Rational Male – Q&A

RM_Q&A

SoSuave and Rational Male reader compleks had a few questions about what he read in The Rational Male book. Since I’ve been doing these weekend questions lately I thought these might make for some interesting discussions. Hopefully they wont distract you from family time this holiday weekend, but maybe they make for some interesting dinner table talk.

Just a side note here, I’m deliberately leaving my own answers less detailed than I normally would so as to inspire your owndiscussions:

If The Rational Male was recommended to me as a book about game, I probably wouldn’t have read it. But my friend who put me onto it basically described it as a life altering piece that would forever change the way I viewed the world of inter-gender relations.

Big sell!

So I read it.

Being freshly unplugged I’m still just awakening from that groggy comatose/confused state. However I feel as though I have a slight head start on at least some of the material. Just by sheer chance, rather than any real research into the subject.

I’ve only ever been in one LTR (2years), and it was with the girl I first hooked up with (she let me sleep with her, better hang onto this one!). Anyway, I ended that (5-6years ago) and have been single ever since, with no desire of entering another relationship.

I started ‘spinning plates’ about a year ago, just through a natural realization that any moral/ethical objection was actually completely unfounded. Not just my own (programmed) objections, but objections from the feminine perspective, which I guess are one in the same. I thought I must have been ‘wired’ differently because I had no desire of settling back into a LTR. I actually argued my case on multiple occasions to avoid it happening.

This book was eye opening and definitely shed some light on issues I never would have even thought to question.

If you care to keep reading I’m just going to spew some thoughts/questions having just finished the book. Keep in mind this is from a very rudimentary understanding of the text.

QUESTIONS

1) Does ONEitis best Hypergamy?
We all know a girl (either personally or anecdotally) who is in a committed relationship with some deadbeat. Everyone knows she can do better, but you can’t possibly convince her to leave him. What factors are at play here? Does SHE suffer from ONEitis to the point that her hypergamous tendencies have been shut off?

Or could it be a case of low self esteem and lack of self worth, so much so that she believes he is the best she can do? Or could he actually just be an Alpha male (albeit a bad example of one)? I’m sure there’s a grey area or middle ground here with many factors potentially at play depending on the specific scenarios. But it’s a pretty common scenario and I’d like to hear what you guys think.

I get this one now and then – “What about this one great looking girl I know who’s stuck on this complete douchebag, deadbeat, scumbag, suckup, :insert invective here:?” While I’m not sold on the idea that women ever get ONEitis for a guy, I am thoroughly convinced that women being 1-2 SMV points below a particular man they’re involved with develop a strong attachment for him.

For women, oftentimes that attachment gets paired with the soul-mate myth. I’d separate that “spiritualism” from the ONEitis a man gets for a woman, but it’s still rooted in the same dynamic – the subconscious realization that this person is the ‘best they can do’ in the SMP.

The reason I’d make the separation between how men experience ONEitis and women is due to the concepts either have when it comes to love. Women’s concept of love is rooted in opportunism as a result of their innate drive towards hypergamous optimization. All this ‘deadbeat’ needs do is be perceptually 1-2 levels above her own perceived SMV and the Alpha prerequisite for Hypergamy is met.

Most guys looking from the outside of that perception in realize the guy’s a fuck up (even Alpha Buddah, Corey Worthington is an example), and we can’t understand why that subjectively hot woman can’t use reason and rationality to see that he is, but then, this is due to our own self-perceptions and our mistaken belief that women’s reason can be appealed to.

2) Genuine Inter-Gender friendships?
Okay, so i don’t have the book with me. But I remember reading a sub-section on inter-gender relationships. It didn’t sit well with me when I read it, but it’s probably something I will have to re-read. I have a lot of female friends. Friendships that go back 15 years. Some of these are very close friends in a completely non-sexual way.

I’m closer with some of these girls than I am with many of my male friends.
Initially these friendships may have blossomed based on the fact that I was a shy kid and didn’t have any ‘intimate’ relationships with women till I was 19. But they are now concreted as some of my most valued friendships.

What is your take on Rollos opinion of inter-gender friendships (as outlined in the rational male)?

My take in the book, and still is, is that men and women cannot be friends in the same way and to the same degree of intimacy that same sex friendships develop.

Men and women cannot be friends in the way or to the degree that most people perceive same sex friendship to be. Now the natural response to this is “I have lots of female friends” or “what are you trying to say, I can’t have female friends, they all haffta be enemies?” Which of course is the standard binary (black or white, all or nothing) retort and the trained AFC thinks anyone suggesting that men and women’s relations as friends could be anything less than equitable and fulfilling is just a neanderthal chauvinist thinking. However, they are incorrect – not because you wouldn’t want to actually be a woman’s friend. There are fundamental differences in the ways men and women view friendship within the framework of their own sex and the ways this transfers to the concept of intergender-friendship.

Quite simply there are limitations on the degree to which a friendship can develop between men and women. The easy illustration of this is that at some point your female “friend” will become intimately involved with another male; at which point the quality of what you perceived as a legitimate friendship will decay. It must decay for her intimate relationship to mature. For instance, I’ve been married for 18 years now; were I to entertain a deep friendship with another female (particularly an attractive female) other than my wife, my interest in this woman automatically becomes suspect of infidelity – and of course the same holds true for women with man-friends. This dynamic simply doesn’t exist for same sex friendships because the sexual aspect is inconsequential.

I should add here that the presumption of an equatable degree, character or quality of intergender friendship (platonic) being the same as a same-sex friendship is a product of the same “we’re-all-the-same-with-different-plumbing” naive equalism that deliberately ignores complementary differences between the sexes.

This presumption is actually a vetting mechanism for women’s control of sexual selection and Hypergamy. The social convention that promotes the idea of equitable concepts of friendship only serves women’s imperative of being able to hold the attentions of multiple male orbiters until such a time that she can optimize both sides of her sexual strategy (Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks). The longer you’re rapt by the idea of an equal intergender friendship, the longer she has to consolidate on whatever side of hypergamy she’s prioritizing at the phase of life she’s in. In other words, the longer you’re in the bullpen, the longer you’ll be a Plan B prospect.

3) Religion vs Evolution vs Habit?
This is a bit abstract. But in terms of a decayed loveless marriage, what would you say are the factors holding these marriages together? Neither party is happy, but they are also unwilling to do anything about it.

One clings to a religious frame as reason to not leave/divorce, as the children are all old enough now that “staying together for the childrens sake” no longer applies.

The other seems completely indifferent and stuck in the routine. Both are mid 50’s and have been married for 30 years and probably just scarred shitless of being alone. But what would you make of this from an ‘unplugged’ point of view. (might be a stretch from the realm of this book, but just curious).

What you’re describing is akin to the phenomenon of Grey Divorce. In the time line from my Preventative Medicine series, I briefly outline what’s known as the 20 year itch – the period of life, usually after 50 around the time a long-married couple becomes ’empty nesters’ and the binding responsibilities of raising children is at, or almost at an end.

It’s around this phase that a reassessment of one’s partner takes place and the prospects of living out the rest of a life with that person gets serious consideration. This is a phase that’s very telling of the overall prospects of marriage as an institution on whole and how either sex really considers their idealistic, loving union from very mater-of-fact practicality, when there is no longer a mutually cooperative goal (childrearing) as the centerpiece of that relationship.

Religion and/or a conviction that children are better raised by an involved two parent (male and female) family who are both mutually invested in the success of their kids is generally a bond that both parties mutually agree to as the cornerstone of their marriage.

Once that goal has been met (or termed out) then that relationship must be reestablished and based on a genuine interest and desire for the other person. For a man this may involve his realizing an understanding of tenets of the Game that he’s, until then, unwittingly been a party to. For women this may be a longing for renewed interest from extra-marital (but not necessarily infidelity) attentions and desire from other men.

It’s kind of telling how men’s idealistic concept of love endures beyond his late-life Epiphany stage. In spite of having experienced the consequences and all-downside risks men face in their prior marriages, it’s still overwhelmingly men who want to remarry and take another shot at that idealism.

It is women, in either their veiled pragmatism or their aging, unrealizable opportunistic concept of love who are more or less indifferent to the prospects of remarriage.

“Most currently divorced or widowed men are open to the idea of remarriage, but women in the same circumstances are less likely to be,” says the report, which draws on figures from a survey it conducted in May and June. Almost two thirds of men either want to remarry or would at least consider it, while fewer than a half of women would.

These stats alone are more than enough to verify my assertions of how either sex hold different concepts of love.

Men still dream of an idealistic love, and women have find precious little use for men beyond the practical when presented with the prospect of having to optimize Hypergamy at an age they are no longer capable of intersexual competition.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
redlight
Guest
redlight
Offline

@Sun Wukong

“So much for that theory of ending poaching”

that’s what I meant by

“Now it’s just musical beta chairs, keep putting money in the slut machine”

the alphas don’t poach these, while the betas keep having to change partners when the pussy dries up

redlight
Guest
redlight
Offline

@Sun Wukong

“So much for that theory of ending poaching”

that’s what I meant by

“Now it’s just musical beta chairs, keep putting money in the slut machine”

Tam the Bam
Guest
Tam the Bam
Offline

“Faux Alphas are less productive the Women. They add absolutely no economic value at all.” Hip hip hooray, for he’s a jolly good fellow etc. Because feminism is a machine that runs on money, like a no-carburettor V12. Lots and lots of (other people’s) money. “Worse than women; at least women can provide and care for children.” only if somebody else is picking up the bills, and also “caring” for the children; see above. Alpha steals your wife? Ain’t “your” wife then, never was. Just breathe a sigh of relief and congratulate him. Finders-keepers old chap, best of British and… Read more »

Judge nismo
Guest
Judge nismo
Offline

You can’t be friends with a woman you haven’t fucked. Friends is a synonym for beta orbiter. A breakup for a man is when a supply of sex leaves. A breakup for a woman is when a supply of attention leaves.

Yep, men and women cannot be just friends. Don’t be surprised the woman leaves because you refuse to be an orbiter.

Rocket
Guest
Rocket
Offline

Wanted to follow up to my comments from last night; was kinda outta line and angry. My revulsion towards the Faux Alpha dudes we have to deal with should have been self evident from my posts. But you may be asking, Why ? Well, I think the thing that has convinced me how evil these people are is the material being published on the N Count (# sexual partners) and how that effects a woman; published at various places in Sphere. I know that historically men have valued Virginity over all other things (or at least a very low N… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Guest
Tam the Bam
Offline

Oh blimey charlie (no, not “him”, it’s a traditional saying).
“You got 5 sluts in your Harem … then you just destroyed each of their lives.”
When you’ve quite finished screeching your foaming acidic fud off .. look up Agency, Free Will, Democracy, Feminism etc., will you? There’s a good little chap.
Takes two to tango (or go to Topeka, Sodom or the The Netherlands, their choice entirely, I’m reliably informed).

redeminence
Guest

Their loss of an orbiter is a minor problem to them, make no mistake if the woman sets you as her friend you are worthless to her. Male to female friendship is quite limited that it can actually be considered a fraud. She can’t openly discuss her life or speak her mind as it would make her a total slut/c#nt. She has to put on a facade so the said friendship can work, and the same in most cases is true for the man as well. In short, if she loses an orbiter, a group of five are more than… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

@Rocket You’re still in the anger phase of TRP. We’ve all been there. I used to think like you, then I learned I’m the only person that’ll ever look out for me and my thinking changed. Betas aren’t hurt by guys that pull lots of ass. They’re hurt by being betas. The guys pulling lots of ass are just taking advantage of that situation. The solution: kill the beta within yourself. http://therationalmale.com/2011/11/21/kill-the-beta-2/ And for the record, I know your comments are leveled square at guys like me, but note that I’m not mad or hurt. I just know where you… Read more »

sean
Guest
sean
Offline

something to help you all out

stop hating women. women crave certain characteristics in a man and there s no point arguing with them to like a beta since they are hard wired to fuck an alpha dude. men are the same way with young pretty girls.
no point in hating them just because they wouldnt fuck you. would you really wanna be with someone who doesnt wanna be with you? let it go and move on the other one spin more plates etc.

JustOK
Guest
JustOK
Offline

Hello. I want to bring to your attention an offensive video for your and your readers’ commentary. (Feminist ‘All About That Bass’ Parody ‘Bitch In Business’ Might Be Better Than The Original; The Huffington Post | By Alanna Vagianos) The video and an article on it are at this link at Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/11/bitch-in-business-all-about-that-bass-parody-columbia_n_6307910.html and here: http://magazine.good.is/articles/mba-feminist-parody and: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lesmarie/columbia-students-made-a-feminist-video-and-its-amazing I believe this video is something your readers would be interested in. Made by three Columbia University Business School students, it would appear also to violate the university’s speech code on gender-based misconduct. (Anyone by the way can report alleged instances… Read more »

JustOK
Guest
JustOK
Offline

the huffingtonpost article Feminist ‘All About That Bass’ Parody ‘Bitch In Business’ Might Be Better Than The Original The Huffington Post | By Alanna Vagianos Email Posted: 12/11/2014 11:41 am EST Updated: 12/12/2014 12:59 pm EST While Meghan Trainor’s hit “All About That Bass” celebrates body confidence, a new feminist parody takes more of an intellectual approach to equality. Created by three Columbia Business School students, “Bitch In Business” puts a feminist manifesto to the tune of Trainor’s “All About That Bass.” The students, who are part of a group called the CBS Follies, describe the video as “a love… Read more »

%d bloggers like this: