Little Big Head

One of the dichotomies I consistently see in the manosphere is the differences in how men approach the importance (or feigned unimportance) of sex. I got a bit sidetracked in last week’s essay. I was planing on writing about this phenomenon when I saw the need to explore how it impacted a larger social narrative. So, let’s consider this essay an addendum to The New Polyandry.

How men publicly and privately prioritize sex is always something that leads to a judgement call about that particular man, how he lives his life, and what it says about his integrity. If you openly make sex a “big deal” in your life, or you acknowledge its importance in intersexual relationships, you open yourself up to men’s Beta Game virtue signaling. The presumption is that if you were a real Alpha sex is just something you should have mastery over. If sex is at all important to a man, and he expresses this, that guy runs the risk of being seen as “obsessed with sex“, a “pussy beggar” or in someway less of a man for allowing sex to control his decisions.

Why is this the perception?

Two weeks ago I had a lively debate with the producer of Pat Campbell’s morning show. While we did have other topics to hit on that morning, she and I dug in and talked about how “sex is the glue that holds relationships together.” You can listen to the full segment here if you like.

As I mentioned last week, the notion that men need sex is nothing I haven’t covered in the past. In You Need Sex I made a case for the importance of sex and how it was, until recently, something that constituted part of a man’s life experience. Now it seems that being a sexless virgin at age 40 should be considered an accomplishment by certain factions in the manosphere: 

One very common dismissal of Red Pill awareness I read from Blue Pill men is this feigned, blasé indifference to sex.

For the most part this false-indifference is really a conditioned, response couched in Beta Game. The idea is for the Blue Pill guy to promote the public perception that he’s above his sexual impulses in the hopes that any girl within earshot (or reading his comments online) will recognize his uniqueness in not letting his cock do his thinking for him. From a male deductive logic standpoint it makes sense to the feminized male – women have all told him how off-put they are with guys who only think about sex, so he’ll identify with the women he’d like to get with and “not be like other guys.”

“All that Red Pill, PUA shit is for guy’s who obsess over sex. They only go to the lengths they do to get laid and never see the bigger picture. You don’t need sex you know? You wont die from not getting laid.”

[…]Thats the Beta Game behind the “you don’t need sex” Buffer, but there’s more to this rationale than that. Technically the Beta reasoning is correct; physically, you’re not going to die if you don’t get laid. You could probably masturbate to relieve yourself or live a sexless existence due to a physical disability and live a productive life as satisfying as you can manage it. If you don’t know what you’re missing or if a sexual substitute does the job, what’s the difference, right? The line of reasoning is that if it isn’t food, water or oxygen it isn’t really a necessity for existence.

You’re All Obsessed!

Self-righteous Blue Pill men always look to make their necessities into virtues. It also helps the men who fall on the 80% side of the Hypergamous Pareto curve to convince themselves and others that their sexual strategy – one that follows enforced monogamy – is the moral one; or the logical, common sense one absent the moral context. If you cannot get laid yourself, at least you can make getting laid into an ‘obsession‘ for the 20% of men who can. By doing so you encourage the 20% of men, who women desire to fuck, to police themselves and women by adopting your own, self-superior, one-woman-per-man sexual strategy.

Pretty much every MRA I’ve listened to, most Traditional Conservatives and a few MGTOWs, like to qualify men who can get laid as being in some way obsessed with getting laid. We’re told how morally superior they themselves are for essentially thinking with the big head instead of the little one, thus confirming their own part in a monogamous sexual strategy. As I mentioned in the last essay, a majority of men tend to fall on one side of the Strategic Pluralism Theory with respect to their sexual strategy.

Low SMV (sexual market value) men are basically forced to invest in one woman at a time if they are to successfully reproduce. This is the basis of a socio-sexual order founded on enforced monogamy. The larger pool of men benefit reproductively if the majority of men can be relied upon to follow the dictates of socially accepted, socially enforced, form of monogamy.

In the past this emphasis also had a culling effect on the worst aspects of women’s Hypergamous tendencies. If all men – including the 20% who could enjoy many women – agreed to play by the old social contract and adopted monogamy as their sexual strategy (in spite of being able to reproduce outside it) then more men would have the opportunity to reproduce. Furthermore, women’s Hypergamy would also be forced to accept lower SMV men’s monogamous strategy as a buffer to worst aspects of their own.

In the past, religious and social mores used to act as a buffer against Hypergamy, but the compromise for women was that they could expect to have the Beta Bucks provisioning aspects of their Hypergamy more or less provided for by the majority of men who adopted this strategy. In an evolutionary sense, protection and provisioning are already an integral part of the male mental firmware. But all of that went out the window after the Sexual Revolution, unilaterally female-controlled hormonal birth control and the socio-sexual/socioeconomic landscape that sprang from the Fempowerment narrative.

Today there is a radical imbalance between the old social contract upon which enforced monogamy was a key element and the new social contract dictated by a gynocratic social order that places women’s sexual strategy well above that of men’s. So it’s small wonder that men would revert back to 80% of low SMV men insisting on, and shaming, the 20% of high SMV men comply with a sexual strategy that women readily confirm isn’t in their best interests. 

On the male side of the strategic equation a majority of low SMV men cannot afford to have Alpha men playing by the rules of polygyny.

That polygyny is really a form of female-directed polyandry (see last week’s essay), but to the 20% of men who enjoy the benefits of falling on the enthusiastic consent side of Hypergamy it just makes sense to go with it. As such, low SMV men are compelled to find ways of discouraging these Alphas from following their r selected sexual strategy. They realize women will want, and pursue, Alphas. And in a polyandrous socio-sexual order based on the Alpha Fucks side of Hypergamy low SMV men drew the shortest straw.

Intrasexual Combat

When Beta men shame women for wanting to fuck Alpha men it has the effect of making those Beta men seem more insecure. In a feminine-primary social order one of the highest crimes is to attempt to challenge Hypergamy in any way. Even in a religious context, to challenge Hypergamy is to be guilty of repressing women’s sexuality. Today, just this impression is conflated with ‘toxic’ masculinity.

In truth, it would never occur to most low SMV men to shame women for their sexual strategy because they know that in doing so they reduce their own chances of reproduction. Women simply deem them ‘losers’ in the SMP (sexual marketplace). They become scolds, or worse, they become men who are “insecure in their masculinity” because they confirm their low SMV status in doing so. In today’s socio-sexual environment men policing women’s Hypergamy is a lost cause.

The solution then becomes an effort to disqualify the Alpha men they compete with by changing the rules that “real men” are supposed to play by. If you can’t win the Game, change the rules to better fit your strengths.

The ‘Real Man®‘ becomes the guy who exclusively invests himself in one ‘Quality Woman‘ – just like they do.

The apex of masculinity becomes whatever definition best aligns with what they believe they represent.

The’Real Man®‘ is the guy who best fulfills a woman’s, often duplicitous, sexual/life strategy by adopting the K mating strategy of socially/religiously enforced monogamy – just like they do. Oh, and the Quality Woman becomes whatever woman whose necessity compels her to agree with and adopt that strategy (Epiphany Phase).

The Real Man®‘ is the guy who plays by the old social contract rules of enforced monogamy, so more Betas might have a better shot at reproduction. True ‘Manhood‘ becomes a title Betas now feel qualified to bestow on other men; just as women also do with men who help complete their Hypergamous life-strategies. 

Trads vs. The Playboy Lifestyle

In order for Beta men to effect this reigning in of the Alpha men women want to tame and breed with, the high SMV man must be demonized and disqualified from the SMP for following his sexual/biological imperatives. The most common way to do this is by conflating his strategy with a degenerate hedonism. he must be made to seem as if he’s not in control of his sexual nature. So the effort becomes one of building an archetype around the ‘Playah‘ – A man who would be a bad long term bet for women’s Hypergamy because he lacks self-control. For this straw man character his little head does the thinking for the big head making him unreliable as a prospect for parental investment.

If enforced monogamy defines the accepted SMP, and women are presumed to be coequal, co-rational participants in it the ‘Playah’ needs to be cast as the outsider. The latent message is the same intrasexual combat method women use with ‘slut shaming‘; the ‘Playah‘ is a bad bet for long term security even if he is the guy women want to fuck.

However, that Playboy is a cruel reminder to low SMV men that they’ll never be able to fully exercise their own masculine imperative – unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. The closest the majority of men will ever get to this is online porn; which of course is why it’s so popular. There is a reason why 68% of Christian men watch porn. They understand that it’s the only viable substitute for their sexual imperative that they’re likely to experience in this lifetime.

While MRAs and MGTOW tend to reserve a special hate for ‘Playahs‘, it’s the Trad-Con mindset that is the most vocal against the Playboy lifestyle. There’s an overarching need amongst Trads to confirm their ego-investment in locking themselves into  enforced monogamy. 

There’s two complications to this:

First, Trad men (and women) tend to superimpose their religious and social belief set on their own sexual strategy. It’s a sin if they don’t accept monogamy as the standard. Today, this belief is a vestige of the old buffers that used to guard against either sex getting too far into their primal sexual impulses and strategies. It’s much easier to impose your sexual strategy on other men, effectively policing their strategy, if it’s ‘God’s Will’ that everyone behave according to that old social contract. I should add that this is the primary reason most Trad men suffer the worst from having their belief in the old set of books destroyed by Red Pill truths. It is galling for men who’ve invested their whole lives in the old social contract to have it vividly disproved by ‘Playahs’ (and women’s behaviors that confirm it) who understand the new social contract well enough to make it work for them.

Second, there’s the self-fulfilling idea that a man who opts for the traditional monogamous lifestyle is in some way more progressive or evolved, or life-satisfied than the ‘Playah‘ with the option to enjoy his non-exclusive sexual strategy. These are the guys who play up the ‘sour grapes’ Law of Power:

Law 36 – Disdain the things you cannot have

If there is something you want but cannot have, show contempt for it. The less interest you reveal, the more superior you seem.

MRAs and Trads alike don’t like being reminded that sex has always been an integral part of a healthy life experience for the majority of men who’ve ever lived on this planet. However, to them, sex is almost always a reward for desired behavior that they believe women expect of them. For most of them sex is always transactional so they never live out any frame of reference of having sex with a woman in a validational sense. It’s likely that they will never experience sex in any other context than the transactional. This is simply one of the visceral realities of a Darwinian sexual marketplace. As such, this pretext colors all of their understanding about what is, or should be accepted as, a legitimate sexual strategy – which unsurprisingly is his enforced monogamy strategy.

“Meaningful” Sex

The low SMV majority have many contrivances to corral uncooperative Alphas to adopt their sexual strategy. However, there’s also an involved necessity to convince themselves that their Blue Pill conditioning is the best sexual strategy that would benefit everyone if we’d all just see the validity of it as they do. To effect this they apply a subjective “meaningfulness” to their enforced monogamy (K selection) and “meaninglessness” to pursuing men’s biological imperatives (r selection) or the Alpha sexual strategy.

As a result, low SMV men tend to deemphasize the importance of sex in life. I asked this in the introduction; why is there a perception that a man who enjoys many women is somehow having sex that is less ‘meaningful’ than a man whose sex live is dependent on his relationship with one woman – or, a man who is ostensibly celibate?

The tactic involved here is the control over what constitutes meaning in sex. Low SMV men need this control to direct a meta-Frame that foments their sexual strategy; sex is only valid if it’s ‘meaningful’ in a way that aligns with an enforced monogamy sexual strategy. Thus, they can disqualify high-SMV men by delegitimizing his sexual experience. The higher the notch count, the less meaningful the sexual experience – and the likelier he can be seeen as “obsessed‘ with (meaningless) sex.

“Meaning” is deliberately ambiguous to better salve the egos of low SMV men, but meaning only aligns with what better promotes the enforced monogamy strategy. This strategy conflict actually serves Hypergamy in the long run as well. Women will endorse the importance of meaningful sex since it helps to convince the r selected Alphas that they should (eventually) shift to K selected commitment and parental investment with them. To the Beta moralist, any sex that doesn’t implicitly lead to marriage, children and the formation of families it’s always ‘meaningless’.

For the less moralistic low SMV man the idea that sex is something easily had, something inherently cheap, serves in devaluing Alpha men’s sexual experience. A popular idea among MRAs is that meaningless sex is something any guy can realistically achieve in a random club on a Friday night. This also serves to debase the value of learning Game; something MRAs never seem to have any facility with. By unrealistically cheapening the process of Game the same ‘meaninglessness’ imperative is created.

If any guy can find a worthless club slut with minimal effort then the low SMV man can raise his value by appearing to have higher standards than to lower himself to doing so. See how that works? This is a variation of the ‘sour grapes’ strategy I mentioned earlier. The Alpha who can easily get women becomes common. And by enjoying what Beta men believe should be a common sexual experience that man is reducing himself to his baser instincts. They say he’s “obsessed with pussy” or a “pussy beggar” because he’s applied himself to learning, in the most marginal way, how to have sex on his terms. And if he plays by a rule set that doesn’t align with the “correct” rules all his efforts become “meaningless”.

I should add here that MRAs and some Trad-Con men also like to foment the idea that because they eschew all that easily-had “meaningless” sex that Alpha men and Low Quality women are engaging it frees him up to pursue more esoteric, philosophical and creatively productive pursuits. Again, this helps to boost their esteem while presenting the appearance of uniqueness in spite of the fact that few of them ever have anything concrete to show for it. Along these lines they also love to imply that famous celibate men of antiquity were somehow more accomplished because they had the forbearance of mind to understand sex was a hindrance. When no one believes you aren’t making your necessity a virtue it’s sometimes necessary to paint men more famous than you with the same false-virtues.

The common refrain is that they’ve reached some Nirvana state of higher purpose or that they’ve evolved above the common need for sex. They shame the Alpha’s intelligence by claiming they allow their sexual nature to dictate to their rational nature. This too is a sexual quality signaling (or they believe it should be). They hope that their coequal, co-rational, Quality women will respond to it because they presume they’re using the same enforced monogamy rule book. Most Beta moralists are egalitarian blank-slate equalists. If they are evolved above their sexuality, then evolved, rational women should be too – but only if they are quality.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
theasdgamer
Guest

@SJF

That was a funny backhanded compliment you wrote. I don’t need Heartiste to validate what I know about maintaining frame, but it doesn’t hurt to get a second voice for confirmation.

Cleaning babies is a continual task to avoid diaper rash (and sores if you fail enough).

(Speaking of shit, there are a lot of young dumbshits around who downvote a solid post because it isn’t about pickup.)

theasdgamer
Guest

I want to accomplish my biological purpose in life, the natural way: P-in-V. Fuck this artificial bullshit. BUT, I want to avoid the associated costs of doing so.

I have a course in how to do just that. $5000 for a weekend seminar

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“..there are a lot of young dumbshits around who downvote a solid post because it isn’t about pickup…” And you know well enough to not attach importance to that. It’s feminine to have a like button without a dislike button. Think about it. I’m glad there is a dislike button. I haven’t been looking at it though. [Vous avez des ennemis? Mais c’est l’histoire de tout homme qui a fait une action grande ou crée une idée neuve. C’est la nuée qui bruit autour de tout ce qui brille. Il faut que la renommé ait des ennemis comme il faut… Read more »

j
Guest
j
Offline

@blax “and then lol at treating him the same as some random dude? For pussy? Really?” “there are so many other women out in the wild”. When I was first introduced to her, and laid my eyes upon her, I knew I had to have her. I wasn’t going to deny my primal desires: It was there I set about seducing her. He actually tried AMOGing me in front of her (he wasn’t a PUA), several times as he watched her attraction for him slowly start slipping onto me. He could tell what I was doing but couldn’t really stop… Read more »

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

Primal desires…..

Keep.telling yourself that’s what it is.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

rugby11
Guest
rugby11
Offline
Culum Struan
Guest
Culum Struan
Offline

As the YSG/OMG liaison on TRM, let me add re @j and Blax: As far as I understand, both with this banging your friend’s girlfriend stuff and more generally (baby with married woman etc), the OMGs aren’t saying @j is wrong to do it, or even taking issue with his moral code. That’s up to him. They are saying his vision is too narrow and he’s not seeing the whole picture. So @j may think he’s taking a calculated risk and knows what he’s doing, but actually his risk is much greater than he thinks and he’s badly miscalculated it.… Read more »

Lost Patrol
Guest
Lost Patrol
Offline

J, and YSGs reading along, are getting some great advice and perspectives. You think you have a plan and it’s good to have a plan, to rehearse in your mind how things might go; but in the immortal words of noted philosopher and all around good guy Mike Tyson – everybody has a plan, until he gets punched in the face. I blame movies and vidya games (hey, you kids get off my lawn!). Fights and explosions happen more slowly on the big screen than they tend to ‘in real life’, and you can come back to 100% in the… Read more »

boulderhead
Guest

You would do well to listen to Palma pertaining to risk. “There are two elements to risk. There’s the initial risk and then the gravity of the consequences of that risk crystallising.” I’ve done the risky biz all my life from dangling off a rope with 500ft exposure to walking 30ft with a walker.After my latest crash and burn the feminist nurse put a fall risk sign on my bed,I had so many broken bones it took three of them to get me on a bed pan. What gets me is the “gravity of the consequences” is really a constant… Read more »

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

Here you go Rollo
comment image

https://twitter.com/WesternIdentity/status/1082301158352396288

[h/t Heartiste]

theasdgamer
Guest

@Culum Great comment! Your risk of getting fucked up might be low if you only fuck one or two married broads, even figuring for a decade. The more you do it, the greater your chance of being fucked up (paralysed or dead)–you have to figure out maybe two decades. If the chance of being caught by any “crazy” husband is .02% per year, you have to figure the total chance of being not caught by any husband over the course of 15 years. So, it totally depends on the numbers. E.g., my SWAG is that 0.9998 to the fifteenth power… Read more »

Culum Struan
Guest
Culum Struan
Offline

Palma – yes. Like an EV calculation. Need to calculate both risk of the outcome occurring and the potential severity. Like a 10% chance of a broken limb may be acceptable but not a 10% chance of death. Or whatever.

Nassim Taleb’s writings on risk are fantastic. I’ve heard him speak and he’s every bit the pompous asshole you’d expect from reading him but the points he makes are accurate.

O.B.I.T.
Guest
O.B.I.T.
Offline

@Nice Guys Can’t Fuck

https://www.google.com/search?q=stupid+T-shirts&rlz=1CAZBMY_enUS613US613&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqhoiZv97fAhUMSN8KHYgICfwQ7Al6BAgDEA8&biw=1010&bih=465#imgrc=ohAW3c6QA_t4pM:

I ilke bushy eyebrows and a big schnoz, young lady, but poor typography is a deal-breaker.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

Stop trolling.

Reality check: you ain’t gonna do shit.😅

boulderhead
Guest

When she cheats with alpha she will be the initiator not him IME. Also when caught it will be his fault even though she initiated the cheating. See 100% authority 0% responsibility. This is one thing betas get wrong again and again,they believe since they are try hard about sex so are the alphas and therefore the alphas are lucky and need to be contained. What needs to be contained are their women,if a betas woman is wearing the pants and looking for alpha this is the betas fault not the alphas. I don’t know how many more ways there… Read more »

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

Everybody mentions my good looks.

Are you a virgin? Or is this another K@r3n bot…

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

Back to Nice Guys Can’t Fuck…

So apparently everyone (guyz and gals) want’s to be choked by Zaddy too… [65 YO btw]
comment image

https://www.instagram.com/p/Br02tVKgCUi/

https://www.thecut.com/2018/08/jeff-goldblum-says-he-likes-to-be-called-daddy.html

[putting aside whether this is staged or not… it’s the sentiment that matters.]

Sentient
Guest
Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

35????

But…but….teh wall!!!!!!!

everybody knows women are worthless past 25, and younger is always hotter and tighter.

😒

Good for Jeff.

boulderhead
Guest

JOHANN LIEBERT Boulderhead When she cheats with alpha she will be the initiator not him “Even if she’s doesn’t, you do and she’ll help you to advance.” This is where egalitarian misses the boat she can’t be your friend it is always about sex where polarity is different. “I had 2 occasion when I initiated the chat. I caused both of them fighting with their respective boyfriends, they still texted me and covertly encouraged me to advance.” Can’t see anything worth fighting over,maybe you caused her to shit test. “But I didn’t. Just a year ago back in my blue… Read more »

j
Guest
j
Offline

comment image

HB?

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

comment image

she’s a 6…

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

hb= Jeff found something he’s very happy with.

MpoO.

I’d guess he’s not into pua dictates, as no man should be.

Do what you want, what makes you happy.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

That’s how you don’t endlessly chase women while maintaining constant boredom and desperately attempting to fill empty holes in your life with pussy.😁

Hint: it doesn’t work 90% of the time.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

A compliment to, not focus of.

j
Guest
j
Offline

@Sentient

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/goldblum-extinct/jeff-goldblum-shirtless-beach-body-far-from-extinct-22.jpg

you sure about that 6 lol?

I mean her face is good. Looks like a much older Ashley Adams to me:
comment image

….only without the assets.

But if that’s a 6, then I know I’m not banging 6’s.

P.S. Check this funny discussion on 6s & 7s over at Roosh’s:

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-71901.html

@blax

Easy hermano….Asked for rank. Not whether he’s happy or not.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

The guys at roosh are funny. When women/girls get together in groups, they try to ” rate ” men a lot.. These dudes at Roosh sound a lot like them – ” oohhhhh, she’s hawt, my idea of an ‘ X’ “. All that’s missing are the high pitched squeals and giggles. So is it safe to assume those commenters are between the ages of 12 and 18? Subjective, mostly. I had an unusually ignorant and headache inducing discussion with one of my oldest boxing trainers this past Sunday. It seems George Lopez said something to a heckler that he… Read more »

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Online

Lol, in the story above it should read ” I dated a very hot Korean girl “, not a very big Korean girl.

That’s funny spellchecker.

Although her tits were stereotype breaking.

susimfive
Guest
susimfive
Offline

Have been listening to you in the RMG and have bought the first book. First article I read on this site. Pure gold. The meaningless sex refrain is one a lot of incels-in-denial I have encountered on the web use. They absolute do talk about cheap sex with a bar slut (if it’s so cheap why can’t they do it? Oh yeah, they are “above it” lol). I have seen women agree with these guys in the day, who are those very bar sluts at night. It’s funny and sad to watch them delude themselves into thinking these women are… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

susimfive

What is your story?

Where have you come from and where do you want to go?

Don’t be shy. Up to this point you should be anonymous.

1 6 7 8
%d bloggers like this: