Most men never vet women for anything like long term acceptability. A lot of guys would have you believe they have high standards for the women they self-righteously allow into their lives, but for the most part this is internet posturing from Trad-Cons and ‘spergs‘ who’d like their circle of virtual friends to believe they have more options, or more learn-ed wisdom, than other men. After-the-fact rationalizations about how discerning a guy was in choosing his wife or girlfriend are a necessary insulation for men’s egos when they come into the Red Pill community. They get uncomfortable when the Red Pill Lens forces them to take a better look at their own choices.
The flip side to this are the guys who’ve already been burned by a woman, and by association the totality of Gynocentrism. They also tend to reverse engineering their lack of vetting. A wife who was once his Quality Woman becomes the bitch who turned on him – the living example of all women and their Hypergamous nature. Likewise, these guys never truly vetted their ex. In someways they may have been as equally naive about the nature of women as the guy still married and self-convinced that he’s done his due diligence in selecting the perfect mate.
Now add to all this a religious belief-set that is founded on marriages staying solid foundations of family formation and resistant to divorce (thus ensuring contentment and righteous living). Here we add another layer of self-blinding on top of men’s haphazard long-term mating strategy founded on his necessitousness. Surely a man’s true religion is the key to a loving and happy wife, appreciative children, strong family ties and quality of life? Men will always seek validation in the choices they invested their lives in – particularly in the face of realities that contradict them.
All of this is related to men’s long term mating strategy. I’ve written extensively on men’s innate mating strategy and the existential importance of men ensuring their own paternity. But just as women’s Hypergamy is a manifestation of their biological nature, so too are men’s imperatives in their own mating strategies. However, a distinction needs to be made with respect to Alpha Fucks/Beta Bucks equalist comparisons with women’s strategies. Men and women’s mating imperatives are both antagonistic and complementary depending on the nature of the men and women coming together to reproduce.
Men’s innate, unconditioned, biological imperative is unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. Left to his own volition, and unimpaired by women’s Hypergamous filtering strategies, men’s innate drive is to opt for variety of sexual experience.
Critics will counter with “Well, women look for variety too dontcha think?”
While there is some truth in this, women’s desire for broader sexual experience is motivated by a search for better quality in the men she has sex with, not quantity per se. Monogamy (as we know it) is really a tool for low SMV men to socially ensure reproduction and paternity (at least in theory).
For men the motivation is about quantity. Yes, men love variety in women. Yes, men would rather there be no hindrance to getting to that sexual experience with that variety. This is why pornography is ubiquitous today, and has always been a motivator for men – unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. There’s a reason why young Muslim men are promised 70 virgins in paradise if they martyr themselves. Variety and ensured paternity, even if it has to be in the afterlife, is clearly a strong motivator for men. Rockstars and religious zealots all strive for the same goal, they just come to it in different ways.
Priorities
Men are so motivated by sexual experience that it supersedes the need for food. Research shows brain cells specific to men fire up when mates are present and override the need to eat. Take this as you will, but it does reinforce the idea that for men, sex is in fact a biological need.
Left unhindered human (Alpha) males will opt for securing multiple breeding partners; in some cases sequestering them for his long-term use. Locking away harems in secured compounds is something powerful men have done since our tribalistic past. Secure mates – secure paternity with them. There’s a reason why eunuchs guarded harems. The notion that men and women were ever naturally monogamous is an idealistic social convention. True monogamy in the animal kingdom is an extreme outlier. It’s just this prioritization of sexual opportunity that makes vetting women for monogamy compete with reproductive opportunism.
Strategic Pluralism
Most men are not Alpha males. The vast majority of men in this life and in eras past only had sexual access to a precious few women in their lives – if at all. Even in social conditions that rewarded monogamy and punished infidelity men and women have always found ways to manifest their antagonistic mating strategies. As few as 8,000 years ago (post agrarianism) 1 male reproduced for every 17 females. And as few as 4,000 years ago women were out-reproducing men. Again, read and make your own conclusions, but the point is human mating strategies find ways to circumvent social conventions.
On paper, monogamy is not a bad idea. As a social convention monogamy has been a stabilizing force in human evolution, but it in no way aligns with our innate sexual proclivities. Monogamy is a sexual strategy that primarily benefits low SMV men because most men will never experience (relatively) unlimited access to unlimited sexuality outside of pornography.
In Red Pill spheres we encourage men to consider themselves the prize. I personally believe that the most important step in unplugging a guy from his Blue Pill conditioning starts by internalizing the concept of Mental Point of Origin, but why is this often the most difficult step for men? It’s hard to think of oneself as a ‘winner’ when all a guy has done is lose for most of his life. The numbers don’t add up, and all the pep rallies a guy can pay for wont account for much until the day a girl actually responds to the “new you“. Feeling good about yourself is great, but most men want a solution to their sexlessness. Remember, sex really is that important to your male hindbrain. Food < Sex, got it?
According to Strategic Pluralism Theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value on the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.
From Why Is Muscularity Sexy? Tests Of The Fitness Indicator Hypothesis
A lot of men get confused about the masculine imperative, but for the most part I think Strategic Pluralism Theory outlines most of mens’ mating strategies. In the Pareto Principle I delved into how women separate men into different sub-groups. The popularized oversimplification of this goes something like this:
“20% of men are fucking 80% of women.”
This is a misnomer. Granted, it used to have the good intention of getting men to believe that a small percentage of guys are having sex with a majority of women, and well, it might as well be them, right?
I’m sure that was meant to be a kind of motivational encouragement for guys learning Game, but it’s effectively wrong. The reality is 100% of women are interested in fucking about 20% of guys. We can see this repeatedly illustrated in various online dating stats and the realities of what Tinder has done to the SMP. But that’s the principle, not the practice. Just because a woman wants to get with a twentieth percentile man in no way means she will be getting with that guy. The issue here is the want not the get.
The Scarcity Mentality
Most men live in a state of sexual scarcity. So to implore a man to believe he’s actually the prize, or he should consider himself the prize, is an alien thought to him. Whether he acknowledges it consciously, his hindbrain understands the realities of his present-state sexual market value and it understands the reproductive equation it’s tasked with solving in (hopefully) a prosocial way.
Any time a woman actually shows an intimate interest in a low SMV man he will instinctively overlook the “deal breakers” his rational mind would otherwise give him pause to consider. Remember, sex supersedes hunger in the evolved scope of things for men. There are no considerations for ‘red flags’ with a woman when reproduction is of more strategic importance to his hindbrain.
When I’m listening to shows like Before the Train Wreck I hear the same predictable problems voiced by young men over and over again. There are consistent red flags these man should’ve seen before committing to a woman. And as a third party to this, we’re always dumbfounded by how the guy couldn’t have seen the signs before acting or committing to a woman’s mating strategy in order to facilitate a compromised version of his own strategy. Men’s rational process (particularly young men’s) are bypassed by sexual instinct and the hindbrain realization that his breeding opportunities are few and far between.
75% of college men would agree to have sex with a (semi-attractive) female they just met on campus while 0% of women would do the same with an unfamiliar male. Most men simply do not vet women for long term compatibility. The nature of our biology and our access to reproductive opportunities makes vetting a hindrance to solving a reproductive equation. In short, most men can’t afford to miss out on breeding opportunities.
As I outlined in Instinct, Emotion and Reason, our rational process requires time to be fully useful to us. The Instinct and Emotional processes are far quicker in their assessments and immediate effect on us. While men may innately prioritize reason before emotion, Instinct beats all other processes in speed and efficiency – if not accuracy. In our feminine-primary social order we further complicate (and disadvantage) men today by teaching them that their emotional response is the “correct” one to base decisions on. We conditions men to prioritize the Emotional process from a very early age. Again, all this makes actually vetting a woman for intimate acceptability almost offensive to the average (Beta) man today.
And this discomfort with holding any standards for women to receive his intimate approval also serves women’s sexual strategy.
You Just Got Lucky
There is a social aspect that comes into play with respect to men pairing up with women. As western societies have become more gynocentric the need to establish limitations on men’s mating strategies, and the simultaneous unfettering of women’s strategies, becomes apparent. In short, men simply aren’t allowed to hold standards for women to follow. And it’s offensive for men (not women) to even suggest the criteria women might need to ‘live up to‘ for men’s consideration of commitment.
Rich Cooper’s engagement on this one Tweet should illustrate what I’m getting into here. I’ve seen other variations of this message serve as outrage fodder for local news programs. The point is that a man making even marginal requirements for a man’s investment in a woman is met with extreme hostility. If your goal is getting social engagement there’s no better way to get it than by having the audacity to tell women they should qualify to a man – in any context. The idea that there is a man somewhere on planet earth who would voice his conditions for intimacy with women is unconscionable in gynocentric society.
But why? Why do women and their ‘allies‘ become so incensed by this? Because it commits the cardinal sin of the female power structure; it removes a degree of control away from women’s Hypergamous choice. If a woman must qualify to a man – in any context – it also sins against the maxim of the Strong Independent Woman®:
Never do anything for the express purpose of pleasing a man.
Notice how hostile women become when any man would place conditions on his terms for intimacy/commitment. This is a challenge to women’s unilateral control of Hypergamy in the social order. But more so, it is an affront to women’s Existential Fear:
The Existential Fear in women is that their innate Hypergamous Filter, their Feminine Intuition, might be fooled, and by being fooled she may either die or have her reproductive potential compromised for her lifetime by bearing and raising the child of man who is a suboptimal Hypergamous choice for her – a man who exerted his will over her Hypergamous choosing filters.
That a Beta male would ever hold conditions for his commitment triggers indignation in women.
Even Alpha men must never put terms on their commitment; men should feel blessed that any woman would have them. When Beta men reflexively default to social self-deprecation around their wives or LTR we see this social convention confirmed. We are conditioned to feel “lucky” that a woman lowered her standards to accept a man as her mate.
This is the intersexual poker game women play with men on whole. Entitlement, solipsism, anxiety over optimizing Hypergamy, all that competes with the foreknowledge that her attractiveness will decay over time. Women’s hindbrains know that their sex appeal, their agency in achieving that optimization, is ultimately perishable. Now add to this the anxiety that a Beta male might ‘trick’ her into choosing him as a mate and you can see why the Sisterhood will rally against men holding any demands for their interest in a woman.
Men often acquiesce to the mindset that they ought to feel fortunate that a woman would ever have them. They also foster this necessitousness in other men, usually as a form of Beta Game.
This endemic sense of metaphysical gratitude is what prevents men from even considering having standards for women. It also polices other men from holding standards themselves. How dare you be so arrogant as to expect a woman to live up to your demands? Just be glad the gods took pity on you and granted you a wife when so many Incels are at home with dick in hand. Tsk, tsk.
When a man ever has the temerity to evaluate women’s worth he’s made into a pariah. Today we expel boys from school for making lists rating the girls in their classes. Meanwhile women develop apps to do exactly the same for the men they’ve dated to inform other women. In a fem-centric social order only women are allowed to hold standards. This fact is a manifestation of a larger power dynamic between the sexes today.
A list of qualities a woman should have to please a man, to hold his long-term interests, goes viral and makes the evening news. Those men then become the easy, chauvinistic, villain to hate – “Can you believe that men like this still exist?!”
Eligible Bachelors
In my last post I made mention of how women were in crisis mode about the lack of ‘economically attractive’ men today. The articles about this crisis center on the idea of “eligible” men. Even the wildly popular show The Bachelor is built around the idea of men’s ‘eligibility’ to be considered for women’s approval. Qualify. Prove your quality. Be worthy of a woman’s love. Be ‘eligible’.
A female-primary social order – an order dedicated to maintaining feminine social control – needs to ruthlessly control which man is eligible for women’s consideration. It’s never the other way around. ‘Eligible’ is a way of psychologically maintaining a superior station of value for women.
Always bear in mind, women break rules for Alpha men and make rules for Beta men. But on a social scale it helps maintain the power imbalance if even Alpha men believe the same mythologies as Beta men.
This essay is the first in a series meant to establish a hierarchy of relationship needs that men might consider to help them accurately vet the women they allow into their lives and to enact these standards.
Hello Rollo. Thanks as usual for a nice post. Don’t take this directed at you but it is annoying as hell to read the blog on the phone and constantly have the window popping up about ”User xxx has commented on [blog post]”; do you know if you can get rid of it or if it is something we readers must adjust in the settings? Best Edit: Not to sound demanding, but it would be helpful if there would be a search option available on the mobile version as well. Many times I only remember keywords from posts years ago… Read more »
Rollo, I want to thank you for being a guiding force for men everywhere. I will be hitting the 3 year mark with my current girlfriend. As this relationship degrades due to her outspoken want for a baby and my refusal, I am reminded by you that it was just my turn. It is time to hit the market place again with the attitude that I am the prize.
Trad cons and spergs.
lulz
Im an Apha male. This realisation took me around 25 years and a full red pill reality sense check to finally come to terms with it. It also took one 7 year marriage and a recent LTR to fully come to grips that I was simply not biolgically created for monogamy and parenthood. I always internally felt that but it took 25 years of dissonance to fully come to terms with this. (and Rollos writings to fully understand this). Ive just finished my LTR and I know I will not be mongomous again, Ive accepted my nature. And this is… Read more »
” . . . alphas will always struggle with the concept of parenthood and monogomy.”
Yet again fresh steak from Rollo. . Thanks…a moment of clarity
This is all completely true. I have 9 women I’m dating and the rules they post on the dating site “friends first”, “coffee and a chat”, “no long distance”, “not looking for hookup” get thrown out the window fast. Had a woman drive 5 hours each way to spend one day. These are “normal” women: teachers, pharmacists, etc.
Most men never vet women for anything like long term acceptability. Certainly they don’t vet her for skills such as being aware that if A + B = C, then B + A = C. Or, on that wake, that if yes means yes, than yes doesn’t mean no, and no meaning no, no doesn’t mean yes (likewise for “sure” and “maybe”). They don’t vet her for ability to be accountable, or answer for her actions. They don’t vet her for ability to be aware that being treated as an equal means being done to her the same that she… Read more »
Nice tighter writing style with dozens of points made
Rollo- ” I’m sure that was meant to be a kind of motivational encouragement for guys learning Game, but it’s effectively wrong. The reality is 100% of women are interested in fucking about 20% of guys. We can see this repeatedly illustrated in various online dating stats and the realities of what Tinder has done to the SMP. But that’s the principle, not the practice. Just because a woman wants to get with a twentieth percentile man in no way means she will be getting with that guy. The issue here is the want not the get.” Gracias. I knew… Read more »
Well done Rollo. Enjoyable read! One thing I’ve noticed as well as been informed by a few honest ride or die chicks over the past 4 decades, is that a woman does not want to ever go backwards ( hypergamy gets foiled ). If a woman ” settles “, it is a blow to her identity that will haunt the fuck out of her, probably forever. Age and the wall will sometimes force a settlement, and that particular man will be in for a rough ride – maybe not today, but it’s surely coming. Sometimes that thing is something as… Read more »
Great introduction, really looking forward to the rest of this series, Rollo.
Post of the year. Most men live in a state of sexual scarcity. This should be the first line. It sums up so much of male behaviour today. I can honestly say that none of the guys I know or have gone sarging with in the last year know anything about Game. They plough into these interactions with women and talk non-stop, escalate too quickly and wonder why they never get anywhere. They ooze desperation. It’s why every guy needs to have a rotation and be spinning 3-4 plates–for your own sexual well-being and hers. NO girl wants a thirsty… Read more »
Modern day standards, hmmmm…
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/life-coach-in-her-50s-pleads-guilty-to-sexual-assault-of-teen-boy-20191016-p5314u.html
Women make rules for Betas and break rules for Alphas.
Men make rules in their head and break them just to get pussy…
Blax, vetting will never find you a ride or die woman…ride or die women are made–and you have to make them into ride or die women–If you are looking for a ride or die woman, you will never be the man for a ride or die woman.
Shakespeare said it first.
Market dynamics can be highly frustrating for outliers. If no-one in your co-hort (sex in this case) applies the standard you’d like, you won’t be able to apply them either. Let’s say I am looking for a woman with a personality solid enough to stand by her words when I remind her of some bawdy utterances she made one day, or minute, earlier, instead of dissociating into another personality and coming out with something like “I was joking”/”I never said that”: can I? I haven’t been with scores of women, far from it. But if I have been with ten,… Read more »
Just because a woman wants to get with a twentieth percentile man in no way means she will be getting with that guy. The issue here is the want not the get.” That explains, in my opinion, why so many females conduct themselves along starkly abusive ways in online dating. Simply put, they are frustrated by the impossibility to get the grapes actually whetting their appetite, and out of the frustration decide to have a taste of grapes they don’t truly like. These grapes are the men they match with, or reply to, but treat abusively since the very get-go… Read more »
Online profiles?
😕
In a pre-agrarian close-knit society, in small tribes of say a few hundred men, I don’t think the men would have put up with one of the Alphas having a harem. These guys would have gone hunting together (pre-agrarian society), they would have needed social structures to keep male unity intact: i.e., monogamy/marriage. The Betas would need to be satiated. You can see this in primitive tribes today. They all have marriage between one man and one woman. Of course, alphas would find a way to spread their seed, and women would find a way to optimize hypergamy via clandestine… Read more »
Just sat through 2 hours at a meeting this evening with 90% 35+ women(it’s a committee I am on). It’s amazing how they are basically all the same and it’s same emoting over and over and the “vibes” and “spiritual”.
Now add to all this a religious belief-set that is founded on marriages staying solid foundations of family formation and resistant to divorce (thus ensuring contentment and righteous living).
Pair bonding and composure https://www.academia.edu/31191375/SPERM_WARS_Infidelity_Sexual_Conflict_and_Other_Bedroom_Battles
Life as a series of choices (Choose not to be a victim Family first good times or bad)
(accurately vet the women they allow into their lives and to enact these standards.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t8xSdtb8Yc
Embrace the challenge’s
“In a pre-agrarian close-knit society, in small tribes of say a few hundred men, I don’t think the men would have put up with one of the Alphas having a harem.” lol @ “pre-agrarian” The reality is that cherry picking one set of data, the earth can appear to be millions of years old, while using a different set of data, the earth can appear to be only a few thousand years old. It all depends on which data you cherry pick. Is there much historical evidence for a “pre-agrarian” society? You know, deeds, church records, town meeting notes, tribal… Read more »
But I just don’t see how beta males would allow themselves to be sexless in a small tribal setting without some sort of rebellion or societal breakdown. Yep. The tribes that practiced monogamy were more stable and had much more loyal “buy in” from the rank and file and, over time, outcompeted the ones who were practicing different social models. Monogamy very well may not be “natural”, but the entire human social order isn’t strictly “natural” either, in the sense that it is just a collection of people who are each following their raw instincts. Monogamy is a social practice… Read more »
Hey look at that, my life explained. Again.
Half the time I didn’t see these things happening all around me. Half the time I did see them, but %100 percent of those times I couldn’t figure out what was going on and didn’t care because blond hair, or smells good, or whatever. What other qualifications did she need?
And as for any red flags I was able to see in advance, with apologies to the late Admiral Farragut – “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”
Foxguy
“Just sat through 2 hours at a meeting this evening with 90% 35+ women(it’s a committee I am on). It’s amazing how they are basically all the same and it’s same emoting over and over and the “vibes” and “spiritual”.”
Was it by Julien or ADJ? what did it cost?
“I feel a terrifically painful disturbance in the natural law of things between men and women that must be balanced in the next few thousand years. What has been done in the name of holding up masculine energy as God and feminine energy as subservient has really wiped out everything.”
Rebecca De Mornay Some hot Milf
Rollo is a trial of 2 yrs a good time frame of seeing the response and character of a women?
“I’m sure that was meant to be a kind of motivational encouragement for guys learning Game, but it’s effectively wrong. The reality is 100% of women are interested in fucking about 20% of guys. We can see this repeatedly illustrated in various online dating stats and the realities of what Tinder has done to the SMP. But that’s the principle, not the practice. Just because a woman wants to get with a twentieth percentile man in no way means she will be getting with that guy. The issue here is the want not the get.” De-bunking Manosphere myths /data misinterpretations.… Read more »
Rudd
I’m an Alpha male.”
Maybe you are, maybe not. Alpha doesn’t have anything to do though with monogamy, marraige or having a kid. It has a lot do do with making choices and MPoO.
Rugby
“Rollo is a trial of 2 yrs a good time frame of seeing the response and character of a women?”
If there is any doubt, then there is no doubt. That is the time frame.
“The tribes that practiced monogamy were more stable “
Did you observe it or is this just more keyboard jockeying?
“The Betas would need to be satiated. You can see this in primitive tribes today.”
…which has no provable relationship to anything else…
…but don’t let me stop your keyboard jockeying…
(somebody ran through the stupid forest and hit every tree…followed by his gang)
To paraphrase the last words of this essay, there’s a big difference between vetting and actually enforcing those standards, just like it is a big difference in society between passing laws and enforcing them…
One point I’d like to make here is my belief and experience that men change far easier than women do.
A man can change…it’s hard, it takes work, maybe years…but for a woman to change…good luck…cause you’re going need a lot of it.
“A man can change…it’s hard, it takes work, maybe years…but for a woman to change…good luck…cause you’re going need a lot of it.”
Lol, how many times did you smack your head in the Stupid Forest?
Women don’t change–that’s rich. 🙂
“Rollo is a trial of 2 yrs a good time frame of seeing the response and character of a women?” First of all, for what? And although you can solicit other opinions, you still have to make a decision yourself in real life and in real time… Shawn T. Smith, Psy.D, addresses this in a calm, cool and composed clinical way in his book The Tactical Guide to Women: How Men Can Manage Risk in Dating And Marriage (Chapter 7). Dr. Smith didn’t write the book from a Red Pill perspective, but is is a pretty well put together book… Read more »
foxguy ust sat through 2 hours at a meeting this evening with 90% 35+ women(it’s a committee I am on). It’s amazing how they are basically all the same and it’s same emoting over and over and the “vibes” and “spiritual”. You can easily impress girls of that age by casually mentioning some exercise or other practice that you do in a “mindful” way. “Mindfulness” is still a thing in the over 35 set. Bonus points for over 40. Or if you are ever bored and desiring entertainment of a certain kind, ask one of those girls what her astrological… Read more »
But I just don’t see how beta males would allow themselves to be sexless in a small tribal setting without some sort of rebellion or societal breakdown.
There’s a lot of variables assumed. For example, historically male slaves often did not reproduce. For another example, polygamy (multiple women) shows up over and over again in human history.
As Nova pointed out, monogamous societies have certain advantages, but human mating patterns demonstrate that monogamy is not cast in our brains like concrete.
@Sentient Was it by Julien or ADJ? what did it cost? It was training led by a company that specializes in “inclusion” , there is a lot of spiritual talk and emotional, etc. I didn’t cost me personally any money out of my pocket directly but I’m sure it costs the organization which my committee is a part of of, tens of thousands at least as it’s a multi year program. I sat through it to observe and confirm everything Rollo writes about for the hundredth time, I was more interested in the business con these trainers where running and… Read more »
To me, the truth about standards is they are double standards. Women have tighter, tougher standards for men, than men have ever had for women. Men’s standards for physical appearance/attractiveness in women are much much broader than women’s standards for physical appearance/attractiveness in men. Men like all kinds of women: everything from super skinny to SSBBW. Everything from tiny tits to monster tits. Everything from tiny little real tits to huge fake tits, and everything in between. Flat asses. Round asses. Real, natural, surgically enhanced, blonde, brunette, redhead, white black brown asian Indian subcontinent polynesian maori black American subSaharan African… Read more »
thedeti Men’s standards for physical appearance/attractiveness in women are much much broader than women’s standards for physical appearance/attractiveness in men. Nah, women have different standards than men, because they are not men with boobs. Women like one, and ONLY one, kind of man: Tall. In shape, low body fat. Masculine facial features: Geeze, deti, you been hanging out at some Looksism site? Frame matters more, you know that. You will not be forgiven one bit if she finds even one thing she doesn’t like about you. And you’ll never know where you’re falling short. Don’t you even RationalMale anymore? What… Read more »
Anon Reader:
I’m talking here about physical attractiveness. I’m’ talking here about what women prefer, the physical ideal. What women really want in terms of physical attractiveness. And the physical ideal is Michelangelo’s David.
Game is important. Personality is important. All very true. Sure, Game can override physical attractiveness. Sometimes. But the point is the desirable physical ideal, and I described that. And physical appearance is taking on increasing importance and prominence as time goes on. Male physical appearance was not always that important. It is now. It is much, much more important now.
On I dunno Deti. I am going to have to disagree somewhat about women having one physical ideal set. They ” say” a laundry list of attributes that a man has to have, but look around. I’ve been hearing hundreds of women over my lifetime, with their ” tall and handsome ” stuff. As Rollo says in the OP, that’s a ” want “. More often than not women too will like a variety of types of men, providing they can set off the right emotional combinations. This is just a part of the reason many women don’t want to… Read more »
@thedeti “Men like all kinds of women: everything from super skinny to SSBBW. Everything from tiny tits to monster tits. Everything from tiny little real tits to huge fake tits, and everything in between. Flat asses. Round asses. Real, natural, surgically enhanced, blonde, brunette, redhead, white black brown asian Indian subcontinent polynesian maori black American subSaharan African Mediterranean Middle Eastern Scandinavian Low European. Everything from 18 years old to GILFs. Smart, stupid, dingbat, intelligent, dull, interesting, talented, untalented, nice, bitchy.” This is bullshit. Invented by long-haul marketers trying like fuck to rebrand slavery. I know what I like and it’s… Read more »
😂 ” male thot” used to be on my resume.
Is this the real Deti? smh
+1000, Blaximus “This is just a part of the reason many women don’t want to be touched by men they initially don’t find attractive. Men want to believe that it’s solely because they are being mean bitches, but it a man isn’t her ideal, she doesn’t want to take ANY chances that he might fuck around and accidentally pick her locks or arouse her in a way that shouldn’t be possible. So she sets boundaries and force fields and personal space and an unfriendly dismissive stance. They. Break. Rules.” They understand at a visceral level the touching part, I have… Read more »
@thedeti you’re slidin’, bro… check yourself… i say this bc it’s true… the FI is cunning and pervasive… for some reason you are letting the FI affect you more than usual… i thought i saw it starting and i wasn’t kidding when i wanted you to answer the question i posed… https://therationalmale.com/2019/10/02/are-men-adapting-to-the-new-sexual-marketplace/comment-page-2/#comment-282525 @thedeti “Rollo posts about a paradigm shift going on in the sphere. And it’s degenerating into a discussion about whether bathroom selfies for guys are a bad idea. Sheesh.” interesting isn’t it?…lol i’m guessing, but you think that is bad?… and no, i’m not really setting you up…lol…… Read more »
At my exclusiv gym, There are women of leisure (read: married to money) who come daily and work the routine of spin, cardio class, and weights. When I was a younger man, I saw a treasure trove of opportunities, easy pickings in my mind; I was young, fit, and single. I would be willing to take any opportunity that presented themselves. Many years later I finally learned a valuable lesson. Eagerness was not my friend. The game being played on me was one of validation. I gave away attention and praise like it was cheap candy. In hindsight I knew… Read more »
Hah. Either Deti is providing metaphorical satire. Or not. It doesn’t matter. There is truth in them there statements. It doesn’t matter. You still have to carve out your own niche. Geez. Can’t you even proceed to live a masculine life that is attractive. Go fucking figure. Go out and do your fucking best. WTF? Whine and cry. Even if true, go prove it wrong. Double dare. And don’t drop out because of it. Everything wrong about what everything wrong is how men double down on thinking wrong. There are a bunch of wrong thinkers out there. “You Have Too… Read more »
Our prehuman ancestors might have been polygamous, but such behavior in inimical to even the least sophisticated of modern human societies. Hunter gatherer or early agricultural societies made up of bands of 50-100 people requires everyone to cooperate, and wouldn’t work with unrestricted polygamy where one or two men get all the young women. So if you look at such cultures they have marriage traditions and sexual mores which seek to limit women’s choices and limit polygamy. These are always imperfectly applied, but even so from memory something like 40% of men ultimately get the chance to father children in… Read more »
@ Chris
You started good: out of Africa, small tribes of humans developed attributes of the mind for 100,000 years. That had an impact, because of evo-psych over time. The Agriculture time 10, 000 years was different. Large societies rather than small tribes were different. Different, but still with adaptation traits and ways of learning and behaving and evolving (gene wise and cultural adaptation-wise).
But then you just made statements.
What is your point? Humans evolved and behave a certain way, or not so certain way, because?
“Research by Helen Fisher in a report in 2016 reported that serotonin signatures of the blood in moon-eyed lovers lasts about 12-18 months.” Lol, men are supposed to wait two years to vet women while fucking them? Maybe if the girls are in a rotation a man won’t “fall in love.” “Women like one, and ONLY one, kind of man: Tall. In shape, low body fat. Masculine facial features: Low hairline (but must have hair or at least be able to grow it), deep set eyes, positive canthal tilt, ears laid back against head, sharp defined jaw line, lantern jaw,… Read more »
@thedeti @HABD for some reason you are letting the FI affect you more than usual… i thought i saw it starting and i wasn’t kidding when i wanted you to answer the question i posed… That was a good question. But then our Feels-to-Thoughts-to-Words-to-Thoughts-to-Feels™ converters always make it harder than necessary… especially for dogs and our iron logic… lol I agree with @HABD’s intuitions. I’ll add that ignoring/downplaying the ‘details’ perspective is often a buffer to not have to deal with our own ‘personal details’… because that would mean giving up ego investments and status quo… which Doing The Work™… Read more »
“Lol, men are supposed to wait two years to vet women while fucking them? Maybe if the girls are in a rotation a man won’t “fall in love.”” Who said what? The context is actively fucking a woman and deciding. But not deciding in a sperg fashion. Or a girly emotional fashion. In a realistic vetting fashion, based on advice. From Shawn T. Smith. That has seen a thing or two in how couples relate. What don’t you get about that? In my world LTR’s are fine. And they work. Esp. for me. So in yours ASD. So what are… Read more »
The call wasn’t for “in rotation”. It was for LTR. Specifically.
What are you advocating for?
Despite all the doom and gloom, there are plenty of relationships in fly-over-country that are just fine.
And I like my recent son-in-law. He’s good.
And my daughter vetted him for four years. I think.
And things are great.
He envoys the spoils.
What is the adversity? i’m no seeing it. Yet.
Surely even the lowest of SMV men employ at least One standard?
The Boner test !! If a female doesn’t pass this most basic of biological tests why would ANY man consider having a relationship with her?
And Boners don’t lie she either arouses you physically or not! You can’t negotiate desire after all and that works both ways.
Depending what I’m looking for I employ different standards on my potential mates because I can! but even for a drunken ONS the Boner test is a non negotiable Bare minimum.
All this harkens back to most women’s inability to take responsibility for anything they do. Cause and effect is a difficult concept for many. This is why bitching and complaining while doing nothing about it is considered feminine, and why it is such an especially unattractive trait in men.
@ thedeti “You must be unfailingly “Nice” and “kind”. She can treat you however she wants. You must conform to all traditional gender roles. She can conform to any roles she wants, or none at all…” I understand where you’re coming from re women’s standards, but most women these days just aren’t up to a decent standard themselves, so higher quality, attractive men as you described just won’t be interested in them anyways. A man doesn’t have to be as physically together as you surmised, though it certainly does help. A good, confident, masculine persona certainly helps too. I do… Read more »
[…] has a great article up about how the majority of guys have little to no standards for choosing a woman. She likes you? Barring hideous deformities, then she’s […]
“The context is actively fucking a woman and deciding. But not deciding in a sperg fashion. Or a girly emotional fashion. In a realistic vetting fashion, based on advice. From Shawn T. Smith. That has seen a thing or two in how couples relate. What don’t you get about that?” Yeah, drugged up (“in love”), with advice, you can make great decisions. Sure. lol I “got it”, but I don’t think that you did. If you have several girls in a rotation, you are much less likely to “fall in love” with one of them. Alternatively, you might vet before… Read more »
“Rollo is a trial of 2 yrs a good time frame of seeing the response and character of a women?”
No. You can’t “vet” a woman then plop on the couch and assume she’s OK from then on.
Women change over time. Princess -> carousel rider -> wall must get hitched -> “mom” -> horny 40yr old -> pre-menopause
The female hormones surge at different levels way more then men’s constant boners. This happens monthly!
Also some mental illness onsets later in life. I found that out the hard way with my ex.
Now I know there is a long list of red flags when seeking a LTR, especially involving raising children. It’s been good practice for me to review them and see which ones that don’t come off as red flags immediately, and then determine the reason why others consider it as one and I just can’t get it. There were a few I did not catch; one big one was choosing a woman who said she was willing to go to a sperm bank and do it “on her own” if she could not find a man. I now see the… Read more »
I’m curious about something.
How many readers are men who think or have proven that they can train a woman to be ride or die?
How many women readers would say that they are ride or die women?
How many readers are men who think that they can never train a woman to be ride or die?
Just Beers one big one was choosing a woman who said she was willing to go to a sperm bank and do it “on her own” if she could not find a man With no context that really can’t be assessed. For a start, at what age? First: girls say all kinds of stuff that is “true” at the instant they say it, and at some later date will be untrue, or “I don’t remember saying that” or “I would never say that!!”, etc. Second, girls say all sorts of stuff at different times in their cycle. Third, girls say… Read more »
Don’t get me wrong, i love Rollo. I read two of the books (gonna read the last one too), and most of the blog posts. I love how he just shows you the door and leave you to it. And i respect that. He just gives you the ingredients and the cooker. You are free to do whatever you want with it. But honestly, i sometimes wish that we had some more guidance. Yeah he gives some advice but it is mostly about changing your situation and circumstances and as a beta or even an omega dude, that doesn’t really… Read more »
fandango
i got the theory right but what about the practice?
Consider starting by reading through a number of Field reports.
Current page:
https://therationalmale.com/field-reports-comment-page-2-comments/comment-page-140/#comments
@fandango
Is this based on your online dating experience? Or real life interactions with girls?
I too suggest taking it to Field Reports.
Fandango
Blogger FreeNortherner had a series on getting away from Omega:
https://freenortherner.com/omegas-guide/
@deti et y’all You don’t have to read this research paper and other recent ones, though let’s look at some conclusions The Dark Triad personality: Attractiveness to women. Personality and Individual Differences https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The-Dark-Triad-Personality.pdf Dark Triad (DT) personality is attractive to women, independent of a man’s physical appearance. “DT is associated with promiscuity and desire for extra-pair sex. DT men report more lifetime sex partners and hold less restrictive socio-sexual attitudes (Jonason, Li, Webster, & Schmitt, 2009).” (that is from another DT research paper) Women have the capability for finding DT, by shit testing. Game allows for the successful emulation of… Read more »
alright, there will likely be no agreement from anyone in these comments, but i’m gonna jump in on this one anyway. @fandango ” but all these doesn’t matter if you can’t really fool a woman’s radar. And let’s be honest, that radar is accurate.” Sort of. It is accurate in the sense that it works as it is supposed to. But you should consider this similar to a toddler with a gun. Guns can serve many useful purposes. But a toddler dunno wtf hes doing with it, so hes just gonna be hitting random shit if he figures out how… Read more »
I’m getting to the point where I feel like I might be over-filtering. Quite frankly, as women have less and less to offer, I basically only look at them as a source of sex. I’m actually concerned that I just no longer have the capacity or patience to even attempt relationships any more. I cut bait so fast now it’s Actually surprising to me. Can’t decide if they are so terrible or my threshold for bullshit is so small.
A toddler with a gun. That’s interesting. Not to belabor a point, but even ” late twenties ” ( depending on life experiences) is too young to make any decisions that are supposed to be life long ones. You only live once, and for a relatively short time. You know, I read over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over….. This stuff about the tilted field and the unfairness and the system and all of that. Complain and complain and complain some more. Go Mgtow or incel or monk . The… Read more »
My future x wife.
Blaximus
Lol,.you.don’t really have much of an idea about the ” system ” or ” tilted ” or ” unfairness “. Trust me, you really, really don’t.
That’s arrogant. You have no idea who’s reading. You really, really don’t. It’s a global internet.
No argument with the rest of you comment.
AR
In the Manosphere, I stand by my statement fully.
The ” system ” didn’t just become magically unfair overnight.
For example, in China the image of Winnie the Pooh is pretty much forbidden or at least strongly discouraged, because of the similarity to Xi. So protestors in Hong Kong wearing masks to evade the Chinese facial recognition AI are asking for double the fun.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7590823/Hong-Kong-activists-wear-Joker-Winnie-Pooh-masks.html
We should pay attention to this stuff, because that whole “social credit” system is a concept that might just show up here.
Blaximus
In the Manosphere, I stand by my statement fully.
The ” system ” didn’t just become magically unfair overnight.
What does this word salad even mean?
LMFAO!!!
“Can’t decide if they are so terrible or my threshold for bullshit is so small.”
Hamsterlation: I expect women to be men with tits–to think like men.
Red Pill: Women aren’t men with tits.
The ” word salad ” means that Americans ( not Chinese…lol ) are adept at ignoring the unjustness , if that’s a word, longstanding in it’s system until either it affects them directly, or someone they know. Being more concerned about what might possibly happen in the future while remaining blind to what’s been happening.
“Look at it this way. The game is rigged currently in favor of “alphas”. But there are only a few “alphas”. There are way, way more “betas” than “alphas”. What you are seeing with the mgtow and incel stuff is a bunch of non-alphas reaching the end of their patience with the status quo.” They need to go eat a bullet if they truly feel this way. Seriously. I have zero sympathy for losers with this attitude. “The game is rigged” lol, in your mind, and only in your mind …today’s betas are such losers–no balls because they pedestalize women…yesterday’s… Read more »
“The ” system ” didn’t just become magically unfair overnight.”
Shock!!! The system is unfaiiiir!!!
lol, there is plenty of unfairness to go around, Blax…the unfairness doesn’t just hit blacks…
…”the system” is corrupt…you should know this by the time you’re 30…and figure out how to mitigate problems…
Funny I didn’t mention ” blacks “.😁
O/T
I.watched Sammy the Bull’s interview on valuetainment. It’s an interesting interview of a guy that led an interesting life. Towards the end he says some things about law and justice that are enlightening to those of us that haven’t killed 19 people, belonged to the mafia or served decades in prison. Especially how the system works against justice for all ( while never saying he wasn’t guilty and deserving of his fate ).
“But things can not continue the way they are. No one is satisfied at this point. Not women, and not men. With the exception of the very small subset of people at the very top of the pyramid, nobody is winning out there. Not really. That’s encouraging to me.” Yeah, there is always Schadenfreude to fall back on for the black-pill tards. “If I compare myself with others and find that I’m not as good as [they are], I’m much more likely to be pleased when they get taken down a notch.” I live in Unicorn-landia. I see satisfied people… Read more »
Mgtow, incel, not flipping any chessboard.
Not even flipping a checkerboard.
Still a very small group of men outside the walls of the sphere.
“A good point, perhaps I should. I would no doubt benefit greatly from moving to Unicorn-landia. But I’d start slacking then. Stop noticing what’s going on. And that would be boring.”
Showing your true slacker colors.
Good luck with that.
Living your best life and having peak experiences is not boring. It’s fun.
I’m reading a plea for equal treatment of men and women. This has never been the case historically anywhere on the planet. For one person’s sexual strategy to be successful , someone else will not be.
“I don’t get the hostility. I haven’t even said anything particularly controversial yet.” You are anti-self actualization. Blaming others for your predicament. Others=the world at large. “Even when you do find some success, our entire system is designed to ensure it does not last.” It’s not very believable. To me. It starts with you. You are up against resistance. You can feel anyway you want about that resistance. Your words are defeatist (demonstrating expectation or acceptance of failure). That’s not a way to go through life with inter-sexual relationships. Which is what this blog is discussing. It’s not about meh,… Read more »
https://www.academia.edu/16361237/Are_men_really_more_oriented_toward_short-term_mating_than_women_A_critical_review_of_theory_and_research
“Only if you view this as the one and only battle. Men collectively lost a battle decades ago and have paid an increasing price for it ever since. There is no shame in admitting this. In fact it is necessary if they are to modify their own strategy in order to secure a win.” Collectively? Why do you use that adverb? Who wants to be a loser in a battle? Are you wanting your loser brother to be your keeper? “As for all interactions with women sucking, that’s not the case 100% of the time, but most of the time… Read more »
(having trouble posting this so trying parts at a time) Here is another research paper you don’t need to read to have some conclusions: Are men really more ‘oriented’ towards short-term mating than women? (see link above) “Men possess greater desire for short-term mating relationships than women. Men prefer larger numbers of sexual partners over time than women. Men require less time before consenting to sex than women.” That has led to some erroneously arguing that the male mating strategy of an alphas is always pump and dump, even though empirical evidence refutes this. If you are arguing that alphas… Read more »
continued “both men and women in our ancestral past likely would have increased their reproductive success when mating with long-term mates by choosing partners who were kind and understanding (Buss and Schmitt 1993). (This) accurately explains why both men and women express preferences for long-term mates who are kind and understanding (Buss 1989; Kenrick et al.1990; Nevid 1984), why men and women effectively attract one another as long-term mates when suggesting that they are kind (Schmitt and Buss 1996), and why men and women find kind marital partners particularly satisfying (Botwin et al.1997).” Thus betas by being kind and understanding,… Read more »
“Collectively? Why do you use that adverb? Who wants to be a loser in a battle? Are you wanting your loser brother to be your keeper?” Because it is appropriate. No one wants to be a loser in a battle. That does not change the fact that everyone at some point or another will be. “Women you aren’t attracted to are dragging you down?” No, they are simply more annoying than women I am attracted to. I can’t place exactly why “You should read the 48 Laws of Power” I have. “Or be slightly more selective in your interactions.” What… Read more »
Aeon’s an even more articulate bot than TT, it could be TT under an alias, learned.
“TT” changes his handle periodically, but not as often as he changes his IP address.
The similarities between Beta and Alpha when it comes to women may not be so vast. We are still men. Let me share a story about that. I’m going to ramble, but here is my main point: Beta men need to understand that “Alpha” is both attainable, and fully human, and need to stop thinking of it as this mythical, unattainable state that only the lucky few are born with or born into. As if a life filled with a luxury of women is a cure-all for the ills and pains of life that we ALL experience, without exception. I… Read more »
Softek’s comment brings up an issue that has always bothered me: On the one hand, men seem designed by nature to compete with one another for the best women. On the other hand, men truly are stronger and happier when they work together as a team for something worthwhile. It makes me think of the movie trope where two best friends or brothers become enemies when they fall in love with the same woman. I’m currently reading a novel about the 300 Spartans and what impresses me about the men is how they’ve clearly chosen brotherhood over women. Their total… Read more »
Softek, foster in yourself a sense of adventure about the unknown.
Softek
Let me condense this for you.
Alpha = attractive to women. [Full Stop]
Alpha /= red pill, good with women, happy, successful, etc. Etc. Etc….
Softek
Hey I hate to break up your pity party. 🎉
But recall you were the one who would not give in to her demands of exclusivity. You essentially dumped her.
Knock this shit off. Go get laid.