The Mate Guarding topic of last week’s post made for some lively debate. It usually does because it’s this behavior, and the root motivators of it, that gets to the heart of dynamics such as an Alpha / Beta mindset, the Scarcity Mentality, Hypergamy, issues of morality and maybe an uncomfortable realization that your LTR has been subject to those motivators.
The purpose and approach men have with regard to mate guarding usually comes down to two positions.
The first being a moral high-ground idea that women do in fact have a moral or rational agency and thus have an obligation to keep their own Hypergamy in check. This may be from a religious perspective, but more often it’s based upon men’s idealistic equalist hopes that a woman can rationally be expected to parse her own investment in what men think should be Relational Equity.
Or in other words, women should know better, and be expected to cooperate with a male imperative by self-regulating their Hypergamous impulses as a matter of personal and social responsibility.
On a limbic level Hypergamy doesn’t care about Relational Equity and openly appealing to a woman’s reason, rationality or sense of responsibility a man believes she should be beholden to is counterproductive in influencing her genuine desires. However, this is usually a self-guided hope that women will recognize and regulate those behaviors at the risk of being socially ostracized in an already feminine-primary social environment.
Again, this can be couched in a religious expectation, but in a secular-equalist sense it amounts to putting the burden of mate guarding on women by presuming their ‘equal rationality’ will result in women mate guarding themselves by policing their own Hypergamy in men’s best interests. Anything less either makes them convictionless or the nebulous “low quality woman” who wont play by the old-order rules and expectations.
The second approach is a proactive mate guarding based on the presumption that mate guarding is a ‘defense’ against mate poaching by other, presumably (but not necessarily) more Alpha men than the one doing the guarding.
Within that context it’s understandable why men would want to protect their personal investment in a woman. What woman wouldn’t be aroused by the prospect of being fought over by two men she perceives as Alpha rivals? It’s a strong affirmation of her desirability and SMV.
Where it turns into a Beta Tell is when a man’s lifestyle revolves around ‘keeping’ her in a possessive sense for fear of losing her because she’s his only viable option for sending his genetic material into the future. That kind of mate guarding is the kind inspired by a scarcity mentality, but it’s also due to long evolved, subconscious sensitivities to her behavioral inconsistencies at or around her time of ovulation.
This is what Dr. Hasselton was getting into in her studies – ovulatory shift in mate preferences created an evolved sensitivity of them in men which in turn produced contingency behaviors (mate guarding) to ensure he wasn’t wasting his parental investment efforts with a child that wasn’t his own.
An evolved mate guarding sensitivity and contingent strategy was basically insurance against men’s cuckoldry risks.
I would argue that a contingent mate guarding strategy evolved not as a direct response to Alpha (or even Beta) competition stresses, but rather due to women’s innate Hypergamy, their sexual pluralism and the potential for parental investment deception when women were left with their Hypergamy unchecked.
If a woman’s predominant perception of you is Alpha, if her mental point of origin is one in which she recognizes her own SMV as being subordinate to your own, she wont be asking your “permission” to go to Vegas with her girlfriends for a weekend because her desire for her Alpha will be stronger than her peers influence on her during her ovulation week.
In theory, no woman who sees you as her perceived Alpha and Hypergamous best interest will want to ‘cheat’ on you – so the idea wont even occur to her. I realize this sounds simplistic until you consider the readiness with which most men will similarly isolate themselves socially, putting off friends and family in preference to spending his time with what he believes is a high-value woman.
Demonstrate, Never Explicate
From The 48 Laws of Power
Law 9
Win through your Actions, Never through Argument
Any momentary triumph you think gained through argument is really a Pyrrhic victory: The resentment and ill will you stir up is stronger and lasts longer than any momentary change of opinion. It is much more powerful to get others to agree with you through your actions, without saying a word. Demonstrate, do not explicate.
There is no greater demonstration of higher value for a man than walking away from a woman. Even a woman’s strongest perception of higher value cannot compete with the self-certainty of value a man has when he disconnects himself from a woman who’s already accepted him for her intimacy.
While Dread (even passive dread) is a strong signal of a man’s higher value, removing your own intimate acceptance from a woman and confirming the value her Hypergamous nature questioned about you is the last word in DHV.
For the first half of their lives, even the most mediocre of women become accustomed to men qualifying for their attention, intimacy and sexual access. Women quickly learn the utility of their first, best, agency with men – the power of sexual control.
So when that agency is proven useless with a man, that control is eliminated and she begins to question her capacity for that control. By removing himself from dependency on that agency he confirms that his SMV is more valuable than her own.
A lot of men report that their unprompted disinterest in sex with a woman, a wife, a girlfriend, often provokes a woman’s imagination with regard to her control and/or inspires a greater sexual determination to please him in order to reestablish this control when they next engage in sex.
There’s precious little that’s more effective at reestablishing Frame for a man than the demonstration of higher value walking away from a woman’s accepted intimacy represents. Some of the best sex you’ll have in your life will come after a reunited breakup.
Now, the reason I’ve detailed this is because the foundations of a man maintaining Frame within a relationship are rooted in limiting or removing this sexual agency and demonstrating higher value as part of that process.
Establishing Boundaries
London Towers on the SoSuave forum started a fairly contentious debate on how a man ought to establish boundaries within a relationship last week:
In my last LTR I never set boundaries, let her hang with her ex, guys, never got jealous, just didn’t give a fuck…because my life was going well and I had no insecurity she wouldn’t do anything because I was the shit. She even wanted her ex to hang with us, just so she could show me off. This actually seemed to work for me as I had some natural alpha state for the first 1 year due to life success and she could feel this, thus other guys were just orbiters. I would even joke to her about who she found attractive in the bar, that’s how self confident I was. This would actually make her want me more.
Then cracks in my game came out, I was going through a rough patch with life and suddenly the game shifted. She would start to compare me to other guys including her ex in a negative way. I suddenly became insecure because I didn’t feel Alpha anymore due to life not going well and suddenly started enforcing boundaries which she would constantly test because she knew I lost my game unlike when I was Alpha and didn’t give a shit. Enforcing boundaries was actually coming from an insecure place and I don’t think your words mean shit if you ain’t got your game tight.
Now, I’m not too sure how I would handle my next LTR. I’m in the process of becoming alpha again, but now truly alpha as in my inner game this time. But would I now still have the not give a sh1t attitude if my girl still hung out with her ex/guys?
Part of me thinks if my game is tight, I give her great sex, pluck at her emotional spectrum, she rides on the magic carpet of my exciting life (which comes from knowing my life mission) she will be hooked on me in a multiple of ways and if she knew I would drop her cold and can easily replace her if she doesn’t provide me with the affection/sex that I need.. she will enforce her own boundaries.
This is the only true boundary I can provide. A girls attention will drop if she starts even emotionally to involve someone else. At that point you just freeze immediately. So the only boundary you can ever enforce is through your attention and her subtle awareness you have options and will walk away with ease at the very beginning of her not providing for your needs. That loss is something she could not deal with.
I’d encourage readers to take the time to read through that discussion and the various approaches to establishing boundaries within a relationship (or even non-exclusive plates you may be spinning). After picking through the differing perspectives I made the connection between establishing boundaries and men’s natural predilection for mate guarding behaviors.
Most of the expressed perspectives tend to side with either of the two mate guarding approaches I mentioned at the beginning of today’s post; one, in which women are rationally expected to police their own Hypergamous impulses, and the other, where an active (and equally reasoned) explicating of boundaries are overtly declared as an ultimatum in an effort to protect a man against the parental investment risks of being cuckolded by a woman he knows can’t be expected not to otherwise succumb to her Hypergamous impulses.
If you notice how London Towers’ story unfolds here he essentially proceeded by demonstrating his higher value, secure in the confidence of it, only to have that DHV eroded due to his life’s circumstance.
This is when the boundary of Alpha indifference he’d organically set (albeit unknowingly), based upon his value, was challenged in his drop of status and esteem. I’ve elaborated in the past about a man’s burden of performance or how women’s concept of ‘love’ is based on a passive opportunism of what a man is (rather than who he is), but you get the picture illustrated for you here.
Next, commenter Soolaimon picks up the opposite end of the extreme:
These boundary guys have it ass backwards.
They are judging women by their words instead of judging them by their actions.
Judge women by their actions and not their words.
Agreeing to a boundary is only her words that these guys think will keep her from cheating.
Women who cut out other men from their lives on their own is a woman who understands what an exclusive relationship is.
Those are her actions you judge her on.
Not useless words she can go back on at any moment.
[…]
Smart classy intelligent women already know what exclusivity means they don’t need to have it defined when they are defining it for you by removing other men on their own.
Women do that for Alphas and not betas who need to set a boundary out of fear.
Women that are really into you will agree to what you want with no problem.
When they lose interest they will still cheat on you making your boundary useless.
If your woman knows what exclusivity means and has the same values as you why are you so terrified to put a ring on her finger and marry her?
There’s a lot to consider when you establish boundaries with a woman. Essentially those boundaries men wish to establish and have respected by a woman really just amount to a codified form of mate guarding.
When you think about it, this is what (at least in an old social order) the marriage contract was meant to insure from a male-beneficial perspective – an assurance of fidelity, but also a contractual insurance against Hypergamy.
Considering the contemporary risks involved, in the current social environment there are any number of reasons men are wary of marrying a woman, but what marriage has become is really a challenge to what a man believes about mate guarding and his confidence in controlling a woman’s Hypergamous nature based upon his degree of desirability to her.
Though I don’t disagree in principle, Soolaimon’s exaggeration is founded on the idea that there’s always going to be a bigger fish; another AMOG to seize your woman’s interest should your combination of Game, material and emotional provisioning, or ambition for such be lacking.
Like most absolutists, he does little to contextualize the preconceptions a woman may have with a particular man they’re already involved with. A woman may fantasize about sex with a more Alpha male during her ovulatory phase, but that doesn’t mean she has the opportunity to realize it – even for “smart classy independent women”.
That said, and after London Towers’ example, it’s impossible not to come to a conclusion that implied, demonstrated boundaries – ones that have actionable consequences of intimate and invested loss (i.e. Dread) – are preferable to explicated, but ultimately appealed-reason declarations of boundaries that are negotiated insurance policies to limit her Hypergamy.
While I do believe boundaries are a necessary part of a relationship, it’s far better for women to discover them for what they are, and the consequences of them, by demonstration rather than overt explanation.
The hand burned by the stove teaches better than any warning.
The only person who’s behavior you can control is your own, but that behavior can have a significant impact on the behaviors of others.
[…] Boundaries […]
Top-shelf post Rollo. “A woman may fantasize about sex with a more Alpha male during her ovulatory phase, but that doesn’t mean she has the opportunity to realize it – even for “smart classy independent women”.” Q. Regardless of whether she already perceives see you as Alpha, do you think women ‘unconsciously’ place themselves in potential situations during the ovulatory phase, whereby they create those opportunities (a GNO / Vegas weekend), or, do do you believe they need to ‘consciously’ remove themselves from those opportunities? Ie. Self-regulating their Hypergamous impulses as a matter of personal and social responsibility. it seems… Read more »
Brilliant post Rollo. Explicating defined boundaries (declaring curfews for GNO’s, insisting on de-friending orbiters on facebook, etc.) is only constraining the woman’s ability to cheat and does nothing to alter her desire to cheat. Introspection that leads to self-improvement would be time better spent.
Women see men as nothing more than a safety net and a path up the social ladder. They use men’s shallow and weak ego and self-esteem to their financial advantage. Men are morons. If she can get the financial part on her own, she’s going to go after younger, poorer, more fit and horny men. Why? For the same reason older, wealthier men go after younger, poorer women. It’s all about finance, control and sex, people. Men and women are the same. The only difference between the two is who controls the wealth and power. Laws are being rewritten to… Read more »
“Girl’s night out? Ok, we’re getting a babysitter and I’m going out drinking with . I’ll meet you afterwards if you like.”
“Girl’s night out? Ok, we’re getting a babysitter and I’m going out drinking with (insert name of your single player buddy). I’ll meet you afterwards if you like.”
In Islamic cultures in which women are mate-guarded by being forced to wear head-covering-clothes, have their mobility restricted, and otherwise kept separate from other men, is this a sign of fundamental beta attitudes in those cultures?
@Carlos, not necessarily Beta per se, but you could certainly make a case that the doctrinal rationale and practice is based on an insecurity that borders on being an obsessive compulsion.
I’m not Muslim so I probably wouldn’t be the best one to ask.
@ Carlos..that’s just religion, but in a way it’s an EXPLICIT way to force Muslim women to overtly demonstrate their devotion to Allah, and consequently their devotion to their men. Christian men do it to. “If you love God, you’ll come correct and not be any other man’s whore but mine”. “If you don’t love God, you’re a dismal failure and should be ashamed”. What red pill Christian men are learning is that these women are NOT ashamed – of anything. Christian women are hardly devout in any context, and are no better than heathen women in many ways. This… Read more »
Rollo, really like your stuff but frankly think you’ve been focusing on being Alpha way too much. Most guys that are below avg in Height will almost never be considered Alpha regardless of what they do. That is 1/2 of all men right there. Not attractive. Too skinny. To heavy. Bald. Introverted. You name it; any little flaw and there are large obstacles to overcome. There is a reason way only a small percentage of men ARE considered Alpha; maybe 10%. And Alphas MUST always be on their game. Somebody TALLER. Or BETTER LOOKING. Or DRESSED BETTER. Or as in… Read more »
Moslem nations are odd; yes they put a tight control on their women but they put them on pedestals at the same time. Literally all over the map on that one even within the same tribe/ nation
Great post. Very throught provoking. I was this guy….I sometimes am this guy: totally confident with the girl. Then something she does to undermine me–usually at a weak moment causing me to over-react. I’ll share two experiences. Years ago (10?) before I became game aware/Red Pill I went out with a girl who suddenly started playing that game of pulling back, making all sorts of weird demands on defining the relationship instead of just going with it. That shifted my insecurities but I was still in charge. One time, she took a guy’s card in front of me. The dude… Read more »
Abandonment is a threat, and an option, but it’s not the only threat, and not the only option.
Just think of training a dog. If the dog misbehaves, do you abandon it? Threaten to abandon it?
Abandoning is one essential tool. It’s the ultimate tool. It’s the ultimate boundary.
But it’s not the only tool nor the only boundary.
Boundaries for thee but not for me.
” women should know better, and be expected to cooperate with a male imperative by self-regulating their Hypergamous impulses as a matter of personal and social responsibility.” I think that men are expecting something much simpler than that: Integrity. If a woman wants to live a life indulging in hypergamy and banging alphas that’s fine. What’s dispicable is broken promises of monogamy, and the damage they do to the lives of men and children. That and tricking betas into thinking she isn’t/wasn’t a CC rider. In short: It’s ok to be a skank. It’s not ok to be a lying… Read more »
re: “it’s far better for women to discover them” I don’t know, frankly. Sometime I think our womenz is not learning because they are incapable of really learning from their own mistakes. If it were really better for your wife, for example, to discover for herself the consequences of her committing adultery, then you may as well set her up in a motel room with some guy and videotape him seducing her … oh wait, wasn’t that a different post? Even for relatively lesser things such as a SAHW being lazy and not cooking dinner, is it really better to… Read more »
Once blown to smithereens, that’s it. There’s no “twice shy”. There is no possible learning from some mistakes. That’s how civilization developed: learning from others. In recent years it’s become clear that imagining correctly described consequences ought to be more than sufficient, actually it’s stronger than experiencing the consequences directly.
Paul A. Howard-Jones, Rafal Bogacz, Jee H. Yoo, Ute Leonards, Skevi Demetriou. The neural mechanisms of learning from competitors. NeuroImage, 2010; 53 (2): 790 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.027
Reminded of a girl I overheard once talking to her friends that her boyfriend gets mad whenever she tells him she would leave him for Prince.
Then she told them she doesn’t know why he would get mad, it’s not like she’s ever going to meet him.
First thought that came to my mind was the best thing the boyfriend should do the next time is not get mad, but either say or demonstrate that he would leave her for a regular girl he found just walking down the street if he thought she was finer or less annoying.
@Rollo,
I’m about to finish reading all your posts,
I’m from a middle eastern background, (I’m agnostic) and I assure you that women are the same even in the middle of the Sahara land and they are fantasizing having sex with the Jinni as we speak.
@WaterUnderTheFridge , deciding which acts are despicable or not doesn’t actually carry any influence. We tend to think that it does, but that’s an error. People don’t really care what we think about them. They care about the consequences of our actions. And women are not integral or integrated. They are segmented, like an orange. Their ego is one thing among certain peers, and another thing in different circumstances. They barely have an ego, as men understand it. So don’t expect integrity from them; it’s impossible. They don’t have it. Our emotional reactions to other people actually carry very little… Read more »
@watercannon: “Then she told them she doesn’t know why he would get mad, it’s not like she’s ever going to meet him.” It’s a shit test, of sorts. His anger is mismanaged, as you said. He’d do better like you said, to do tit for tat and tease her in turn. Actually, you do it in stages 1) ignore 2) tell her to stop doing that particular shit test, because it is rude. She can do that in private if she has to (contacting guys on her phone in front of you, looking at online dating sites in front of… Read more »
@carlos,
And I really feel sorry for the phony feminist Beta Alaadeen.
And the notion that we can just casually next any girl if she messes up really isn’t in line with reality. 1) girls are not all of the same value to us – some girls are hotter, have better personalities, have a valuable history with us, are trained up according to our desires, have a superior sexual chemistry with us, etc. Girls are not equal and replacable like gears for a gear box – they are all different sizes and shapes and don’t match our needs in the same way 2) Not all relationships are fuck buddy relationships. You are… Read more »
There are also a great many stories online of guys who were once treated as betas by their wives, who successfully turned things around.
So for them it was certainly not better to just dump a girl who wasn’t really ito him and spend his efforts on getting a new girl. They were able to CULTIVATE attraction.
Attraction is not just a given thing, set in stone and done, at the first glance. You are not an Alpha or Not-an-Alpha.
They cultivated genuine sexual desire. Over time. And it was worth the investment.
@xsplat I agree with you. There are two types of honor/shame: 1. Internal/Emotional An implant that is either installed in a human being’s youth, or isn’t. Properly installed it hurts them when they do X ( lie, cheat, steal, betray etc.) and pleases them when they do Y ( honesty, loyalty, charity etc.) This implant works well in men though it isn’t installed as well or as often in recent decades (poor socialization). As far as women go, the implant is almost completely incompatible. A human being that can talk itself into anything is immune, add to that our decreased… Read more »
@wateruderthefridge. Yup. We can decrease the risks of cheating. Decrease the risks of having our property stolen. But we can’t eliminate them, as far as I know. Risk management and reward management. I’ve been able to learn of some of the more extreme rewards that women can provide, and I find such a vast life improvement, that I’ve found it important to be able to stay in the game and minimize as much risk as possible while still getting as much reward as possible. But there is always risk. I fully expect losses as built right into the very fabric… Read more »
Thank you Just spoke with a good friend of mine about this.
Rollo, I have been following you for quite a while now and I really respect and admire the value and insight you have provided to the community and men in general. I do not consider myself a men’s rights activist but I have sincerely accepted most of the red pill truths and totally agree with your philosophy and views. I have always been a game-aware individual and I wanted to thank you for helping me evolve my mindset and expand my knowledge in areas where game was lacking enough insight such as LTRs. What I wanted to say however is… Read more »
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/11/17/the-boyfriend-zone/#comment-632058 1905hrs
http://therationalmale.com/2014/11/17/boundaries/#comment-68832 2123hrs
lol Rollo if the timezones are in synch then you’re getting recycled garbage.
Interesting article, Rollo
Takeaways:
1. Relationships require management. (Andrian, relationships require work by the man. You don’t get a free pass because you’re alpha.)
2. Management is by actions primarily and ultimately.
3. Discuss a woman’s behavior that is risky and shows a lack of self-mateguarding. Assume that a woman will acquiesce to expected self-mateguarding behavior.
4. Do not negotiate boundaries.
jf12 had useful input about the importance of verbal lessons.
xsplat had a helpful observation that women aren’t fungible commodities in relationships. Vaginas are fungible commodities, but not fun, sweet, warm women who make sammiches and self-mateguard.
xspat you sound like a woman
WELL WRITTEN, THOUGHTFUL, HEAVY ON THE … SINCERELY APPRECIATED.
THE…………Even a woman’s strongest perception of higher value cannot compete with the self-certainty of value a man has when he disconnects himself from a woman who’s already accepted him for her intimacy.
IS PRICELESS
THANK YOU
@xsplat re: “There are also a great many stories online of guys who were once treated as betas by their wives, who successfully turned things around.” I have never seen any that seemed at all realistic, and believe me I’ve looked at hundreds of thousands of such online pages over the years. I have seen highly ratcheted-up Dread work, online and irl, but nothing else. Although women are very flighty and wishy-washy about all other things, about the one thing a woman never changes is whether she treats a particular man as beta. Empirically once beta always beta. As you’ve… Read more »
tasdg makes an excellent point. “Vaginas are fungible commodities, but not fun, sweet, warm women who make sammiches and self-mateguard.”
Obviously it would be ludicrous to Next a good woman. But I think that point has to be made explicitly anyway, because someone’s gonna argue otherwise. Lousy women are indeed fungible, since there are so many of them.
@jf12, have you read the stories from http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/ ? They had been originally told on the Roissy.wordpress.com website, which later became heartist.wordpress.com. I forget his username back then. He went into great detail and his history was also turned into posts on some sites.
@xsplat re: Hawaiian Libertarian / Keoni Galt / Dave from Hawaii. Yes, I’ve read him extensively in the past, including the several different versions, originally redpill now purplepill, of what he thought finally did the trick within his own marriage. I think it’s very nice that his wife managed to change herself into something more closely resembling a good wife. I’d be curious to learn what she believes i.e. which changes in KG’s behavior were most closely correlated with the changes in her behavior. I do not believe most/all women respond properly to being treated well. I think it’s far… Read more »
I am currently writing a book for Koreans traveling to America. I have a chapter on dating I am working on. In Korea, the main value in a relationship is HARMONY. In America the main value in a relationship is TRUST. Because East Asians/Koreans value HARMONY, anything that interferes with harmony, some opposite sex friend beta orbiter or alpha guy can be safely eliminated from the equation. Couples can be honest how they feel and say,” I don’t like when you talk with him, it makes me feel “. Or the can be more “Patriarchal” and say, DON”T TALK TO… Read more »
@xsplat “And the notion that we can just casually next any girl if she messes up really isn’t in line with reality. ……….. Yes, maintaining and increasing attraction is worth it, and far superior to nexting, in most circumstances. If you are actually into the girl.” This needs to be said, thank you. But then, earlier on…”But shit tests can escalate into emotional abuse, and so the man really must get emotionally and even physically violent to prevent being treated like a shit stained doormat.” Physical violence is not in the tool box. Nor is physical escalation in the face… Read more »
@xsplat re: purplepill. Over at the Dalrock’s, Dave pecked out the following sequence of ASCII text characters: “An unapologetically manly man will cause gina tingles in virtually all women, irrespective of his social or economic status. If the guy in church displays the manhood that was evident in Christ, most of the sisters would swoon over them.” Obviously those words have no correspondence to reality, at all, but they do tell us of what Dave, and many men like me, would *prefer* to be true. Doctrinal aside, for those who care, Christ’s female followers were not lusting after his manhood.… Read more »
“The hand burned by the stove teaches better than any warning.” Gems…. You are on a roll these last months brother. RT has really helped me realize what I think all men already know but subsume to convention – feminine imperative, gynocentrism, etc – the medium is the message. There’s this neighbour I’m trying to get to put out…everything I’m learning from RT & the manosphere is being displayed, shaming, shit tests…medium is truly the message. And today’s post…On point!!! Basically, be aware that you have value and be willing (& able) to walk away…it’s always best for a man… Read more »
@jf12 , I have no first hand knowledge of what happened with the guys who claim to have increased the frequency and quality of sex and lessened the strife with their wives. But I know that in my life the act of laying down boundaries and expectations does not all happen on the first date. So the framework of a cultivated sexual response to a cultivated alpha persona is in line with my personal experience. Now of course by now I lay a lot down immediately – in fact that’s a big part of my fast seduction style – to… Read more »
Charles Bukowski on setting boundaries:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8KJiay6EI0
She married him the same year.
