be a passionate tiger the next if you play your cards right and give her your passion.

    Rollo would have us wait until she is dripping gobs of slime all the way to the floor before we throw her down and rip off her clothes. No thanks. I will continue to assume the close and escalate relentlessly unless I hear our safe word and California can fuck right off. This backhanded acceptance of YMY by the lion of the manosphere is unfortunate.

    1. Would you rather be tolerated or would you rather be desired?

      That’s the real question.

      If you can push past LMR and prompt genuine desire by way of dread, natural arousal, or sexual tension it’s a far cry different from playing a waiting game trying to prompt a woman to genuine desire by way of making her comfortable and being more familiar with her.

  69. We could take the thin crust and glue it on top of the stuffed crust using extra cheese! I’m like a genius or something!

  70. So, when, not if, the female libido drugs are widely distributed and quite inexpensive due to extra competition within the next few years at the very latest, are men going to get their long-overdue apology? “I’m so so sorry for turning you down so much. I was stupid, and selfish.”

  71. jf12 – “…are men going to get their long-overdue apology? ‘I’m so so sorry for turning you down so much. I was stupid, and selfish.’ ”

    Hah! More likely another lament. “Why can’t you guys appreciate we have to take drugs for you?” While at the same time claiming the drugs have erased any remaining agency and therefore responsibility. Likely the use of such of drugs would also render all forms of screaming enthusiastic consent legally null and void.

    But then I may be a pessimist.

  72. re: pessimism.

    Las Minute stuff. “EO 14289, signed along with a few hundred others at 11:59 on 1/20/17, outlaws any male from possessing or wanting to possess any drug, concoction, or medication proven or reputed to enhance female libido. From henceforth only females will be allowed to give date-enhancement pills to other females. At males’ expense.”

  73. As to wanting to be desired or tolerated..
    I’m slowly starting to not give a fuck either way. If she is banging me because she thinks I’ll be her BB, or because I’m her AF, what does i really matter, in the long run? Unless you have marriage on the brain, I can’t tell the advantage of either,
    Lately, I can tell with better accuracy which role she has me in, and here is how I am seeing it- so long as I’m getting what I want, and so long as I am not giving her anything I don’t want to give, what goes on in her pretty little head barely matters.
    The radical change in my not caring became really glaring recently when I went out with a woman lately who was 34, still looked good, but obviously looking for an LTR beta with enough aplha to get her going.. Within a few hours we at my place and she was “enthusiastically” giving and getting .. I knew all along there was a part of her looking to use this sex as a lure to get me hooked for her long term plans. I couldn’t care less,
    Next day she texts me which I responded it was a good night- I did this to get something on text in case she pulled the rape card down the road. Ignored her for another day after she responded that it was indeed very hot.
    She kept texting and eventually asked me wtf? I texted that I wasnt feeling a LTR but maybe we can get together and have fun again soon. She exploded in rage..
    Whatever, I got what I wanted, it was hot and fun, I covered my legal ass, who gives a shit if I’m “desired” alpha or her “beta bucks”? I gave only what I was willing to give, and got what I wanted.
    I’m starting to think this Alpha Beta thing is a very FI thing.. in a way, we are making what they feel, and their desires all important. As if that is what matters. Maybe its best just not to give a shit at all either way. So long as you 1. don’t get married 2. don’t get oneitis 3. spin plates and have options 4. get your needs met and 5. don’t ever give anything you don’t want to give.. you’re golden.
    Of course, I’m not really sure if this is the best strategy, but its where I am at.. and fully aware might just be a phase post BP. Would love to hear some imput from others about it.

    1. If you’re spinning 3 plates and 2 of them are enthusiastic fucks, while the 3rd is a somewhat mediocre “tolerance” fuck who needs ‘convincing’, which gets the call on a Friday night?

      Pretty obvious, right, but what do you with 1 plate who was an enthusiastic lay when you had more plates going, but becomes a ‘tolerance’ fuck after you get into an LTR?

  74. Gedankening. Suppose a woman happens to enjoy being pounced upon unexpectedly (disclaimer, I’ve never done and have no desire to do), and her man knows it and has practiced it with her for years. Can he do so ever again, under YMY?

  75. re: pouncing:
    illegal!
    “The existence of a dating relationship between the persons involved, or the fact of past sexual relations between them, should never by itself be assumed to be an indicator of consent.”
    If someone’s getting pounced it’s gonna be the dude, always…

  76. @Rollo.. yeah, I think I get your point. But all the more reason to not get into LTRs. or to never stop “performing”.
    Option, options, options.. got to have em at all times..
    Am I reading it right?

  77. Rollo asks the world “what do you with 1 plate who was an enthusiastic lay when you had more plates going, but becomes a ‘tolerance [lay] after you get into an LTR?”

    I say we *mandate* sexual enthusiasm in LTR. Who could be against mandating enthusiasm in LTR, and what would be the stated reasons?

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: