Last week saw the publication of the latest paper by Dr. Steven W. Gangestad and Dr. Martie Hasselton titled Human Estrus: Implications for Relationship Science. Anyone who’s read the Rational Male for more than a year is probably familiar with my citing Dr. Hasselton in various posts (her catalog of research has been part of my sidebar links since I began RM), but both she and Dr. Gangstad are among the foremost notable researchers in the areas of human sexuality and applied evolutionary psychology. For this week’s post I’ll be riffing on what this paper proposes with regard to a condition of estrus in women.
In the introduction section of The Rational Male I relate a story of how in my Red Pill formative years I came to be a connector of dots so to speak. While I was studying behavioral psychology and personality studies a great many issues jumped out at me with regards to how many of the principle of behavioral psychology could be (and were already being) applied to intersexual relations. For instance, the basic concepts of intermittent reinforcement and behavioral modification seemed to me an obvious and learned practice of women in achieving some behavioral effect on men by periodically rewarding (reinforcing) them with sex ‘intermittently’. Operant conditioning and establishing operations also dovetailed seamlessly into the Red Pill concepts and awareness I’d been developing for several years prior to finishing my degree.
Since then the ideas I formed have naturally become more complex than these simple foundations, but what I only learned by error was how thoroughly disconnected both students and my teachers were with what I saw as obvious connections. I met obstinate resistance to flat denial when I wrote papers or gave a dissertation about the interplay between the foundations of behaviorism and interpersonal relationships. It was one thing to propose that men would use various aspects to their own advantage, but it was offensive to suggest that women would commonly use behavioral modification techniques to achieve their Hypergamous ends.
This peer resistance was especially adamant when I would suggest that women had a subconscious pre-knowledge (based on collective female experience) of these techniques. I never thought I had brass balls for broaching uncomfortable considerations like this – I honestly, and probably naively, assumed that what I was proposing had already been considered by academia long before I’d come to it.
I was actually introduced to the work of Dr. Hasselton during this time, and along with Dr. Warren Farrell, she’s gone on to become one of my go-to sources in respect to the connection between contemporary behavioral ‘dots’ with theories of practical evolved function in intersexual dynamics. I owe much of what I propose on Rational Male to this interplay, and while I doubt Hasselton would agree with all of what I or the manosphere propose, I have to credit her and her colleague’s work for providing me many of the dots I connect.
I understand that there are still evo-psych skeptics in the manosphere, but I find that much of what passes for their piecemeal “skepticism” is generally rooted in a desire to stubbornly cling to comforting Blue Pill idealisms. That said, I’d never ask any reader to take what I propose here on faith, but personally I’ve found that the questions proposed by evo-psych reflect many of the observations I had in my college days.
Hypergamous Duplicity
For the social theater of the Feminine Imperative, one of the more galling developments in psychological studies to come out of the past fifteen years has been the rise of evolutionary psychology. The natural pivot for the Imperative in dealing with evo-psych has been to write off any concept unflattering to the feminine as being speculative or proving a biased positive (by “misogynistic” researchers of course), while gladly endorsing and cherry-picking any and all evo-psych premises that reinforce the feminine or confirm a positive feminine-primacy.
Up until the past two years or so, there was a staunch resistance to the concept of Hypergamy (know as sexual pluralism in evo-psych) and the dual natures of women’s sexual strategy. Before then the idea of Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks was dismissed as biased, sociologically based and any biological implications or incentives for Hypergamy were downplayed as inconclusive by a feminine-centric media.
However the recent embrace of Open Hypergamy and “Sandbergism” of the last two years has set this narrative on its head, and the empowered women who found the idea of their own sexual pluralism so distasteful are now openly endorsing, if not proudly relishing, their roles in a new empowerment of Hypergamous duplicity.
Your Beta qualities are officially worthless to today’s women:
For those of you that aren’t aware, women now are often out earning men and more of them receive college degrees than men. As of now there aren’t really any programs to help guys out. Assuming this trend continues what do you think will happen to dating? I think that attractive women, will have their pick regardless.
However, for a lot of women, trying to lock down a guy in college will be more of a big deal. I don’t think hook up culture will disappear, but will definitely decrease.
With the exception with my current boyfriend, I have always earned more than any guy I have dated. It has never been an issue. I just don’t have to think about their financials, my attraction is based on their looks and personality. I am guessing the future will be more of that.
I thought this TRP subred was an interesting contrast to the Estrus theory proposed in the Gangstad-Hasselton paper (comments were good too). Yes, the woman is more than a bit gender-egotistical, and yes her triumphalism about the state of women in college and their earning is built on a foundation of sand, but lets strip this away for a moment. The greater importance to her in relating this, and every woman embracing open Hypergamy, is the prospect of better optimizing the dual nature of her sexual strategy.
In many a prior post I’ve detailed the rationales women will apply to their sexual pluralism and the social conventions they rely upon to keep men ignorant of them until such a time (or not) that they can best consolidate on that dualism. Where before that strategy was one of subtle manipulation and pretty lies to keep Betas-In-Waiting ready to be providers after the Alpha Fucks decline at 30, the strategy now is one of such utter ego-confidence in feminine social primacy that women gleefully declare “I’m not just gonna have my cake and eat it too, I’m getting mine with sprinkles and chocolate syrup” with regard to Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks.
The Estrus Connection
For all of the ubiquitous handwringing the manosphere imparts to the social implications of today’s Open Hypergamy, it’s important to consider the biological underpinnings that motivate this self-interested conceit.
From Human Estrus: Implications for Relationship Science:
In the vast majority of mammalian species, females experience classic estrus or heat: a discrete period of sexual receptivity – welcoming male advances – and proceptivity – actively seeking sex – confined to a few days just prior to ovulation, the fertile window. Only at this time, after all, do females require sex to conceive offspring. The primate order is exceptional. Although prosimians (e.g., lemurs, tarsiers) exhibit classic estrus, the vast majority of simian primates (monkeys and apes) are sexually active for at least several days outside of the fertile period [2]. Humans are an extreme case: Women may be sexually receptive or proceptive any time of the cycle, as well as other nonconceptive periods (e.g., pregnancy).
Do Women Retain a Functionally Distinct Fertile Phase?
Graded sexuality. Women’s sexual activity is not confined to an estrous period. But are women’s sexual interests truly constant across the cycle? Many female primates (e.g., rhesus macaques and marmosets) are often receptive to sexual advances by males outside of the fertile phase, but they initiate sex less [2].
In fact, women’s sexual interests do appear to change across the cycle. Women exhibit greater genital arousal in response to erotica and sexually condition to stimuli more readily during the follicular phase [5-8].
A recent study identified hormonal correlates of these changes by tracking 43 women over time and performing salivary hormone assays [9]. Women’s sexual desire was greater during the fertile window, and was positively related to estradiol levels (which peak just before ovulation), but negatively related to progesterone levels (which rise markedly during the luteal phase).
Changes in the male features that evoke sexual interest. Since the late 1990s, some researchers have argued that what changes most notably across the cycle is not sexual desire per se but, rather, the extent to which women’s sexual interests are evoked by particular male features – specifically, male behavioral and physical features associated with dominance, assertiveness, and developmental robustness. Over 50 studies have examined changes across the cycle in women’s attraction to these male features.
The importance of behavioral features? Whereas preference shifts of major interest early on concerned male physical features (e.g., facial masculinity; scent), several recent studies have focused on women’s reactions to men’s behavior and dispositions. Previous research had found that women find male confidence, even a degree of arrogance, more sexually appealing during the fertile phase [e.g., 15-16]. Recent studies replicate and extend that work, finding not only that fertile-phase women are more sexually attracted to “sexy cad” or behaviorally masculine men (relative to “good dad” or less masculine men), but also that, during the fertile phase, women are more likely to flirt or engage with such men [17,18]. Females of a variety of species, including primates [2], prefer dominant or high ranking males during the fertile phase of their cycles. These males may pass genetic benefits to offspring, as well as, potentially, offer material benefits (e.g., protect offspring). Women’s fertile-phase sexual attraction to behavioral dominance appears to have deep evolutionary roots.
Much of what’s explored here I laid out in Game terms in Your Friend Menstruation over two years ago, but the implications of the behaviors prompted by women’s menstrual cycle and biochemistry strongly imply an estrus-like predictability. This estrous state is a foundational keystone, not just to developing Game, but a keystone to understanding the dynamics behind Hypergamy, women’s dualistic sexual strategy, Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks, and can even be extrapolated into the drive for ensuring feminine social dominance in both overt and covert contexts.
When women embrace a social order founded upon a feminine state of openly revealed Hypergamy they confirm and expose the reality of this estrous state.
Whereas before, in a social order based on concealed Hypergamy, this state could be dismissed as a social construct (and a masculine biased one at that), or one that had only marginal influence to reasoning women with a “higher” human potential. No longer – the confirmation of a true estrus in women via open Hypergamy literally confirms virtually every elementary principle Game has asserted for the past 13 years.
Dual Sexuality
Within the dual sexuality framework, fertile-phase sexuality and non-fertile-phase sexuality possess potentially overlapping but also distinct functions [22,23]. In a number of primate species, extended sexuality – female receptivity and proceptivity at times other than the fertile phase – appears to function to confuse paternity by allowing non-dominant males sexual access [e.g., 24]. These males cannot rule out their own paternity, which might reduce their likelihood of harming a female’s offspring. In humans, by contrast, extended sexuality may function to induce primary pair-bond partners to invest in women and offspring [e.g., 22].
I found this part particularly interesting when you contrast this dynamic with the social resistance that standardized paternity testing has been met with. In a feminine-primary social order based on open Hypergamy, the Feminine Imperative can’t afford not to legislate a mandated cuckoldry. If Beta provider males will not comply with the insurance of a woman’s long-term security (as a result of being made aware of his place in Open Hypergamy) then he must be forced to comply either legally, socially or both. The old order exchange of resources for sexual access and a reasonable assurance of his paternity is replaced by a socialized form of cuckoldry.
Some studies have found that women’s sexual interests in men other than partners are strikingly rare during the luteal phase, relative to the fertile phase [25,26]. Other research has found moderating effects; for example, women who perceive their partners to lack sex appeal experience increased attraction to men other than partners, less satisfaction, and a more critical attitude toward partners, but only when fertile [27,28]. Fertile-phase women in one study were more assertive and focused on their own, as opposed to their partner’s, needs, especially when attracted to men other than partners during that phase [29].
Most research on cycle shifts has been inspired by theory concerning women’s distinctive sexual interests during the fertile phase. One study explicitly sought to understand factors influencing women’s sexual interests during the luteal phase, finding that, at that time, but not during the fertile phase, women initiated sex more with primary partners when they were invested in their relationship more than were male partners [30]. This pattern is consistent with the proposal that extended sexuality functions, in part, to encourage interest from valued male partners. Others have proposed that women’s estrus phase has been modified by pair-bonding.
Initiating sex or being receptive to a primary partner’s sexual interest during the luteal phase (the Beta swing of the cycle) follows when we consider that a woman being sexual during this phase poses the least potential of becoming pregnant while simultaneously (rewarding) reinforcing that primary partner’s continued investment in the pairing with sex (intermittent reinforcement). This is a very important dynamic because it mirrors a larger theme in women’s socio-sexual pluralism – it’s Alpha Fucks/Beta Bucks on a biological scale.
Compare this intra-relationship predisposition for Beta sex and contrast it with the larger dynamic of open Hypergamy Alpha Fucks during a woman’s prime fertility window in her peak SMV years, and her post Epiphany Phase necessity to retain a comforting (but decidedly less sexually exciting) Beta provider.
Women’s sexual strategy on a social scale, mirrors her instinctual, estrous sexual strategy on an individual scale.
Cues of Fertility Status
Females across diverse species undergo physical and behavioral changes during estrus that males find attractive: changes in body scents in carnivores, rodents, and some primates; changes in appearance, such as sexual swellings, in baboons and chimpanzees; changes in solicitous behavior in rodents and many primates [2,31] Because women lack obvious cyclic changes, it was widely assumed that cycle shifts in attractiveness were eliminated in humans, perhaps with the evolution of
pair bonding [32].In 1975, a pioneering study documented increased attractiveness of women’s vaginal odors midcycle [33]. A quarter century later, research revealing other detectable fertile-phase changes began to accumulate, including increased attractiveness of women’s upper torso odors, increased vocal pitch and attractiveness, and changes in women’s style of dress and solicitous behaviors [34]. Meta-analysis of this literature confirms that changes across the cycle in women’s attractiveness are
often subtle, but robust (K. Gildersleeve, PhD dissertation, UCLA, 2014).A notable recent study demonstrated that hormones implicated in attractiveness shifts in non-humans also predict attractiveness shifts in humans [35]. Photos, audio clips, and salivary estrogen and progesterone were collected from 202 women at two cycle points. Men rated women’s facial and vocal attractiveness highest when women’s progesterone levels were low and estrogen levels high (characteristic of the follicular phase, and especially the fertile window).
Emerging evidence suggests that these changes affect interactions between males and females. During the fertile window, women report increased jealous behavior by male partners [25,29,36]. A possible mediator of such changes – testosterone – is higher in men after they smell tshirts collected from women on high- than on low-fertility days of the cycle [37; cf. 38]. A recent study examined related phenomena in established relationships by bringing couples into the lab for a close interaction task (e.g., slow dancing) [39]. Following the interaction, male partners viewed images of men who were attractive and described as competitive or unattractive and noncompetitive. Only men in the competitive condition showed increases in testosterone from baseline – and only when tested during their partner’s fertile phase.
What remains less clear is how we can understand shifts in attractiveness from a theoretical perspective. It is unlikely that women evolved to signal their fertility within the cycle to men [22,34]. In fact, the opposite may have occurred – active selection on women to conceal cues of ovulation, which could help to explain weak shifts in attractiveness relative to many species. Concealment might have promoted extended sexuality with its attendant benefits from investing males, or
facilitated women’s extra-pair mating. Possibly, the subtle physical changes that occur are merely “leaky cues” that persist because fully concealing them suppresses hormone levels in ways that compromise fertility. Behavioral shifts, by contrast, may be tied to increases in women’s sexual interests or motivation to compete with other women for desirable mates [e.g., 40].
Usually after first-time readers have a chance to digest the material I propose in Your Friend Menstruation the first frustration they have is figuring out just how they can ever reliably detect when a woman is in this estrous state. On an instinctual level, most men are already sensitive to these socio-sexual cues, but this presumptuousness of sexual availability is rigorously conditioned out of men by social influence. In other words, most guys are Beta-taught to be ashamed of presuming a woman might be down to fuck as the result of picking up on visual, vocal or body posture cues.
Beyond this perceptiveness, there are also pheromonal triggers as well as behavioral cues during estrus that prompt a mate guarding response in men.
I would however propose that the evolved concealment of an estrus-like state and all of the attendant behaviors that coincide with it are a behavioral mechanic with the purpose of filtering for men with a dominant Alpha capacity to “Just Get It” that a woman is in estrus and thus qualify for her sexual access either proceptively or receptively. Women’s concealed estrus is an evolved aspect of filtering for Alpha Fucks.
In addition, this concealment also aids in determining Beta Bucks for the men she needs (needed) to exchange her sexual access for. A guy who “doesn’t get it” is still useful (or used to be) precisely because he doesn’t understand the dynamics of her cyclic and dualistic sexual strategy. Her seemingly erratic and self-controlled sexual availability becomes the Beta Bucks interest’s intermittent reinforcement for the desired behavior of his parental investment in children that are only indeterminately of his genetic heritage.
Evidence of this intermittent reinforcement can also be observed in what Athol Kay from Married Man Sex Life has described as wives “drip feeding” sex to their husbands. The confines of a committed monogamy in no way preclude the psycho-sexual influences of estrus. Thus placating a less ‘sexy’, but parentally invested man with the reinforcer of infrequent (but not entirely absent) sex becomes a necessity to facilitate the prospect of a future sexual experience with an Alpha while ensuring the security of her Beta.
In closing here I think the importance of how this estrous state influences women on both an individual and social level can’t be stressed enough in contrast to the social embrace of open Hypergamy. The Hypergamy genie is not only out of the bottle, but women are, perhaps against their own interests, embracing the genie with gusto.
Just today Vox posted a quick hit article about how men are discovering that pornography is now preferable to relating with the average woman. In an era of open Hypergamy I don’t believe this is a rationalized preference so much as it’s simply a pragmatic one. Men are rapidly awakening to a Red Pill awareness, even without a formal Red Pill education, and seeing the rewards (the intermittent reinforcement) simply aren’t worth the investment with women who blithely express their expectations of them to assume the role they would have them play in their sexual strategies.
[…] Estrus […]
This is a great science post. But I have a question. If all of this theorizing and SMV analysis is true then it seems like having a healthy relationship with a pre-epiphany stage is impossible. It’s just like girls saying: “oh no relationships are impossible because all guys just want to fuck and game as many girls as possible” when yes that’s true, but when I’m in a relationship with a hot girl I probably won’t cheat on her unless she doesn’t give me sex. So I think this theorizing is a soft application to the feminine subconscious. But then… Read more »
“I don’t get how all of this is supposed to work.” In the past, the elders of the society, both male AND Female, made the families stay together. They married young and stayed together. There was no alternative. Feminism, “the promiscuity movement” destroyed that. That is why you see 50% single mother parents. Eve, deceived just as she ever was. It’s actually mens’ fault for allowing women so much power. Civil War, WWI and WWII war fatigue softened the men, liberalizing them and stopping them from passing the shit tests. Everything has sucked since then. We have no good “king”… Read more »
actively seeking sex – confined to a few days just prior to ovulation As a performer that regularly gets very sweaty during a performance, I can say that women get turned on by the smell of a man when they are at their fertile stage – at least if you can believe what they say. (Which I always take with a grain of salt as women lie.) But I can say from past experience that women who have trouble having a child with their husband, will often turn up preggos after an affair. One of the reasons that I enjoy… Read more »
@will I’m in a similar boat. While, I just had my 31st birthday, over the past 2 years 21-25 year old women have become increasingly more interested in me…. both in the “let’s hookup and fuck” type of interest as well as “I want to be in an LTR with you” type of interest. Since, I’ve been reading RM, I have managed to resist getting into an LTR, but I often wonder if I’m missing out. For instance, there is the new girl I’ve been sleeping with who is a 22 year old HB 9. Remarkably for her looks, she… Read more »
An LTR is only possible with a girl over whom you have a clear SMV advantage and with a steel frame. Furthermore, the girl has to show a unique personality that will make her be worth the investment. Everything else is doomed to fail.
Rollo,
I thought this TRP subred
Did you mean subthread?
Rollo,
do you have any date for the release of the 2nd release of your book, and also for your new book? I bought your book to give it to somebody, and would like to buy your new releases for myself when they come out.
Thanks.
@Dawg, there’ll be an announcement about mid January
Nathan
December 18th, 2014 at 12:14 am
Social conservatives – the so called defenders of the family – gave in on “no fault divorce” with nary a whimper. Thus destroying any chance of enforcing a morality of sexual relations that would tend to keep families together.
There is probably no totally going back but it may be possible to revert to the old rules if children are involved. Thus leveling the playing field some for Betas.
Just Saying
December 18th, 2014 at 12:19 am
No more playing “Hide the Daddy”. (DNA testing)
My opinion, if you’re a western man and in a LTR, then the girl you are with better have fought, scratched, clawed, and conned to get you into that LTR.
Very good advice.
New Yorker
December 18th, 2014 at 12:45 am
I went for good genes (some math ability). The children (4) have turned out well in the brain dept.
I agree with the study, but up to a point. I feel like it down plays the genetic factors which primally attract women during peak fertility. While dominance is an important factor in mate selection (for females), there are many studies which show that women also appraise physical features in men during peak fertility. I’d wager that physical characteristics would be of primary importance and dominance would be of secondary importance. See the studies below: Ovulatory Shifts in Women’s Attractions to Primary Partners and Other Men: Further Evidence of the Importance of Primary Partner Sexual Attractiveness. Christina M. Larson, Elizabeth… Read more »
Women’s orgasm has little to do with love or experience.
Dang. And I thought it was my skill. Oh. Well.
“The Hypergamy genie is not only out of the bottle, but women are, perhaps against their own interests, embracing the genie with gusto.” Rollo, in what ways do you think that this could be against their [women’s] own interests? I ask because you also stated the following: “If Beta provider males will not comply with the insurance of a woman’s long-term security (as a result of being made aware of his place in Open Hypergamy) then he must be forced to comply either legally, socially or both.” If beta men stop complying then the end result would have to result… Read more »
@A Woman, “want’s” got nothing to do with it. As I stated, the Hypergamy Genie is out of the bottle, and women are busy partying with him because he’s letting them have their cake and eat it with sprinkles and chocolate syrup too. @MrBiggs, women aren’t just coyly confessing to Hypergamy, it’s becoming part of their popular consciousness and they’re embracing it triumphantly. Not only that but they’re also blatant and proud of the expectations they have of both Alpha and Beta men to willingly or coercively accept their roles in that open Hypergamy. Needless to say this hubris isn’t… Read more »
Finally answers the, “If you can’t handle me at my worst then you can’t handle me at my best.”
Manosphere translation:
If you can’t handle being beta bucks during my luteal phase then you can’t handle me getting alpha fucks during estrus.
It’s interesting that most advice to men from women involves how to tip toe around women during the luteal phase, concealment.
Even shit tests may be a way of dividing men into luteal men and estrus men.
Excellent post Rollo, it proves scientifically most of the points you made in the past and is really mind boggling in general! “I would however propose that the evolved concealment of an estrus-like state and all of the attendant behaviors that coincide with it are a behavioral mechanic with the purpose of filtering for men with a dominant Alpha capacity to “Just Get It” that a woman is in estrus and thus qualify for her sexual access either proceptively or receptively. Women’s concealed estrus is an evolved aspect of filtering for Alpha Fucks.” On this I’d like to add a… Read more »
Here’s a shocking excerpt from the article Rolo mentioned above. It’s incredible how stupid people have become:
“The researchers were interested in how declining marriage rates impact society and the economy. They said that stable marriages create substantial welfare improvements for society, especially to the degree that marital stability produces high-quality children.”
Oh really?! That can’t be true! I thought we had to deconstruct the family for better options like single parenthood and stuff
Rollo – “If Beta provider males will not comply with the insurance of a woman’s long-term security (as a result of being made aware of his place in Open Hypergamy) then he must be forced to comply either legally, socially or both. The old order exchange of resources for sexual access and a reasonable assurance of his paternity is replaced by a socialized form of cuckoldry.” It takes a village to raise a child. And when the village is raising the child, and providing for it the mother is free of guilt, and reponsibility. And this is goal of the… Read more »
re: “Females of a variety of species, including primates [2], prefer dominant or high ranking males during the fertile phase of their cycles. These males may pass genetic benefits to offspring, as well as, potentially, offer material benefits (e.g., protect offspring).”
Neither of these supposed reasons has EVER been experimentally demonstrated! “Good dads” definitionally are much better with children, for example. Intelligence is *negatively* preferred, for another example. Females do NOT have magic pickers, and to defend that view is White Knighting.
re: “Women’s concealed estrus is an evolved aspect of filtering for Alpha Fucks.”
No doubt. Hence, red pill awareness rationally demands 24/7 Alpha behaviors from a man, thus filtering for women who will be more receptive.
We also know from other studies that sex every 3 days or oftener keeps a pair bonded.
heyjay
December 18th, 2014 at 4:00 am
Funny enough – destruction of the family has been a Marxist goal forever.
My political program to begin the restoration:
Divorce is ALWAYS somebodies fault.
No more hide the daddy. (DNA testing)
jf12
December 18th, 2014 at 4:54 am
.Intelligence is *negatively* preferred, for another example.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that. But the first mate’s criteria and mine was intelligence. We got that in our children. If it was a good choice – evidenced by grandchildren – remains to be seen.
@ Rollo – Outstanding and really a lynchpin for your your case. Call it sexual pluralism, that works for me…My thoughts. It’s not too far a stretch to say that these masculine traits which demonstrate genetic fitness were created by women, not men, due to their sexual selection preferences. But we never hear any of this discussed. I’m perfectly willing to have a civil discussion with women about the power imbalances that exist in our society. But that discussion should include women’s power as well. Women don’t question possessing the power of reproduction and choice over when men have sex… Read more »
Glenn – “I wonder, would any feminist be willing to have a conversation framed in this way?”
No.
You question presumes the ability of a feminist to have a conversation that involves a two way flow of ideas based on facts and logic, and expects both sides to listen to the other. Feminists aren’t capable of two way conversation as that assumes that the feminist position might need introspective examination and therefore be less than perfectly correct.
But it’s nice to dream isn’t it?
This takes me back to Desmond Morris ‘the human animal’ which was my first exposure to the idea that the fact that humans are animals meant something about our behavior. As much as we like to think of ourselves as divine creatures of infinitely free will our behavior is actually highly predictable in almost all cases and especially when it comes to one our oldest most primal drives: sex.
@ BP – I’d love to hear a response to my comment from any feminist lurker on this site. Please, ladies, I don’t often welcome your participation here but in this case, I’d love to hear it. Even supposedly RP chicks – are you willing to acknowledge how out of touch with reality the SJW’s priors are? Are you willing to see how by selecting males who are most masculine and dominant and aggressive when you are most fertile that you are reinforcing the exact traits women say they want to change about men? Women choose. Once I got that… Read more »
@Glenn, heh, I dare you to c&p this post link and your comments over at Bodycrimes blog.
For the lulz of course.
I have noted this sort of “switch” that has been occurring in men really since the “Slap the Soul Out of Girl” video. In more ways then just this video, take even like the UVa thing. It is as if you are watching a pro wrestling match and the bad guy has been cheating and abusing the good guy while the referee is distracted, and then there is that one moment when the good guy… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czb4rImsph0 Did you cheer when subway guy just reached back to Brooklyn and let that bitch have it with the best bitch slap I have… Read more »
@ Minter – Speak for yourself – I in no way see this as proof that women are “lying cheating whores”. Wow, you are such a disgusting lowlife.
@ Rollo – Done, I dropped a comment and link, let the fur fly of course for the lulz. Not much of a dare…I should be clear, my question to women is purely rhetorical. I don’t expect to have any effect on their thinking, but this subject should drive any feminist batshit crazy, so let’s get it on!
Jeez Glenn, white knight much? Read the post. Let’s see they conceal fertility to trick the provider but are attracted when the sex might actually produce a conception to masculine or high status features. The intent is to confuse the issue of paternity to yield greater resources from the beta while enjoying the genes of the alpha. It is fundamental in their makeup that they lie. It is fundamental to cheat the beta out of resources. Fundamental that they conceal fertility to use it when they desire. It is fundamental that the whole basis of sex for them is trading… Read more »
@Glenn – link or it didn’t happen 😉
@Mark Minter (and others) – don’t play the victim. Knowledge is power!
@Glenn. I read lots RP blogs and am generally in agreement with them. What I don’t understand in all this is the frequent assertion that beta men have less access to sex in today’s feminist, hypergamous world. I’m referring to sex outside of marriage, where betas are undeniably shafted. Did beta men–that is, most men, since time eternal– more access to sex prior to FI culture, in 1950 or 1850 or 1750 or 1050, or whatever? I would think the most hapless beta stumbles into sex today more than his counterpart could a century ago, since most women are available,… Read more »
It is no surprise that female behavior is being impacted by a force like Estrus. As a father of two sons it is obvious to me that behavior is driven by biology far more than socialization. Perhaps the most interesting part of human biology is that so many people, particularly those in leadership positions deny its importance. At least they do so publicly. The dominant social meme is that behavior is driven by socialization. This is 180 degrees off the mark.
Nancy Collins: “You genuinely like women, don’t you?”
Jack Nicholson: “Yeah, I genuinely do. I prefer the company of women, and I have deep respect for them. I’m buzzed by the female mystique. I always tell young men there are three rules: They hate us, we hate them; they’re stronger, they’re smarter; and, most important, they don’t play fair.”
(Rolling Stone Interview, March 29, 1984)
“Do RP men genuinely want to return to pre FI state where male sexuality was also somewhat restricted and funneled into marriage and offspring for the good of the nuclear family and civilization?” I can’t answer for all men, but for me the answer is: yes. I would rather see both men and women deal with restraints on their sexuality for the better of the nuclear family than to raise kids in the cesspool we live in now. That being said, I have no desire for the “good old days” to return. I’d prefer a modern version of it with… Read more »
The real question is when women will start taking responsibility for the world we live in? They “chose” it in many more real ways than men have – yet they shriek like victims. The irony is just too delicious, yes? I don’t know about “delicious”, but the truth is the truth. And I’m not holding my breath. “Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.” (George Bernard Shaw) Men may dread it, but women simply refuse responsibility, and the power they already have (and can never lose) enables them to do so. “I think women rule the world,… Read more »
@A Woman – You make an interesting point. Birth control has dramatically increased the supply of sex available to most men. Perhaps the sex lives of Beta males have undergone a relative but not absolute decline when compared to Alpha males. I think what Rollo is getting at is that female mating strategies are shielded from men.
I have always struggled with accepting the fact that women are slaves to their hormones and sexuality. As well as how clueless they are to their own powerlessness over it. It’s like watching an alcoholic who hasn’t come to terms with their disease. They’re oblivious to the destruction they are causing themselves and those around them. Complete and utter lack of discipline. I swallowed the blue pill version of women being the ones more in control of their desires hook line and sinker. The fairer more moral sex and all. It was a belief in an innate goodness in all… Read more »
@A Woman: What I don’t understand in all this is the frequent assertion that beta men have less access to sex in today’s feminist, hypergamous world. I’m referring to sex outside of marriage, where betas are undeniably shafted. Did beta men–that is, most men, since time eternal– more access to sex prior to FI culture, in 1950 or 1850 or 1750 or 1050, or whatever? As certain ecological pressures weaken to provide a prosperous society (like the one we enjoy today), women will deviate more to fulfilling their short-term mating strategy. Their short-term mating strategy favors only the top percentage… Read more »
@zdr Thanks for responding. I absolutely agree that female mating strategies are shielded from men, as they have been for eternity. I don’t understand the argument that most men’s sexual choices are in fact more limited than in the past, especially outside of marriage, a frequent RP argument related to the former.
@A Woman, in the old order there were social checks and balances on Hypergamy by way of religion, social mores and the simple liabilities that were inherent to women who had little or no control over their becoming pregnant. The sexual impulse was there all along, but the social restraint was necessary to buffer women’s innate Hypergamy. In our new order of unfettered Hypergamy we’re now aware of the social implications and personal consequences of allowing women unilateral freedom in optimizing Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks. Your present concept of human sexuality is the result of 70+ years of having… Read more »
What remains less clear is how we can understand shifts in attractiveness from a theoretical perspective. It is unlikely that women evolved to signal their fertility within the cycle to men [22,34]. In fact, the opposite may have occurred – active selection on women to conceal cues of ovulation, which could help to explain weak shifts in attractiveness relative to many species. Concealment might have promoted extended sexuality with its attendant benefits from investing males, or facilitated women’s extra-pair mating. Possibly, the subtle physical changes that occur are merely “leaky cues” that persist because fully concealing them suppresses hormone levels… Read more »
@ A Woman – Lol, in fact, two hundred years ago I could be much more forceful in extracting sexual congress from my wife by all kinds of coercion. I would have had many more levers of power to offset her sexual power at that time. As for betas, I believe the woman had far fewer chances to meet alphas due to population density and transportation, and there were also not nearly as many good choices for a woman to have a good sex life, so i bet betas had a much better time than they have today. I mean,… Read more »
@ Minter – If you were on fire, I wouldn’t piss on you to douse the flames. How are your kids?
@A Woman Thanks for responding. I absolutely agree that female mating strategies are shielded from men, as they have been for eternity. I don’t understand the argument that most men’s sexual choices are in fact more limited than in the past, especially outside of marriage, a frequent RP argument related to the former. That’s a very baffling statement. You seem to acknowledge that men display and women choose, and that that fact has been shielded from men for eternity… and yet you’re confused why men’s choices might be more limited than in the past, a past with arranged marriages? Arranged… Read more »
Note to Glenn. First, I edited this comment down to remove some things I said to attempt to keep it in a civil tone out of respect for this forum. You think you know me. You don’t. You read some things my ex-wife said when she came into the sphere on the day it was announce I was engaged to try to blow it all up for me, swell person that she is. How would you fare Glenn if your ex came in and told us her side of the story? How would anyone? I am not going to continue… Read more »
@ A Woman I don’t understand the argument that most men’s sexual choices are in fact more limited than in the past, especially outside of marriage, a frequent RP argument related to the former. When I was young and dating in the early 1990s I knew I was going to get sex. That probably wouldn’t have been true in the 1890s. However I think a problem that beta males face isn’t a complete lack of sex as much as the reality that women don’t want them. Betas aren’t much more than economically useful farm animals. So although sex occurs it… Read more »
“Neither of these supposed reasons has EVER been experimentally demonstrated! “Good dads” definitionally are much better with children, for example. Intelligence is *negatively* preferred, for another example. Females do NOT have magic pickers, and to defend that view is White Knighting.” The point is, women have the pickers evolution has (so far) designed for them. Change has happened quickly enough that there’s a lot of confused, overlapping systems all running at once; you only find rational simplicity in much more stagnant species. I empathize with your desire to de-pedestalize women, but your teardown mentality isn’t a stable endstate opinion. High… Read more »
@A Woman “Do RP men genuinely want to return to pre FI state where male sexuality was also somewhat restricted and funneled into marriage and offspring for the good of the nuclear family and civilization?” There is no going back for us, and your next comment illustrates why: “I absolutely agree that female mating strategies are shielded from men, as they have been for eternity.” Over the past 40 years, feminism has removed all social constraints on hypergamy while keeping it secret from men just long enough to ensure AF/BB. Most guys didn’t catch on until they’re past 30 and… Read more »
“Put more plainly, does the feminist POV deal with the fact that women control the entire fate of humanity with the power of sexual selection? How and where and when do women take responsibility for how masculinity itself has been shaped by women’s sexual selection strategies?” Glenn nails it, predictably. In an environment very altered from our ancestral environment, it’s becoming necessary to carefully consider how we structure things. We can’t just coast on instinct, we need to take responsibility for shit. Women dominate reproduction, so they need to understand it and own it. I don’t see much willingness to… Read more »
Jeremy :- “Now you have many males in close contact with each other, working together for mutual survival”
as in, pack-hunting neandertal/denisovan “alphas” down to their caves/brushwood lean-tos; get it right up ye, fat lad! And here’s another one for free .. oh FFS, are these his burds? Don’t fancy yours much ..
“In a feminine-primary social order based on open Hypergamy, the Feminine Imperative can’t afford not to legislate a mandated cuckoldry. If Beta provider males will not comply with the insurance of a woman’s long-term security (as a result of being made aware of his place in Open Hypergamy) then he must be forced to comply either legally, socially or both. The old order exchange of resources for sexual access and a reasonable assurance of his paternity is replaced by a socialized form of cuckoldry.” Look at this: a legislated (by God) timetable for when a husband is allowed by the… Read more »
GREAT point being made here. Ladies, you’re unhappy with today’s man? You fucking chose our dads. You have to choose better. Police your sisters! You have to take SOME responsibility for the “patriarchy” you brought into existence. Paternity fraud around 5%? Hmmm, MAOA-2r is around that in some demographics. It’s a statistically significant 1% in the largest demographic. Look it up. MAOA-3r has also been shown to correlate with antisocial behaviour, when childhood conditions are found lacking (abuse/neglect). I’d argue the abuse is increasingly codified institutionally, and the lack of a strong, benevolent male role model in most households is… Read more »
So a menopausal woman on HRT perhaps responds to different game style than an estrogen depleted menopausal woman?
“…the rewards (the intermittent reinforcement) simply aren’t worth the investment with women who blithely express their expectations of them to assume the role they would have them play in their sexual strategies.”
A way to adapt to this besides MGTOW is simply to play the role they want instead of assuming it. If it becomes time to bail and you want to avoid a hypergamy frustration rape accusation, just claim to have realized that you’re gay. It’s fashionable these days.
OH yeah, funny thing about the MAOA gene… it influences male behaviour disproportionately because it’s on the X chromosome, and we only have one of those.
That’s right: in men, it only comes from the mother. Happy googling
zdr01dz – “However I think a problem that beta males face isn’t a complete lack of sex as much as the reality that women don’t want them.” Bingo! Sex is not impossible to obtain. Good sex can be purchased. And purchased sex is every bit as special and meaningful as the “free” variety that a beta can obtain. The unwanted beta has no incentive to seek a relationship that requires his total commitment. In this open hypergamy system commitment only flows one way. And men being the sex that makes commitments, rather than being the recipients of them, will find… Read more »
@ Minter – I shit out a turd more consequential than you this morning. You have no power to shut me up here – none at all. And I don’t believe a fucking thing you say because you are a well documented liar. Oops – I’m sorry, is reality a fucking inconvenience for you?
Glenn,
Go back to the previous thread and check the stuff I posted. It might change your mind about me calling them Nazis. Or not.
Re: Minter. Just how disgusting can a guy get? You’d almost think he takes it personal. As if F=ma is an insult.
Minter asks:
the comments where the guys are asking “What can I do then?” “How is it possible to have a constructive relationship?”
OK Minter. One thing is to learn dominance/Game. That raises your SMV.
And then there is the political program:
No more playing “Hide the Daddy”. (DNA testing)
Divorce is ALWAYS someones fault.
the nuclear family
The brother in law was a Naval Nuke. I was a Naval Nuke. Thus I have a nuclear family. The first mate was attracted to me in part because of that. I was attracted to her in part because of that.
Rollo,
Women will only be able to party with the Genie for so long before men come to realize the shit sandwich women are openly telling them they’re feeding them.
That is why I keep telling men that despite their disinclination they must get political.
No more playing “Hide the Daddy”. (DNA testing)
Divorce is ALWAYS someones fault.
Will it totally redress the balance? Hell no. But it is a start.
Beta Bucks Enforcement, UK style. Introduced by a “conservative” government. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30532087 “A new domestic abuse offence for “coercive and controlling behaviour” within relationships has been announced by the home secretary. Theresa May said domestic abuse by intimate partners or family members was a “hideous” crime that shattered lives. She said she hoped the new law would protect victims from extreme psychological and emotional abuse. The maximum penalty for the new offence in England and Wales will be five years in prison and a fine. Coercive and controlling behaviour can include the abuser preventing their victim from having friendships or hobbies,… Read more »
Glenn, Do you admit that the entire responsibility for what masculinity is in large part falls on the heads of women who exercise sexual selection in favor of the same masculine traits that feminists attack and denigrate relentlessly? Put more plainly, does the feminist POV deal with the fact that women control the entire fate of humanity with the power of sexual selection? How and where and when do women take responsibility for how masculinity itself has been shaped by women’s sexual selection strategies? Good question(s). If they want more betas why don’t they counter their sexual preferences? You often… Read more »
Hugh Mann
December 18th, 2014 at 5:34 pm
I keep saying: “Until men get political they are at the mercy (screwed).”
M. Simon – “You often hear the SJW lament: ‘I hate it, but I’m not attracted to nice guys.'”
Fair enough. I’m not attracted to SJWs except as targets for my aggression and anger.
Minter
I say, “Step up and hit them in mouth”. Bitch, get right or get gone.
You sir are a truly vile creature. That kind of violence sets a very bad example for the children. Very bad. And can land you in stir for a nice long stretch.
If the only way you can dominate is violence – you got nothin’. Less than nothin’.
“Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Mark Minter
December 18th, 2014 at 1:19 pm
Dude. You are so in love with her it hurts. Even from here.
And you don’t hurt them at all by striking back. Complaining. Proving your dominance over her or any of that other shite.
You want to hurt a woman? Be indifferent.
Then to take this to broader level as they attempt to create a socialized hypergamy…
Dude. Dude. Dude. It is already created. All they are doing is trying to strengthen it.
You are so beta it pains. Jeeze.
You have been so thoroughly outsmarted it hurts. If you want to do something consider a political program because that is where they have totally whipped your azz and you don’t even notice.
No more playing “Hide the Daddy”. (DNA testing)
Divorce is ALWAYS someones fault.
Lets try that last one again:
Then to take this to broader level as they attempt to create a socialized hypergamy…
Dude. Dude. Dude. It is already created. All they are doing is trying to strengthen it.
You are so beta it pains. Jeeze.
You have been so thoroughly outsmarted it hurts. If you want to do something consider a political program because that is where they have totally whipped your azz and you don’t even notice.
No more playing “Hide the Daddy”. (DNA testing)
Divorce is ALWAYS someones fault.
Nice….detailed…but nice
@Woman- The entire premise of your questions reveal much about women. In your mind, men should be happy because they get more sex now. End of story- the rest is all a mystery. And why shouldn’t it be, to you? You’ve been conditioned to think that all men are walking penises (peni?) who are happy so long as their dicks are wet. What you miss with your question, and what you reveal about the female nature is this- Men are built for much more than women can even appreciate or comprehend. This is why men have made the greatest discoveries,… Read more »
Seems like every time things devolve here into a pissy insult match, Glenn is right there. I’ve commented on here for months without insult. Well, except for Glenn… and here he is at it again.
It’s a shame, he has great things to offer, unfortunately it comes in this way of arguing and insulting. He thinks its alpha, but its just like a woman, all personal drama and he centers himself right in the middle.
Hobbes, your response to Woman is brilliant, perhaps the most hopeful and aspirational comment I’ve seen in the ‘sphere.
It’s completely fucked and confusing since the whole swallowing red pill and my first shitty break up. Even with the very cute, innocent, somewhat religious nice girls I get suspicions that crowd me from LTR now. It’s horrible. Because you wouldn’t expect these nice good girls to be like some of the dirty hoes, but they all have the same instinctual framework…. I say this because a lot of the time I try to tell myself “oh no the guys on the manosphere blogs are just talking about the dirty tatted hoes” but that probably isn’t the case (I hope… Read more »
Hobbes
December 18th, 2014 at 7:41 pm
I don’t know if Glenn insulted you but I gotta say. Minter is painful.
===========
Re your list. Don’t leave out man the engineer. Man the builder. Man the tamer of the forces of nature. Every time I engage in that kind of work I get a thrill that females can’t even comprehend.
Will
December 18th, 2014 at 8:21 pm
They are all like that.
@Will- it’s not so much the women, although they bear the responsibility for their actions, but it’s the society that accepts and promotes her hypergamy that you really need to be wary of. There are no easy answers. You have to decide for yourself what path, and how to walk it. I you decide on an LTR, will it be marriage? will it be simply ltr without the added burden of marraige, kids? if so, be aware that that choice means mastering game, maintaining frame at all costs, and knowing that it can all change despite your best efforts. You… Read more »
@ will If a girl wants you there is nothing ambiguous about it. She’ll get in your space, make time for you, tell you sweet things, etc. etc. That’s the kind of woman you want. If you’re doing all of the work she isn’t really interested. In her eyes you’re an expendable beta caught up in her web. Spend your time on your career/business and move up in the world. Staying skinny doesn’t hurt either. Attractive women will compete for your attention and it feels good. Ten years from now you’ll run into this nice religious girl and 9 chances… Read more »
@M Simon- Glenn went at me once, but it’s the general idea of it. I’m not saying we should all sing kumbaya, but petty insults suck. One of the things I love about this space is how much there is to learn and the higher form of dialogue that exists here. Personal petty stuff drags it down. I know who Minter is, and I am aware of some peoples feelings towards him. I, myself, don’t care about all that. He has a valuable perspective and manages to express it well- whether I agree or disagree hardly matters, it’s food for… Read more »
Hobbes @ December 18th, 2014 at 7:34 pm Thank you for this comment, Hobbes. Something like this has been, to use another Matrix phrase, a splinter in my mind for a while. I’m not sure if I can gender it completely, but it is certainly true that men try to go beyond the physical and emotional impulses more often. In dealing with women, there is always something you cannot seem to express yourself about, something centrally important yet ineffable. And I’ve not been able to find a single woman truly interested in it. I have very intelligent female relatives, and… Read more »
I’m a fan of masculine anger, indignation. It expresses the very opposite of PC understandings of the world, says which is not convenient about things. I think Glenn’s anger is, overall, an asset. He expresses a lot that needs to be said through it. But I am leery of these random vendettas; after a while they seem more like censorship than real thought. Let’s hear more Glenn, less “Don’t listen to Mark Minter.” No-one is perfect, and even a crooked stick can hit a straight ball. Many men read these comments, and they need to hear how to be a… Read more »
@ A Woman and Glenn: “Lol, in fact, two hundred years ago I could be much more forceful in extracting sexual congress from my wife by all kinds of coercion” There would be no ‘coercion.’ Women gave it up when the husband wanted. That was how ALMOST EVERY SOCIETY IN HUMAN HISTORY worked until about 1964. That was the entire purpose of marriage from the man’s point of view. @mintner: “It is fundamental in their makeup that they lie. It is fundamental to cheat the beta out of resources. Fundamental that they conceal fertility to use it when they desire.”… Read more »
@zdr01zd
I completely agree with that post.
BUT then why would girls be down to kick it and hang with you once you’ve been fucking them. Like they KNOW they will get fucked and they hang with you still.
That in my mind shows interest.
But then it’s like, if I’m not hitting her up then we don’t talk for daysssss.
It doesn’t make sense, idk how to handle it if I’m looking for a good high smv girl
Basically, in my 20s, I’ve never seen a girl go sooooo out of her way long term for a guy. Even out of my 30+ friends from a big college.
It’s probably because they’re in college. But still I’ve never seen a girl straight out chase one guy. Maybe for like the first month of courting but that’s it. After that it’s the guy that seems to have to plan everything and initiate texts etc
You probably don’t remember me, because I don’t have my Cat Woman Avatar right now. I thought the Christian Manosphere was going to be the shit. I was wrong. It’s not. Burn it. Burn it with fire. Here’s a recent meltdown that I had on a Christan Blogger’s blog. I can’t deal with the insufferable people. It’s overrun by strong crazy women. Please destroy. Okay, so we hit it off, FBNF gets jealous, FBNF moves in bends things to make it look like she’s this submissive person while undermining whatever I have say. Now she’s nice for once, and this… Read more »
Oh yeah, the blog is Deep Strength. Now you have a reason to go check it out.
A Woman contradicts herself, no surprise. “What I don’t understand in all this is the frequent assertion that beta men have less access to sex in today’s feminist, hypergamous world. I’m referring to sex outside of marriage, where betas are undeniably shafted.”
Her pretend question boils down to denying the undeniable.
For her information, yes it is much worse to be a beta man now than ever before.
There has been a recent increase on blog posts concerning the effects of the menstrual cycle in women. I wonder however of this is relevant in todays Western world at all. I cannot speak for America but the vast majority of sexually active women here in Germany is on the pill 24/7/365 anyway (just skipping the week the menstruation itself occurs) no matter if they are in a relationship, fucking around or waiting for Mr Big. I therefore never noticed any change in the sexual appetite of my partners at all – which renders all these discussions about the cycle… Read more »
Will
December 19th, 2014 at 12:44 am
My OL has two personalities – Nell from Dudley Do Right (My Hero) and your standard issue c*nt. My job is to – by dominance – spend most of my time with Nell. And I do. But that means cutting her off about 1/2 the time. Frees up time for more engineering.
Trugingstar
December 19th, 2014 at 2:58 am
It’s overrun by strong crazy women.
And weak crazy men pretending to be strong rational men.
There’s nothing more beta than changing your entire beliefs system for a woman.
I made my OL change her religion for me. Heh. She got the whole 9 yards mikvah and all. She is a mainstay at the temple.
Not trying to troll…and I found this blog like a day ago and have read a bunch of articles/comments, but Love exists right? I mean two people who just immediately and without bullshit dig each other? Maybe it’s rare but it exists right?
@Jack, yes, but not in the Blue Pill context you’d ideally hope it exists in.
What does “without bullshit” mean to you?
http://therationalmale.com/2014/09/29/a-new-hope/
The key to living in a red pill context is to unlearn your blue pill expectations and dreams of finding contentment in them, and replace them with expectations and aspirations based on realistic understandings of red pill truths.
Learn this now, you will never achieve contentment or emotional fulfillment in a blue pill context with red pill awareness.
“”Love exists right? I mean two people who just immediately and without bullshit dig each other? Maybe it’s rare but it exists right?”
It can happen. I think I’ve seen it happen. But mutuality is temporal and needs maintenance. Also, it’s not the everyman story it’s sold as.
@ Will
Her behavior sounds like it might be erratic. That makes prediction difficult and an LTR impossible. I know I might be in the minority but I’m in favor of LTRs. Find one good woman with a high SMV and stick with her for life. If it takes you 10 years to find a good woman it is worth the wait. Each year you wait your SMV goes up and good women become easier to attract.
@hobbes thanks for responding. All in all, I don’t disagree with you. It’s tragic that feminist choices directly created generations of men for whom marriage and family aren’t a source of joy, social status or even prestige, but a source of burden, humiliation, and theft. And it’s equally tragic that women don’t see how their feminist sexual choices affect men’s decisions, when they decry the lack of marriageable men. As a mother of a young daughter, how I wish that my husband and I could direct her hypergamy toward a good man at the peak of her SMV and into… Read more »
@glenn. I agree with your central question. As for a beta 5, in the past he would have a far easier time being appreciated for provider qualities and “rewarded” with a woman and social status through marriage, no doubt. For civilization to continue undisturbed, that’s enough. But I would guess that his satisfaction with his marriage and women was low– though maybe not as low as his modern equivalen– just because he was a beta 5, lacking game or alpha traits, lacking understanding that he will always need to perform (per RM’s recent post). You can see a good example… Read more »
“I fuck her once, forget her
Your bitch choosin’, just let her
She choosin’ this whole life”
This whole song is a great lesson.
Trugingstar’s comment is a prime example of why we need masculinity. I feel bad for her, she has nothing stable to brace herself against.
Gentlemen, understand this: if your woman ever goes off like this, it’s a sign that you haven’t provided her with a sufficiently strong masculine frame. Beta frame hurts women too.
@jack
“but Love exists right?”
yes Love exists! You can love a woman unconditionally and she can love you conditionally.