There are times I’m typing away on a particular topic and I get scooped by my own comentariat.
Quote from BadPainter (emphasis mine):
George – “She prefers a dual pluralistic feminine sexuality where she can express and enjoy greater sexual freedom and an artificial feeling of control and dominance.”
Because giving herself sexually to a man who is a provider either makes her a whore (trading sex for material goods), or a slave (giving up power to submit to a dominant man). By chasing Alpha Fux she can submit in that moment and maintain the illusion of independence. By accepting commitment from Beta Bux she gets the very highest price for her sex and can aintain the illusion that’s she is not a whore. Combining the two, Alpha Fux and Beta Bux means accepting a submissive position to a man who provides with an expectation of sex.
This is antithetical to entire feminist paradigm of equality with, and independence from, men. To achieve this ultimate feminist goal women achieve equality, and equality of outcome by political policy, and they achieve independence by becoming lesbians.
George’s response:
Well put, agreed. I wonder how many women really are successful with this plural hypergamy and how many really aren’t. We are seeing many media examples of this and examples of young girls in traditionally masculine leadership fantasy roles (hunger games, etc.). However, I personally know very few real females who are successful with “open hypergamy” and none who characterize real leadership traits. The ones attempting to practice this plural hypergamy expose themselves as the untrustworthy sluts they are, divorced, etc and no man worth a shit wants anything to do with them. They end up extremely insecure bitter hags in short order.
Again BadPainter:
George – “They end up extremely insecure bitter hags in short order.”
This seems to be the case amongst all women who hold to the feminist notion of equalitarian relationships. And I think generates similar results amongst women who don’t actively subscribe to feminism but willingly accept the benefits of feminism. And I think it’s the career track reality that does it.
A woman working outside the home must submit to the hierarchy of the work place. The workplace is the Alpha of her existance because it can and will dispose of her as soon as she is unwanted/not needed. The workplace is dread writ large. When she goes home she can’t as easily submit to her beta husband because she knows he can’t and won’t dispose of her so easily, especially if there are children involved. This is a source of disrespect, she gets away with it because she can. She resists because she has been playing that submision game all day and refuses to simply give in at home.
Likewise a man having to walk the tightrope of workplace politics being both a good follower and showing initiative, and leadership irrespective of rank and position, has little desire to fight those same battles at home. So he gives in out of exhaustion what he wants is a moments peace where his way is the only way because he’s the king of his own castle at least in his own mind.
Both man and woman are ultimately played against each other in this situation. The woman is more resistant to submit, the man more reluctant to dominate because he now has to be more dominant than the woman’s work place without the benefit hard dread sans consequences. In the past the practiced amount of domestic dominance required would be reduced or mitigated by the economic reality of the woman’s dependence on the man for her material standard of living. Not so today when divorce law favors the woman, and domestic violence laws, and standards for defining abuse only apply to men. Today those influences plus the nuttiness of feminism makes a challenging situation worse as the the gender roles are now competitive instead of complimentary and collaborative
I realize I may raise a few hackles with today’s post. And while I wont apologize for what I’m going to propose here, just know that my intent isn’t to offend or injure, but rather to strip away a degree of what I think is a very pleasant, but sugar coated fiction.
Whenever I read or hear a man consistently refer to his wife as his “bride” it alerts me to his Blue Pill state of mind as well as his conditioning. This is a relatively new colloquialism for the Christian set (“christianese”). Generally I hear and read this from Evangelical Christian men because their context (or domain) is one of a self-enforced reverence for their wives. Usually it’s meant to be a not-so-veiled attempt at pedestalizing their wives in casual conversation with people they think will appreciate it (and hopefully earn cookie points with the wife), but what it reveals in my Red Pill lens is a guy who believes his “voluntary” deference to her makes him more respectable to her.
Before you think I’m unfairly highlighting “Christian Beta Game” there is a similar, but more pervasive dynamic in the married-man set of the manosphere. Whenever I read a man (I’ve never heard a guy verbalize this) refer to his wife as the “First Mate” or “First Officer” it similarly sets off the same sensitivity I get with the “brides” men – and for much of the same reasons.
Any man with a cursory experience in the manosphere recognizes this buzz-term from Athol Kay’s Married Man Sex Life. The principle of the term stems from the idea that a husband needs to be the ‘captain’ of his marriage, his family and the director and decision maker of where that unit will go, what their goals are, etc. On the face of it, this male headship positioning stresses what men (and wives) interpret as an old-order conventional complementarity between the sexes.
A strong male leadership role is very appealing to both men and women, and I’ll be the first to cosign the need for a man’s ‘captaincy’ as it were in his marriage and his life in general. This ‘Manning Up’ into a headship of his relationship hits the right buttons for a man predisposed to Beta complacency (not to mention it gives him a faint hope for resolving a sexless marriage), but also for women who are encouraged by the ‘new’ Alpha-ish husband they hope will take the lead (usually from her) and potentially generate the tingles he’s never quite been able to do for her.
Unfortunately, this push for ‘captaincy’ is self-defeated by the equalist-mindset compromise of allaying a woman’s inherent insecurities by giving her assurances that she will be the “first mate” in this new arrangement. Even in a position of instated headship (relinquished or otherwise), men predisposed to an egalitarian equalism still want to ‘play fair’ and offer an appeasement for being allowed to be the head of the home.
Her voice will be heard, her input will be considered, because he just “loves her that much”; this is the self-satisfying rationale for being allowed to direct the course of his marriage and family. The problems inherent in this are rooted in the compromise of his assuming all accountability for the failures of that arrangement while still granting her his magnanimous assurances that he’ll always have her best interests in mind.
Father Knows Best
I overheard a young woman explain what amounted to open Hypergamy to a Beta kid I know over the holiday. At one point she said, “It’s women’s job to get away with everything they can in life.”
Then the kid asks, “So what is men’s job to do in life?”, “Not to let ’em” was her reply.
I’ve always stressed that the Frame in which you begin a relationship will set the overall tone of that relationship. That’s not to say the predominant Frame can’t be altered (indeed many men fall victim to their own Beta backsliding in marriage), but that tone, that predominant directorship of who’s Frame will set the course for where it goes and how it develops is set before you sign on to monogamy in its various forms. It is either your reality into which a woman must enter, or hers that you must enter. Their may be compromises, but these will be colored and characterized by whose Frame is the dominant one in the relationship.
Know this now, your wife, your LTR girlfriend, doesn’t want to be your “First Mate”.
While you may think you’re flattering her with your self-styled magnanimity, this compromise only reflects your Blue Pill equalist hope that she will genuinely appreciate the sacrifices you make in considering her Frame. The dominant Frame (hopefully yours) is what matters. While a wife’s input may present you with insight you may have overlooked, she must ultimately acquiesce to your Frame’s primacy.
When you consider her a co-equal actor in what you believe is a mutual Frame (or what you’ve convinced yourself is really your Frame to maintain that relationship) you will own your mistakes and failures, but she will share in, and at times take an equal credit for, your successes.
There’s a reason that the cliché is “Behind every great man is a woman” and not the other way around. Any man claiming a supportive responsibility for a woman’s success – or even being graciously acknowledged by her for it – is perceived as a coattail rider. When it comes to a comparison between Sensitive New Age Guy® and Strong Independent Woman®, a woman is always a support system for a man’s success. Men’s genuine support is emasculating because ‘support’ is a feminine role in either an egalitarian or a complementarian relationship.
Down with the Ship
While it may be comforting for a woman to believe her opinion is valued, or that what passes for her newfound submission to his direction is guaranteed by his considerateness, very few ‘first mates’ are willing to go down with the ship once it starts taking on enough water. The ‘first mate’ notion is really a win-win situation for women who are already virtually guaranteed of long term support whether her ‘captain’ sinks the ship or not. With so many reassurances of social, emotional and financial support women can always reserve the right to jump ship should her husband’s fates and fortunes not live up to his headship.
When she goes home she can’t as easily submit to her beta husband because she knows he can’t and won’t dispose of her so easily, especially if there are children involved. This is a source of disrespect, she gets away with it because she can. She resists because she has been playing that submision game all day and refuses to simply give in at home.
In other words, the ‘captain’ is really on his own regardless of his ‘first mate’s’ input.
She’s absolved of his failures and shares in his successes – which are made all the better when he convinces himself that the directives of her Frame are really his own. Any consideration for real mutual input will always be mitigated by this foreknowledge of a relatively ensured support should he not live up to the performance demanded of a ‘captain’.
Forgetthesky from last week’s comment thread:
I think George and Badpainter bring forward an interesting hypothesis above: the idea that women are pursuing an AF/BB strategy so relentlessly not only because a man to exemplify both sides are so rare (though they are unusual), but because women would generally avoid such a man – because she would have no power over him, he would command all spheres. And modern women fear submission greatly, they’ve been trained to. And they’ve often enough never experienced it positively, with so many absent and beta father’s around.
A Man needs to command all spheres to genuinely be the ‘captain’, and ultimately this disqualifies any validity of his woman’s considered influence on him.
The idea of a needed balance of including a wife or LTR in a man’s decision making process is not just the result of an equalitarian mindset, it also serves the Feminine Imperative. While equalism is the root belief, the notion of a mutual (though nominally lesser) inclusiveness works on much the same level as Choreplay. If a man “plays more fairly and evenly” the expected reciprocation should be a reward of more of a woman’s love, respect and pussy. In fact this is the sell for both equalist Purple Pill inclusivity and doing a feminine defined set of equalized chores.
The problem then becomes one of the observer effect when a woman is constantly aware of the inclusivity, captain-first mate Game that she and her husband are both overtly playing. Observing the process will change it, so any assuming of ‘captaincy’ and any presumption of a roleplaying legitimacy on his part become suspect of both he and his wife’s genuineness. Truly submissive women want a decisive, unapologetic man with masculine determination and ambition for his life, who doesn’t need to be told he needs to be so. He ‘Just Gets It‘, and so much so that his Frame is the dominant one from the outset of the relationship without any back and forth about captains or first mates. She enters his reality, or she doesn’t associate with him.
Women don’t want to be overtly reminded that they’re “being included”. This is pandering to women who already know they have the blameless option of abandoning or jumping the ship. This overtness then inevitably script-flips to male ridicule.
“I’m the king of the castle. My wife told me I could be” is how the joke that men tell themselves goes, but the self-observation is really one of abdication to a woman’s Frame while he lamely grasps at an authority he doesn’t believe he’s ever earned.
No one laughs at his joke.
[…] There are times I’m typing away on a particular topic and I get scooped by my own comentariat. Quote from BadPainter (emphasis mine): George – “She prefers a dual pluralistic feminine sexuality where she can express and enjoy greater sexual freedom and an artificial feeling of control and dominance.” Because giving herself sexually to a […] http://therationalmale.com/2014/12/30/mutiny […]
[…] Mutiny […]
From post: “When she goes home she can’t as easily submit to her beta husband because she knows he can’t and won’t dispose of her so easily, especially if there are children involved.” I can’t agree with this line of thinking. The best word I can think of for women working is “resentment”. Women seem to resent having to work if their work is required to make ends meet. In my work life I lead a large staff. I would never characterize a female subordinate as “submitting” to any hierarchy. This is not HR BS it’s just my observation (note… Read more »
When the realization of just how far you have dropped your standards for that emptiness between her legs hits, you can only hope there is enough life left to climb back to your feet.
Not even women live well with women.
Women don’t want to be overtly reminded that they’re “being included”. This is pandering to women who already know they have the blameless option of abandoning or jumping the ship. This overtness then inevitably script-flips to male ridicule. ~Rollo Tomassi Countless artists have stated that their work was written in a short period of time. Sylvester Stallone famously wrote the first draft of the “Rocky” script in three days. @LadyGaga has stated that her song “Edge of Glory” was inspired by “Rocky” (the movie). This amazing work by Rollo Tomassi has clearly been inspired by an out of this world… Read more »
No True Captain has only one underling …
Possibly the “first mate” idea is ok IF it is a large patriarchal household, i.e. many children underfoot, several generations, etc. The first mate is perhaps delegated authority over babies and little girls, for example.
Otherwise the nonequalist reality is that one person is in charge and the other person is NOT in charge, period.
P.S. “Underling” as a new term of endearment. I’ll have to try it tomorrow.
Apprentice is the highest rank I would ever give her.
@ liveFearless – well said.
Apparently these women think it’s both funny and responsible to talk about sex as IF they were sluts (one was dumped some time ago by her last boyfriend and hasn’t had any sex for over a year, and the other has been living with her ltr guy forever). Neither would be good for anything but walking the plank, arrr! Bad word alert.
http://www.salon.com/2014/12/28/feminism_is_just_owning_your_s_and_feeling_good_about_your_decisions_salon_talks_with_the_hosts_of_guys_we_fked/
Been reading RM for about 18 months now, it just keeps getting better and better. Thank you Rollo you truly are a deliverer of great knowledge.
This article makes a lot of sense, but one thing seems confusing: “Combining the two, Alpha Fux and Beta Bux means accepting a submissive position to a man who provides with an expectation of sex.” Why wouldn’t the “Beta Bux”, in this case, just be an afterthought, since he wouldn’t actually be providing “with an expectation of sex”? The sex and accepting a submissive position come first, because her man is Alpha. As long as he continues to keep her as an Alpha’s woman, as his property and perhaps even as part of a harem, why would the facts that… Read more »
Thank you for this article Rollo. While I value its underlying message for its own sake, I also admit that I’ve taken bit of glee at your mockery of the term “first mate” since I have found its use by some of your regular commentators (ahem… M Simon… ahem) to be remarkably pretentious.
Yes, I have always disliked those terms. They are twee. I can’t imagine a woman really wanting to be a First Mate. For starters, most women do not read about Captain Jack Aubrey and think in naval terms. Also, it is not “hot”. I can’t imagine Christian Grey saying to Anastasia, “you can be my First Mate”. Either treat her as a full equal or as distinctly inferior. She is not your First Mate. She will never be promoted to Captain. As a goodish woman I know wrote, “if my husband were to abandon his place as head of house,… Read more »
eon – “Why wouldn’t the ‘Beta Bux”, in this case, just be an afterthought, since he wouldn’t actually be providing ‘with an expectation of sex’?” So long as an LTR never becomes a marriage. I think it’s more than an afterthought because there’s no chance of him providing without an expectation of sex regardless of his Alpha cred. Women are taught to avoid this transaction. It’s one thing to accept gifts, or even co-habitate, but marriage would be public, contractual obligation to mutually exchange personal goods and services in a committed relationship. So long as there’s no marriage she can… Read more »
Ang Aamer – “I would never characterize a female subordinate as ‘submitting’ to any hierarchy.”
Sure, but from her perspective she’s overworked, underpayed, and under appreciated and follows the rules, and can’t just quit. Her perception is that she is submitting. And perception is reality, or at least feels like it. That’s what counts; feelz über alles.
Well that is interesting Rollo, I’m trying an experiment with the first mate (heh). I’m working on teaching her to be a willfully submissive female. I have explained to her that to be submissive in a way that makes her happy and do it all the time she must be really strong. That a weak woman can’t submit. BTW I’m a Navy man. Thus “first mate”. Of course she isn’t my first, not even 45th. And in our dating period I did other women. So what am I making her submit to? “You will bring me a very beautiful woman… Read more »
Women in business. Esp. a STEM related business. Well they don’t think logically. In public forums with mainly male commenters. This is all too obvious. An embarrassment. Plus they have belief rather than verified facts. A real weakness if they are unable to change their world view to conform to new facts. A trait that is critical in engineering. Women can adopt a position but rarely can create one. And if in a position of authority they can give orders but they can’t lead. And they don’t work well with alpha men. At all. The alphas get run out as… Read more »
BTW I have explained to the FM that I’m training her to be the Yin to my Yang. Receptive, Feminine. / Creative, Masculine.
My model is the relationship my father had with my mother. He was the leader, but they both worked together to accomplish their mutual goals. Things that HAD to be done for life on the frontier. The Captain needs a strong First Mate so when he leaves the ship from time to time it is in capable hands. But when the Captain is on board he is the absolute Master.
[…] Captain/First Mate concept of husband/wife relations. I wrote of this expression on a comment at this post, “Yes, I have always disliked those terms. They are twee. I can’t imagine a woman really […]
While it may be comforting for a woman to believe her opinion is valued, or that what passes for her newfound submission to his direction is guaranteed by his considerateness, very few ‘first mates’ are willing to go down with the ship once it starts taking on enough water. My ship has been taking on water for the last 15 years and I’m just starting to get the bilges pumped. She is still with me. Why? She is not interested in ANY other man. Other than economics I’m EVERYTHING she wants in a man. As she puts it “the economics… Read more »
I think Christianity is like programmed beta. Just look at what it did to the wild Norsemen. The kings imposed it to better control the people. It seeks to hide most or all outward signs of sexuality (long hair, beards, cover bodies, and discourage obright showy clothes). Encourages meekness, tolerance, and love of all. /the only way they could be more beta is to cut off all the baby male penises.
The current situation for women is weakness masquerading as strength.
I see Rollo’s interaction with his commenters very encouraging. Here’s mine. It’s been almost ten years that I read all possible shit on human nature through the lens of understanding it. Outside me and inside of me, of course. Rollo’s writing is closest to this goal. I like the rational approach–it’s very masculine and that way it gets into our heads more easily. Reading your posts makes me feel like a balanced man has only one workable option–focus on yourself only and suppress the idea of being here mainly for the woman–have this natural or automatic after some rational and… Read more »
teenagers and drugs usually
Drugs are never the cause. They are symptoms. Think of it his way. Insulin is not a cause. It is a symptom. Drug taking (or alcoholism for that matter) is self medicating for a problem.
Victor King
December 30th, 2014 at 3:26 am
Greatly honored. Thank you. Occasionally I use OL. and today I started using fuckbuddy.
Oh. Yeah. I NEVER call her “First Mate” to her face. It is a term I only use on line.
For what it’s worth, I didn’t write this as a dig on you M Simon. I know you use Athol’s Star Trek ‘first mate’ reference often, but I’ve had this warming up in the notebook for a while now.
It was actually George and BadPainter’s exchange that helped it along while I was coming back to it.
Here is the paradox:
The more naturally mean,self centered, and cruel you are as a man, the more naturally nicer and kinder your mate will be as with the girls you attract.
Yin/yang, Nature abhorring a vacuum…etc.
Be a pussy, attract a shrew.
In some ways, all this is boiling down to the ‘burden of performance’ for me. I have been “off” for the past month, letting worries and other negative emotions take me off my game. With a Red Pill mindset, I’m less forgiving of this in myself than I’ve ever been. One of the hardest things I’ve seen this month is how permissive I’ve become about my ups and downs and emotional state, and how I let myself off the hook for performance and self-improvement too readily. When I really looked hard at it, it was simple. I had a lot… Read more »
@ M. Simon – Hey. First let me say I thought it was weird to take your “first mate” stuff on the way Rollo did. And it turns out that you don’t use it with your wife, so it seems it may not be an analog to the use of “bride” by evango men. But your reply left me with a big question for you, M. You seem to be attempting to negotiate your wife’s submission overtly, to convince her that submission is good for her. Now I do get that you are dominant in the relationship in real ways,… Read more »
“I think Christianity is like programmed beta.”
Depends on who’s teaching it. Jesus was a meek and humble man, but He wasn’t a milquetoast; the tax collectors in the temple found that out the hard way. The Book of Ephesians also states that the husband is the unequivocal head of the marriage and household.
The problem is that it’s becoming harder to make a distinction between the collective Church and secular culture, and not even the Church is immune from the Feminism virus anymore.
…she said, “It’s women’s job to get away with everything they can in life.”
Then the kid asks, “So what is men’s job to do in life?”, “Not to let ‘em” was her reply.
In the hills beyond Bragg’s ranch, I saw the Appaloosa, nervously herding his mares along toward fresh pasture. He’s got the mares, I thought. But the mares got him, too.
(Robert B. Parker, Appaloosa)
Rollo,
How do we (I) will this organic relationship war (there was peace until her rebellion).
A bulleted list man.
Please. Operationalize it:
Gym until you are jacked
Own your millionaire business
Attitude of my reality or gtfo
Where is the minimum threshold for “performance”
@Nathan,
Our great fear isn’t aiming for lofty goals and falling short of them, our great fear is aiming for mediocrity and achieving it too well.
I like this article. I’d like to contribute what I intend to be an augmenting perspective: All people, regardless of gender, do have an internal sense of self that demands expression. A person’s well-being and happiness is to a large extent a function of the extent to which he can achieve unobstructed and socially harmonious personal expression and self actualization. This is true for both women and men, but the optimal mechanisms for achieving this are different for men and women. A woman, essentially, has two choices for self-actualization that don’t deny her the equally prominent drive of mating with… Read more »
Language tells like “bride” and “first mate” always end up with me rolling my eyes involuntarily.
Reminds me of a conversation with my niece about a boy she likes. She started calling him “the boy” during the conversation. I laughingly asked her why she wouldn’t refer to somebody she likes by their name. Was she ashamed of her feelings? Of course, she’s young and I could be the goofy, roundabout uncle about it and she opened up a little.
Same principal. It’s poor framing, I think. It reveals both intent and insecurity.
There’s a reason ranchers never name their livestock. It makes it easier when they go to slaughter.
Women objectify men in far more ways than men will ever objectify women.
“It’s all about performance for men. Our entire lives are about producing, providing, entertaining, leading, creating – we don’t get a break. You take a break, and the pack eats you alive or another, better man steps in and shoves you aside – and “your” woman will welcome him if you’ve not maintained your dominance. And if she sticks with you for other reasons, she will hate you for it even more. That’s every man’s life.” And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree whose fruit I commanded you not to… Read more »
If a man wants to be Alpha at home he needs to be successful in life. Game is a helpful skill but over the long run it is not enough. Success in your career is what keeps you on top at home. It’s that simple. Put simply being on top at home is made possible by being on top outside of the home. As an aside I have always been shocked by how many men from the WW2/Korea generation openly defer to their wives authority. Many almost seem proud of it. I’m 45 and I don’t think guys from my… Read more »
Glenn: I realized a fundamental truth about my own emotions and view of women. My Mom [was] my protector from my terroristic and horribly abusive Dad. Consequently, a woman’s love and affection WAS really like heroin for me for most of my life. This basic need crept up and shaped every interaction I had with women. Indeed, same here. Only after a lifetime of beta/gamma misery, and 20 years of chronic illness, am I old/tired enough to have only remnants of libido left, and thus able to begin to see females realistically. And realize that I am profoundly grateful for… Read more »
‘In other words, the ‘captain’ is really on his own regardless of his ‘first mate’s’ input.’
He’s on his own with the final decision…but only a fool would disregard important input. Especially if this person is meant to help you.
Do you do that with male colleagues on a job?
He’s on his own with the final decision…but only a fool would disregard important input. Especially if this person is meant to help you. Do you do that with male colleagues on a job? I expected this. There’s always going to be the paradox of receiving outside wisdom vs. basing personal decisions on that ‘perceived’ wisdom. In the end though, whether that decision was based on that imparted advice or not, you still own the consequences of that decision, succeed or fail. Succeed and it was sage advice, fail and you were just stupid to have considered it seriously. YOUR… Read more »
I’ve been observing a couple lately. The guy constantly refers to his girlfriend as his ‘bride,’ constantly agreeing with everything she says and telling her how awesome and intelligent and special she is, constantly fawning over how beautiful she is, calling her ‘my wife,’ ‘my beautiful _____’, etc… I admit I’m still a little plugged in, as I’ve seen girls with guys like this for years and I get jealous. A lot of pretty girls I knew from high school have been in multiple relationships with guys I’d classify as chumps. Relationships come and go, but I still can’t get… Read more »
I would submit (!) that the MMSL model of “captain/first mate” (or XO) is a decent prescription for men trying to right a foundering marriage. The error is to publicly use the moniker as some kind of social proof. In that instance it does come off as no better than “the boss” or “my bride” or She Who Must Be Obeyed. Which yes, all sound twee and fake, wince-worthy. That said, let us not be too hung up on policing our language for “happy thoughts only” names for things as intersectionalists, SJW’s and even rabid Tea Partiers do. We deal… Read more »
‘Why can’t I get even a little of what these blue-pill, fawning manginas get?’
I get that feeling sometimes too..but I remember:
‘Would I rather be abused and mocked behind closed doors…or alone and at peace?’
And the upside is if I ever got into a relationship I know better than to become the fawning mangina.
“First Mate”……”Apprentice”……”Significant Other”…..and…”Subordinate”…and many other words have been employed during the past 150 years…..as we struggle to define the new meaning of CHATTLE.
Correction…CHATTEL….sorry for the misspelling
Badpainter, “So long as an LTR never becomes a marriage.” I agree with what you are saying about LTR versus marriage, which is why I was trying to separate the Alpha Fux + Beta Bux itself from the ways in which society is now structured to de-Alpha (replace-Alpha) a man. . “I think it’s more than an afterthought because there’s no chance of him providing without an expectation of sex regardless of his Alpha cred. … So long as there’s no marriage she can entertain the illusion of the whole thing being an ‘at will’ agreement where his provisioning is… Read more »
The whole cloying “First Mate” thing bothers me because it assumes a rational interplay of two actors managing a ship. In aircraft this is Cockpit Resource Management; this ethic of strategic interplay makes flying safer, as it restricts the ability of the captain to act unilaterally, emotionally, or otherwise stupidly. So the first officer has authority in that cockpit, and the captain is required to verify, listen, interact. CRM is now being adapted to operating theaters, again to provide some checks, balances and other benefits in surgery. However, in both cases, CRM is highly structured, and highly limited; the protocols… Read more »
Rollo’s ‘heads I win tails you lose’ trope, what with the woman having a claim on success but the option to ‘put’ the marriage contract if she decides it’s insufficiently gratifying, is really central to intersexual dynamics. Women have successfully accumulated one-way options in their efforts to install the feminist state and workplace. One-way options: a. to be a SAHM b. to work full or part-time c. to divorce unilaterally, without penalty d. to accuse a spouse of violent assault e. to be or not be a custodial parent f. to (with Yes Means Yes) decide if sex is consensual… Read more »
‘Succeed and it was sage advice, fail and you were just stupid to have considered it seriously. YOUR discernment is what matters.’
I agree…so it is important to know where your discernment is coming from.
@Rollo’s “Mutiny” “She’s absolved of his failures and shares in his successes” This is absolutely the truth on many levels. The Internal Revenue Service provides a “No Fault” form for spouses. This form allows spouses (almost always the female) to claim “No Fault” regardless of whether they signed an erroneous or fraudulent return and regardless of whether they financially benefitted form tax evasion or not. No proof is required, only the claim made by filling out and submitting the form. Typically the female is at “No Fault” and enjoys whatever financial benefit without persecution while typically the male is persecuted… Read more »
Great blog. One thing I like about it is all the good comments posted here (some of the other good manosphere blogs, unfortunately, have too many knucklehead commenters). Anyway, I get what Rollo and others are saying about the flaws of that concept. The Captain bears ultimate responsibility for everything that happens in his domicile. Even being a First Officer requires ability to handle ultimate responsibility. Yet, women are masters at evading direct responsibility for their actions, so how anyone can expect them to handle ultimate responsibility is beyond me. I don’t remember which blog I read this on (may… Read more »
Glenn wins for clarity: “How can you be dominant AND ask her to be submissive? If dominance has to ask to be submitted to, is it really dominance at all? Or is it equalism posing as dominance? I’d say it’s the latter.” From the beginning, Genesis Chapter 1, and always, dominance literally means stomping down: boot on the neck, treading on them. This is precisely what women insist you have to Just Get: be a mean ogre to her whenever you feel like it regardless of her feelings. This is the ONLY thing women have ever meant by a man’s… Read more »
Dominance is the intended and expected punishment for her lack of submission; it is what her lack of submission is supposed to provoke. In contrast submission is intended to ward off dominance. That’s why it is much more important for the woman to submit than for the man to dominate.
While you may think you’re flattering her with your self-styled magnanimity, this compromise only reflects your Blue Pill equalist hope that she will genuinely appreciate the sacrifices you make in considering her Frame. The dominant Frame (hopefully yours) is what matters. While a wife’s input may present you with insight you may have overlooked, she must ultimately acquiesce to your Frame’s primacy. I would venture that it is a requirement for valuable insight to come from an external and subservient viewpoint. The dominant frame saturates the thinking of the one from which is comes, and can without such counterbalance cloud… Read more »
@BuenaVista re: “It’s a curious, and highly successful, political rhetoric that explains unilateral agency, and the assignment of one-way options, to one sex, as a notable quest for “equity.””
Clearly, women (and their supporters) believe that a man exerting dominance would still work well, since everything they do is to counter it.
Picked this comment up from the TRP mirror thread, too good not to repost here: http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2qtom2/the_rational_male_mutiny/ …it is physically impossible for men to be the commander of all spheres in this day and age. It is impossible, at best highly challenging, for a husband to compete with his working wife’s boss(es) in terms of dominance. Her boss can dispose of her for any given indiscretion, while a husband has had his hands bound by the law, and that simple fact will prevent him from measuring up to those types of men in her life. Her view of those mens’ SMV… Read more »
@Rollo re: “Precious few wives trust their husband’s direction implicitly, and those who do usually have little recourse not to.”
Basically, all of societal evolution since the 1950’s has been to remove the man’s ability to direct, and erode the woman’s ability to trust, and promote women’s recourses, enabling women to evade their responsibility to submit.
I wouldn’t say it’s about a woman’s responsibility to submit, but rather absolving her accountability for having been submissive.
The thing many of us miss in the Captain/First Officer model is that it is….A MODEL. It is NOT reality. The desirable reality is a submissive, feminine woman and a dominant, masculine man. That is the reality the Captain/FO model is trying to create and it is trying to get there from the standard Beta/Weak/Supplicating male establishing the proper dynamics with the Strong/Independent/Ball Busting female that society has created and we have allowed. So I agree with Rollo that if you are a true Alpha (TM) and you have a Feminine, submissive woman there is no need for this to… Read more »
@Tilikum re: the paradox.
Yes, but it is so much more than mere paradox. The correct way is for a woman to fully submit to a man she trusts will NOT bother hurting her: she should prostrate herself and her place his boot on her neck WITHOUT him doing it. The wronger way is for the man to force her to submit by dominating her. The wrongest way is escalation, i.e. for her to remain defiant in the face of overt dominance.
From an evo-psych perspective it’s easy enough to explain all this as women *expecting* to be raped.
@bluepillprof, conceptually it’s flawed because it’s still a half-measure between true Frame control and an equalist compromising.
Captian/FO is an effort in Alpha apologetics. For men starting from a Beta baseline the idea of Alpha dominance is either distasteful or ridiculous, but for a guy to accept the model it’s an easier sell if he can embrace the half-measure of thinking he’s still being diplomatic with his wife’s concerns.
There is no first officer, there is either your Frame or her Frame that sets the tone for your relationship.
The solution (alteast workplace dominance), select a partner who is below you in terms of career and salary so even if, her boss can dispose of her for any given indiscretion, she knows you will be there to lean on as the main dominant figure in her life.
I always compared women to the role of a lookout. She sits far away, up in the crows nest, and yells down information. Unlike a first mate a lookout has no weight on the decision making process; they merely provide facts. They only give a different viewpoint that the first mate and I could not collect at the helm.
I think with all the talk of how to relate the actual dynamic of the male and female in the relationship in terms of something else closely comparable (ie. captain/firstmate) we are losing the main focus on what’s actually happening/needs to happen in the scenario. Who cares what labels we use, hell im good with captain/firstmate, lets just get into the details behind why it is like that and how we should proceed. We can argue all day about different terms to use or what most closely relates to the dynamic but in the end in doesn’t really matter as… Read more »
FYI, Giardia, treating a man like your king means you acting like the peasant-servant. Not queen.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20456256,00.html
“All men want to be treated like kings in a relationship, and I think if women don’t indulge that sometimes, their men are likely to stray and look for someone who can give that to them.”
Advocatus Diaboli had a great article about Escorts on his blog once. Look at any any profile for an online ‘Escort’. Older Escorts in the 33-45 range tend to be more down to earth in the descriptions of what “services” they offer and why they offer them. Usually their pitch is one of flattering older, often married men who “work hard and deserve her special attention and appreciation for their efforts.” It’s interesting because many of these more mature escorts seem to better understand the submission/appreciation dynamic and how lacking it is for most married men. Granted a whore is… Read more »
Forestalling ALL the women, and ALL the White Knights, who falsely claim “If only you were more dominant THEN I would be happy to submit to you!”: Nope. Nope, nope, nope. Totally wrong, 180° from truth. If he is more dominant then he is more able to break you, to force you to submit unhappily. That is all.
If not Underling, maybe Love-Slave.
@jf12
Giardia, sounds like a quality girl, wifey material.
Which mutiny on the bounty movie is that picture from? The Clark Gable version or the Marlon Brando version? I think this is the first picture selection that I got right out of the gate. For those that don’t know the story… the first mate takes over the ship, leaving the captain stranded in the pacific on little more than a dinghy with no rigging, almost no food or water, and no charts for navigation (though they did have a sextant). The captain (and remaining non-mutineers) subsequent story of self-rescue is one of the finest stories of human navigation and… Read more »
@Jeremy, I think the Gable one since the Brando one was in color.
I thought the pic was great.
@Rollo
Regarding the escort ad’s, im not sure if the older ones acknowledge this need in terms of male/female dynamics. Im leaning towards them just being aware of what the situation is in terms of how to make the most money by providing the best sale pitch like selling the car based on its features.
I see these same escorts living their normal lives as the very women they are putting down in the ads and not treating their male partners the way they so nicely market.
@Rollo
I think I understand what you’re getting at. Another way to explain it might me this: women only respect masculine displays of True Power, and True Power is never given to you by another person for their own interests. It is instead taken by you for your own selfish interests. It is a further continuation of the Enlightened Self Interest which should be guiding all your decisions regardless of a woman’s presence (or absence) in your life.
@Softek – Dude, forget about the pussy other guys are getting. I do like how feisty you are getting though – use those balls to approach until you get laid. A few concrete recos for you. 1. Watch this Krauser infield – see what he’s doing that you aren’t. http://youtu.be/9Hur5DM0hlg He opens beautifully, with a compliment that seems legit. But first things first – he’s only approaching a woman he got an IOI from. This is crucial. Just listen to how easily he picks up this bird. You can do this. When I last gave you advice, I suggested you… Read more »
@Glenn
I think he is just on the fence regarding af/bb, seeing bb on the surface makes him angry but he also understands his anger is misguided as the male in the bb relationship is a chump. Not sure of is gaming abilities though, your advice sounds like a bunch of scripted pua jargon lol
‘From the beginning, Genesis Chapter 1, and always, dominance literally means stomping down: boot on the neck, treading on them.’
I think you have dominance and tyrannical mixed up.
@ Daedalus – As a lifelong sailor, I can tell you that a captain of any sizable vessel rarely is at the helm. The captain charts the course and makes sure the crew is doing it’s job – steering the boat is quite easy to do and in fact, with today’s auto-pilots, usually isn’t even necessary. He also makes sure the boat is in proper condition and that supplies are laid in etc. And when it really counts, I go up and look for myself as I don’t trust anyone else’s eyes. Being captain of a boat is most of… Read more »
Earl – “I think you have dominance and tyrannical mixed up.”
Dominance is a tyranny of dread.
What seems to be key to making that, work without being oppressive, is to create an understanding that the man doesn’t need the woman. Nothing she can do can’t be done better or cheaper by contractors. She is attached to his project because she pleases him, and being pleasing is the entirety of her role. A role that needs to be filled but a role that can filled by many different women. Making clear her replacibilty is the baseline of dread.
Your captain until her hypergamy finds an admiral that out ranks you.
Jesus Christ Softek… I’m reading through your entire wall of text and thinking to myself the whole time that the hot little 9 who walks all over her boyfriend was throwing out a shit ton of very blatant IOI’s. My guess is she was DTF. I get the frustration though. As a super lone wolf, introvert, I used to be completely oblivious to women’s interests. Not anymore though.
As for Gina de Laurentiis…
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2014/12/30/giada-de-laurentiis-husband-divorce-todd-split/21044183/
One thing we should all remember and stay focused on is the fact that controlling our own lives (living within OUR frame not anyone else’s) is first and foremost the route to fulfillment. Controlling others behavior toward us is impossible without first being in control of ourselves.
Rollo hammers this fact home over and over again from various angles.
Thank you Rollo.
One thing we should all remember and stay focused on is the fact that controlling our own lives (living within OUR frame not anyone else’s) is first and foremost the route to fulfillment.
My mission requires me to go dancing both Fri. and Sat. nights. My wife thinks that I should stay home one night. “Married men don’t do that.” Constant insecurity testing.
Putting my dick in a vagina is not worth this amount of hassle. I’ll die a virgin and I’m okay with that. Fuck this shit.
@Mentats!
“Putting my dick in a vagina is not worth this amount of hassle. I’ll die a virgin and I’m okay with that. Fuck this shit.”
LOL
@theasdgamer
“My mission requires me to go dancing both Fri. and Sat. nights. My wife thinks that I should stay home one night. “Married men don’t do that.” Constant insecurity testing.”
I like it, its like permanent dread for maintenance.
@earl, I suggest you reading the Bible about domination, starting as I said in Gen 1. Domination is what it is, i.e. boot on the neck. I don’t like it either, btw.
@mentats “Putting my dick in a vagina is not worth this amount of hassle. I’ll die a virgin and I’m okay with that. Fuck this shit.” Do not loose heart. You are not ok with that. Isolation will lead to nothing but extreme regret leaving you unfulfilled and bitter. It is worth it when you understand the dynamic and to control your space. It is like taming and riding a horse. You must first understand the nature of the horse, recognize and embrace your power before you can gain respect from the horse. Observe, patience. There is much to be… Read more »
@George
Too much work with no reward. I refuse to work to gain the affection of someone who can never appreciate the sacrifices I make for them.
@Mentats
Real lasting appreciation from another is illusive and unreliable at best in all contexts. This appreciation sought after pales in comparison to self respect and the realization of your abilities. We are all formed and live as seperate beings. This is the reality and the essence of freedom. The world is both treacherous and beautiful. This is what makes the dance of life worth the effort. What may seem like work now can and will become play once you start taking the steps.
@Mentats! Too much work with no reward. I refuse to work to gain the affection of someone who can never appreciate the sacrifices I make for them. Keep in mind before you say that, that even men cannot appreciate the sacrifices you have made. Humanity is solipsistic, not by intent, but by mental limitation. We exist as a tiny spec in a universe whose vastness we cannot comprehend, yet we go about our days as though what a single person said on twitter is the most important thing in our lives. If we had the natural capability of true multitasking… Read more »
‘ I suggest you reading the Bible about domination, starting as I said in Gen 1. Domination is what it is, i.e. boot on the neck. I don’t like it either, btw.
George’
Are you referring to boot on the neck when it comes to sin in your life…or in matters when it comes to your wife?
@George
I don’t want to deal with women’s bullshit. I find interaction with people tiring and the idea of putting on this bullshit act to get pussy sickening. Love is a lie and marriage is slavery. So fuck it I’m avoiding all of it. There is always someone better and I’m not going to be used to branch swing.
@Mentats, you can never leave the game. Despair is not an option.
Don’t wish it were easier, wish you were better.
http://therationalmale.com/2014/09/23/the-burden-of-performance/
I can’t be better. I am what I am. A hopeless beta, if that. I’m lucky to be an omega. I refuse to be used or “provide” and get duty sex. I’ll never inspire the tingles so I’m not going to bother.
…it’s easy to see why the MGTOW option seems like an understandable recourse for red pill men. It’s a very seductive temptation to think that a man can simply remove himself from the performance equation with regards to women. I’ll touch on this later, but what’s important here is understanding the performance game men are necessarily born into. Like it or not, play it or not, as a man you will always be evaluated on your performance (or the perception of it). I think what trips a lot of men up early in their red pill transformation is sort of… Read more »
One thing I’ve noticed about the married alpha types is that they often didn’t enter the relationships as alphas but that their wives helped build them into alphas. A certain type of woman (dare I say good woman) will naturally defer to the man and allow herself to be lead. Being the object of deference (cooked meals, clean house, washing and ironing etc.) instills a certain obligation to reciprocate. For the infantry guys out there they know what it’s like to be a squad leader, you go from being a grunt to a leader of men, completely different mind set.… Read more »
Mentats,
“Pity” is no more useful than “appreciation”.
@ Bromeo – Scripted PUA jargon works. Just don’t make your life about getting laid. I basically learned much of the same techniques PUAs teach via NLP and as a trained sales person and some leadership training I did that started with linguistics and ontology. Scripts work to teach new sales reps how to sell, but no good rep uses a script. Ditto for PUAs. I got interested in it after taking the Red Pill and it’s helped me refine my approach with women and filled in some blanks for me. I’ve just read a couple of books at this… Read more »
@ Mentats I understand what your saying, and have said exactly the same thing right here myself many times. While I think we’re correct In our superficial observations and conclusions. I also think we’ve missed something, something very important. And that is the idea that we, WE control the rewards. Confusing us about that is an intentional goal of the FI. For we who are recently unplugged the lingering Bluepill bullshit has defined for us the rewards we are allowed to seek. As well the fucked up notion that we are responsible for the feelz of women, as though those… Read more »
“It’s women’s job to get away with everything they can in life.” Then the kid asks, “So what is men’s job to do in life?”, “Not to let ‘em” was her reply. -Simply GOLDEN!! Cannot be more true!!!! Who said that?What age was that girl? teen? Tweenzzz? Pretty mature and straightforward – seemed like it came from a worn out cougar who has had a lot of experience (not that teen girls these days don’t have a lot of experience) but still.. and by the way wait for this article on the 31st, I have included this one on our… Read more »
That sounds tedious. Women sound tedious and untrustworthy. I’ve heard the story of the frog and the scorpion. I refuse to get stung halfway across.
LOL I always refer to women a mine, my girl, my woman, my darling and often my property. Girl#1 is now my brood mare or my breeder & when ever one of them tries to get an “I love you” out of me I will tell her I love all my property equally, my dogs, my car, my bike etc all equally beloved. LOL that makes them cranky. I have never received good advice from a woman on any issues beyond her technical field of expertise. I have gotten good advice from a lady dentist about dental care but not… Read more »
I never felt the Captain / First Officer model was a good one to describe any masculine / feminine relationship, let alone a marriage. My reasoning is a bit different. First, masculinity and femininity is about polarity. Chain of command is about linearity. You cannot use a straight line to define a circle. Second, subordinate officers do not shit test superior officers, nor do they open defy the chain of command. The punishment for mutiny is death. Third, the first officer can step up to take the position of captain if needed. Femininity can never take the place of masculinity.… Read more »
“I’ve become better at detecting subtle IOIs,”
Can someone recommend a good resource (book, article, etc.) for explaining IOI’s from women, especially the subtle IOI’s?
Thanks,
BrianS.
Rollo, I’m not sure how you made the leap where First Mate is on Equal footing with the Captain. In my mind, the First Mate role is for the purpose of wielding the man’s authority vicariously in regards to the kids. Beyond that it is an honorary title, not a working one. Like an honoary doctorate. They aren’t *really* a doctor. A first mate title would have to be decorative because the woman does not have any actual authority to act beyond what the Captain has authorized. Neither can she ever hold her own true authority, because of her known… Read more »