Ovulation & Dread


I had an interesting study brought to my attention recently (ht/ Robert Burriss) and I thought I’d get back to a nuts and bolts post with something useful I found in it.

Women Selectively Guard Their Desirable Mates From Ovulating Women.

As you might expect, much of the findings in this study reinforce many Red Pill principles founded in evo-psych, but there are a few new angles to consider here. Before I start to riff on this study, bear in mind that the concept of female mate guarding behavior centers on what the researchers define as ‘desirable mates’ to women. This subjective assessment of desirability will play into all this analysis.

For women, forming close, cooperative relationships with other women at once poses important opportunities and possible threats-including mate retention. To maximize the benefits and minimize the costs of same-sex social relationships, we propose that women’s mate guarding is functionally flexible and that women are sensitive to both interpersonal and contextual cues indicating whether other women might be likely and effective mate poachers. Here, we assess one such cue: other women’s fertility. Because ovulating (i.e., high-fertility) women are both more attractive to men and also more attracted to (desirable) men, ovulating women may be perceived to pose heightened threats to other women’s romantic relationships. Across 4 experiments, partnered women were exposed to photographs of other women taken during either their ovulatory or nonovulatory menstrual-cycle phases, and consistently reported intentions to socially avoid ovulating (but not nonovulating) women-but only when their own partners were highly desirable. Exposure to ovulating women also increased women’s sexual desires for their (highly desirable) partners. These findings suggest that women can be sensitive to subtle cues of other women’s fertility and respond (e.g., via social exclusion, enhanced sexual attention to own mate) in ways that may facilitate their mate retention goals while not thwarting their affiliative goals.

Right from the start here we have two Red Pill foundations confirmed; the influence that perceptual SMV plays in women’s sense of passive Dread and the fundamental influence that menstruation dictates to sexual arousal and concurrent motivations for sex appeal during women’s ovulation phase.

I’ve previously gone into the dynamics that play out between men and women with regard to perceived SMV of a partner versus the other partner’s self-perception of their own SMV and how this determines secure vs. insecure attachment. This post was more of an outline of results of SMV imbalance rather that the motivations for the characteristics of those personal attachments. This study illustrates these underlying motivators very well.

Anyone who’s heard my Man in Demand talk on Hypergamy understands the (menstrual cycle) biological root for women’s personal and sociological behavior, and this study provides yet another confirmation of it. I’ve also written in the past about men’s propensity for mate guarding and the behavioral cues women, both subtly and not so subtly, display that prompts them to mate guarding. However, I’ve yet to explore women’s mate guarding behaviors.

I’m bringing up the SMV ratios and Mate Guarding posts here because it’s important to bear in mind the subjectivity that perceived SMV plays in regard to motivating mate guarding. Depending on that balance (or imbalance) one partner will be more motivated to mate guard than the other. Which of course then brings us back to the Cardinal Rule of Relationships. Mate guarding impulse is contextual to the comparative value of both individuals and the value of others in their social environment (potential sexual competitors).

Thus, it is a significant challenge for women when other women attempt to poach their partners. For instance, over 50% of women admit to attempting to poach another woman’s partner, and over 80% of men admit to having been the object of another woman’s poaching—with about half of men admitting to “going along” with the poaching attempt (e.g., Schmitt et al., 2004; Schmitt & Buss, 2001). Women have good reason, then, to mate guard.

I’m going to encourage readers to take the time to, at the very least, read the introduction, premise and results of this comprehensive study. Naturally there will be incredulous women who will insist that men tend to overestimate the displayed sexual interests of women towards them. This is a common social convention that serves a very specific purpose for women; plausible deniability.

If the common group-think is that men are egotistical, think they’re “all that” and stupidly believe they’re seeing sexual cues from women because “that’s just how men are”, then we have a pre-established condition in which women can believably deny interest. Thus, should a man not find a woman attractive, or opt for another, this then serves as a rejection buffer as well as a precondition for her own rejection of a man should he make an approach and not be found attractive.

The Schmitt & Buss studies account for this, but even if they didn’t there would still need to be a functional reason for women’s mate guarding behavior. That reason puts the lie to the social convention of women presuming men aren’t as perceptive of their sexual cues as they’d like to believe.

[…] whereas men have at times physically isolated and sequestered their female

partners to restrict other men’s access to them (e.g., in harems), women may analogously socially isolate their partners from potential poachers—keeping them apart so as to preclude potentially costly competition for their romantic partners.

The usefulness of this strategy depends on women being able to identify those who might be likely and effective mate poachers, and then excluding them (but not others) from their social circles. If a woman indiscriminately distances herself and her partner from potential poachers (i.e., all other women), she is assured of his fidelity but at the cost of eliminating her access to the numerous benefits of female–female friendships.

Spoiler alert: The study confirms that women will covertly exclude themselves and their lover’s company from women who A.) outclass them in comparative SMV (hotter women than they perceive themselves to be) and B.) happen to be in the proliferative phase of ovulation.

This indicates that not only are women subconsciously (if not consciously) aware of intrasexual rivals ovulatory states – as evidenced by dress, ornamentation, vocal intonation, scent, sexual proceptivity, etc. – but they are aware enough to orchestrate covert methods to protect their sexual investments in a ‘high value’ male while ensuring future intrasexual friendships.

That may seem like an overly scientific way of saying women watch out for other women slutting it up, but the subcommunications of ovulation are so subtle that women’s subconscious, peripheral awareness of those cues evolved for a sensitivity that goes beyond the obvious slut. That’s how important retaining a better-than-self SMV optimal mating choice is to women in an evolutionary scope. That sensitivity is part of women’s psychological firmware.

[…]In addition, if a woman were to consistently and indiscriminately exclude other women from her own and, by extension, her partner’s social circle, she might gain a reputation for being non-communal and non-nurturing, and thus, for being an undesirable friend. This might not only thwart her ability to form future friendships with other women, but might also lead her partner to perceive her as highly difficult, uncooperative, controlling, and non-trusting.

Thus, on one hand, the costs of indiscriminately avoiding other women are high because women reap important benefits from making new same-sex friends, On the other hand, women can and do mate poach with frequency, and those women deeply embedded in one’s social circle may have increased access, motivation, and ability to poach successfully.

There’s a few things to unpack here before we can make this information Red Pill / Game applicable. The most important metric that female mate guarding indicates is her genuine assessment of a man’s SMV and how valuable his participation and investment in their LTR (or even STR sexual value) is to her.

I’ve seen this mate guarding play out in my own relationships before, both as a Red Pill husband who happens to work with beautiful women in the liquor industry and prior to my Red Pill awareness of it in my libertine 20s. Back then it was easy to pass off as ‘bitches be crazy’ when a girlfriend or a short term sex partner “just got jealous”. But in hindsight the timing of those fits of jealousy seemed a bit to regular.

I’m going to suggest that developing an awareness of a woman’s bouts of jealousy or her subtle timing in wanting to spend time alone with you, or her being more sexually proceptive (she wants to fuck more) with you at times you may think odd. These are Alpha or Beta TellsA woman’s preoccupation with guarding you from other women is a prime indicator of your SMV worth to her. It stands to reason that only ‘desirable’ men deserve the effort of her mate guarding.

This is an important Red Pill sensitivity to have as it also allows you to determine a woman’s unspoken understanding of where she and you stand in relative SMV comparison. As I was saying in the introduction here, that ‘desirability’, that SMV ratio, that Alpha impression that makes you worth mate guarding is subjective to what a woman’s self-perceived SMV is in respect to your own. When we interact with women in the long term it’s very easy for men to lose sight of this balance and think that their frumpy wife is the best they can do. There is a definitive psychological game that women of low SMV will play with men they know are of higher value – they will continually devalue that man as a form of mate guarding.

That devaluation may take the form of browbeating, nagging or accusing him of being attracted to other women in an effort to get her higher value LTR man to self-limit his being poached by endlessly qualifying himself to his low SMV wife/girlfriend. It’s far easier, and far lower an investment of resources if a low SMV woman can convince her higher SMV man to mate guard himself.

Just as an aside here, there may be a few readers who’ll think women will rationally consider that their long term provisioning is virtually assured in a feminine-primary social order. Alimony, child support or pro-female government will assure her and her offspring a baseline of security, so why mate guard any man?

The answer of course is that women’s psychological firm ware didn’t evolve to acknowledge these considerations. Once again T-Rex doesn’t want to be fed, he wants to hunt. So even with the logical consideration that provisioning is assured women’s limbic (particularly on an Alpha Fucks short term breeding assurance) still wants those environmental and behavioral cues that indicate they have that security.

Passive Dread

So with all of this to digest how do we put this knowledge of women’s limbic desire for ensuring a mate’s exclusive sex and provisioning to use for us?

The obvious answer is in the title of this post – developing that awareness of your SMV worth to a woman is a good starting point from which you can subtly employ a passive form of Dread.

I’ve gotten a lot of grief for just my acknowledging Dread, much less using it beneficially for both a man and whatever woman he chooses (long or short term). It’s always about how horribly manipulative it is, or it’s just an unsustainable game of brinksmanship between a couple that destroys trust. But what these (usually female) critics never recognize is that Dread is already an integral part of every relationship by order of degree.

The fact that both male and female mate guarding behaviors are evidential facts of both sex’s hindbrain function should be proof enough that Dread, the concern of loss of investment, and the subconscious, comparative evaluation of SMV is something that’s always an operative. It’s inherent to our conditions as evolved human beings.

My advice in this instance is for men to become sensitive to the indicators of that ovulatory mate guarding dread and use that insecurity to promote a better, genuine desire in that woman. Suggesting this will seem counterintuitive to a Blue Pill mindset. The conditioned response will be to allay that woman’s fears (the ones she’s subconsciously aware of but will hate you for making her acknowledge) and provide her with comfort and familiarity.

But comfort and familiarity are anti-seductive and kill the genuine desire, the genuine need to fuck you in order to keep you and show her appreciation for your higher SMV. Why does a woman compete for what she is constantly comfortably assured she already has?

The trick to employing soft or passive dread is making yourself sensitive to the opportunities to use it and then gently provoke it in as covert and indirect a way as possible. One of the better ideas the early PUAs had was mastering the art of the Neg, or the backhanded compliment. The idea was to casually knock a woman’s self-image down to a manageable degree in order to get her to qualify herself the the PUA. Passive dread operates on a similar principle.

You need to see the opportunities for its use, and women’s propensity for mate guarding men they find ‘desirable’ is a reasonably predictable opportunity. See those chances for other women’s casual flirtations with you, look for those unsolicited opportunities for easy social proof, and don’t dissuade your woman’s initial mate guarding response. Casually push back on the mate guarding impulse, don’t jump to the reassurances of your undying love and interest.

See that opportunity for what it is – a chance to restate whose Frame she’s chosen to be a part of. She wants to merit your value. Take that effort away from her and you become valueless to her.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

968 comments on “Ovulation & Dread

  1. Last several comments were awfully good stuff. I need those reminders. As I read Blax’s post I was thinking yeah, it’s all about your mental point of origin. Sure enough, he nailed it as he closed his post. +1

    SJF, thanks for more copy pasta goodness. Always appreciate your nudges that help keep complacency at bay.

    KFG wrote:

    “He isn’t necessarily chopping wood to attract a woman, he’s chopping wood so he doesn’t freeze to death in the winter.”

    Indeed, my stacks of ash have made for a toasty hearth this week. Coincidentally, my gf texted me a photo today her coworker shared of an axe and a pile her husband had made that needed splitting. Both the gf and her coworker share the same cycle right now and were gushing about how it’s rouses (and wets) them to watch their men split wood. GF was so horned up I thought what a great opportunity to christen her office desk. She has been reluctant to do so in the past. After a 10-hour day grinding numbers at work I stopped by her office which was deserted except for her waiting for me, and lived up to my burden….and it was sweet.

    Andy, perhaps take a step back and not overthink this burden thing. When I embrace the burden I feel energized and firing on all cylinders.

    I’m digging the lumberjack look this winter letting a beard grow in. I finally watched Fight Club, now a beard. I started the beard as a joke but now find when I look I the mirror (which isn’t much) that it is a reminder of my masculinity. My sister always said I was a late bloomer. Better late than never. Lovin’ life and my mental point of origin. A year ago my life was a mess. Tonight I cooked dinner for my kids and then we watched Sicario. I love those kids and absolutely enjoy cooking a meal for them.

  2. “Andy, perhaps take a step back and not overthink this burden thing. When I embrace the burden I feel energized and firing on all cylinders.”


    Yeah, I embrace my masculinity and burden and everything. I guess you’d call me a “handy” guy. I live in an old house, so I pretty much always have some sort of project going on. I do all the car work and such. Also, my beard would make Dan Bilzerian poop his pants. My issue is just like the whole separating my id from my ego. Am I doing X because I truly want to do X? If yes, am I wanting to do X to appease my ego/society? Am I not doing Y because I don’t want to do Y, or is my ego getting in the way of my true desires. That kind of thing.

    “Stop trying to stand out, get attention and be so darn special. It’s okay to be ordinary. Act ordinary and do things that benefit other people (starting with your wife and children and move on to your social set).”


    Look doc, I appreciate that you’re trying to help but insinuating that I don’t do things enough to benefit my wife and children just rubs me the wrong way. I think it might be a good thing for you and I to disengage for a bit.

  3. @SJF

    I think you’ve taken a single aspect of Andy’s circumstance and pigeonholed him in it.

    When he was first digesting RP stuff he was frustrated that his circumstance (wife with kids) limited his sexual options. That’s not something that frustrates you in your circumstance so you’ve interpreted that as ‘he’s just a kid who’d rather bang chicks than accept his responsibilities as a man.’ I don’t think that’s fair; I think it’s great that you’re satisfied by your wife, and I could see myself having a similar mindset if I were married, but I can also empathize with his desire for sexual variety. It’s not mutually exclusive with real desire and drive to do well in a marriage at the same time.

    I think Andy assimilated his frustration and moved on to other topics admirably quickly.


    “My issue is just like the whole separating my id from my ego. Am I doing X because I truly want to do X? If yes, am I wanting to do X to appease my ego/society? Am I not doing Y because I don’t want to do Y, or is my ego getting in the way of my true desires. That kind of thing.”

    I don’t think this ever fully goes away; the ego is always fighting to keep you under its heel.

    This struggle is age-old, though it found different forms and meanings in different places. To wit, the Apostle Paul:

    Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. [….] I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

    You see, it’s only by fixing his mind upon a continuous struggling that he approached what he ‘willed’ to do, and by placing trust in forgiveness that he found peace in falling short of that. This mindset can be shorn of its theism, its dialetic of ‘sin’ and ‘forgiveness’ if you wish.

    Pay attention here: “Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.” Note that he disengages his identity from the sorts of things that he ‘just does’ that he doesn’t want to do. This is the clearest way to see your own intentions and actions in a clear light, and so to have a chance at changing them – if you identify with them, your ego will protect you from seeing or changing a thing. Until you land into a truly traumatic circumstance, such that seeing the behavior is less painful than the trauma.

    But let’s not get too far down the rabbithole lol. This stuff is why I basically tell everyone the same two things: Try new shit. Pay attention to how it actually makes you feel, not how you expect to make you feel. YaReally tightens it up a bit: The field is king.

  4. @Andy


    Yeah, this all sounds real simple. The problem is that you’re not really taking into account how deep societal programming runs. It affects what we perceive as a “want” or a “need” despite the fact that it may not be necessary at all. Subconsciously looking to the FI for direction. THAT is my problem. Not the burden itself. Deciding if I’m actually doing something for myself, or if I’m doing it because that’s what I’m “supposed” to do. When I say FI, I mean societal programming. Maybe you take it to mean something else.”

    FI = societal programming…it’s not completely the same, but even for a pedantic sperg like me, it’s “close enough for the girls we know”…lol

    that’s my problem too, but i’m working it out (thanks to insight by kfg and Blaximus = Thank you, gentlemen!…(and my Dad = Thanks Dad!…)),

    but, you are right, there is something more to it (= having issues accepting it/applying it) than just ‘adopting’ ‘old school masculinity’ (bc that’s all that they are talking about…i know bc i would have gotten this attitude straight from my dad (he tried hard enough…lol)…if it wasn’t beaten out of me by the FI…i got hit with the original ‘churchianity’ transition to FI, in addition to the ‘normal’ FI explosion in society…so, my guilty/shame/fear runs deep…lol…on a base identity level…that shits like a root virus…lol…and i’m having trouble reloading an operating system, bc all you can do is fix parts, not a complete reload…otherwise, i’d just load up ‘linux’ and be done…lol…)

    ” My issue is just like the whole separating my id from my ego. Am I doing X because I truly want to do X? If yes, am I wanting to do X to appease my ego/society? Am I not doing Y because I don’t want to do Y, or is my ego getting in the way of my true desires. That kind of thing.”

    i’m just working through this section of the problem, so i though i’d pop back in to update you…still not completely there though…

    this is essentially a circular thinking feedback loop, which you are never going to get out of…provided you keep playing…so, the answer is to stop playing…lol…

    i know, easier said than done…which is why you are having issues with SJF’s pushing you…lol…he doesn’t seem to understand that we already KNOW all that stuff…we just can’t seem to apply it in situ…

    so, here’s where I”M at so far… and this is partly me thinking out loud… bc i don’t have any red pill men friends to talk about this with in the real world…which is actually a big part of our problems (and one that SJF glosses over in the advice copy pasta…even though his heart is in the right place…)

    just as an aside, it’s all well and good to SAY ‘just get some men friends to hang with, but really, how many red pillers ARE there out in real world situs (and being friends with blue pillers is fine, but it’s not going to give you the support you actually NEED…at least not to deal with the FI-based issues…bc fighting off ‘white knightery’ while you are dealing with this stuff is just slightly counterproductive…lol).

    i mean THIS place only has how many active commenters? maybe less than 100? i’m not sure on the readership numbers, though…but it’s still a tiny, tiny number compared to finding men friends in the real world… and that’s exactly one of the real threats to the FI from roosh’s recent ‘meetup’ gambit. (and as kfg pointed out – FI (temperance committees) don’t like that idea…AT ALL…lol)

    you won’t be able to KNOW what you actually like if you don’t try it…you know…IN-FIELD experience…just like meeting girls…lol…it works for other stuff to…BUT we already KNOW that too…so, what’s the disconnect?…we have to accurately identify the problem, before we can get to a solution…and i think part of the solution is in an idea that kfg put forth on solving this problem…just have to get close enough and then wing it…lol…but then we’re back to the original circular feedback loop…lol…

    what I’M feeling is that the FI is pushing on me in a way that i can’t readily identify, but i CAN tell that it’s based in societal programming…so, i know that there is a red pill solution…i guess i need to let that red pill slide down even further…lol…and i thought i was just about ready to poop it out, too…lol…well, i’ve been wrong before…lol…and it won’t be the last time…

    i’m thinking the disconnect (for me anyway) is based in ‘getting credit’ (which may be FI value OR just part of human nature…not really sure on this, right now) for your work/accomplishments…

    bc IF you do it for YOU, then you are NOT doing it for the benefit of the FI…and then you get into a ‘gas lighting’ problem, where you only get credit/acknowledgment FROM the FI system…kfg was right about the MGTOW problem, bc that’s the dynamic in play…(i also think this is WHY those guys are so bitter…bc this whole situ is not doing ME any good, and i’m almost completely red pill…lol…or so i thought…)

    i also think it comes back to Sentient’s platinum rule…but implementing THAT is just a restatement of this same issue…again, we KNOW that’s what we CAN and should be doing…it’s just that implementation is the problem…

    it’s kind of like wearing seat belts when you drive…it’s a good idea…and when there is no ‘law’ telling you that you have to do it, you ‘get credit’ for making a good choice in your life = it is a ‘positive’ to your overall identity…BUT, when there is a ‘law’ that says you HAVE to buckle up, you DON”T get credit for that choice (so, it’s not a positive to your identity)…and not only that, it becomes a negative, bc now you are ‘conforming’ (positive feminine trait) as opposed to ‘taking personal responsibility’ = masculine trait…’ (so the overall effect, on society and individual, is to decrease the ‘masculine’…)

    acting on your burden of performance is the same…you don’t get ‘credit’ for it (either through societal accolades nor through a boost to your self-identity…) (UNLESS your MENTAL POINT OF ORIGIN is based on you alone…but now (with the FI is play) that takes even MORE brass balls than it used to…lol…(and props to Blaximus for raising those girls…))…

    this is all FI in play…

    when we lived in a masculine-oriented system, even if society didn’t ‘actively acknowledge’ you performing your burdens of performance (and it actually did much of the time…especially when society was more ‘community-based’…) it didn’t actively ‘oppose/gas light/ding’ you for doing that…can you FEEL the shame/guilt when you even THINK about acting on your burden?…at least for doing it for YOU?…that’s the FI pushing on you (me)…

    “The trick is when you hide behind your “burden of performance” as an excuse to stay within your comfort zone.”

    that’s true…

    so, here’s what I’VE decided to do to take some action…i’m going to treat it like pua…lol…(i didn’t have anybody to wing me then…and i didn’t die…lol…(scary as hell though…)) so, i’m just going to push through to ‘outside my comfort zone’ (where we KNOW positive transformation takes place…(still scary as hell though…lol)) and do the ‘mindfulness’ thing of ‘just noticing’ what my body/feelings are telling me…bc that’s HOW I/we can know if we are pushing those boundaries…just keep a journal to identify your patterns…

    so, i just EXPECT to feel shame/guilt/fear…lol…essentially i’m going to USE the FI to my advantage…lol…as a touch stone to get out of my comfort zone…kind of like with a 30 day challenge…

    and then, once you have tried something, you can identify what you like or don’t like about it (outside the feelings generated by the FI…) and make a choice to continue or not…bc you really WON”T like everything you try…but you generally have to try it at least a couple times to know for sure…

    and be mindful of ‘lack of male (red pill) companionship’ as a negative in play…bc i’ve hit this before, too…

    good luck!


    @ Blaximus

    Thank you, gentlemen!…

    good luck!



    i haven’t read that chapter…and i’m not going to until i get more time…bc i know i’ll get sucked in (even more than i have been today)…lol…but i will and i’ll give a fair consideration…

    @having a bad day

    low alpha low beta = omega
    high alpha low beta = playah…lol
    low alpha high beta = beta provider/orbiter
    high alpha high beta = alpha provider (this is actually the goal for a great marriage btw…lol)
    but to get ‘laid like tile’ all you really need is high alpha (= high sexual repro fitness)

    You are totally mis-representing low alpha/high beta.

    no…these are the archetypes…the only ones possible given the variables in play…each man is somewhere on that grid given a bell curve distro on each of those variables…and each variable is discrete, but ‘blended’ into each man’s situ…similar to height and weight…

    And you are totally misrepresenting beta as blue pill.

    no, i’m not…although i see how my comment could be construed that way…

    most men are blue pill = they don’t understand/accept red pill…that i agree with…

    BUT, this generally ‘presents’ as them ‘providing’ as a way to increase their SMV…which doesn’t work…bc that’s what girls TELL men is sexy…lol…

    (although ‘providing’ (high beta) does increase their MMV…but not on the sexual (alpha) side…)

    but blue pillers misconstruing that fact doesn’t change the fact that ‘providing’ is a separate part of the equation/separate variable…

    i don’t think we are saying different things, just mis-communicating…

    and as far as variables in play…there are only 2 wrt to how men relate to girls: sexual and non-sexual…lol…but wrt to men relating to themselves and other men there certainly ARE more variable in play…that i agree with…

    The FI won a long time ago.

    it’s winning for sure…and we ARE almost at the end point… but it hasn’t ‘won’ yet…i know this bc when it actually does ‘win,’ society fails…completely…and how far it ‘drops’ is based on the failure point…that’s just based on the historical record…

    and bc it hasn’t won yet, there is no reason to give up fighting against it…bc ‘starting over’ really is a bitch (regardless of the MGTOW opinions to ‘just burn it all down’ to the contrary)…and that’s based on the historical record, too… (but i do recognize the long odds…lol)

    thanks for the tip on blockquotes…now, how do i do strikethroughs?…

    good luck!


    @Forge at 8:58am

    +1…on all of it…

    i guess it’s nice to know we’re in good company trying to work through that circular thinking feedback loop…lol…

    you know, for a young gentleman scholar, you really do have your shit together…lol…

    good luck!

  5. i guess i missed a /blockquote in there somewhere…lol…oh, look! velcro!…now, i can tie my shoes…lol…

  6. @Forge,

    “I think you’ve taken a single aspect of Andy’s circumstance and pigeonholed him in it.”

    Ah, that makes sense. Is your IQ like 2 billion or something?


    ” but really, how many red pillers ARE there ”

    Right. I am doing an okay job of making friends… But god. I practically have to call their wives and ask if they can hang out. “Hey can Jimmy come out to play?” So, yeah. I know I need to get out and find some single friends.

    “that shits like a root virus…lol…”

    Exactly… that’s why I have a hard time with people claiming that they’ve got it all figured out, or that society doesn’t affect them… I can barely even accept that it’s a possibility. Especially when those “desires” suspiciously seem to perrrrrrrfectly coincide with the FI… lol. Like, I can’t even take that person seriously. However, I will acknowledge it is TECHNICALLY possible.

    “bc IF you do it for YOU, then you are NOT doing it for the benefit of the FI…and then you get into a ‘gas lighting’ problem, where you only get credit/acknowledgment FROM the FI system”

    Like, the first time I fix the car, it feels fucking good. I don’t really get much credit for it, but it still feels good. The next time I fix the car it feels a little less good and a little more like work… So I guess stepping outside your comfort zone to learn and accomplish new things is a true desire?

    I don’t know where I’m going with this. One thing I remember that Survivor Man always says… You need to keep improving your situation to keep your spirits up. I think part of it is that we need to be working TOWARDS something. But then we get to another problem I have… Can the burden be the mission? Does the mission have to be completely separate from the burden?? EH, doesn’t matter for me right now. I can’t even think about a mission until I get my social skills where they need to be.

    “so, here’s what I’VE decided to do to take some action…i’m going to treat it like pua…lol”

    Yeah… That’s it. Really. That’s the solution. The rest is just mental masturbation…. I’ve started taking notes every day. Right now all the entries read something like this: “Girl comes over and stands next to me. I don’t say anything. WHY? WHHHHYYYYY?!?!?” “Here’s what I SHOULD have said” lol.

  7. @Andy

    “So I guess stepping outside your comfort zone to learn and accomplish new things is a true desire?”

    it can be, and it’s pretty cool when it is (which is why it’s good when you adopt that attitude), but mostly it’s where personal growth takes place, so you just need to go there regardless…that’s why buffers are so insidious…bc they create comfort…which is…comfortable…lol…

    i used to know this really cute girl (total hippie freespirit type…one of the coolest/realest people i ever met…(back when i was a clueless omega sperg…and couldn’t see the IOIs…lol)) and every time she got ‘comfortable’ she would do something like move or quit her job (without having anything else lined up…i think she lived in her truck for awhile at a bunch of different times…) just for the experience of not becoming ‘comfortable’…(but then again, she WAS really cute…and a girl…so, she didn’t really have ‘no net,’ so to speak…lol…)

    that kind of stuff is hard to do with responsibility of ‘family’ but that attitude is golden as far as ‘personal growth’ is concerned…

    my current goal (while working through my burden of performance issues (= putting effort into my mission…)) is to try to channel Phineas Flynn at all times…”ferb, i know what we’re going to do today…”…”say, where’s perry?…”…lol…


    “Yeah… That’s it. Really. That’s the solution. The rest is just mental masturbation…. I’ve started taking notes every day. Right now all the entries read something like this: “Girl comes over and stands next to me. I don’t say anything. WHY? WHHHHYYYYY?!?!?” “Here’s what I SHOULD have said” lol.”

    incremental steps…performed consistently over time = big changes in position…

    if opening is your current sticking point, here’s a tip = open EVERYBODY you meet…unless you have a specific reason not to…girls, guys, young, old…everybody…try to work up to 30 seconds or so of interaction, then transition out of the convo…and at some point hotties are ‘just another open’…

    and you can game the wife, too…she’s a girl…lol…and AWALT, so she will respond just like any other girl – good, bad or indifferent… (just think of her like a live-in shit test machine…you know like one of those tennis ball shooters that tennis players use to get better…lol)

    the main point is you can’t ‘next’ her (at least as easily as just not calling her…lol), so, just like i laid out for Dutch, don’t try to deliberately take her emotions from positive to negative (on purpose anyway, bc it will probably happen naturally as you handle shit tests…depending on her rolodex…) and you should be fine just running standard game techs…and if she’s in a negative mood, lead her to positive…it really is great practice…

    ” But then we get to another problem I have… Can the burden be the mission?”

    that’s my issue…my mission IS my burden…that’s why it’s messing with my head…lol…

    “I can’t even think about a mission until I get my social skills where they need to be.”

    you CAN work on both at the same time…lol…if they’re not the same…but maybe getting social skills IS your mission right now…

    good luck!

  8. Andy
    Like, the first time I fix the car, it feels fucking good. I don’t really get much credit for it, but it still feels good. The next time I fix the car it feels a little less good and a little more like work… So I guess stepping outside your comfort zone to learn and accomplish new things is a true desire?

    The first time you unstop the toilet the kids plugged is an accomplishment. The next few times, not so much. Then it’s just a chore, part of maintaining the house, and also a teaching moment for the oldest, who gets taught to plunge the toilet.

    Some time back on Spearhead Zed noted that some things a man does are like shoveling gravel. When pouring a slab, for example, someone has to shovel the gravel. The gravel doesn’t shovel itself.

    Not to be a downer, but some things are just shoveling the gravel until it’s done. However, if there’s even a slightly different way to shovel the gravel just to have some sort of variation it’s worth the effort just so it’s not “same shovel, different day”.

    Small victories help morale.

  9. Let me be clear on my motivations and intentions.

    See this place is a safe place for men to discuss (through intellectual debate) things that they can’t in real life. That would be because some of you guys can’t find any red pill men out there. So we are here to talk about red pill awareness and game.

    Even though the last half of the discussion should be and is about how to score easy pussy, the first half of the discussion is about masculine self improvement.

    I’m not here to dis or to sucker punch Andy or anyone else. I don’t have it all entirely figured out yet, nor all my awareness fully employed in the Game that I want yet. When I do, you probably won’t see me here as much.

    So I’m out to engage in gang activity based on the primal nature of us men. Intellectualization and intellectual debate is simply a vicarious gang activity as the need for men to hunt, struggle and fight in the real world is diminished by real world relative prosperity and security.

    About me: I am fully invested in red pill. There is nothing about red pill awareness that I am not in full acceptance of.
    I think of the Feminine Imperative and its social conventions the same way Spock thinks of the Malkotians bullets. And the same way Morpheus explains to Neo.

    Neo: What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge bullets?
    Morpheus: No, Neo. I’m trying to tell you that when you’re ready, you won’t have to</blockquote

    Andy, when you are ready, the FI and your burden of performance won't be targeting you and you won't have to dodge their bullets. You will be the Alpha Oak.

    So also I fully embrace PUA as field data collected by some excellent personalities. It fullfills my SJF Maxim #2. All game is fungible. Across all relationship platforms.

    So I am on team Masculine Imperative. I am on team Red Pill. On Team PUA. I have had life experiences. A lot of them. And I made it out of triage. I don't mentally masturbate on this part of the keyboard nearly as much as some of you want to imply. I do shit well in real life. Based on experience and a self identity without buffers and continual self improvement.

    I’m not out to cock-block Andy. So Andy, there is no need to disengage. No need to take your ball in our intellectual debate and go home.

    Now I do have to say that I entirely phrased my advice to you wrong.
    I was getting at your what you call vanity and how to turn that into an asset. Once again, not trying to dis you but to get you to minimize your weaknesses and build up your strengths. This is guy to guy talk. “Accept your friend’s another red-pill man’s criticism” is a way of self improvement in a man’s way (and don’t get me started as to why you don’t want to do this or you are really going to want to take your ball and go home. Sure I’m the wrong voice here because my previous comments to you. But this is a safe place. Enjoy the criticism for self improvement.)


    Well my intent is not to label you for nefarious purposes. My intent is to help with self awareness and self improvement. To identify tactics on how to improve upon your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

    If indeed vanity is part of your character set own it and use it for your advantage. Employ empathy in your social interactions.
    You want to look good to others so do good in your social interactions. Always be adding value.

    Stop trying to stand out, get attention and be so darn special. It’s okay to be ordinary. Act ordinary and do things that benefit other people (starting with your wife and children and move on to your social set).

    And I don’t see how vanity can’t also fit well into healthy aspects of masculinity including strength, discipline, courage, passion, persistence, and integrity.

    I said that wrong. If you are a self admitted narcissist vain antisocial you need to to work with that as a positive asset. And empathy, whether real or fake is a tactic to make your personality work in real life. And you shouldn’t give a shit about what I think of you, but you should at least look into some of my advice. I’m not as dumb as I sound in the words I write.

    I should have said (and am backed by the link to Eric Barker’s blog above) that your mindset should be to do things that benefit other people in real life. I did not mean to imply that you don’t do things for your wife and children. You focused on that rather than how to be a better vain, antisocial man who is better at being a man as an antisocial narcissist. Take who you are at this point and be better at being a man. I was pointing at a tactic for you to employ for your better success in your mission.

    (And notwithstanding Law #3 of power, I do freely admit that I am using tactics in engaging with you to use your vanity against you (Law #33.)
    To whit:

    If you are in a position to advise, ask what people would think. Narcissists are not stupid; there are just things, like other people’s feelings, that they rarely consider. If you have their ear, don’t tell them how people might react; instead, ask probing questions. Narcissists are much more likely to act on ideas that they think they thought up themselves.

    Emphasize community and use disappointment, rather than anger, to keep them in line. They want to look good. So help them look good by helping them do good.

    Umm, Sorry for turning your thumbscrew. (Did I mention Law #33?)

    And no it is not about my having an issue with a previous discussion about you knowing you want and will have other women in the future. I’m not judging you about that, I just wanted to point out to you in the past that now is not the time (with a two-year old in the house) to be complacent about your role as father and husband. You might not fuck it up, but the other women and your wife sure will for you.

    TL;DR We’re on the same team. Were here for our own masculine self-improvement first, secondly to help others. Discuss wisely and follow ScribblerG’s advice: “To me, the only issue is whether a comment is adding value and moving the dialog along in interesting ways. The ‘burden’ is to be engaging.

  10. HABD you are infectious. I forgot to close the blockquote after

    “Morpheus: No, Neo. I’m trying to tell you that when you’re ready, you won’t have to</blockquote

    To use the strike through format set it up like this but use the instead of the brackets like this

    [del] strike through text[/del]

    to look like this: strike through text

  11. Here is some background material taken from “The Way of Men” in regards to us men “fighting” like in a bar fight, or in a pre-agricultural game in online blog intellectual debate:

    As prosperity and security increase, and the need for men to hunt, struggle and fight decreases, the male desire to engage in gang activity can be controlled and channeled though simulation, vicariousness, and intellectualization.

    A minority of men need extremely frequent opportunities for vital, immediate equivalents to hunting and war as they can get to keep them productive, and to keep them from self-destructing. Charles Darwin thought that these “restless” men were a “great check to civilization,” but that they could “make useful pioneers.”[51] These men tend to get into a lot of trouble in higher civilizations—they fill our prisons and often have problems with substance abuse—whereas they’d probably do pretty well in a survival scenario.

    Another small number of men are happy to live almost completely in their heads, and are easily satisfied by intellectual pursuits and abstract demonstrations of masculinity. Just as jocks brag that real men play sports
    because they are good at them, abstract thinkers will pretend they have conquered their baser instincts by simply doing what they are naturally good at. Men compete for status, and they want to feel like they are winning.

    Once you recognize this, debates between men about the true nature of masculinity become amusingly predictable. Engineers think manhood is all about technology, liberal arts majors think it is about civilized virtue, and athletes think masculinity is all about strength, speed and perseverance. Effeminate males think they are more “evolved” than their brutish brothers, and thus, the truly better men. In a balanced, unified, patriarchal society that provides opportunities for the majority of men to put their talents to use, all of those guys can be right—at least partially. They can all demonstrate strength, courage, mastery and honor to their peers in different ways, and they can all feel valued by a set of peers. Ideally, those guys could cultivate a modicum of respect for their different roles—though since status seeking is the way of men, men with healthy egos will usually believe that their own role is just a little more important, and a little bit better.

    The compromise between modern civilization and manliness promoted by intellectuals is, predictably, an increased emphasis on intellectualized channels for masculinity. There are a few problems with this.

    For starters, not all men are intellectuals, so they are going to suck at that game. No one likes losing all the time—ask any nerd or fag who has been bullied. If only a minority of men are intellectuals, and intellectualized masculinity is all we have, the majority of men are going to feel like they are losing all the time. If you want to create a society of listless antisocial losers, convince the majority of your men that they’re already losing, and that no matter what they do, they will never be able to win.

    What’s the point in trying if you know the game is rigged?

    For the satisfaction of knowing you are contributing to the greater good?
    That’s just the kind of stupid thing an intellectual would say.

    You call it mental masturbation, I call it just hanging out in a gang and engaging in evolutionary hind brain behavior when there are fewer outdoor activites. Although I was out today with the chainsaw improving my hunting farm and cutting splitting and stacking firewood for next years fire pit discussions with my red pill IRL friends.

  12. In regards to this not having decent guy friends in real life. You know red pill masculine ones.

    Keep searching, but vet them and next them if they don’t live up.

    One thing I did was convert some online friends in a different venue. A sportsman’s forum where there was at least the Private Messaging feature on a forum, rather than a blog which doesn’t have this feature. I met up in real life with sportsmen that had the same narrow and broad interests and that worked out well. These guys were already vetted somewhat by their previous posts and you could get their temperaments and whether they resonated with the same types of thoughts.

    I picked up a core group of about five guy friends and a larger group of about 15 acquaintances that way.

    Another way is to strike up an email relationship with some other guys here. That way you can do more private things like send photos, more field reports about personal (whether embarrassing or not) and more personal details to share red pill and game ideas.

    These are a bridge to not having red pill friends but going more in depth until you get some guys in real life that share the red pill/game/PUA enthusiasm.

    And then there is also pick up a blue pill prospect that needs to be red pill and mentor them, or find someone who is good at Game (a natural, perhaps) and get them to mentor you.

    To get a mentor search for guys that are actually very good at what you want to accomplish in your mission.

  13. “if opening is your current sticking point, here’s a tip = open EVERYBODY you meet”

    Yeah, good advice. Why didn’t I think of that? I’m going to a thing tomorrow. I’ll try that.

    “and you can game the wife, too”

    My learning curve has kind of leveled off here. I don’t think I’m going to learn much more from this one.

    Similarly, I have this weird thing where if I get to a certain level of familiarity with someone then the “fun, outgoing, gregarious” switch goes off. Also, if there’s say… 3 people I’m familiar with and 2 people I’m not… The fun gregarious switch is still on. Now say there’s 2 people I’m familiar with, but 4 that I’m not familiar with… Fun switch is off. I’m sure it’s an ego thing. I just don’t get it. I feel like if I could figure out what triggers this logically, I might be able to fix the glitch. Its probably a common thing.

    “that’s my issue…my mission IS my burden…that’s why it’s messing with my head…lol…”

    Kindred spirits. I should have known after seeing so many ‘lol’s’. In your comments. Lol.

  14. “and don’t get me started as to why you don’t want to do this or you are really going to want to take your ball and go home.”

    Lay it on me sensei. I don’t want anyone walking on egg shells around me.

  15. I’m not saying this applies to you. Just food for thought.

    Chapter 10 of Deida’s “The Way of the Superior Man”

    Enjoy Your Friends’ Criticism

    A man’s capacity to receive another man’s direct criticism is a measure of his capacity to receive masculine energy. If he doesn’t have a good relationship to masculine energy (e.g., his father), then he will act like a woman and be hurt or defensive rather than make use of other men’s criticism.

    About once a week, you should sit down with your closest men friends and discuss what you are doing in your life and what you are afraid of doing. The conversation should be short and simple. You should state where you are at. Then, your friends should give you a behavioral experiment, something you can do that will reveal something to you, or grant more freedom in your life.

    “I want to have an affair with Denise, but I don’t want to hurt my wife. I’m afraid of her finding out,” you might say.

    “You’ve been talking about Denise now for six months. You are wasting your life energy on this fantasy. You should either have sex with her by tomorrow night, or drop the whole thing and never talk about it again,” your friends might say, challenging your hesitation and mediocrity.

    “OK. I know I’m not going to do it. I see now that I am too afraid of ruining my marriage to have an affair with Denise. My marriage is more important than my desire for Denise. I’ll drop it and refocus on the priorities in my life. Thanks.”

    Your close men friends should be willing to challenge your mediocrity by suggesting a concrete action you can perform that will pop you out of your rut, one way or the other. And you must be willing to offer them your brutal honesty, in the same way, if you are all to grow. Good friends should not tolerate mediocrity in one another. If you are at your edge, your men friends should respect that, but not let you off the hook. They should honor your fears, and, in love, continue to goad you beyond them, without pushing you.

    If you merely want support from your men friends without challenge, it bespeaks an unresolved issue you may have with your father, whether he is alive or dead. The father force is the force of loving challenge and guidance. Without this masculine force in your life, your direction becomes unchecked, and you are liable to meander in the mush of your own ambiguity and indecision. Your close men friends can provide the stark light of love—uncompromised by a fearful Mr. Nice act—by which you can see the direction you really want to go.

    Choose men friends who themselves are living at their edge, facing their fears and living just beyond them. Men of this kind can love you without protecting you from the necessary confrontation with reality that your life involves. You should be able to trust that these friends will tell you about your life as they see it, offer you a specific action which will shed light on your own position, and give you the support necessary to live in the freedom just beyond your edge, which is not always, or even usually, comfortable.

    Chapter 3 of Deida’s book:

    Live As If Your Father Were Dead

    A man must love his father and yet be free of his father’s expectations and criticisms in order to be a free man.

    Imagine that your father has died, or remember when he did die. Are there any feelings of relief associated with his death? Now that he is dead, is any part of you happy that you need not live up to his expectations or suffer his criticisms?

    How would you have lived your life differently if you had never tried to please your father? If you never tried to show your father that you were worthy? If you never felt burdened by your father’s critical eye?

    For the next three days, do at least one activity a day that you have avoided or suppressed because of the influence of your father. In this way, practice being free of his subtle expectations, which may now reside within your own self-judgment. Practice being free in this way, once each day for three days, even if you still feel fearful, limited, unworthy, or burdened by your father’s expectations

  16. And here, I am not saying you are a Nice Guy, or that you are ineffective. Nor I am I saying there is anything wrong with your father. It is just that certain things have been run by the FI that don’t benefit sons.

    I know this doesn’t apply directly. But there is probably some indirect impact on all males that applies to not having stand up masculine fathers, dominating mothers and the lack of agency in sons of some sort.

    Forget whatever he is saying about “nice guys” and translate this into anything you are lacking agency in. Up to and including the burden of performance and just who are you serving.

    From NMMNG book by Robert Glover.

    The Loss Of Fathers

    The shift to a manufacturing society and an urban migration in the post-war years took fathers away from their sons in droves. According to the US census, in 1910 one-third of all families lived on farms. By 1940, this number had shrunk to one in five. By 1970, 96 percent of all families lived in urban areas.

    In an agrarian society, boys connected with their fathers by working alongside them in the fields. This often meant contact with extended family that included grandfathers, uncles, and cousins. This daily contact with men provided boys with an intimate model of maleness. Sons learned about being male by watching their dads, just as their own fathers had learned by watching their fathers. As families migrated from rural areas to cities and suburbs after World War II, the contact between fathers and sons diminished significantly. Dads left home in the morning and went to work. Most sons never got to see what their fathers did, let alone have much time to spend with them.

    Fathers became unavailable in other ways. Men’s addictions to work, TV, alcohol, and sex took them away from their sons. Increases in divorce began to separate boys from their fathers. Census statistics show that the incidence of divorce among men tripled from 1940 to 1970. In 1940, just over five million households were headed by women. By 1970, this figure had almost tripled to over 13 million households.

    In general, the Nice Guys I have worked with do not report having had a close, bonded relationship with their fathers in childhood. Sometimes this was a result of their fathers working long hours, being withdrawn, or being passive. More often than not, Nice Guys describe their fathers in negative terms. They often see them as controlling, rageful, angry, absent, abusive, unavailable, addictive, or philandering. It is not unusual at some point in childhood for Nice Guys to have made a conscious decision to be different from their fathers.

    The unavailability of dads during this era often required mothers to take over the job of the fathers. Women inherited the defacto job of turning boys into men. Unfortunately even the most well-meaning mothers are not equipped to teach their sons how to be men by themselves. This hasn’t kept them from trying.

    I believe the significant number of Nice Guys produced in the ’40s, ’50s, and ’60s is the direct result of mothers, not fathers, teaching their sons how to be male. Consequently, many Nice Guys have adopted a female perspective of masculinity and are comfortable having their manhood defined by women.

    The Female Dominated Educational System

    The modern educational system has also contributed to the dynamic of boys being raised by women. Since World War II, boys have entered schools dominated by females. For most boys, the first several years in school become basic training in how to please women. From kindergarten through sixth grade, I had only one male teacher and six females. This is pretty consistent with national norms.

    Men account for just one in four teachers nationwide. In the primary grades, they make up only 15% of the teaching staff, and that number is steadily dropping. From daycare to preschool to elementary school, little boys in the post-war era have been surrounded by women. There have been few adult males to help them through this experience. If a little boy was already disconnected from his father and trained to please a woman, the typical school system magnified this conditioning.

    The Vietnam War

    In the ’60s, the Vietnam War crystallized the feeling of alienation between many baby boom boys and their fathers. Battle lines were drawn between young men protesting a war started and perpetuated by their fathers. A generation of World War II veterans could not understand the flaunting of responsibility and the social rebellion of their sons. The young men of this generation became the antithesis of their fathers and of an establishment that solved domestic and international problems with guns and bombs. The anti-war movement created a new breed of males focused on love, peace, and avoiding conflict.

    Women’s Liberation

    During this same period of time, many women were beginning to work outside of the home, birth control provided new freedom, and women’s liberation was in its infancy. Some mothers during the Baby Boom era could foresee a change in gender roles on the horizon. They worked to prepare their sons and daughters for what was to come. Many of these mothers raised their daughters to not need a man. At the same time, they trained their sons to be different from their fathers — peaceful, giving, nurturing, and attentive to a woman’s needs.

    Radical feminism in the ’60s and ’70s projected an angry generalization about men. Some feminists claimed that men were the cause all of the problems in the world. Others asserted that men were merely an unnecessary nuisance. More than likely, the majority of women during this era did not feel this way about men. Nevertheless, enough angry women were significantly vocal to contribute to a social climate that convinced many men that it was not OK to be just who they were.

    Epitaphs like “men are pigs” and “all men are rapists” were prominent during this time. Less angry slogans of feminism asserted that “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Men who were already conditioned to look to women for definition and approval were especially susceptible to these kinds of messages. This added incentive for these men to try to figure out what women wanted and try to become that in order to be loved and get their needs met.

    Soft Males And Boy-Men

    Robert Bly, the author of Iron John, writes about how the social changes of the Baby Boom era created a new breed of American men. Bly calls these men “soft males.”

    He writes, “they’re lovely, valuable people — I like them — they’re not interested in harming the earth or starting wars. There’s a gentle attitude toward life in their whole being and style of living. But many of these men are not happy. You quickly notice the lack of energy in them. They are life-preserving but not exactly life-giving. Ironically, you often see these men with strong women who positively radiate energy. Here we have a finely-tuned young man, ecologically superior to his father, sympathetic to the whole harmony of the universe, yet he himself has little vitality to offer.”
    From a different perspective, Camille Paglia comments on how the social changes of the last five decades have changed roles of men and women. “The hard-driving woman has to switch personae when she gets home. She’s got to throttle back, or she’ll castrate everything in the domestic niche. Many white, middle-class women have dodged this dilemma by finding themselves a nice, malleable boy-man who becomes another son in the subliminally matriarchal household.” (“Politically Incorrect Desires,” Salon: Issue 49)

    Regardless of whether we call these men “soft males,” “sensitive new age guys,” or “Nice Guys,” the unique combination of social events in the post-World War II era reinforced and magnified the messages that many little boys had already received from their families — that they weren’t OK just as they were. These social events further amplified the belief that if they wanted to be loved, get their needs met, and have a smooth life, they had to hide their flaws and become what others (especially women) wanted them to be.

    My observation in recent years points to the reality that the conditioning described above did not end with the Baby-Boom generation. I am seeing more and more young men in their twenties, and even teens, who demonstrate all of the characteristics of the Nice Guy Syndrome. Not only have these young men been effected by all of the social dynamics listed above, even more grew up in single parent families or were raised by Nice Guy fathers. As I write this, I expect that we are just beginning on our third generation of Nice Guys.

    The Habits Of Highly Ineffective Men

    As a result of the family and social conditioning described above, Nice Guys struggle to get what they want in love and life. Due to their shame and ineffective survival mechanisms, the road map they follow just won’t take them where they want to go. This is frustrating. But rather than trying something different, their life paradigm requires that they keep trying harder, doing more of the same.

    I frequently tell Nice Guys, “If you keep doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep getting what you’ve always had.” To reiterate what I’ve illustrated before, Nice Guys prevent themselves from getting what they want in love and life by:

    ● Seeking the approval of others.
    ● Trying to hide their perceived flaws and mistakes.
    ● Putting other people’s needs and wants before their own.
    ● Sacrificing their personal power and playing the role of a victim.
    ● Disassociating themselves from other men and their own masculine energy.
    ● Co-creating relationships that are less than satisfying.
    ● Creating situations in which they do not have very much good sex.
    ● Failing to live up their full potential.

  17. Not saying that Chapter 3 applies. But maybe your father wasn’t as strong as you wanted him to be in retrospect.

    What about your mother’s influence? Again, I’m not saying you are a “nice guy” without testicles, but the FI has been an issue for you. It is the Matrix and it is feminine feminist.

    And strong male guy friends that you can hang out with, bond with and have them resonate with you on your terms are necessary to advance your mission and help define your mission.

    Contrary to the prevailing sentiments of the last few decades, it is OK to be a guy.

    Men born after World War II had the misfortune of growing up during the only era of recent western history in which it was not always a good thing to be male. This was primarily the result of two significant family and social changes in the post war era: 1) boys were disconnected from their fathers and other healthy male role models, and 2) boys were forced to seek approval from women and accept a female definition of what it meant to be male.

    As a result of these two dynamics, many boys and men came to believe that they had to hide or eliminate any negative male traits (like those of their fathers or other “bad” men) and become what they believed women wanted them to be. For many men, this life strategy seemed essential if they wanted to be loved, get their needs met, and have a smooth life.
    Due to the continuing social change of the last half of the 20th century, this belief system is no longer limited to just men of the baby boom generation. I frequently observe men in their thirties, twenties, and teens, with strong Nice Guy traits. It seems that each successive generation of men are becoming more and more passive.

    This social conditioning effects Nice Guys in many ways:

    ● Nice Guys tend to be disconnected from other men.
    ● Nice Guys tend to be disconnected from their own masculinity. ● Nice Guys tend to be monogamous to their mothers.
    ● Nice Guys tend to be dependent on the approval of women.
    Nice Guys Tend To Be Disconnected From Other Men.
    I frequently hear Nice Guys make comments such as:
    ● “I’m just not comfortable with other men. I don’t know what to talk about.”
    ● “Most men are jerks.”
    ● “I used to have male friends, but my wife made it such a hassle to do things with them that I just gave up.”
    ● “I tend to be a loner.”

    Many Nice Guys have difficulty connecting with men because of the limited positive male contact they experienced in childhood. Because these men did not have a positive bond with their father, they never learned the basic skills necessary to build meaningful relationships with men.

    Another common trait among Nice Guys is the belief that they are different from other men. This distorted thinking usually began in childhood when they tried to be different from their “bad” or unavailable father. In adulthood, Nice Guys often create a similar dynamic with men in general. Nice Guys may convince themselves they are different from (better than) other men because they believe:

    ● They aren’t controlling.
    ● They aren’t angry and rageful.
    ● They aren’t violent.
    ● They are attentive to a woman’s needs.
    ● They are good lovers.
    ● They are good fathers.

    As long as Nice Guys are disconnected from men or believe they are different from other men, they cut themselves off from the many positive benefits of male companionship and the power of a masculine community.

    Nice Guys Tend To Be Disconnected From Their Masculinity

    I define masculinity as that part of a man that equips him to survive as an individual, clan, and species. Without this masculine energy we would have all become extinct eons ago. Masculinity empowers a man to create and produce. It also empowers him provide for and protect those who are important to him. These aspects of masculinity include strength, discipline, courage, passion, persistence, and integrity.

    Masculine energy also represents the potential for aggressiveness, destructiveness, and brutality. These characteristics frighten Nice Guys — and most women — therefore Nice Guys work especially hard to
    repress these traits.

    Most Nice Guys believe that by repressing the darker side of their masculine energy they will win the approval of women. This seems logical considering the anti-male climate that has permeated our culture since the 1960s. Ironically, these same men frequently complain that women seemed to be attracted to “jerks” rather than Nice Guys like them. Many women have shared with me that due to the absence of any discernible life energy in Nice Guys, there is little to be attracted to. They also reveal that their tendency to be attracted to “jerks” is because these men have more of a masculine edge to them.

    As Nice Guys try to avoid the dark side of their masculinity, they also repress many other aspects of this male energy force. As a result, they often lose their sexual assertiveness, competitiveness, creativity, ego, thirst for experience, boisterousness, exhibitionism, and power. Go watch little boys on the playground and you will see these qualities. I am convinced that these are good things worth keeping.

    One of the most visible consequences of the repression of masculine energy in Nice Guys is their lack of leadership in their families. Out of fear of upsetting their partner or appearing too much like their controlling, authoritarian, or abusive fathers, Nice Guys frequently fail to be the leader their family needs. Consequently, the job of leading the family often falls on their wives. Most of the women I talk to don’t want this job, but end up taking it by default.

    Nice Guys Tend To Be Monogamous To Their Mothers

    Becoming and remaining monogamous to their mothers is a common pattern for Nice Guys. This unconscious bond is the result of a normal childhood developmental phenomenon gone amuck. Let me explain.
    All little boys naturally fall in love with their mother and desire to have her all to themselves. Healthy mothers and fathers help their sons successfully move through this normal developmental stage. As they do, the young boy individuates from his mother, bonds with men, and becomes available for an intimate relationship with another woman in adulthood.

    Each parent plays a significant role in facilitating this healthy transition. First, the mother must know how to give enough to meet the child’s needs without creating dependency. She must also know how to get her own needs met so she is not tempted to use her son to fill the void. Second, the father must be present and have a healthy bond with his son. This connection helps the little boy move from the cozy lap of his mother to the challenging world of men.

    As stated above, most Nice Guys do not report having had close a relationship with their father in childhood. As a result, many Nice Guys were forced into an unhealthy bond with their mother. This bond might have formed if they had to please an angry, critical, or controlling mother. More often than not, the bond was the result of being forced to take care of a needy, dependent, or smothering mother.

    Without a supportive father, these boys had to negotiate an impossible situation on their own.

    Both childhood situations — trying to please an angry or controlling mother, or becoming mother’s little partner — created a dynamic in which Nice Guys unconsciously became monogamous to their mothers and did not individuate in a healthy way.

    When a Nice Guy has been conditioned to be monogamous to his mother in childhood, his adult partner will know at some level that he is not really available. The partner may not consciously connect this to his bond with his mother, but she knows something is missing.

    Anita, a woman in her late fifties, was married to a man who was monogamous to his mother. I met Anita when she called and made an appointment for individual counseling. She believed her husband was having an affair and she wanted some advice. As we began our session she sat down on the couch and smiled nervously.

    “I feel so foolish coming here, but I just don’t know who to talk to. I feel crazy, because I think my husband is having an affair with his secretary. He denies it but I know something is going on, there’s just too much evidence.”
    Anita’s smile disappeared and was replaced with a look of grief. She took a tissue and dabbed the corner of her eye.

    “Dutton, that’s my husband, has been through so much lately. He’s under a lot of pressure at work, things have been tight financially, and his mother died last year. He was really close to her and I think it was really hard on him.”

    Anita told of her suspicions of her husband’s infidelity but then came back to the subject of his mother again.

    “If I didn’t know better, I’d say his infatuation with his secretary began right after his mother died. It’s like he needed something to fill a hole in his life. I always liked his mother. She was a nice lady, but I always had the feeling that Dutton was more connected to her than he was to me. Is that crazy?” she asked quizzically. “To be jealous of your mother in law?”

    I encouraged Anita to tell me more about Dutton’s family.

    “Other than his father,” She continued, “He believes it was great. That’s because of his mother of course. She was a real saint. His father was extremely harsh with the kids. Their mom was the one they turned to for nurturing. She was really good at listening and being there for them.”
    Anita seemed relieved to be able to talk about something besides her suspicions of her husband.

    “Before she died, Dutton paid for them to get carpet in their house and bought them two nice reclining chairs because he knew his father never would. He used to drive her places because he knew his father wouldn’t. He treated his mother real special — I think to make up for what she had to go through living with his dad. One time I was angry at him and I accused him of treating his mother better than he treated me. He blew up.” Anita made an explosion gesture with her arms. “He told me to never say that again. He didn’t talk to me for two weeks after that. I learned not to bring up that subject.”

    Anita paused for moment. “Do you think there could be any connection between his mom dying and him having an affair? They loved each other so much. Maybe his secretary fills that void. Does that sound crazy to you?”

    Nice Guys Tend To Seek The Approval Of Women

    Due to their family and social conditioning, Nice Guys tend to seek the approval women. Even as they are trying to become what they believe women want them to be and doing what they believe women want them to do, Nice Guys tend to experience tremendous frustration in gaining the approval they so intensely desire.

    This frustration is due to the reality that in general, women view men who try to please them as weak and hold these men in contempt. Most women do not want a man who tries to please them — they want a man who knows how to please himself. Women consistently share with me that they don’t want a passive, pleasing wimp. They want a man — someone with his balls still intact.

    Getting Your Testicles Back

    Avoiding relationships with men and seeking the approval of women prevents Nice Guys from getting what they really want in love and life. In order to reverse the effects of the Nice Guy Syndrome Nice Guys have to reclaim their masculinity. The process involves coming to believe that it really is a good thing to be a man and embracing all of their masculine traits.

    Reclaiming one’s masculinity involves:
    ● Connecting with other men.
    ● Getting strong.
    ● Finding healthy male role models.
    ● Reexamining one’s relationship with one’s father.

    Connecting With Men Helps Nice Guys Reclaim Their Masculinity

    Connecting with men is essential for reclaiming masculinity. Building relationships with men requires a conscious effort. This process begins with a commitment to develop male friendships. In order to do this, recovering Nice Guys must be willing to make the time, take risks, and be vulnerable. For most Nice Guys, time seems to be a big factor that keeps them disconnected from men. It takes time to talk with a neighbor, call up a friend, or go to a ballgame. Since many Nice Guys are enmeshed with their wives, families, or work, this means taking time away from these things.
    Connecting with men involves doing guy things with guys. There is no right way to do this, but it can include joining a team, going to sporting events, joining a prayer or discussion group, having a poker night, doing volunteer work, going fishing, going for a run, or just hanging out.

    Alan is an example of what can happen when a recovering Nice Guy makes the decision to connect with men. Alan had a difficult time doing things for himself, especially with other men. When he made a conscious effort to begin addressing this issue he had to first take a look at what kept him disconnected from men and what he could do to start changing the pattern.

    One of the first things Alan did was to join a men’s therapy group. Even then, it took more than a year before he began doing things with the men outside of the group. As he did, these men were able to give him feedback about his defense mechanisms that kept him isolated. These men also supported him in changing the ways he related to his wife.

    Alan also joined a health club where he started playing volleyball and racquetball with other men. Later, he took the lead in starting up a softball team. At first it was difficult to take time out just for himself, especially when it meant being away from his family.

    It took a few years, but Alan now has a couple of close male friends as well as several other guys he sees on a regular basis. He even takes a yearly road trip with friends across the country for a weekend of golf. He looks at these trips with the guys as one of the highlights of his year.

    Both Alan and his wife Marie believe Alan’s conscious decision to connect with men saved their marriage. Alan had made his wife his emotional center. His life revolved around trying to please her and make her happy. Due to his ineffective covert contracts, Alan never believed Marie gave as much to him as he gave to her. As a result, he was often resentful and passive-aggressive. When Alan began to get his emotional and social needs met with men, it took a lot of pressure off his wife.

    As Alan reclaimed his masculine energy, he also began to look more attractive to Marie. Even though it was initially difficult to tell her that he was going to spend time with his friends, she respected him when he did. This newfound respect rekindled the feelings she first felt toward Alan early in their relationship.

    As Alan found out, there are numerous benefits from developing male relationships. Perhaps one of the most significant benefits for Nice Guys is that it improves their relationships with women. I consistently tell Nice Guys, “The best thing you can do for your relationship with your girlfriend or wife is to have male friends.” As they get many of their emotional needs met with men, recovering Nice Guys become less dependent, needy, manipulative and resentful in their relationships with women.

    Developing male relationships makes recovering Nice Guys less susceptible to seeking women’s approval or allowing themselves to be defined by the opposite sex. If the Nice Guy’s girlfriend or wife is angry at him or thinks he is a jerk, he can take comfort in knowing his buddies think he is OK. He is therefore less likely to resort to peacekeeping or fixing to try and keep his partner happy.

    Friendships with men have the potential for tremendous depth and intimacy because there is no sexual agenda. A Nice Guy will frequently avoid doing anything that might upset his partner and cause her to not want to have sex with him. With men, recovering Nice Guys don’t feel like they have to please, placate, lie, caretake or sacrifice like they believe they have to with women. Not having a sexual agenda removes the fear and dysfunctional dances so common for Nice Guys in their relationships with the opposite sex.

    Breaking The Monogamous Bond To Mom

    Developing male relationships helps undo a Nice Guy’s monogamous bond with his mother. Little boys get pulled into unhealthy relationships with their mothers only when their fathers allow it. The solution to reversing this dynamic is creating healthy relationships with men.

    When my daughter Jamie was 18, she had a boyfriend who had been conditioned to be monogamous to his mother. The boy’s father frequently traveled for his job, was emotionally unavailable, rigid, and demanding. The boy’s mother smothered her son and made him her emotional partner.
    On several occasions, Jamie felt as if she were competing with her boyfriend’s mother for his attention and affection. Unfortunately, since the mother had first dibs on him, she usually won. It felt strange to Jamie to be jealous of and in competition with her boyfriend’s mother. Nevertheless, she passed the situation off as just a case of her boyfriend and his mother having a very “close” relationship.

    One Friday night, Jamie and I went out for dinner. While we ate, she shared her frustration of having to compete with her boyfriend’s mother, especially now that he had joined the Marines and was away at boot camp. I empathized with my daughter and shared the facts of life with her.
    “Your boyfriend is a classic Nice Guy,” I told her. “He has been conditioned to be monogamous to his mother. Unfortunately, that means that he will never really be able to bond completely with you. Something will always get in the way. You may be tempted to focus on that thing, as if it is the problem. But the real problem is his relationship with his mother.”
    Jamie wasn’t thrilled with what I told her, but for an 18-year-old she was pretty intuitive and knew what I was saying was true. She even shared a few examples of the ways she had already seen this happen.
    “Is there any hope?” Jamie asked. “Can he ever break free from his mother and become available for me?”

    “Yes,” I said, “there is one hope. He has to learn to connect with men in ways that he couldn’t with his father. I think it is a good thing,” I told her, “that he is in the Marines and connecting with men. You can support that too. If you two continue dating or even marry, encourage his relationships with men. They are the one hope you have of him breaking his monogamous bond with his mother.”

    A month or so later, Jamie flew down to San Diego with her boyfriend’s parents to attend his graduation from boot camp. As usual, his mother acted possessive and territorial. Amazingly, Jamie noticed a difference in her boyfriend. On several occasions, he set boundaries with his mother and refused to let her hook an emotional hose up to him. Jamie could tell that this was primarily the result of her boyfriend having bonded with several guys in boot camp and from embracing his own masculinity.

    Not saying all this applies. So don’t take this all literally. If any of it applies, then take in into account of your battle plan and your eventual release from constraint.

  18. Heh,

    I reached the end of the Robert Glover book. Not much of the “nice guy” type resonated with me because I never really acted or behaved as a nice guy (who would have thought).

    But I do resonate with his ending suggestions and have employed most of these suggestions he suggests as a breaking free excercise at the end of the book. I did most of these things by default in my life.

    Sure it is common sense in a red pill/game world, but it doesn’t hurt to review.

    1 If it frightens you, do it.
    2 Don’t settle. Every time you settle, you get exactly what you settled for.
    3 Put yourself first.
    4 No matter what happens, you will handle it.
    5 Whatever you do, do it 100%.
    6 If you do what you have always done, you will get what you have always got.
    7 You are the only person on this planet responsible for your needs, wants, and happiness.
    8 Ask for what you want.
    9 If what you are doing isn’t working, try something different.
    10 Be clear and direct.
    11 Learn to say “no.”
    12 Don’t make excuses.
    13 If you are an adult, you are old enough to make your own rules.
    14 Let people help you.
    15 Be honest with yourself.
    16 Do not let anyone treat you badly. No one. Ever.
    17 Remove yourself from a bad situation instead of waiting for the situation to change.
    18 Don’t tolerate the intolerable — ever.
    19 Stop blaming. Victims never succeed.
    20 Live with integrity. Decide what feels right to you, then do it.
    21 Accept the consequences of your actions.
    22 Be good to yourself.
    23 Think “abundance.”
    24 Face difficult situations and conflict head on.
    25 Don’t do anything in secret.
    26 Do it now.
    27 Be willing to let go of what you have so you can get what you want.
    28 Have fun. If you are not having fun, something is wrong.
    29 Give yourself room to fail. There are no mistakes, only learning experiences.
    30 Control is an illusion. Let go; let life happen.

  19. Another masterful post. I can attest to this myself. I work out often and am in great physicial shape. I had a cute girlfriend back in the day who was cute, but not crazy hot. She was jealous as hell and it was partly because I gave her reason to feel that way – I would flirt lightly with her friends and with women in front of her. And she was frequently immersed in this feeling you speak of.

    With all the manipulation they employ… heck, I’m fine with us having some of our own tools as well. It’s only fair 😉

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: