Estrus

 

Thomas_Doherty

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.

5 1 vote
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Speak your mind

353 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
xsplat
6 years ago

Glenn And the phrase that would fall out of my mouth, after she’d spent an hour or more dragging it out of me, was ‘I feel like I’m falling in love with you – I know that sounds crazy, but it’s true. Do you feel it too?” Lol, yes they did, each time. But this is no beginner gambit. I call it love at first sight game and have done that a lot. Although for me I do it with girls that I’m genuinely into, and allow for some genuine emotions. People have a difficult time believing that it can… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

@ Mike – With respect, what is a man who doesn’t believe in God supposed to do?I also note your admission that divorce rates are similar in the Christian community, so ahhem, what exactly is it that is being offered in terms of different outcomes? And you also describe how sexuality is leeching into the popular culture of the Church, I saw the early days of this in the Catholic church actually, years ago. I say that occurs because of shifting female values, yes? I also don’t see women devolving into less independent roles in any foreseeable future other than… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

@ Xsplat – It scares me how much I relate to some of your posts, it makes me feel bad about myself actually, lol (just kidding around, sort of…). “Love at first sight game” – holy shit. Yeah, that’s it. And yes, it does work better when you are attracted to the person and like them – in fact, I’d say that’s a must have because it’s an ultra-intense approach, All I really did was amplify the feelings and intimacy, and actually act like I’m “falling” in love without saying it. The key for me was acting uncomfortable about it,… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

Just had to share this treatise on the FI in Vogue. Talk about Open Hypergamy http://www.vogue.com/6643067/breathless-ten-things-i-learned-about-love-and-sex-in-2014/ “And it’s true. As the emotional, social, and financial equality of the sexes becomes a reality, this change is having a huge impact on sex, romance, and family life. In Dr. Helen Fisher’s TED talk, “Why We Love, Why We Cheat,” she says that we’re returning to an ancient form of marriage equality. “The 21st century is going to be the century of what they call the ‘symmetrical marriage,’ or the ‘pure marriage,’ or the ‘companionate marriage.’ This is a marriage between equals, moving… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Mike, given that the leadership of God Almighty Himself does not induce great, good, or even half-hearted followership in the VAST majority of humanity, there is no possible way any putative Christian can actually believe that it is the husband’s fault when the wife doesn’t follow him. It’s 100% up to her to follow properly. All the fault is on her if she fails.

xsplat
6 years ago

@Glenn re love at first sight game:

https://xsplat.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/intimacy-without-commitment/

xsplat
6 years ago

But tell me the truth, X, it was always game, right? I mean, it was technique – you don’t actually tell yourself you are falling in love with these women, do you? Are you one of those guys who tells yourself you do love them all? I get the sense you play many high stakes games yourself, if you want to share more of your exploits here I know I would enjoy hearing them. I don’t consider that I tell myself anything or play any games. I have an internal narrative, as we all do, but I also feel genuine… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Sunday morning, out at breakfast by myself. Moms in yoga pants everywhere I turn my head. Two, I’m sure, are in estrus right now. The older one is trying to look like her mid-teen daughter, who is sort of like Hayden Panettierre in sagging dark gray sweatpants and fuzzy slippers. The daughter’s golden hair is perfect going-to-meeting ready, but she otherwise smells heavily of sleep: saliva, urine, feet, underarm, etc. I presume mom helped her with her hair first to avoid whining before the little chapel service later. That blonde mom in estrus has welcoming hips and a two-finger thigh… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Glenn, re: “In what circumstances does open hypergamy not benefit women?”

Good question. The answer is reactionary. If there is too much open hypergamy there will be revolution by betas.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

The forebrain permits delayed gratification, communication, and planning. These essential attributes enabled betas to gang up on the undelayedly gratified alphas, and to demand a share of the females. After many generations, now the females seem to be getting forebrains as a side effect.

xsplat
6 years ago

hese essential attributes enabled betas to gang up on the undelayedly gratified alphas,

Sounds like your mental map matches up closely with The Planet Of the Apes.