@bbb re: “Physical violence is not in the tool box.”
Correct. But a woman would do well to *perceive* the threat of violence anyway, to help herself maintain the proper respect in LTR.
My soft Dread was too impotent, apparently.
Treat em mean to keep em keen.
Ya, but 80 or 90% of the time they have to feel warm and comfortable with you.
Yes, you can’t be honey all the time, and even vinegar is not always harsh enough.
@bbb Assault, battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, and statutory rape are against the law. Sure, definitions can be parsed by jurisdiction, but the fact remains that NOBODY should behave in a manner that could be construed (even if factually innocent) as any of these things. Man, you are such a fan of hyperbole and exaggeration. I mention a spank and unhooking bras and sex with a 17 year old and you bring up all these completely unrelated things, such as sex with a minor, sexual assault, sexual battery, etc. We don’t have to tip toe around so cautiously. Stop making… Read more »
In my country the legal age of consent is 16, by the way. The girl told me she was nineteen, and will be eighteen in a few months. I have nothing against her being 17. Not a damned thing. If I date a 21 year old for five years, in five years she’ll be 26. Have you ever compared a 26 year old ass against a 21 year old ass? In 5 years the 17 year old will be 22. It’s no wonder that people in the US, Europe, and every fucking where else on the whole planet used to… Read more »
@rocket
> What wish you’d do is focus on Beta’s and what
> they can do to be more successful with women
> and have more successful relationships
>… an actual strategy that WORKS would be a
> great asset.
I will recommend my essays about appropriate masculinity, especially this one:
http://davidvs.net/hobbies/masculinity-connection.shtml
There are ways to connect with people better that anyone can learn. Being the best man that she can picture herself getting is largely about her memories of how well you two relate,
Regarding Charles Bukowski game, that short temper can be a byproduct of long heavy drinking. It’s been about five years since I was a regular drinker – I drink less than once a month now – but I’m very familiar with the drinkers short fuse. I look at that clip and just smirk. Most guys would not be able to intuit the response to expect to such actions. A fiery temper is base and crass. Cave man. That not holding back instant expression of primal emotions tends to elicit some primal responses. I’m not sure if 1 in 100 guys… Read more »
jf12, don’t know if you’re following my Dread Game reports anymore, but looks like Mrs. Gamer has settled down as far as her insecurity tests go. I woke up today and thought, “Wow, guess I’m happily married!” Don’t know how long this will last.
Here is an example of my Charles Bukowski style game. (I’ve never read his books and that’s the only clip of him I’ve ever seen). Two nights ago my new 17 year old came over late. She had been clubbing and had a few drinks, and fucked me like a wild animal possessed by the spirit of another wild animal. In the morning she was unresponsive and distant. That pissed me off. So after five minutes of gently trying to get some action started, I just got up, pulled my shorts over my lubed dick, and started walking out. She… Read more »
Oh, and a few days ago I had left her asleep in my bed to go visit a different girl, and came back with a heart and “I love you” drawn in pen on my belly. I forgot to wipe it off and she discovered it while I was naked with my belly near her face. I turned around and quickly rubbed it off and claimed first “oh, it’s just dirt”, and then “oh, I drew it on myself”. Both excuses were transparently lame. But I didn’t care how lame they were. I wasn’t trying to pretend they weren’t lame.… Read more »
@Rocket more successful with women and have more successful relationships. Beta’s are the vast majority of men and you can do far more to help them than you can do to help true or even faux Alpha’s. So maybe its not “Alpha” to mate guard, but for a beta in a LTR who wants to keep his wife from straying … an actual strategy that WORKS would be a great asset. http://therationalmale.com/2011/11/21/kill-the-beta-2/ http://therationalmale.com/2012/10/02/up-the-alpha/ http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/05/build-a-better-beta/ IMO, soft dread is the best form of mate guarding http://therationalmale.com/2013/05/13/soft-dread/ FWIW don’t expect me to build you up as a ‘positive’ Beta, you’ll only get… Read more »
the best way to up the alpha is to become dangerous and or master a high risk hobby
everything in the SMP is a proxy for violence and the ablity to take on risk
@Andrian, I am starting to perceive your advice as a rough guide on how to constantly micromanage my woman’s animalistic/hypergamous nature. http://therationalmale.com/2014/02/03/tales-of-hypergamy-recursive-game/ Micromanagement is what men men believe Game and the Red Pill is all about before they internalize this awareness and incorporate it into who they are: As you think so shall you become. Neo: “What’re you trying to say, that I can dodge bullets?” Morpheus: “No Neo, what I’m saying is that when you’re ready you wont have to.” There comes a point of internalization when your Game-awareness becomes part of who you are. There is no longer… Read more »
When it’s all said and done, a woman, whether she’s a fling, a GF or a wife, will do what she wishes to do and decides to do. The trick for the man in the relationship is to make it so she wants to do what is most beneficial for the man and for the relationship. Sometimes she will choose to do what he wants, sometimes not. The man also has to put down his boundaries and institute clear consequences for crossing them. If she crosses them, the man has to impose the consequence. The man and/or the relationship has… Read more »
There are at least three different aspects to mate guarding, and they should be considered independently. . Mate guarding, as an attempt to prevent infidelity, directly, cannot work. It sends the wrong message, and if a woman wants to cheat, she will find a way around any relevant boundary. However, a woman needs boundaries, as a direct expression of male dominance (and which show that her man has self-respect), and as an unambiguous way for her to experience and participate in the submission part of the relationship dynamic (which is natural for her). For example, her going on a Girls… Read more »
@ ton
the best way to up the alpha is to become dangerous and or master a high risk hobby
I recommend javelin-catching.
everything in the SMP is a proxy for violence and the ablity to take on risk
There ya go. Catching incoming javelins is risky.
lolz
A thedeti The man and/or the relationship has to be high enough value to her such that worsening the relationship or losing it altogether is a less appealing choice than working to preserve it. Yes, and this is another way in which the alpha bux/beta fuck dichotomy can break down. A woman loves pragmatically. She will subconsciously calculate the mans value to her, as an overall picture. And this calculation will affect how much she fucks him and wants to suck his cock. And the calculation can include how much she needs his money. Necessity is the mother of good… Read more »
Hi Rollo,
I’m pumped about book 2!
Please consider putting this one in it: Plate Theory V: Lady’s Game
Plate Theory V: Lady’s Game is key
Heh, that’s already in Book 1!
Mate guarding is not a one situation event. There is classic beta mate guarding which I think most everybody is talking about, that is, some insecure schmuck with no boundaries or control over his woman, who is deathly afraid that she’ll stray because he knows that he’s outgunned in the SMP by a whole swath of men. He knows this because his gf openly flirts with other men, treats him like a schmuck, etc. So he jumps between her and any man she sees talking to her. The second case is that the woman in fact is yours, you’re the… Read more »
Tl;dr – if you’re guarding her as you would guard a small child or a weaker male friend, that is, from assault and actual physical bullying, that’s cool. If you guard her because you’re an insecure dweeb who fears that she’ll walk on you with the first guy that talks to you, then you need to up your self esteem and SMV, stat.
This all assumes you care for her of course.
When I wrote “After that point, the responsibility shifts to you to manage the situation”, I was thinking about “management” in the sense that the threat, to her, is no more than annoyance.
Otherwise, I agree with The Burninator.
And Ton was right when he wrote: “the best way to up the alpha is to become dangerous and or master a high risk hobby … everything in the SMP is a proxy for violence and the ability to take on risk”.
Until you do this, you cannot truly understand what he is talking about.
Also, being disrespected by some random fool is just noise, and does not merit much of a response, in and of itself.
However, being disrespected on your home turf or in a significant environment is serious, and must be quashed immediately and completely, and in a way that leaves no doubts.
And Ton was right when he wrote: “the best way to up the alpha is to become dangerous and or master a high risk hobby … everything in the SMP is a proxy for violence and the ability to take on risk”.
LOL
I need to reread the first one!
Last comment,
Please Keep the pictures in the book. Pictures increase retention. They put the abstract into the concrete.
Pics = way more effective book
@ ton “the best way to up the alpha is to become dangerous and or master a high risk hobby” I disagree. I’m into skydiving, and it’s just about the most high risk hobby there is. doesn’t make me any more of an alpha…..just means that i’m into a high risk hobby. A woman’s gina isn’t going to tingle just because I jump out of a plane. There has to be the element of douche rag loser piece of shit there beforehand before skydiving would change anything. Then again, since women like doucherag loser pieces of shit, I wouldn’t need… Read more »
“I disagree. I’m into skydiving, and it’s just about the most high risk hobby there is. doesn’t make me any more of an alpha…..just means that i’m into a high risk hobby.”
It depends on your mindset and nature. And note that he said “master” a high risk hobby.
If you are just an adrenaline junkie and numb to everything else, then no, there will be no other benefits, because there will be no self-development through discipline and pushing your mental and physical limits.
A few questions come to mind Is there a difference between PDA and mate guarding? I’ve always been a very kino type of guy- probably one of the reasons I did ok even at my worst BP days. I never did it with fear in mind that I can think of, it’s just always been a thing to hold hands, put my hands in the small of her back etc. If anything I always chiled it a bit if other people are around or engaging.. otherwise I just do all that stuff kind of naturally. Now I’m wondering if that… Read more »
Also, all high-risk activities will not necessarily be seen as Alpha by women.
The totality of what Ton has done is much more high-risk than just skydiving. And yet, as he has told us, women do not always appreciate these accomplishments.
Women are unduly impressed by shiny and flashy things, as are pigeons and squirrels.
I think a lot of more insecure guys like to rationalize mate guarding as protecting or guarding their mate from a subjectively more Alpha guy than themselves. The evolved instinctual sensitivities and consequent behaviors that constitute a suspicious guarding of a woman don’t originate from running off a sexual rival, but rather from the subconscious understanding that (particularly during ovulation) a woman wants to have an extra-paired mating with a more sexually dominant, sexually desirable male. Fighting off a sexual rival can be considered ‘guarding’, but a mental need to guard a woman originates from men’s instinctual sensitivity to women’s… Read more »
If a girl wants to cheat and you’ve past the point of no return (in extreme betaness), then nothing you do will stop her from cheating. Case in point: I hardly have much experience banging older women (only banged two), but on one occasion, I banged some ho who was married and had two kids. I first saw her walking adjacent to me on campus and while her face was hot from a far, her body screamed fertility. She had that ass that latin women are most known for, so I instinctively had to say something to her. I was… Read more »
@TheDeti
“The man and/or the relationship has to be high enough value to her such that worsening the relationship or losing it altogether is a less appealing choice than working to preserve it”
This can prevent many types of bad behaviour, unfortunately it will not prevent sexual infidelity. It’s simply far too easy for a woman to cheat without being caught. Quite reasonably she does not expect consequences, so no ultimatum, tacit or explicit, will stop her. Only honor would do the trick.
I wish that were true:
http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/18/the-honor-system/
I agree with Tinder here.. when a woman decides to go, she’s gone. Nothing you do will change it and will actually just become part of her rationalization. Dread game? she’ll say she was justified in cheating because you never made her feel safe. Made her feel safe? she’ll just say that she loves you, but is not IN love with you anymore, etc etc.. The only disagreement with Rollo and TM here is the thought that alphas arent getting cheated on with regularity. Yes,they are. Women are amazing creatures that way. Remember, women crave alpha certain times of the… Read more »
but also crave beta sometimes of the month too. Yeah, when they need something to make life easier. Women don’t bang guys for validation, they bang them because the exchange is good while they’re waiting for the Alpha to get done with one of her girlfriends and she’s on her upcycle. They bang Betas because they recognize their necessity for doing so in order to ensure a long term provisioning. Women cheat with Alphas and on Betas, but you are right they will bang Betas when necessary or just often enough to keep the intermittent reward dynamic working for her.… Read more »
@Rollo
Me too. Only honor WOULD do the trick. Sadly it’s not on the menu. Very glad you added that link. Even as I said it I had in my head what you had said about honor being a tool invented by man, which woman uses against him while pretending she too adheres to it….if you don’t think I’ve misconstrued it by shortening it.
I agree with what Rollo has written.
On a related topic, in male dominated and led relationships, a natural dynamic (figuratively speaking, and not as some absolute limit) is that the woman takes care of their inner world, while the man interacts with the outer world, and acts as its boundary.
So when she tells someone that she belongs to you, she has essentially retreated within your home and closed the door.
At that point, continuing persistence by another man is equivalent to a stranger pounding (or worse) on your front door.
@Rollo I’d love your opinion on something that I think about often lately. I believe that exclusivity of intimate and sexual attention increases the feelings for the target. I’ve experienced monogamy and I’ve experienced non monogamous though affectionate relationships. There are plenty of reasons to avoid monogamy (for example decreased capacity for dread game), but one reason to want it, even without sexual jealousy, is the basic reality that human attention is finite and divisible, including the types of attention we call lust and love. I know that when my intimacy is divided between women it dilutes the strength of… Read more »
Rollo wrote: “Fighting off a sexual rival can be considered ‘guarding’, but a mental need to guard a woman originates from men’s instinctual sensitivity to women’s Hypergamy and the behaviors it prompts them to.” That reminds me of the ev. psychologist David Buss who wrote a book about why jealousy is as necessary as sex and love. “Humans are jealous because non-jealous people were not our ancestors.” First chapter: http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/b/buss-passion.html The discussion here about how different men (alpha, beta etc.) express that instinct is most interesting. There was a comment about how women who self guard tend to be less… Read more »
@jack, interesting take. This is along the lines of the Hasselton study I linked in this post. I’ll have to consider further.
These are related to that jealous dynamic though:
http://therationalmale.com/2014/01/08/possession/
http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/28/gut-check/
@Rollo- exactly. But a cheat is a cheat. If the guy is alpha enough, he probably won’t care much.. but even the best of alphas can be layed low by a cheating spouse/gf if he’s in any way invested in her.
End result is alpha or beta- keep your eyes open.. no self comforting lies, no end, as you say, to performance.
@thepatriotblogspot re: danger
Well, yuh see, there’s cool danger, and there’s uncool danger. High school nerd risking blowing his face off by mouth-pipetting nitrating acid to perform heavily unsanctioned experiments in the woods, somehow doesn’t arouse the girls’ dreams.
@Hobbes: I wouldn’t say, “women crave beta”. Alphas are something they do crave but a beta is something they’re “eh” or “okay” about. Also, I don’t think anyone here has stated that alphas don’t get cheated on. They do. Hell, even I got cheated on once (that I could confirm). I suspect that there was probably two other times but that wasn’t ever confirmed. Now, where alphas do have the advantage, is they’re more likely to consistently have their girl on check during their luteal/ follicular phase of the month AND the week she’s most fertile (which let’s be honest,… Read more »
Women don’t “crave” what’s readily offered and available.
Nice post jacklabear. There are clearly biological and genetic reasons for many of our behaviors, jealousy included. Coveting what others have contributes to the competition for resources and reproduction, makes the species stronger, etc. Humanity has only lived in this charmed highly advanced prosperous technical civilization for maybe a century out of the 200,000 years our species has existed. Our biology has not fully evolved to this style of sedate living, we still have genetic traits that are more useful to a nomadic hunter and gatherer. The fact our society has made illogical and irrational wholesale changes in gender dynamics,… Read more »
+1 to that. Beta men crave. We’re the ones that know what “craving” is. As far as “boundaries” go? That’s the ticket. When you realize how much fucking bullshit you have put up with as a properly-conditioned mangina, and start to reclaim your balls, you will realize that no one has the right to use and abuse you. The take home message I’m getting from this post is respect yourself: the boundaries you establish — by demonstration, not explanation — will be a result of your level of self-respect and self-prioritization. This goes back to the “show” instead of “tell,”… Read more »
problem with sky diving is for some reason it doesn’t transfer to you being dangerous. its a rather non physically demanding event… most of the time
“There was a comment about how women who self guard tend to be less sexual by nature, so there is a trade off in choosing that kind of woman” My wife comes in the study where I’m watching TV and reading this on the computer. She gives me a kiss, tells me she loves me, and then starts watching a bit of the TV and reads the computer screen. She is mate guarding. She reads the quoted line and asks what is “self guard”. Using google translate new hamster setting, I tell her that some women who have a boy… Read more »
So interesting Rollo! I kind of agree with jf12 on how it can be better to learn from the mistakes of others… seeing a train-wreck happen in front of you has a way of really getting the message home. It’s so weird, we’re in our 7th year of marriage and going strong, but we’ve seen so many friends divorce already – and particularly in their 7th year. A friend (she looks freaking gorgeous – she is actually a pageant winner in our city) just announced her and her husband’s divorce. They are in their 7th year, have THREE kids, her… Read more »
Obviously when you guys are talking about “women not craving” a beta you mean a beta with no game. Women are absolutely capable of craving any man who has an understanding of game and how a woman perceives “chemistry”. The difference is that non alpha game is purely about a “love” bond in a woman’s mind not the animal sex bond.
Women can crave a beta to make love to but not fuck. There might be some crossover on occasion but generally that’s how it works. For an alpha it can be either or both.
@TM and Rollo- You guys are missing the point- it’s not whether she craves beta or not (funny that you guys are hung up on that) it’s the fact that women cheat and being alpha is no insurance on female desire to cheat. Do you really care why some other cock is pounding your womans pussy? It needs to be pointed out. There is a false sense of security here concerning alphas as some sort of panacea, and I can just imagine some guy reading all this and thinking – well I got my bitch in check, I’m all alpha-… Read more »
@ bango
“For an alpha it can be either or both.” Salient and true dat.
A great point that cant be reiterated enough is that the ‘sphere is BetaBuilt (and in some rare cases by benevolent Alphas).
That origin point is a key concept to embrace.
@Hobbes “The only security is no commitment. Thats it.”
Isn’t that similar to saying that the only way to insure your bank account against loss is to have no funds in it to begin with?
@sfcton, re: dangerous vs violent
As we’ve discussed there are definitely extremely dangerous things, like skydiving or manufacturing explosives, that don’t involve much violence (if any). I think maybe it is the lack of violence that makes women uninterested.
So are there extremely violent things, that make women interested, that aren’t dangerous? I think so. The example that sticks in my mind is the buck gorilla pounding his chest and roaring.
@gwadt, re: 7th yr. My first marriage took a turn for the worse in the 7th year, but my second marriage got better, for a few years, in the 7th year. I’m pretty sure the old “seven year itch” canard has been superseded by a 5 yr itch for young couples. Moreover, the objective quality (=quantity) of a long term sexual relationship goes extremely downhill after the honeymoon period, which for hetero couples is typically a couple of years max, 99.9% due to the woman. If the 7 yr itch period ever had any validity it was only formalizing the… Read more »
There was a comment about how women who self guard tend to be less sexual by nature, so there is a trade off in choosing that kind of woman
Not in my experience.
@Hobbes: Lol. I was simply pointing out that women do crave alphas but not betas. I don’t see how someone is “hung up on that” by making that simple observation. Also, women aren’t driven by a desire to cheat just for the sake of it, they only do so when their hypergamy assesses that the man she’s with is of lower value. Again, this is in relation to her OR when she meets a men who’s value is higher that your’s and hers. Make no mistake about it, women do compare men especially when she’s in a relationship. Girls have… Read more »
One of my favorite movies has a great line of wisdom applicable to the topic of fear of loss. “Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.” The ‘heat’ can be a whole host of FOO issues, hormones, old boyfriend issues, or neurosis that could change a woman’s attachment to you at any time. You need to be willing to lose any relationship, if that relationship becomes toxic and endangers your well-being. Rollo is relaying wisdom, so use it to better… Read more »
I know the red pill is bitter…but this shit is so depressing ha. When does that red pill bitterness get better and how sheesh…
@Will
http://therationalmale.com/2014/09/29/a-new-hope/
@Will- keep at it. I no longer find it depressing, which is hard to believe considering it once was- very much so. I now find it oddly motivating and liberating. Rollo had a post a while ago about performance and for me it was the epiphany that freed me from that and changed my perspective. You may not think it, but that sadness over women not being how we were taught they were supposed to be- the bitterness of the RP- is not a result of who you truly are, but who were conditioned to be by the FI. Once… Read more »
I’ve been thinking about the sky diving thing In over 6 years of military free fall operations, HALO and HAHO, we had one injury and that was at night, up high enough we were using oxygen. My exposure to the extreme sports crowd was in Hawaii, and now that I think about the sky divers did the worst, but were also the type who couldn’t put it down. Their whole sense of self was tied up with it. They were also the most unfit. This was much less so with the rock climbers, surfers, motor cross guys and the dudes… Read more »
Alpha and beta are relative concepts. Yes, there is a large SMV component here, but many women cheat with men that are of comparable or lower SMVs to their husbands. The issue comes down much more to dominance, and specifically to the TYPE OF DOMINANCE THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE WOMAN. As much as the Red Pill informs key intersexual dynamics, there needs to be an acknowledgement that different women crave different types of dominance and that these cravings somewhat change as they age. Thus, a woman married to an frame-holding hedge fund manager may still go cheat with the… Read more »
@ New Yorker
You’re just describing a woman’s physiology. It’s not about different types of dominance. See my blogpost about managing your relationship with your woman. It’s all about managing her mental chemistry. I’ve been through the fire and know whereof I speak.
@ ton
IMO, the most dangerous beast is the leopard due to its quickness, strength, agility, and camouflage. It’s a quick silent killer. If we men try to emulate the leopard, women will fail to see our ability to inflict damage, since we camouflage it.
For me, what it gets down to is manipulation pure and simple. I used to be the one being manipulated, now I’m the one doing the manipulating. Like Tinder, I’ve also been cheated on by the wife in the past (at least I believe so… no definite proof). All the mate guarding in the world wouldn’t have worked, and in fact I did mate guard hard. It just significantly lowered my SMV and made it even MORE likely that the cheating would occur. I also was very in tune with her manipulation. I could recognize it immediately or very soon… Read more »