My mental map looks nothing like yours. In my mental map those who are successful with women are at least as likely to be intelligent and well bred.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@Glen, With respect, for the man who doesn’t believe in God, I believe hypergamy and the FI are among the least of his worries. He faces an even more diabolical enemy that he cannot see or understand. The FI is just a pawn, which this enemy has been using since the beginning of time. The strategy has always been to initially target the woman, being the weaker sex, overcome her and then use her against the man. We are just seeing it implemented increasingly on a macro scale across all cultures. Man, without God, will inevitably be defeated by this… Read more »

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@ jf12, I agree. Nothing is certain with women or anyone for that matter. Sometimes they will chose not to follow you regardless of your righteousness. Even God himself is not exempt from the risk of experiencing the pain that brings.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@ jf12, By the way, I’m not saying RP awareness is not useful for Christian husbands, just that righteousness is not necessarily a liability. My point was that alpha behavior can be embodied in a man of God just as easily as it can be in the archetypal “bad boy”. It is only essential for a woman to be aware that a man has placed something above her as the focus in his life, whether it be God or himself.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

In fact, it seems like many, even in the manosphere, have yet to uncover one particular pretty lie that has been forcing most men into one of two manageable categories for the FI for the better part of a century. The lie being that evil = strong/alpha and good = weak/beta. This is absolutely false…remember John Wayne, Gregory Peck, Clint Eastwood, Kirk Douglas, Charlton Heston. These guys did not play beta characters but righteous, uncompromising men that were every bit as arousing to women as any villain ever was. Sadly, their kind is all but extinct though they will be… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago
Reply to  Mike

@ mike – So, you’ve got nothing for the vast majority of men who don’t subscribe to Chritianity. Got it. It seems as though you don’t understand that most men do not subscribe to your mythology. I also do not want to live in a world dominated by Christianity, we’ve already had that. Funny, I bet you have no idea what a snake oil salesman u sound like. ‘Not only does it cure feminism and hypergamy, it will also cure baldness’. Tell me, what doesn’t this magical belief system of yours fix? And how come it’s all invisible and requires… Read more »

Badpainter
6 years ago

jf12 – “It doesn’t HAVE to be a catch-22, IF the woman chooses to treat a beta as if he were an alpha.”

“IF” Is a quixotic fantasy. Women can act against their basic natures but won’t because it’s not in their nature to do so.

David W
David W
6 years ago

@sjfrellc you said “Go forth and be better for your woman.”

No, you got it wrong there, instead:

‘Go forth and be better for YOURSELF’

David W
David W
6 years ago

@ Glenn, Your comment to Mike (21st, 2014 at 4:03 pm) is spot on.

@ Mike, keep your proselytizing to the Christian forums please.
(maybe this will help you understand, would you appreciate it if a Muslim started proselytizing here?)

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Mike re: “I agree. … Sometimes they will chose not to follow” I’ve cut out all your irrelevantly distracting points about “men do it too.” And you still need to change “Sometimes” to “Most of the time”. MOST women are extremely lousy followers, especially of good men. If you can’t concede this easy concept, then you are not in truth. The one empirical thing to keep in mind about this topic is that a man behaving evil is *inherently* sexually attractive to women. Don’t distract about good women or whatever. When a man is bad to women, is abusive to… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@xsplat re: “mental map”. I understand that men would like to believe better of themselves, but come off it. 1. Alphas don’t have to delay gratification to gain sex, and so they never learn how. 2. Alphas don’t have to communicate well to gain sex, so they never learn how. Generally, pointing to his genitals and grunting works fine. 3. Alphas don’t have to plan to have sex, so they never learn how. Alphas are lousy seducers, and lousy in bed. Sex just happens too easily for them, like breathing. Women make themselves easy for alphas; women line up to… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Badpainter re: ““IF” Is a quixotic fantasy.”

Yeah, but Don Quixote had his Sancho Panza. What can be done to make women more willing to support men’s fantasies?

Badpainter
6 years ago

jf12 – ” What can be done to make women more willing to support men’s fantasies?”

Nothing collectively.

And why would we want our fantasies supported when realty itself sucks? The only way is to be bad, or badder. Which is OK so long you are compliance with the letter of the law.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Thought for the day. The loosening of socio-sexual mores has allowed women to reveal their actual sexual preferences in these five decades post- Sexual Revolution. Women specifically prefer to have sex with *bad* boys; and revealing of this preference has *grown* enormously.

The theory had been that normalizing immorality by making fornication and promiscuity expected, common, and supposedly e.g. *good* “It’s your body, and you’re free to give it whenever you want!” that young women would then choose good boys more. That theory failed, completely backwards.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Rollo, re: “The idea that moral attractiveness is DHV exists only in the minds of men who’ve invested themselves in ‘religious Game’. …The simple fact is that virtue in men isn’t arousing.”

Amen, preach it brother. The fact that you don’t fumble this concept, like so many others do, is one big reason I’m almost exclusively commenting here.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “religious Game”

This particular version can work too well (don’t say I didn’t warn you):
Him: “It is hard to be around you.”
Her: “What do you mean?”
Him: “I want to be good, but you make me want to be bad with you. I’d like to go to heaven, but oh I’m torn.”

Almost instant, I’m telling you.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

2nd thought for the day. Much of women’s fashions and makeup were designed to simulate some estrus-y conditions. Her swishing in high heels like her fanny needs attention, and her face flushing with engorged lips, etc. Maybe modern humans are headed away from the aftereffects of concealed ovulation, towards continually pretended ovulation.

Badpainter
6 years ago

jf12 – “This particular version can work too well”

Concur, as does the secularized version.

Several months ago you suggested the script that involves an ambiguous “you bother me” followed by walking away. I’ve tried that twice. Once with someone I previously acquainted with, once as a cold approach. Both were successful, the cold approach yielding the best results in conjunction with a secular version of the “religious game” script above.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

You have all missed the point. “At the end of the movie it wasn’t their virtuousness that left the ladies with tingles.” Exactly. It did not matter that they were the “good guys”, just that their behavior was generally alpha. You do not need to be a criminal to impress women. Besides, modeling your personality based on what “gives ladies the tingles” is extremely myopic. This is not what life is about gentlemen. @Glen & David, Get used to my proselytizing. You will never hear the end of it, ever. You can cut my head off, lift it up and… Read more »

David W
David W
6 years ago

@ Mike You might want to reread what Tomassi said “I make a policy not to get into issues of race, politics or religion on RM, not because I think those topics are too sensitive, but because intergender relations universally underpin all of the foundations of these. I don’t care if you’re Hindu, Mormon or Jewish, or Black, Asian or Maori, or liberal or conservative; under all of these are how men and women relate to one another.” IOW, Religion is not the topic here. No one is trying to silence you, and no one will; as Tomassi has made… Read more »

Mr T
Mr T
6 years ago

@Rollo,
you concluded :
Hypergamy, the Feminine Imperative, don’t care about your race, religion or what your political ideology is
and I should add , and no matter how much you love her..
100%.

Mr T
Mr T
6 years ago

@ Rollo ,
You can’t be Beta 6 days a week and expect her to fuck you like an Alpha on Saturday night. .
holly cow !
remember my friend ? I saw him today and guess what he told me ?
he told me , she lets him fuck her on SUNDAY after noon !.
he was up set she does`t fuck him Fri nite after taking her out for a nice expensive dinner !!.

xsplat
6 years ago

@JJ, you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Yes, some women can be attracted to some guys in jail. That does not mean that all women are attracted to all guys in jail. Yes, you have to treat em mean to keep em keen. That doesn’t mean that you can’t be forward thinking in order to be attractive. Yes, handsome guys get more female attention. That doesn’t mean that only handsome guys are “alpha”. You’ve made yourself a completely black and white view of the world. If you go to a football stadium and prime yourself to… Read more »

Badpainter
6 years ago

xsplat – “This alpha fucks beta bucks idea is so fucking completely overblown as to be a fucking comic book charicature.” I disagree. The bad boy thing has been overblown to be sure, Alpha/Beta oversimplified sure but AF/BB is to my observation pretty much spot on. In the US the model is for a woman to party it up chase AF, then decide to grow up obtain BB and breed. Whether the breeding is with an Alpha or a beta is not relevant so long as some chump gets the burden of provisioning. The problem with this is the BB… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

@badpainter, it’s not true that a man is EITHER a provider, OR a cad. It’s not true that women ONLY have a dual sexual strategy. We’ve heard it mentioned over and over that during the fertile period women are more apt to stray, and with a certain type of man, right? However that’s NOT right. ONLY women who are not with a high value man show any difference at all. Women can and do get both their strategies met by the SAME man. All the time. It’s not some rare dolphin unicorn. Yes, women have a dual sexual nature. But… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

I call it the Peter Parker underwear hero syndrome.

Guys feel under-appreciated by women. In order to not walk around in a funk all day they downplay the competition. Oh, those guys are just the stupid jocks. Or, oh those guys are just the bad boy criminals. Their dumb and girls are dumb to want to fuck them.

It’s just enough truth to convince a desparate ego that it’s not really our own fault for for not being attractive.

xsplat
6 years ago

It’s an underwear hero syndrome because we tell ourselves that if only girls took the time and were smart enough to see beneath the surface, they’d realize that actually WE are the real superheros after all.

Badpainter
6 years ago

xsplat – “In real life young girls are not all tossing around their pussy to the most handsome bad boy and then extracting resources from a guy she has no interest in fucking.”

Actually they are. The only variable there is the N, and assuming it’s N=10 by age 30 is not a fantastic stretch of imagination. Given the correlation between number of partners and the reduced capacity to bond emotionally it’s a safe bet that epiphany phase provider is a temporary choice, especially when the society enables and encourages it.

xsplat
6 years ago

And it’s often the same underwear heros who harbor fantasies of the apocalypse, when the meek shall inherit the earth.

That story has been around so long that it’s possibly genetically influenced.

Ya, right, the apocalypse is right around the corner guys. Ya, you meek and downtrodden are finally going to get what’s coming to you, and all the guys on top now are going to be up against the wall.

Yup.

Enjoy that fantasy as if hope actually mattered.

Me, I’m taking real life actions and having real life consequences.

Mr T.
Mr T.
6 years ago

I feel sorry for men who doubt the believe in Alphafucks/beta(thinking he’s alpha)Bucks .

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “we tell ourselves that if only girls took the time and were smart enough to see beneath the surface, they’d realize that actually WE are the real superheros after all.”

Who’s we? My contention is that if girls were smart enough then they wouldn’t want superheroes at all.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Badpainter, re: “Both were successful” Glad to hear it. I’ve found, in my dotage, that I’m kind of a natural in opening, especially in cold approach banter: assume the woman is interested, i.e. curious, and assume that her interest can be immediately sexualized. I suppose that probably would have been dangerous for me to know when I was young, which is probably why I/we all were told not to do it that way. I was eating alone again, unusually since I prefer an audience, this evening, nearby but off the reservation/ compound/ enclave of petroleum workers. My eye caught a… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Sun Wukong
6 years ago

@Mike “Please WAKE UP before it is too late.” I’d say the same to you, but it’s a waste of my breath. Only complete and total collapse of everything you thought $YOUR_DEITY_OF_CHOICE has awarded you with will have a chance of changing your mind. As a fellow man I hope that never happens to you, but not so you can stay asleep. It’s so you can avoid feeling the pain many of us have gone through to learn the actual truth of the world. I wish you well, but I hope you’ll understand that just because your beliefs are thousands… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

@Rollo, we don’t disagree that alpha fucks/beta bucks is a real dynamic that really happens. And I don’t think we even disagree that it’s not the ONLY thing that happens. You’ve said yourself before that women strive for an alpha provider, and I’m sure every now and then you’ve admitted that such men exist and do get into long term relationships. So fundamentally we agree on what colors are in the landscape. What we disagree on is the level of contrast and the distribution of colors. I’m suggesting that your painting is cartoonish – a dramatically reduced color pallate and… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Who’s we? My contention is that if girls were smart enough then they wouldn’t want superheroes at all.

Ya, same difference. Our true value is unnoticed, and in effect hidden. The metaphor holds well enough. Under appreciated underwear heros.

Some guys really do think that their value to “society” IS heroic, especially as exemplified in their willingness to marry and provide stable familes and work hard. Da-da-DAA! It’s Family Man!

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “The metaphor holds well enough.”

No. It’s the same as saying that if men were smart enough then they’d realize that ordinary girls are the True Stuck-up Princesses. It’s a wrong metaphor because it presumes that men *ought* to want stuck-up princesses. I refuse to concede that women *ought* to want superheroes.

xsplat
6 years ago

The metaphor is that women *ought* to want anything at all other than what they want. It’s a metaphor. I’m not suggesting that people literally are heros. I’m suggesting that people think women *ought* to want them. You seem to be hung up on the hero part, for some reason. There is SOME quality or other that people assume women are too stupid to see. Call it whatever you want. What you call that quality is not my point at all. Any man who feels undervalued by women is in a way a Peter-Parker-Underwear-Hero, not by virtue of his having… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

A pretty straightforward example of why alpha fucks/beta bucks is WAYY overblown; most all rock stars and top level male celebrities marry or otherwise pair bond. It’s not either/or. There is a really powerful word in the English language. It’s called “and”. Heartiste has his pet theory that EVERYTHING boils down in the end to confidence. No matter how clearly or in how many different ways you point out to him this amazing word “and”, he literally can not hear it. Confidence AND looks? No! Looks increase confidence, and it’s therefore ONLY confidence. So now he just censors anything that… Read more »

Badpainter
6 years ago

xslpat – “..most all rock stars….”

You seem to suffer from you’re own apex fallacy. “Rock stars” are so few in number that at best they are exceptions to whatever rule you want to discuss.

You as well just say NAWALT and be done with it or provide a better working model.

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

@ jf12 and Xsplat – This is an argument that should be put in proper context. The most brilliant evolutionary biologists (and other scientists who study human sexuality) on the planet haven’t figured all this out yet. If you keep track of the field, you see that there are major disagreements about many basic issues. The ideas presented here are best thought of as heuristics. Sure, we have evidence and some theories that seem promising, but that’s about it. AF/BB is a good perspective, but more than that? If you think Rollo’s got scientific certainty here, wake up. This isn’t… Read more »

Ted D
6 years ago

Xslpat – re:rock stars – and how many of them end up divorced within 5 years of getting married? They are mostly the “alpha fucks” with lots of cash. Thing is, lack of comfort will kill that relationship no matter how alpha he is. Especially if the marriage is between two stars, as is often the story with musicians and actors. In fact, all of the entertainment industry might as well be considered one giant orgy of serial monogamy as mates tend to hop from star to star marrying and divorcing. They are the extreme example of what is becoming… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

The point isn’t whether rock stars get divorced, and the point isn’t what percentage of the population are rock stars.

I would have thought the point as obvious as the morning sun. How can you not see the morning sun? How can you not see my point?

I’ll repeat. It’s not just alpha-fucks and beta bucks.

It’s ALSO alpha-BUCKS.

alpha-BUCKS.
alpha-BUCKS.
alpha-BUCKS.

Unstop your ears.

alpha-BUCKS.

All men, alphas and betas, tend to pair bond. NOT just betas.

ALL men, alphas and betas, tend to pair bond. NOT just betas.

TuffLuv
TuffLuv
6 years ago

Alpha waxes and wanes.. A chick who is blown away by your ‘rock star’, willing to blow you backstage, and become your groupie 1, is a honeymoon phase away from moving on when your licks are no longer new to her (i.e. when she meets the drummer). Successful, sexually fulfilling, LTR game is reinventing your Alpha again and again. Alpha dry spell == LTR nuke Heartbroken rock stars fell into the blue-pill trap, and dared to love the woman the way she ‘told’ him to love her.. by abandoning some of his wildness, carelessness, and opening up, being more beta…… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Rollo, yes or no – are there Alphas out there who pair bond and enjoy long term relationships?

Yes or no, are there alphas out there who support their wives and children?

TuffLuv
TuffLuv
6 years ago

Ah yes.. had read.. exactly.

TuffLuv
TuffLuv
6 years ago

@xsplat Yes and no.. I was married to a hottie for 19 years. I dominated her. I fought for my right to be male.. then, 15 years in, I capitulated.. I became Clark Kent.. I thought those sacrifices would be vastly appreciated.. forever. I was dead wrong. The important thing I think you are missing.. Alphas are not a breed. Alpha, is not everlasting. True Alpha, imo, is really about the burden of performance, as Rollo puts it.. When your chick tells you to do more housework.. fuck that go change the oil in all five cars, while she sits… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Yes, tuffluv, you mention basic red pill stuff. Stuff that we agree on. Stuff that I’ve written about myself. I talk about keeping a woman in aquisitive mode, which some might consider getting the alpha treatment. A lot of it does have to do with boundaries. And it’s an ongoing project. But yes and no is equivocating. Unless I’m reading Rollo wrong, lately he’s been leaning in his essays and comments to a different view than he seemed to start with. Lately he seems to be making more of a drastic K and R selection distinction, and implying that if… Read more »

teddj4g
teddj4g
6 years ago

Xsplat – sure there are “alphas” out here taking care of their kids. But you are missing the point. If they are indeed alpha, their wives are with them FOR the alpha. The bucks is a bonus. With a beta bucks guy, the ONLY thing he has going for him is the dollars and cents. Ideally the woman’s idea of “fried ice” is an alpha with money that is “nice” to her but a “bad boy” to the rest of the world. Since most men don’t fit that ideal, most women have to make trade offs when selecting a mate.… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Tedd, I’m not missing any point at all. In fact you’re thinking that I am is likely just another example of the very black and white thinking that I’m talking about. 10,000 times yes, I agree with the alpha fucks beta bucks distinction. Get it? Or should I agree 10,000 times more? But that’s not ALL that’s going on. There is nuance, and also OTHER options. It’s not JUST those two things. That is MY point. The other point was long ago agreed with. You seem to assume that if I’m not with em I’m against em. It’s not that… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

And look, men make very grave relationship errors when they assume that finances can not be an aid to maintaining genuine lust and aquisitive mode and alpha treatment. Define what behaviours women show that prove she is treating her man like an alpha, and use that empirical evidence as the real test. It’s not what she says, it’s what she does. A big reason men have a difficult time maintaining aquisitive mode is that they lose hand. Financial hand. It’s an ALPHA tool to maintain hand. A tool that causes orgasms and blow jobs, and empirical outward signs that are… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Does she like your six figure income? Hell yeah! But you don’t want her to choose you based on it alone. Right? Women are hypergamous and go for the best they can get. So she’s going to choose me for SOMETHING. Somethings. I’m fine if money is a variable in why the girl chooses me. The money is a major reflection on my character. It took brains and ambition and perseverance and social skills to earn my wealth. A hottie was once asked why she married the old man. Her answer shut everybody up. “Because he’s rich and hung like… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

Using money to aid attraction does not CAUSE the beta bucks side of the equation.

The opposite. It helps to cause the women to give all the measurable signs of treating the man as the alpha, and to engender real lust and real passion and real devotion.

AND

It can be used in ways that don’t cause attraction.

See?

See how that works?

TuffLuv
TuffLuv
6 years ago

@xsplat I see what you’re saying.. I think maybe this all goes back to not clearly defining alpha. We all know.. Alpha: that guy who chicks just want to fuck, and that’s usually all they want from him.. It’s no secret. He’s a natural. It’s usually just physical. We all know we can’t aspire to be him. He is gifted with women, even when he says nothing. And somehow also has the fortitude to relish this (confusing) carousel of female attention. He’s built for it, mentally and physically. This guy would have a hard time needing, wanting, or maintaining an… Read more »

Badpainter
6 years ago

xslpat – “See how that works?”

Umm…so what?

NAALT (Not All Alphas Are Like That), I always thought that was implied.

Money by itself indicates nothing but potential for material comfort. Which seems to be a positive generally but indicative of neither Alpha nor Beta. Kinda of like height, looks, intelligence and physique.

xsplat
6 years ago

My apprentice/business partner is in the top 1 percent of attractive males. He is one definition of alpha, in that he neither needs nor wants pair bonding and can get laid with multiple women every week. But if that is the definition of alpha, then spell it out and let it be known. Because it’s rather useless definition. Like you said, every man is only alpha because one or more women perceives him to be. He may be perceived that way by 50 women in a room, or by 1 in a city. It may have been instant attraction or… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

And of course a guy can even learn to have multiple women treat him like this, all knowing of and even knowing each other. Year after year.

Alpha is not a demographic of of guys who limit themselves to one night stands.

xsplat
6 years ago

In fact I hereby propose a new definition of what makes a man alpha: It is how he is treated. We can measure how he is treated in two ways: 1) By what percentage of women would fuck him with little resistance 2) By what behaviors of total devotion any particular woman regularly does show him. Behaviors such as a) cooking and cleaning, including regularly asking the man what he wants to eat, and cleaning with joy, as if the duty is a devotional b) initiating sex and blowjobs c) public displays of how proud she is of her man… Read more »

teddj4g
teddj4g
6 years ago

Xsplat – ok I get your point better now. However, I’ll take genuine lust over any combination of attractive traits hands down. I certainly won’t quit my job to ensure my wife is with me because she thinks I’m hot stuff. But she also showed some very raw and obvious desire for me before she knew my last name, let alone my income. So I do agree with you that there is nuance to relationships. I’m sure my provisioning is a great comfort to my wife. But I’d bet you my next paycheck it doesn’t in any way make her… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

@Tedd, ya, people don’t seem to easily grasp the fact that money can increase lust.

No matter how many different ways it’s stated, men seem completely unable to grasp it. For is MUST be negotiated desire, and CAN’T be possible for wealth to increase actual lust.

http://xsplat.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/women-orgasm-more-for-wealthy-men/

teddj4g
teddj4g
6 years ago

Xsplat – in some cases sure. But brother, I’m never gonna have the kind of money it takes to generate that kind of lust. And all things being equal, even if I did have that kind of cash, I’d want and expect straight up attraction from a woman before I would let something like money bias her opinion. Much better that she find out I’m stinking rich AFTER the hook is set so to speak. That being said, I’m more than happy to enjoy a little buffer/boost to my “value” because I have a decent income. But I would never… Read more »

Wolf
6 years ago

If you’ve navigated the Sexual Marketplace for long, chances are you’ve already begun to sense when women are in the estrus state. The signs are subtle, but we’re biologically programmed to pick them up. She’ll stare up at you with her big dilated doe eyes. Her body will orient itself towards you, and if you display the correct combination of alpha mannerisms she will in turn carry herself with the biologically submissive manner that comes naturally.

We are all beasts. We must act like it if we wish to succeed in this dog-eat-dog world.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

You guys are still missing the point. No one here believes that moral virtue is synonymous with alpha or even that it can possibly inspire a woman’s arousal in and of itself. If you read my previous posts carefully, I think you will see there is much more to what I am saying than that. Many of you do not realize that you have chosen the quick and easy path to alpha but there is another. The journey is much longer but the destination is well worth the trip. The type of man who choses this path is the rarest… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago
Reply to  Mike

@ Mike – Indeed, cult members will respond to members who behave like cult leaders. This is very true, thanks for that.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@ Rollo, what about denying the antecedent?

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

i.e. Your basic argument seems to be: If one is a man, he is not genuinely righteous (a man of God). So, all I have to do is provide one example of a true man of God (true Scottsman). I have provided two.

teddj4g
teddj4g
6 years ago

Mike – “i.e. Your basic argument seems to be: If one is a man, he is not genuinely righteous (a man of God). So, all I have to do is provide one example of a true man of God (true Scottsman). I have provided two.” But your two examples are from a time and society far removed from ours. Many men is the ‘sphere believe that being a man as you describe was once possible, but in modern society its a losing bet. I get that suffering and going against the norm is supposed to be part of the journey… Read more »

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

Or: I say true men of God are righteous. So, Glen mentions cult leaders (implying there are no true men of God because cult leaders are not righteous) and Rollo thinks I made the “no true Scottsman” fallacy.

Rediculess.

@Tedd, not actually trying to prove anything here.

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago
Reply to  Mike

@ No, I was not implying anything about ‘true men of God’. I meant that when you act like a divine, messianic freak inside of a cult (and christianity is a cult, surely the evango branches meet all the definitions), you can probably get some of the hottie cult members to fuck you, or at least blow you in a supply room or something.

But of course, to non-cult members, you just look ridiculous.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

Ridiculous.

JJ
JJ
6 years ago

Money, height, game, fame, etc. are alpha multipliers. They do not make a man alpha by themselves, but they can help increase the relative alpha aspect of a guy.

Why not use every advantage you can get?

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@tedd, I know it is a hard sell…always has been. That’s why they crucified Christ…doesn’t mean there is a better deal for anyone in the long run.

stuttie
6 years ago

@ Mike – http://godisimaginary.com/i1.htm

Mr T.
Mr T.
6 years ago

An advice from no nothing me,

For all of you men out there:

Do you want to know whether you are alpha or beta ? Date a beautiful BLIND woman.

Bundles
Bundles
6 years ago

I have to say that I’m a blind woman, and I’m going through menopause. Estrus is still there, but it usually accompanies a strong smell in my case. It took me a long time to discover the source. Well, I have a heightened sense of smell. Now, I’m a proud atheist and a proud woman’s rights activist. I was petitioning for woman’s lib during the days of woodstock. Back in those days, you wore Birkenstocks, and nobody thought, “she’s gay! She’s a lesbian! She’s homosexual!” No one thought She was a fag. We never did ask questions, because sex wasn’t… Read more »

Bundles
Bundles
6 years ago

I can’t tell if I’m beautiful, but I imagine I am. There’s something inherently beautiful about womanhood anyway. You can have anything that you can grab, girlfriend.

Mr T.
Mr T.
6 years ago

The simplest thing men don’t know is :

Women see in their EARS.

Bundles
Bundles
6 years ago

@ Mr. T: Not exclusively. I’m very open-minded.

xsplat
6 years ago

@Tedd Much better that she find out I’m stinking rich AFTER the hook is set so to speak. Ya, most of us feel that way. And regardless of before or after, money only can provide a boost, but is not sufficient in and of itself to create or maintain lust. In the context of alpha fucks beta bucks it should be obvious why I brought up the scientific study that shows that women orgasm more for wealthy men. It’s because shows directly that bucks are not only about the beta comfort and provisioning side of the equation. The variables bleed… Read more »

xsplat
6 years ago

So any theory of behavior for women has to account for 1) women orgasm more for wealthy men 2) even men with the most options with women – the men for whom the largest percentage of hot young women would fuck with the least resistance, routinely pair bond and even marry. How does alpha-fucks beta bucks incorporate that data? AF/BB is not wrong, it’s just incomplete. AF/BB AND. And 1) Money can have effects on both sides of the AF/BB equation – it can increase comfort and be a type of negotiated desire, but it can ALSO increase and maintain… Read more »

Mr T.
Mr T.
6 years ago

Or how about this:

Beta gets woman’s eyes
Alpha gets women’s ears+downunder.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@ Rollo, Again, if you look at the rest of his life, you will see that David was in pretty high demand with women long before he was king and started comiting atrocities or “black knighting”. And how do you explain the other example I provided, Joseph? Both of these men were obviously seen as alpha by women regardless of their deeds. @ Glen, Your cult leader comment did imply there are no true men of God whether you want to admit it now or not. Obviously, no one would consider a cult member to be a true man of… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago
Reply to  Mike

@ Mike – Wow, now you are telling me what I mean after I’ve clarified it. Are there no bounds to your arrogance?

xsplat
6 years ago

Also of course any theory for women’s behavior has to account for 1) how women of all social classes and backgrounds and cultures and countries behave towards pimps. Even old ugly pimps. There are some books put out by pimps and some documentaries that are very instructive. Women behave very submissively, to say the least. 2) The difference between the guy that more women would more easily fuck for one night stands, and the guy who inspires incredible submission and devotion and sexual attention and orgasmic lust. These are not the same thing, as even a guy that most women… Read more »

Mr T.
Mr T.
6 years ago

Here is another advice from know nothing me :

For beta bucks = unedited words from your honey.

For alpha = your woman edited words 10 times before delivery.

So, there you have it.

Sun Wukong
Sun Wukong
6 years ago

@Glenn
Relevant quip I once saw…

Cult: A small, unpopular religion.

Religion: A large, very popular cult.

Sun Wukong
Sun Wukong
6 years ago

“make it easier on us to find husbands.”
Stop emasculating boys and the next generation will get that wish fulfilled.

Your generation is fucked though. Thank the previous generation of women for that.

melmoth
melmoth
6 years ago

@ zdro1dz (I think)

“So ladies, when are you going to step up?”

…Never. Never ever ever. Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. Blaming men is written into their psyche with more redundancy and certainty than any computer software you could ever find. The more all of this crumbles, the stronger their conviction becomes that they were right about men all along. Hostile feminist triumphalism will grow at the same rate that the society decays, like a succubus. Their own children’s starvation right before their eyes would actually tickle the confirmation bias receptors of feminists.

Sun Wukong
Sun Wukong
6 years ago

@Miss T
I believe I placed blame squarely on the generation of women before you and gave you a course of action to be taken to help the next generation of women.

Nice solipsistic assumptions on your part though.

Nathan
Nathan
6 years ago

Rollo,

You are kind to your readers (I also have Christian convictions).

This was spot on: I make a policy not to get into issues of race, politics or religion on RM, not because I think those topics are too sensitive, but because intergend intergender relations universally underpin all of the foundations of these.

Intergender relations universally underpin all of the foundations of these.”

Deep

Nathan
Nathan
6 years ago

How so miss tea?

Mike
Mike
6 years ago

@ Rollo, just read your Chasing Amy post. With all due respect, this cliche, sweet, little, beta, Christian, boy pinning after his dream girl is a straw-man. I never said church attendance, Bible study or anything else professing Christians do can inoculate them from the BP/FI. As you have acknowleged, however, the Bible does provide plenty of examples of men who knew and even spoke directly with God and retained their full manhood and exhibited exemplary alpha behavior. A personal relationship with God through Christ Jesus has the power to set anyone free from anything but going to church and… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

@ Mike – Yes it is, logically and rhetorically nonsensical for you to infer what you did from my comment. As for living in a solipsism, wow, that’s you Mikey. And it was relevant to your post because what you described is some freak with a messianic vibe getting bitches wet. You are so detached from reality that you barely even comprehend what others say to you. It’s pretty sad. Now get back to begging your make-believe-man-in-the-sky for stuff and preening around your ancient, absurd mythology as though it’s anything but debunked nonsense. Good boy. you are so good! Isn’t… Read more »

353
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: