The Crux Of The Matter

Maxim #1(a)(2): Men want to be turned on by their women. Women want to be proud of their men.

What do I mean by proud? It doesn’t necessarily mean she’s proud of your career success. It could mean something as simple and endearing as installing a mantle over her fireplace, so that when her girl friends come over for a party and ask about the fantastic looking mantle, she can tell them, with no uncertain amount of swelling pride, that her boyfriend did it. For her.

As for you women… well, men want you to look good. Period. That means:

Be hot.
Be thin.
Be young.

Now you can’t do anything about your age or your genetically endowed looks, but you can do something about staying slim and keeping yourself looking as good as possible by adopting beneficial lifestyle habits and, if necessary, “getting some work done”.

If you ask me, I think women actually have it tougher keeping their partner attracted to them over the long run.





Comments


  1. “If you ask me, I think women actually have it tougher keeping their partner attracted to them over the long run.”

    No shit

    Like


    • She can improve her chances if she not only stays in shape and feminine, but she tries to improve herself. This is also just as crucial if not more so. She must find a decent man who will stick around and must be supportive of him. The problem is he may be too beta or betaize himself in the relationship or conversely become too cruel in an attempt to not become a beta or betaized. The problem with getting a marriage license is she literally has you by the literal and/or figureative balls. Long Term Relationships with no children are another dynamic which she has to work for you the man though to stay around. There may be other things she can do to improve her chances which I have not thought about.

      Like


    • You mean getting off their ass once in a while and taking a walk along with being nurturing and feminine? Yeah women…they have it so tough.

      This blog has already shown that being age is less of a factor than weight. There are many 40-50 yr old hotties I’d much rather bang then some 200 lb college fatty from Iowa. Especially if I were 20 years older than them.

      Plus with all the betas in the world who get all lovey-dovey with the first girl who actually treats them like a human being, I’m not counting on them abandoning that girl anytime soon.

      Like


  2. This goes to the heart of hypergamy. A woman wants the highest-status man she can get, with status often being defined by what her female peers think of him, or how well she can brag about him to her friends.

    A man wants a woman who makes him feel good.

    Like


  3. But men have a greater responsibility in the success of a relationship. I think that if you handle your part of the deal (ie being alpha and making her proud), she will have an incentive to please you. Keep her hamster happy and you probably won’t have to ask her to hit the gym.

    Like


  4. It’s hard to say who has it tougher. A man is not a human being, he is a human doing. If you are not installing mantlepieces, building society and being a leader, then you are in a state of involuntary celibacy. Remember, in order for you to be a leader, there must necessarily be a surfeit of losers, since power is relative and not absolute.

    Like


    • True. It seems both have it tough for different reasons… But at least the man’s attractiveness can be influenced more. Except that some men have a hard time doing it, like women have a hard time looking young as they age.

      Like


    • 33% of american women are obese. There’s a lot of female losers too.

      Like


    • A man is not a human being, he is a human doing ’em wimminz.

      Installing mantlepieces does not seem to generate enough tingles these days. As average chicks go, they have barely a glimmer of idea that society has to be built, for them it simply is. That’s their wiring.

      Like


      • Is it their wiring or upbringing? I don’t hang out with women often so don’t always understand what and “average” chick is like, but it seems like they are average because they have beed catered to their whole lives and they simply expect it to continue. They see no reason to put in any effort as they’ve never had to before.

        Like


      • “Been” catered to . . .

        Like


      • Wiring. It is an adaptation on a species level, to guarantee the continuation regardless the conditions. Upbringing introduced the concept that the society has to be built, in former times. These days, it’s absent, to a degree. Yes, it is contained in social studies curriculum, but the concept on the surface does not seem to have any connection with the perceived reality. Thus it is relegated to a “not important” heap in their purdy lil’ heads..

        Not that boys today have any better grasp on the conceptual level, but they are wired as builders.

        Majority of people aren’t going into a deep philosophical issues, they are just trying to get by within the conditions of the social theater at hand.

        Like


      • agree with @cadnerd above. It is wiring – as smart animals as women are (if for no other reason than they bear smart sons), the hamster is much more powerful than reason. Were it not so! Lamentations aside, this is the why the females on this blog should be respectful, and more seen than heard. Only if a woman is confident that she has her hamster under a little control, should she consider making a substantive comment. And how can a woman know if she has a handle on the critter? The test is simple: did she (NOT will she) knowingly sleep with a beta last? If not, she’s not overcome her wiring.

        Like


      • Tough precondition. It’s like asking a man to sleep with a repulsive chick without being drunk.
        I wonder though if there are some women with a beta fetish. After all, there are fatty fuckers out there, there are even straight dudes who don’t give a fuck about tits and ass.
        And being attracted to betas should have some kind of evolutionary advantage, or wait… maybe not. But still, it’s weird that women seem to be universally turned off by beta behavior, with no exceptions.

        Like


      • @matador:
        “tough”
        “women seem to be universally turned off by beta behavior, with no exceptions”

        Exactly. That’s how powerful the hamster is. Without hamster-powered hypergamy, mammals would have perished; with hamster-powered hypergamy, modern civilization could not exist.

        Religion’s primary purpose was to tame the hamster, and as the genetic record shows, nearly ALL women in history cheated nevertheless. Now all bets are off – religion is dying as a moral force controlling women’s actions; and modern genetic testing is showing the betas how universally they get cheated on. A quandary indeed.

        I write the above NOT to educate any women (women who don’t WANT to beta sperm cannot be educated on matters of sex and relationships), but for those males struggling with today’s ethical landscape. Take the red pill, brothers!

        Like


      • I think my confusion regarding wiring and upbringing comes from personal experience. (I realize I am snowflaking here, but please bear with me.) I have admired and loved manly men, well, forever. Even though I did buy into the feminist crap for a while I always realized who did what around my house and my dad created and my mom nurtured. It did not take me very long to realize that this is the way the world works and no matter how much women complained about this, it was never going to change. You can’t change biology. I think it is for this reason that whenever I see a man doing very manly things, such as building a mantle, I turn to putty. Always have, always will. Show me a cowboy and watch me drool. I can’t help it. Show me that “Dear Woman” video and watch me wretch.

        Now, obviously, I am a typical woman as I need to see the world through my own personal experiences (and so much more). But why are some of us able to over come our hamsters? Are we wired a bit differently than some women or were we able to overcome our wiring because of the way we were raised?

        Like


      • There are definitely women with a beta fetish, and even an omega fetish, I just don’t know how many.
        When I start liking a guy, and then find out he’s quite popular with girls, I get terribly disappointed. Manly men are cool, but what I really REALLY like are guys who are cute as kittens. Desperation is cute. Too bad I haven’t met any other girl who likes that, that would have been interesting. Maybe someone here will relate? Most likely not, but I might as well ask.

        Like


      • Emma,

        Susan Walsh over at Hooking Up Smart is a self declared beta lover and some of the women over there have said the same. I can’t speak for the other women posters, but Susan has posted videos and pictures of the men she finds attractive and they are most definitely beta.

        Like


      • Thanks, Stingray, I will check that out 🙂

        Like


      • @ Emma

        When I start liking a guy, and then find out he’s quite popular with girls, I get terribly disappointed.

        So in your mind, the male loses status because he is too popular. A superficial observer might write this off as fear of competition; my belief is it is the action of a subculture narrative which merely reassigns status elsewhere, according to different interaction values. Plain English, the “emo” brood chick requires a more vulnerable male to accommodate her specific cultural mutation. You are still after an alpha, but one in “emo” garb. The true beta is the ugly guy smoking too much weed and wearing plaid shorts who lunges for you after fifteen minutes of small talk. You do not have a “beta fetish”. Your “beta” is a commodified anti-alpha in service of the greater anti-male/family narrative, as is your desire therefor. To the extent you prefer the anti-alpha alpha, you are after nothing more than domination from an apparently submissive type. Naturally your own desire to control figures into this equation, as would fag-haggery if you were overweight. A man cannot be controlled and will make demands of you to be normal. A “boy” will not. In sum, you’re looking for a way out of the primordial relation, and so are useless for reproduction.

        Manly men are cool, but what I really REALLY like are guys who are cute as kittens.

        QED.

        Desperation is cute.

        Mommy.

        Like


      • uh,
        “You are still after an alpha, but one in “emo” garb”
        No I’m not. I’m not even involved in the emo culture. Alpha is, by this site’s definition, a guy who can get laid a lot, if he wanted to, not a guy who is suffering from involuntary celibacy. In fact, I like guys who look like that:
        http://www.allmotivated.com/pictures/basement_Dweller.htm
        Unfortunately I haven’t gotten any of those (although when I was a teenager I was about to, but it didn’t go anywhere due to crippling shyness from both of us). I think I may have expressed my preferences somewhat wrongly. When I said “popular”, I meant among women, not as in “a prep/football player/popular in school”. You are right, it could be fear of competition, but I think it’s way more than that. If I was simply afraid of competing, I wouldn’t get turned off so suddenly. And fear of competition does not make you genuinely attracted to basement dwellers.

        “you are after nothing more than domination from an apparently submissive type”
        Well, I like to serve, but on my own terms, and I do it for people of both genders, because I care for them and because they deserve it. I’m not really into domination in bed or anything…

        “The true beta is the ugly guy smoking too much weed and wearing plaid shorts who lunges for you after fifteen minutes of small talk.”
        Sounds hot. Except I wish he didn’t do the lunging, because it’s hard to build trust with someone when they do this. But there is a solution for that – internet.

        “A man cannot be controlled and will make demands of you to be normal.”
        Look, in a relationship a man can ask me to stop doing something or start doing something, and since I’m so nice, I will do it. I don’t wish to control anyone. I just want to make them happy through my efforts. Of course, I can’t go against my core morals for them, but I can do many things.

        ” In sum, you’re looking for a way out of the primordial relation, and so are useless for reproduction. ”
        You are right, I don’t want any children. Not everyone is made to have them. Some people are made to solve the mysteries of nature and helping the rest of the world.

        “Mommy”
        You might be onto something here. Betas make me feel predatory, caring and protective at the same time. I know it must mean I’m some kind of sick person in your eyes, but what does it matter, if it makes me useful to others and happy?

        And thank you very much for creating an analysis of my preferences. This is the first time anyone did it so thouroughly and even if it’s off the mark, it was still interesting to read.

        Like


      • Better explanation of why I don’t like them to be too alpha:
        Sleeping with an alpha is like giving money to a millionaire. So pointless and unsatisfying! (I’m not saying it’s like that for everyone, just me)

        Like


      • In response to a comment concerning Susan Walsh above, she is a self-confessed slut (not the title, just the behavior) who slept with several alphas before finding a nice beta to marry.

        Girls got no clue about who they sleep with – they love all alphas. Girls HATE HATE HATE betas, Susan Walsh too hates betas from the core of her soul, her words to the contrary notwithstanding. Now that she is a washed-up old hag, she can say all she wants. When she was younger and tighter, she slept with multiple alphas (her open confession on her own blog).

        Dont fall for the words of the ladeez – listen to their actions, not their words. Their actions dont lie – crumptess who posts elsewhere on this thread about a supposed beta-attraction is sleeping with an asshole alpha at this very moment (her own words in a recent thread).

        They all want alpha sperm – and their hamsters are so bloody powerful – that they will twist themselves and others into knots not to admit it. All that betas are good for – from the female point of view – is for their resources – the beta money is good! Science has blown the cover off the female biological program – and women are now getting pumps and dumps in consequence.

        Like


      • Betaness works somewhat in foreign countries. It’s provider game. When you need food and shelter and the government doesn’t care a kind person can work wonders. It’s only a poor strategy for young women in the western world.

        Like


    • Involuntary Celibacy?

      Like


  5. Nope, just looking good ain’t enough for me.
    I guess when you say “hot” that includes a lot of qualities which are beyond sheer looks — like being feminine, warm, soft, sweet, etc (at least sometimes).

    In recent years I’m more aware of how much femininity women exude (or do not) and the vibrant dynamic of contrast between feminine & masculine essence, etc. Crucial stuff.

    Part of a woman’s femininity is her apparent awareness & appreciation of sensuality (in many forms) and grace, which usually reveals her capacity for erotic electricity during sex. If she appears oblivious & indifferent to sensuality & grace, stomping around carrying herself like she’s heavier than I am (when actually she is much lighter than I am), etc, it’s doubtful I’ll enjoy her much in bed.

    A woman who is merely ‘hot, thin, young’ but comes across as being cold, hard, hostile, humorless, unappreciative, selfish, etc. does not attract me enough to bother with her.

    Like


    • She also needs to find a decent man who will appreciate her for having a good personality if she wants him to stick around. Staying in shape, being feminine and trying to improve herself along with being supportive of her mate helps too. There may be more to add which I have not thought about.

      Like


    • totally agree with the last paragraph. unfortunately that seems to be the norm

      Like


      • You should try avoiding the over-inflated ego’s and bellys of white american chicks who all assume they are ‘owed’ something – such as half your money after they marry and divorce you.

        And look elsewhere.

        Women from places outside the United States are not like this. For better or worse, the grass really is greener on the other side of the fence.

        Like


    • Yep, femininity can overcome some other semi-serious deficiencies in girls. Just like game can overcome some other semi-serious deficiencies in guys.

      Like


  6. Everyone can nit pick all they want. Hot, thin, and & young is 95% of it. The rest is a matter of personal taste.

    Like


    • “Hot, thin, and young” is 50% of it.

      This website does a service to mankind by bluntly, and without apology, exposing the heart of female desire beneath the layers and layers of feminism and self-deception and wishful thinking.

      But it is not nearly as expert on what drives men. While Roisy can pinpoint with laser accuracy what women find attractive in the opposite sex, and while he has marshaled tons of studies and anecdotes to support these vital, verboten, and difficult truths, his assessment of male desire is cartoonishly inaccurate and incomplete.

      It works in a pinch to say men dig cute chicks — a kind of placeholder. After all, who really cares what makes us tick? We just tick. We are seeking gina tingles, not scrote tingles. We know them when we feel them. On with The Game.

      But physical comeliness is not even close to the whole story, even after correcting for the obvious higher priority men place on the beauty factor. It seems Roisy suffices to say: men are compelled by physical attraction far more than women, therefore men are solely compelled by physical attraction. (He cites a 95% or 97% number in an early post.)

      In addition to what lazy guy says above, poise, posture, affect, tone, vulnerability, voice, submissiveness, fidelity, modesty, grace, serenity, chastity, passive strength and even confidence all contribute to an ineffable aura surrounding a put-together woman. It registers as “young, hot, and thin” in our hindbrains, but cannot be objectively captured in an image like BMI or big eyes or natural gold-spun hair. How often have photographs failed to capture the aura of a woman that coruscated the air in her physical presence? How often have photogenic girls felt flat in person? Just about all the time appearances fail — think of the pictures that didn’t quite show off the babe who commanded your attention the night before. It often happens on websites discussions like these, too, where hard examples of physical beauty (Your Link Here) are denied and argued away as matters of taste, tempting us to fall back on the “eye of the beholder” myth.

      This isn’t to say a ginormous porker’s sloppy avoirdupois doesn’t cancel out “her” other non-physical qualities (and then some), just as a horribly disfigured dude would only get so far with game before hitting a hard limit. And of course men have more room to improve through game, as our attractiveness is based chiefly on status and behavior.

      The false assumption that game needed to dispel was thinking women ranked the physical as highly as we do. That goal has been achieved adequately, and admirably, and hilariously. But 95% is a Scared Straight number to get betas’ thinking processes on track with no real grounding in reality.

      Men are just as ignorant of what drives their desires as women.

      Like


      • Yes, and H has stated that sexual attraction and sexual pleasure is solely affected by looks. Sex with a 9 will certainly be better than sex with a 6.

        I disagree with that.

        Looks are one very important factor.

        Another factor that some of find important is how orgasmic the woman is. And of course the non-controversial pleasing factors of how loving, attentive, how good a conversationalist, how good a cook, etc. Daily positive interactions all add up as associations during fucking, so that when you fuck, you are thinking of HER, not that random salesgirl you met. Her face pops into your mind when you close your eyes.

        Apparently men have individualized orderings of important criteria. For some companionability is paramount. For other it is sexual compatibility. For others looks. We all want it all, but we DON’T all want the same thing at the top of our list.

        Like


      • A womans looks and sexyness will always attract male attention; all the other factors; personality, character, intelligence, her value as a partner is what will keep a man there for the longer term.

        Most women confuse one with the other.

        Like


      • I wonder if he is actually trying to say sex with a 9 is better than with a 6 all else being equal. There are few that would argue with that.

        However it is my experience that you’ll never see a ceteris parabis comparison. And the authors and commenters here have made statements about how for them other aspects can be the equivelent of one to three points of attractiveness.

        By harping on the physical attractiveness scale I don’t think that the authors are trying to ignore the other factors that make a woman attractive but rather are trying to fight the feminist mantra that looks don’t matter at all.

        Like


      • round of applause…

        Like


  7. Women don’t seem to understand that “keeping their men attracted to them” can also be something small that he notices in passing that leads to him bending her over the couch.

    In striving to have it all, those who couldn’t possibly, end up with nothing.

    I love seeing a woman dressed like a slut but I also LOVE when I catch a glimpse of some unintentionally exposed skin as a woman stretches to reach for something in a store.

    Like


  8. on September 4, 2011 at 4:50 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    lzozozlzlzllzl

    how does homer’s iliad begin????

    with a BEAUTY CONTEST between the goddesses slzozozlzlzlzl

    wlcassically wpeaking womeenenz are vessels of beauty and ehave ever been vesseles of beuaty ad men go to war to fight for them as the TORJAN wrrr war was all about the GReeks fighting the Trojanss after the Trojan pretty boy stiole HELEN from KING MENALAILS zlozlzlzzlzolz.

    OMG dat HOMER WAS AGENEIUSSSSSS!!!

    but because he spoke the TRUTGH like ROISSY about womene should being bueatifyu ll and men should be strong and heoric, the oeneoncon charlotte allenes and neoncons sfmeinziznan fmeinsinsst sfemaianidniznies hate HERTISET THE GREAT! ! lzozlzlzlzlzlz HEARTISTE THE GREATATATAAT!!!!!!!

    rea dhomeerr homer & read roissy/heartistses chateau for a more modner take on classicla epic tTRUTHRS lzozlzlzlzlzl

    otherissee the neoecnso witll butthex you into oblivisn ssoo zozooblisbsvsion lzozllzlzl

    Like


  9. And it is clear that women dont consciously umderstand what is required for a man too be attractive – its simply complained about if not present.

    Like


  10. This is why historically women have “tricked” men into marriage while in their physical prime. By the time her beauty fades, he’s stuck with a family and reluctant to get out of it just because of his horny desires. He cheats on the side instead. These days, women are trying to get married AFTER their prime, with predictably laughable results.

    Like


    • damn, roosh, that’s good stuff. I guess the modern trick women are trying to perpetrate these days is the legendary lonely, aging bachelor, so as to trick men into marring women after their primes. Because if you don’t get married, then you’ll be the one alone in the nursing home…right.

      Like


    • “By the time her beauty fades, he’s stuck with a family …”

      Stuck with a family? Children are the cutest and most beautiful creatures on this planet – I don’t understand why people wouldn’t want to be “stuck” with them …?!

      Like


      • Nowadays, because of the diminishing role of a fatherhood in the social context, a man does not feel much of a stake in the institution of family. Hence “stuck”.

        Like


      • Yeah, my single mum knows this very well. I hope I’ll find a nice beta husband for me.

        Like


      • I hope I’ll find a nice beta husband for me = Female-Omega Frame

        AKA: self-fulfilling prophesy

        Like


      • Children are a giant buzz kill. They cost money, take up my time, reduce my flexibility, cry in the middle of the night and overall annoy the hell out of me.

        I wonder if I could finally (late 20s) find a doctor that would put an end to this risk – in my early 20s they all refused to do so…

        Like


      • They aren’t toys. They are unformed, evil creatures that take a huge amount of work and funds to turn into a civilized member of society. That they are cute and we love them doesn’t change the effort it takes if one wants a functional human being when grown.

        Like


      • I’ve been told that there is such a thing as a paternal instinct to procreate. If so it’s not universal. Only when having sex do I ever get the urge to make a baby.

        I’m in a new city travelling with my girl. More than any city I’ve ever been in this city seems filled with eager young women. Would I prefer to
        A) stay at home with my loving beautiful mate and play games with a baby, or
        B) walk around town meeting young girls and arranging dates and fucking their little brains out?

        And yet every day my girl tries to “forget” taking her pill. Every month she attempts an ooops baby.

        The maternal instinct I believe in. The paternal one is hearsay.

        Like


    • I agree what you said. However most men would not be able to cheat so easily if at all. Most men didn’t have enough money for prostitutes nor were prostitutes always so easily available. You need enough men with enough income to make prostitution a viable industry. Most men were poor, and either didn’t have enough money most if not all the time. I’m not saying there wasn’t prostitution, but prostitution became more rampant in Victorian times with people, both men and women, having more freedom to flee home far away from home and ply their trade for money due to the increasing technology, urabanization, anonymity and increasing wealth. This was especially true for women who wanted to be prostitutes. Upper class men were more likely to use prostitutes or bought mistresses also.

      Most men then as of now didn’t have any one or any combination of the following: time, know how, money or desire to GAME women. They usually didn’t even know what they didn’t know.which is less true now. Also, for most men cheating with another man’s wife, daughter or sister could cause him to beat or kill you, and even if he failed the rest of the village might beat or kill you. Again, the 19th and 20th centuries really allowed women to give it up more easily because of technology(especially birth control contraceptives, urbanization, anonymity and increasing wealth. I’m not saying cheating or adultry didn’t occur, but the upper classes of men were more likely to engage in it earlier than the poorer men with their side girlfriends or mistresses. Living in a small backwards farming village makes it harder to get away with. Yes it’s true that the alpha men were more likely to get away with it then beta or omega men, but the beta or omega men were more likely to know, and more likely to have a chance and take that chance of killing the Alpha men and/or more likely to beat or kill his cheating wife. All men were also more likely to beat and kill even their daughter and sister too. I’,m not saying it didn’t happen, just much less than today for the obvious reasons..

      Most men had to imagine their wife as she was when she was at her most beautiful. Women also when they got uglier were more likely to stay physically as fiit as possible which helped. I’m guessing that these men had easier to pass boner tests in some, but not all respects for these women as well. For example, she might be uglier than sin and more worn out than old leather, but at least she’s not a blubbering mass of fat. Most men were encouraged to get married and use their wife for sex with divorces being less likely due to social and legal constraints with marriage being a much better deal for men in times past.

      The real questions are many today. Why are men still getting married with marriage being a bad deal today? Why aren’t more men trying to learn Game? If men either can not or will not learn game, why aren’t more men advocating for legalized prostitution which when prostitutes are much STD safer(not completely safe) than sticking your dick in some random non-prostitute pussy? One answer is because most men today are messed up in the head about women and sex, mentally emasculated pussies who hardly deserve to have a dick attached to them as its like the saying about as useless as tits on a bull, and really don’t care for themselves and their fellow man unlike men in the past in too many respects. I’m not slamming the Beta and Omega men who don’t know how to do better with women as I accept that there are winners and losers in this world. I’m really slamming any man, Alpha, Beta or Omega who won’t give a damn about himself or his fellow man, and at least say it would be nice if more men knew how to game women, laws and social norms were more equitable to men, and there was more legalized prostitution even if he does nothing about it; and, this would be a giant step up from what most men think or much more rarely do today.

      Like


      • “If men either can not or will not learn game, why aren’t more men advocating for legalized prostitution which when prostitutes are much STD safer(not completely safe) than sticking your dick in some random non-prostitute pussy?”

        Being a prostitute is a very soul-harming job IMO. I’d be traumatized for life from only one day of working as a prostitute. I’m sure I’d feel even more like damaged goods if I had a job like this :S These poor girls probably have big problems when they want to marry and start a family 😦
        Prostitution should be strictly forbidden.

        Like


      • Wrong answer. Although I agree that being a prostitute can be a soul crushing job and ruin a woman’s chances at marriage and other relationships, it is something that the government should at definitely legalize, and maybe regulate and tax. What consenting adults decide to do behind closed doors is their business, not the government and not anyone else including you and me. Prostittution should be entirely voluntary though. Most of the unncessary nastiness comes from the government making it illegal. Speaking of job nastiness, virtually every job has nastiness to it, but someone has to do this. Some women need money, and some men need sex, and as long as it is a voluntary exchange it isn’t anyone else’s business.
        .
        Speaking of soul crushing jobs, the military is a soul crushing job, and I say this as a former U.S. Army SOLDIER VETERAN of IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. The U.S. Army has a 75% divorce rate with the U.S. Marines being at 70%, and I know this because I was chosen by my company and took the breifing, 2 day class, to watch for soldiers before deploying to Afghanistan to look for Soldiers becoming mentally unstable and looking to commit suicide.The Army has the highest suicide rates of any branch of service with the Marines being a close second. The suicide rates are the highest in military history. The Army suicide rates are higher than the Marines because Soldiers are deployed longer to the war zone than the Marines, 12 months opposed to 6-9 months. The number one reason Soldiers and Marines commit suicide is because the male Soldier or male Marine has a Wife/Girlfriend who decides to divorce/leave him while deployed usually commiting Adultry/cheating, stealing his money, and taking his children away from him if there is any. This reason is a higher percentage than all of the other reasons combined. Men have very limited rights to their property when married, and typically get at least half of it taken away in a divorce. Single, married or divorced men have limited or no rights to their children and are not even allowed to protect their children’s lives and well being.

        I’ve personally warned one woman who was thinking about becoming an escort to really think about what she was doing. I’ve also warned people especially men to do the same when considering joining the military. I tell them that their is a PERSONAL COST to all of this although PROSTITUTION and MILITARY SERVICE are both NECESSARY and potentially TRAGIC. I have horror stories which are more horrifying drama than anything you have heard, read or watched. When I say horror stories, I mean horror stories about the relationships my fellow soldiers has with the monstrous Western specifically American ladies back home. Our Allied military such as.the British, Austrailian and Canadian etc. have similar horror stories.

        Before I became a Soldier, I was vaguely aware of how many women were bad news in the ways I will say next. Needless to say, my time as a Soldier has acutely and vividly convinced me that most Western women regard men as money machines, sperm donor baby makers, resource providers, security against danger, and as pets for female pleasure even if that be sadistic pleasure and do not see men as fully human who can be hurt. Most Western Women more highly regard pet dogs and cats then men. Most Western men specificly American men regard women as better creatures than they are. A man must endeavor to understand the true nature of women, and not only love her good side but love her bad or dark side too, but he must never allow her to have power over him for she is by far more likely to attempt to destroy him when she has power over him than when he has power over her. Men are less likely to harm women when they have power over them, and I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, only that this is not in most men’s nature because men on average have a tendency to be caretakers of women. Women have a tendency to destroy men when they have power over them, and this is her nature. I love women, but I have no illusions about them.

        Like


      • Being in the military wouldn’t be so soul crushing if we rewarded soldiers appropriately. Once upon a time, the military was a high risk high reward strategy for extraneous betas to, if they survive, effectively become alpha. The soldiers who were victorious would come home with riches, women, and slaves.

        Today we ask men to give their lives for abstract ideals like democracy instead of tangible rewards like women and slaves.

        Like


      • WRONG ANSWER!!! What consenting adults decide to do in private is noone’s business not even the government. Virtually all jobs are soul crushing to one degree or another. Being as Soldier is a soul crushing job too, and I say this as a IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN VETERAN. Some women need money and some men need sex and as long as it is voluntary and consensual, it is noone’s business. Government prohibition makes prostitution nastier than it needs to be.

        Like


      • I’m really sorry that you had to go to Iraq and Afghanistan 😦
        I know that not everything is perfect on this world but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to make it better for everyone.
        Girls who are prostitutes are usually forced into it by one way or another. I met once a Russian girl who was a prostitute and she was so severely disturbed because of her job that I was left without words. She acted as she’s numb and she doesn’t care but on the other hand she was extremely neurotic and unable to behave like an adult woman. Why would we want to produce girls like that? I wonder if she’ll ever be able to marry and have a happy family. Is sex still pleasurable when you know you’re fucking a damaged girl who will be left even more damaged after you finish? I don’t know. Maybe I’m not aware of the desires men have, but that just doesn’t sound okay to me. Not to mention they spread STD’s. At least check your STD status if you ever had sex with a prostitute.

        Like


      • In a primitive state, females have basically the choice between prostitution and marriage. The two are mutually exclusive. Here is an interesting study to back that up:
        http://the-idea-shop.com/papers/prostitution.pdf

        And no, not all prostitutes are forced to do that, i’ve known many upper middle class girls who did it because they were lazy and had expensive tastes. A prostitute is generally a failing golddigger, she can’t snag a rich beta provider, and thus resorts to the easiest path.
        Of course, there are girls who are forced to do it by mafias, but if you go anywhere in Europe where prostitution is legal (Spain, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland…), a large percentage of the working girls are doing it without any kind of pressure.
        However, i find it hard to pay for sex when you learn about game. There are not many excuses left to go for hookers.

        Like


      • @ Matador

        That’s right, prostitutes aren’t the marrying type in the first place.

        Like


      • “Government prohibition makes prostitution nastier than it needs to be.”
        Hell yeah, it definitely does. You can’t eradicate prostitution. I think it should instead be regulated.

        Like


      • You are from Norway, right? What happened in the last two years since prostitution is illegal? Is it worse than it used to be?

        Like


      • Well, from reading the news articles, I got the picture that the prostitutes are having a rougher life. Pimps have gone underground, the customers who used to tell the police about pimp activity are no longer telling the police anything (obviously), the prostitutes can’t warn each other about potentially dangerous customers… So prostitution is still there, but more hidden and the “bad guys” are harder to catch.

        Like


    • You say it’s laughable Roosh but why would they not have as many sex partners as possible before getting married instead of marrying one guy and then having him cheat on her later in life?

      Like


      • 1) women aren’t inherently logical enough or contain the foresight capacity to think of a gratification strategy as such
        2) women aren’t hard wired for sexual conquesting
        3) women are hard wired to want to find a ‘provider’ and poop out kids

        I’m not claiming that women “don’t want to have fun” (to use their watered down vernacular) in their sex prime years, but I’m claiming that the masses of women will eventually succumb to their yearning to “pumpin’ out a unit” (credit george carlin :). Worrying about their attractiveness to their hubby at 10 or whatever years out and whether he will/can cheat on her at that time I surely doubt will be on their mind.

        If there was an 8 women in her sexual prime that sat down when she was 20 and created a strategy like:
        1) fuck 100 men before age 25
        2) accomplish sex tasks, A through Z, including DVDA
        3) move away from so. California to utah.
        4) marry beta guy with good income
        5) poop out 4 kids, raise family, get fat and not care about hubby
        [Hubby starts cheating]
        6) divorce hubby, take half of assets
        7) use hubby money to get lipo, tummy tuck, face lift, boob job
        8) bang young male betas, DVDA, laugh that ex hubby is footing the bill

        …lol…wouldn’t you love to meet her?

        Like


      • That’s fucking hilarious, yersad but true at the same time. The only exception I would make is that most women don’t plan it. They just do it, and our culture and laws encourage them to do this. Then people wonder why I say marriage is sucha bad deal for men.

        Like


      • Do guys themselves actually sit down and make lists like this though???

        Like


      • Ha. More than you could possibly comprehend. It is one of the male traits that led to science, technology, and The White Man’s Burden. And … dare we say … the entire “Seduction Science” and “Venusian Arts” industry?

        Could you imagine the effort it takes to minutely focus on every single aspect of male-female interaction, as this website and dozens or hundreds of others have attempted? And he calls it a “hobby”!

        We white men vivisect, analyze a thing to death. Then we dig up the corpse and dissect some more, pass it around, argue it back into the ground, then disinter it again, just in case we missed something. It is in our nature, and why our culture has come to dominate every corner of the planet.

        Steve Sailer wrote about the white male tendency for overanalysis in a recent article. Twitter and Facebook are dominated by women, blacks, and gays. White men have a difficult time editing themselves down to 140 characters.

        [C]onsider the career of the most popular sports pundit to emerge from the online era, Bill Simmons. He has a relatively functional personality, but he revolutionized sportswriting by adopting the nerds’ virtual approach to data-amassing. Traditionally, a newspaper’s baseball beat writer would laboriously follow the local team around the country, watch each game from the stadium press box, then trudge down to the locker room to ask tonight’s hero what kind of pitch he hit for a home run. To Simmons, that seemed like a ridiculously low-bandwidth way to analyze sports. Instead, he stayed home and watched four televisions at once.

        In contrast, the social-network era of, say, 2005 onward has seen the Revenge of Normal People. Twitter is restricted to 140 characters, a length that us nerdy straight white guys find absurd. How can anybody say anything that is true, new, important, and interesting in 140 characters?

        But most people don’t care about saying things like that. They just want to say whatever is on their minds at the moment. They have a life.

        http://takimag.com/article/the_golden_age_of_white_male_antisocial_media/print

        I don’t apologize for this. This tendency will save the world from its depravity, again, as it has for all of modernity.

        Like


      • Ummmm….*blinks*…..ok. And I didn’t know that it was a white thing.

        Like


      • “We white men vivisect, analyze a thing to death. Then we dig up the corpse and dissect some more, pass it around, argue it back into the ground, then disinter it again, just in case we missed something. It is in our nature, and why our culture has come to dominate every corner of the planet.”

        …except the corner between your own women’s legs.

        Like


      • not necessarily. but more generally, men have to be consciously aware of goals and take charge of our lives in a way that women don’t. if we completely lack any kind of vision and sense of direction, we lose by default.

        whereas a lot of women tend to just react to their emotions and exciting things happening around them.

        Like


      • on issues of sex and relationships, Pete is 100% correct. Women have no functioning reason once hamster-powered hypergamy is triggered. Yes, Renee, you women have a massive human brain, but mother nature has ensured that it doesn’t work. If you could think, you would chase beta sperm, not alpha.

        Like


      • King A is describing more of one side the right side of the bell curve than the center but he isn’t that far away. Even grocery shopping for a man is treated like a battle plan. Plot the list so that you spend the minimal travel distance to obtain everything, plan the timing to avoid the crowds, when approaching checkout look for the line that will take the minimal time while allowing interaction with a cute checkout girls, etc.

        What few women today understand is that this is just natural for most men. it doesn’t take much effort to do it and is pleasurable when done correctly.

        Yes, Renee, guys do this to a certain extent all of the time.

        In the past in Western cultures women were taught to do this too. For most it does not appear to come naturally and so they were taught how to plan their life, their family and how to manage their home. If you were upper class a woman was expected to have the skill set of a modern mid level corporate manager.

        Now they are taught that it is more important to feel good than to actually be a functional part of civilization.

        Like


      • Even grocery shopping for a man is treated like a battle plan. Plot the list so that you spend the minimal travel distance to obtain everything, plan the timing to avoid the crowds, when approaching checkout look for the line that will take the minimal time while allowing interaction with a cute checkout girls, etc.

        Hey, minus checking out the checkout girls, I do this too lol.

        Like


      • Renee, yes they do. King A may be a bit to the side of the bell curve in his description but not too far away from the center.

        Even grocery shopping can be planned to tiny details. Where to park, when to go to minimize crowds, laying out the list to minimize both distance travelled and time spent, judging which checkout line will take the minimal time versus the cuteness of the checkout girl, etc.

        For most men this is not a material effort and can be enjoyable when your planning all works out. Most women today act like they don’t have a clue as to how to even begin to do this.

        In the past, at least in Western cultures, women were trained to do this. In fact for the upper classes the training resulted in the skill set required for a corporate middle manager today.

        Nowadays we only worry that they “feel” good.

        Like


      • Hey, Renee. Your “Ummmm….*blinks*…..ok” bewilderment in the face of the “male tendency for overanalysis” (demonstrated in my very post) proves my point about the female mind. Not sure if you noticed.

        Like


      • First off I was being funny and secondly, I wasn’t expecting all of that (or that it was a white thing). Like Anonymoose said, your explanation was a bit to a side of the bell curve. I wasn’t expecting an big, indepth answer, simple as that.

        My female mind wasn’t overwhelmed and it wasn’t bewilderment, so kindly get over yourself 😉

        Like


      • I’d love to meet her before she turns 25.

        Like


      • Never seen the acronym DVDA, had to look it up in The Encyclopedia Britannica.

        Like


    • @Roosh…interesting…a girl I’d gamed and banged was supposed to come over for a major holiday.

      But her girlfriends somehow convinced her that I was a bad boy and she shouldn’t so she bailed at the last minute.

      Then she had some kind of remorse over it…

      Since then she’s been inviting herself over for months.

      When I’m in her city I bang her…but she’s a it older now and so the idea of inviting her over for a weekend and treating her the way I would someone I’m actually seeing is….frankly too much work.

      As for the other part of this post regarding women being proud of their men…volunteering at something….organizing something, making a speech–even MC’ing a wedding…being able to speak another language in front of her….all good examples of DHVing…..

      Like


    • Tricked? Oh please. You are all the ones who are saying looks count.

      You want to be fooled.

      Like


    • LOL.

      Well said sir.

      Like


  11. Women have it easier: just keep crap food out of their piehole & stay thin. All women can physically do that.

    Men have it harder because by definition, only a small percentage can be alpha.

    What keeps most women from staying skinny & fit is their emotions. Emotions say crap food FEELS good, baking their skin in the sun FEELS good, staying up late & overdrinking alcohol FEELS good, etc. But their emotions cannot logically arrive at the correct, singular answer on what they can do to remain hot.

    That’s why most just get fat with age, even though it’s so easy to stay fit.

    Like


  12. on September 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm Robert in Arabia

    The most important article about women and social decay I have ever read. http://www.fisheaters.com/garbagegeneration.html

    HITLER SPEAKS TO THE NS WOMEN´S LEAGUE 11 SEP 1936

    Like


  13. “If you ask me, I think women actually have it tougher keeping their partner attracted to them over the long run.”

    Why do you think it’s tougher for us women? There’s no easier thing than staying thin and in shape – in case you respect your body. What other things a woman has to do to keep her man attracted to her? I hope you don’t suggest face-lifts, botox etc.?! That’s ridiculous. I’d feel totally tired if I had to think constantly whether my husband is still attracted to me or am I already too old.
    I’m thin and okay-looking – and I’ll be thin and okay-looking forever and all without any effort (being thin is the most natural state of a human body IMO) – but I won’t be young forever. Since I plan to age without skin fillers and cosmetic surgery – do you think I won’t be able to keep my husband attracted to me for my whole life?! :S

    Like


    • Read the last paragraph of lazy guy’s post a bit above. There’s your answer.

      Like


    • “Why do you think it’s tougher for us women?”

      Men are attracted to young women. Women are attracted to charismatic men. Learning to be charming is difficult but possible; stopping the aging process is not.

      Like


  14. Whilst I agree that looks are of supreme importance, there are other things that most men take into account as well:

    * can she cook and clean?
    * is she feminine?
    * would she/does she make a good mother?
    * is she a generally amicable person?

    There is no point in having a 10/10 missus, only to come home and find out she’s eaten your kids. That would kind of ruin the fun. What I have listed above are other things you might take pride in your woman for.

    Sure, it’s cool to tell your buddies down the pub about her banging body and outrageous sex drive. However, it’s also cool when your buddies meet her and say ‘bro, you’ve met yourself a keeper.’

    Of course a huge amount of bias is always going to be placed on looks. I do it myself, and this is unlikely to ever change, but at the same time it is foolish to ignore other positive aspects of women.

    Like


    • Sexual history is also eminently important. You don’t want to marry a reformed slut. A woman who has banged dozens of random dudes has damaged her ability to bond with a man.
      And also, since marriage in the west is such a raw deal for men, you have to consider her family history. Was she brought up in a stable home, with non-divorced parents, or does she come from a monoparental family? You don’t wanna take ANY risks when it comes to marriage.
      Finally, having kids is the only valid reason of getting married. If you don’t feel the need to have babies, don’t fucking get married.

      Like


      • 100% good post.

        ” Finally, having kids is the only valid reason of getting married. If you don’t feel the need to have babies, don’t fucking get married.”

        Amen.

        Like


      • True true.

        My list was in no way meant to be exhaustive.

        Like


      • “A woman who has banged dozens of random dudes has damaged her ability to bond with a man.”

        This has not always been my experience. And while we do see higher divorce rates for women with higher partner counts, there is a correlation causation issue there. Those with high socio sexual scores are naturally going to be inclined to have both more sex partners and more divorces.

        And women change their sexual strategies – as we have discussed here. They honestly do play the field, then settle down. Just as men do.

        And lastly – perhaps a woman who has played the field is a high risk if you don’t measure well against all her other lovers.

        But if you do measure well, and can handle her in the alpha way that she requires?

        It happens every day and we’ve all seen of and heard of it – sluts settle down. Are they a greater RISK? Sure. But risk is not a black and white all or nothing issue. Risk often also comes with benefit.

        Don’t marry a bar girl is sound advice. Don’t marry a girl who shows all signs of being in love and devoted and who you get along great with and have great sexual chemistry with and for whom every day is like a birthday because she has a sexual past is not sound advice.

        Like


  15. on September 4, 2011 at 7:25 pm Dead Eyed Dick

    A woman with more than two partners prior to yourself is a very high risk investment-

    Like


  16. Interesting insights here. I had an arguement with the girl I’m seeing over…of all things, the fact we went to dinner, I had arrived first and had a drink so asked her what she wanted.

    She turned to me and said “a water.”

    I looked at her and said: “Don’t tell me, tell the guy with the apron…”

    She insisted that “you’re the man, you should take care of me….”

    “What are you my daughter? You can’t order a drink, what if I wasn’t here?”

    As she escalated this, I agreed and amplified and that made her laugh.

    But afterwards, two things happened.

    1) I was really turned off
    2) She was more accommodating

    But I think to myself, why be with someone who is constantly shit-testing and confronting?

    I have options…

    I volunteer at an organization. Women who come out are immediately attracted by this. The fact a guy is putting in his own time to do something is a way of DHVing.

    Like


    • You, like so many men on this blog, have once again inadvertently revealed your low breeding.

      Like


      • You, like the few ass clowns that pop up once and a while and troll this blog, have once again inadvertently revealed your sad angry life.

        BEAT IT NERD!

        Like


      • What’s the point of this comment??? Not necessary.

        Like


      • Funny that you mention breeding, like someone bred for a nice sized and juicy ham, being the perfect ass. No see, that only works when the babe submits to the masculine authority across the board. Then he acts as an authority. When she otherwise does not submit, then it looks like he is a slave.

        Like


    • Power struggle?

      This reminds of the question of if all girls can be tamed, and how important the starting material is.

      Perhaps due to a string of workable and tameable girls, I’m optimistic on the subject that conditioning can work wonders on women.

      But optimism and stupidity sit side by side and sometimes bleed into each other. Yes, mate choice is at least as valuable as mate training.

      Like


    • Um, sweetheart… you’ve missed the point.
      Back In The Day of Gentlemen, YOUR part WAS to turn to the waiter and say, ‘Miss ______ would like a water, please.”

      Like


      • I play it the opposite.

        I make the girl handle all details, from ordering food, to paying the bill. I’ll hand her the wallet at the end of the meal to do so.

        I don’t sully myself with details. My personal assistant (my mate) takes care of that.

        Like


      • That’s beta…she should be asking me what I want.

        After that arguement…she cooked for me…go figure.

        She said she’d never cooked for guys before…you don’t ask, you don’t get….

        Like


      • Not necessarily beta. If done right, ordering for a girl can be hugely alpha. But I gotta ask, if you asked her what she wanted, why are you getting pissed that she answered you? That was your first mistake. Either don’t ask and let her order, or call the waiter over and just place the order firmly and without further comment. There is nothing beta about ordering for your girl unless you drool all over her in the process.

        I don’t know how long you have been working on game, but I get the impression that you think a lot about what you are doing. Completely understandable if you are only into it a couple of months, but at some point, you gotta stop over analyzing and just do what makes you feel like a man. Chances are, if it makes you feel like a strong man, it is alpha. Even doing the comfort stuff can make one feel like a man, as in a LTR, part of your job is taking care of her. (Though it also sounds like you girl puts you through a lot. I’m not slamming you here, just offering a polite suggestion.)

        Like


      • I generally order everything for a woman if we go out. Typically, she doesn’t need a menu. If I’m paying, I’m deciding what we’ll eat and drink and at what pace.

        I’ve had a tiny handful of women take offense, at which point I toss my napkin on the table, flip some $20s on it, and walk.

        My money = my time = my rules = my way.

        100% of those bitches begged for a second chance. Of course I said no.

        Like


      • And that’s really the point. It’s not which etiquette shows the most dominance. It’s whatever the fuck YOU want. Period.

        What I want is to order first, like an arrogant son of a bitch. I pay no attention to what the girl orders. She takes care of that herself. And I let her converse with the waiter, and I let her handle the money for the bill.

        If I wanted something else, that’s what I’d do.

        There is no specific restaurant etiquette that is the ultimate dominance display. Some people say it’s weak to pay. Some say it’s weak not to pay. For me I feel I gain hand when I pay – otherwise I wouldn’t pay. For me I feel I gain hand if I treat the woman like a personal assistant – otherwise I’d order for her. Etc.

        Like


      • Yep, I am unsurprised that they begged for a second chance. I wish women could learn to think for two seconds before they open their mouths. I’m sure they missed a good time and a good meal. May I ask what you typically order for them or does it largely depend on the situation?

        Like


      • Oh, and if the girl tries to eat off of my plate I make dog barking noises and guard my plate with my arm.

        Like


      • So…being a massive douche is the new “alpha”? Got it.

        I’ll happily continue to place my order after you drop those 20s and walk. Peace and quiet…aaaaaahhhh.

        Like


      • Peace and quiet. That’s what you went on a date looking for.

        Peace and quiet. Just you, and maybe a cat or two.

        Your life aim is noted.

        Like


      • Dada,

        That’s funny, my father-in-law is a big-shot litigation attorney, and very outgoing, very alpha. He will come to town and take my wife and me out to dinner, suggest a restaurant to dine in, then a minute after the menu arrives say, “I know what I want?” and call the waiter over. He places his order first, and then on your turn, If you hesitate for a moment, he will unceremoniously order for you. Hasn’t happened to me yet, but he often orders for my wife and others.
        He also has a habit of stopping random waiters delivering entrees to other customers, and asking what it is, then ordering a side for us too.
        Then he will open free-ranging conversation with every table near us – he’s quite the showman, and used to being the center of attention, which he demands and gets.

        Like


      • @ That Guy
        I find showboats like that insufferable to be around pretty quickly. Makes me wonder what they feel like they have to prove, or what their bluster and forced joviality is hiding.

        Like


      • Tinderbox

        @ That Guy
        I find showboats like that insufferable to be around pretty quickly. Makes me wonder what they feel like they have to prove, or what their bluster and forced joviality is hiding.

        I think monkeys feel something similar. When there is a rising social star who doesn’t quite have enough diplomacy skills, he’ll get a public communal beat down.

        Hating on arrogance and douchebaggery is a type of hating on competition. We must push down our rivals, lest our rivals win and get the better of us, or get the resources we want.

        It’s a primate emotion to hate on successful mating strategies.

        Like


      • @Stingray/Dada…

        The context of this arguement may be worth noting.

        The night before the girl had asked me to carry some shopping bag in front of her girlfriend and some other beta guy saying “it’s heavy…”

        Me; It’s heavy for me too….

        Lots of power sulking….

        So the water comment was a bit of that…maybe over-kill.

        But the comment that if you’re thinking about it, it’s beta…not sure that’s true.

        I think in learning game, I have become more conscious of what a woman communicates and sub-communicates.

        Does this awareness lead to misunderstandings? Maybe.

        Like


      • Walawala,

        No, I don’t believe that if you think about it is is beta, but over analyzing it MAY be. By all means think about it. And when your girl does something stupid, like a shit-test, let her see the mirth in your eyes when you respond (BTW, that mirth drives us crazy and puts the hamster into hyper overdrive). My point is that at some point in the journey it will behoove you to internalize it. I don’t know how long you have been doing this, but at some point don’t you start to have a feel for it? Doesn’t responding to a girl appropriately give you confidence that you slowly being to internalize? My point is that you have to start trusting that and not rely so much on your thought process. The more natural it becomes, the more girls will respond.

        Like


  17. That author has several interesting observations, and one that agrees with Roosh’s post above: matriarchy is what happens in a state of nature, while patriarchy is a social construct. No surprise the author can find feminazis celebrating the retreat into savagery. As Hayek described in “The Fatal Conceit”, socialists tend to have a hard-on for the Stone Age.

    Like


  18. 1(a)(2) !?!?
    come on now, that’s down 1984 road! The propreitors of an establishment where petty lies perish can surely do better than adopt a bureaucrat’s numbering system.

    That quibble aside, the chateau’s post is gold, as usual.

    Like


  19. Be conscious of the fact that it takes more than looks to turn on (necessary, not sufficient).

    Also note to be proud of yourself regardless. Her feelings will follow suit.

    PG

    Like


  20. I’m starting to think women don’t have a real capacity for empathy, except as a social strategy. The things they do, say and want can all be traced to ‘me’ ‘me’ ‘me.’

    Even the whole big wedding, eternal love, raisin’ babies drive seems to be some sort of fantasy self-fulfillment.

    Women are supposed to be the social creatures. They’re supposed to be the ones who understand that they will be happier with a partner who is the most socially compatible- but they don’t. They’d rather chase the man with qualifications.

    Like


    • it would be dangerous to the survival of the species if women had any empathy at all (except for the neuro-chemically caused one for their children).
      Men have the luxury of thought and ethics, women don’t. Women’s job is to continue the species, and that’s only possible by (genetically) killing betas.

      Like


  21. Well, I’ve dumped a few women for having a shitty character, even though they still were reasonably hot.
    I believe that, together with infidelity of course, character is the main reason for men to dump their women.
    Declining looks, in my experience, have no effect. The decline is too gradual and slow for this.
    The reason why women more often than not leave their men, I guess, is that men fear the downsides of being alone. They know men are generally having a hard time to find somebody else, unlike women.
    Women, obviously, get caught in the cold when they still continue their habit to dump betas after they turn 40. Before that age, it just works, she’ll find somebody else immediately, never mind he’ll more often than not be a player uninterested in a mongamous relationship.
    I’ve been alone for long stretches of time as a result of dumping girls for being a tad too uppity. My buddies don’t understand this behavior. But I really prefer to return to loneliness rather than face a barrage of shit tests every day. And it’s OK really, my character always ends up luring women after a few months. I don’t even really need game.

    Like


  22. Perhaps I should trademark the term hamster-powered hypergamy! Perhaps the reason the hamster is so awesomely strong, is because it needs to power a supremely critical evolutionary function – hypergamy. And perhaps the reason women are unable to supress hypergamy is that it is more than super-duper-hyper powered, it’s hamster-powered.

    Like


    • Just a random thought, but (especially prefeminism) maybe women are hamster driven to hypergamy because it made men step up and be real men.

      Then again, I could be way off. But I gotta think that there has to be some logical explanation for the hamster. I have not been able to come up with a better reason than that.

      Like


      • It’s very simple – hamsters kill off betas – the proof is in our genetic record, half the percentage of men in any generation reproduce as compared to women. Killing betas is essential to genetic variation – critical for species survival. Why not kill women (or men and women equally) ? Because females are biologically more valuable. That’s why the hamster is both powerful and not in much (female) control. Women’s raison d’etre is to kill (some) men. That’s why taking the red pill evinces anger from betas.

        Like


      • I understand what you are saying, but you need to modify your vocabulary some. You say we want to kill betas, but that would mean we would be murdering them left and right. I think you mean we want to them out of the gene pool.

        Anyway, I see your point, but if this were true I do not think we would be seeing the huge increase in betas over the years we have been seeing. Also, we would not be seeing so many women settling for the betas and having their children if this were true. The hamster actually aids in this pairing as it allows the woman to rationalize that I will marry this beta and I will love him because he will change after the wedding and things will improve. When they don’t, after a few years and the kids are born, she divorces him and moves on to try for the alpha. In a way, the hamster may actually be creating more betas. The hamster is also what allows a woman to forgo seeing reality (Men actually ARE stronger than women) and buy into the feminist BS that ROAR! I can do anything you can do, better.

        Like


      • @Stingray:

        I am committing the sin of directly addressing a woman’s mind (may God above forgive me!). But hopefully some guy out there will find the below helpful:

        (1) Learn science – betadom is relative, not absolute. Genetic variation requires the extinction, in each generation, of a significant number of the more expendable gender.

        (2) Killing is not murder, there is no mens rea (criminal intent). Women kill off men’s genes – that’s their duty and genetic destiny – I am not making any legal (criminal) or even moral claim – I didnt say this was morally wrong.

        (3) The point about the anger has to do not with sperm (genes), but to do with resources. Females of most mammals (and many other vertebrates also) aid in species survival by milking males of their resources ($$$ in modern life), even when no genes from said males make it to the next generation. Science has exposed this biologically-crafted female-program (called hypergamy) to male view and the male reaction (ask the men on this blog) is universally anger – anger because resources are taken for nothing in exchange. That’s why the hamster exists – women cannot afford morality (our species would die if women knew the difference between virtue and sin) – but the giant brain of our species requires a mechanism to actively fool women into NOT recognizing their own natures (i.e. thieves).

        Now you see why pumps and dumps are advocated by PUAs, and why most PUAs are former-betas? But I am breaking my head against the wall – mother nature is far more powerful than my feeble attempts above to explain. I doubt very much if a single woman who reads this will understand an iota of what I am saying – but again, hopefully a guy out there will benefit (I was once a newbie, and a beneficiary of the community, too).

        Like


      • Point 1) OK, this I get. Makes perfect sense.

        Point 2) You did say in you initial post ” Killing betas is essential to genetic variation.” Yes, killing is not murder, bad choice of words on my part, but there is a difference between killing men and and killing off their genes, hence me clarifying and obviously, we are in agreement.

        Point 3) I get why men are so angry, completely. They have every right to be angry, and not just because women have taken their resources, but in such a seemingly sneaky manner. Supposedly the wives/girlfriends are in love and then the men are dumped and raped of their hard earned income with no rational explanation.

        I do understand what you have said and do not know enough about science to be able to disagree or agree with you. The only thing I am not sure about is the numbers. I don’t see that many alphas fathering that many children, yet I do see lots of betas doing it. I also fully believe that cuckolding happens , but without seeing the numbers it is difficult to believe that it happens in any kind of majority at all. That is what is throwing me off your theory. And I highly doubt that we are going to get a number of women out there willing to subject themselves to paternity testing to be able to come to any conclusions.

        Like


      • Samson,

        Excellent post. Very nicely done.

        Like


      • I would say that feminism and the way many young boys are brought up in the west beta-ized a large part part of the male population who would otherwise be lesser alphas.
        Many men don’t need seminars and bootcamps and thousands of pages to learn how to seduce. Actually most of them get it instantly, and realize how much they were wrong, and how unfair the fact that they’ve been lied to. The reprogramming phase from beta to alpha may take time, but many sense that something was there deep down, waiting to be awakened.

        The fact that there are many apparent betas out there doesn’t deny the fact that most contemporaries are descendents of a minority of men, which means that betas have been cuckolded over and over for millenia.

        Like


      • Excellent point, Matador.

        There is a misconception out there that the natural default state for most males is beta. I would argue it is lesser alpha.

        People forget that there was literally a war declared on masculinity in the 60s, that has continued to present day, in all anglo western cultures. It has been a sneaky, insidious, devastatingly effective battle that has stripped most men of their natural masculine pride.

        You are quite right in the observation that for many reformed betas, the process to alpha is not becoming something they are not – it is freeing themselves from the mental shackles that were purposely placed there by evil women. Women who were so hateful and envious of masculine agency and efficiency, that they sought to tear it down and degrade it by any means necessary, including by brainwashing their own sons and daughters. This is the baby boomer generation, friends.

        Look back past the baby boomers and the pussified american male is the exception, not the rule. You had to be a bad motherfucker to carve out the west like we white men did.

        Like


  23. Doesn’t installing a mantle for her kinda’ go against the laws of Asshole Game?

    Like


    • Not all alphas are assholes.

      Like


      • @Stingray
        “Not all alphas are assholes”

        Most of the ones here are (or pretend to be).

        Like


      • BTW, A.B. Daba is not one of the assholes.

        Like


      • Some are, yes. But there are a couple in my personal alpha radar who are not. And I have personally met a couple who treat there wives very well. Though their wives also work hard to be treated that way.

        Like


      • “Their”

        Like


      • Dominance and submission is seen as a subversive concept to many women, who will respond with eye rolls and snark.

        “Assholes, or pretend to be”. Nice spin on dominance. Make me a sandwhich woman, or go back to your cat.

        Like


      • Xsplat,

        If you are responding to me, I am very opening submissive in my relationship with my husband and would have it NO other way. No snark from this girl.

        Like


      • Argh! “openly”

        Must learn to read posts before hitting the post button.

        Like


      • I understand that I was quoting “Young and Hot” with her “Assholes, or pretend to be”, and also understand that you promote that females assume a division of labor and division of decision making in their household. You advocate letting me be and feel like men, so that women can be and feel like women.

        Like


      • Yep, since you quoted under my handle I wanted to make sure we’re on the same page. One problem I have with internet comments is the inability to see facial expressions and body language. I sometimes miss ones intention.

        Like


    • “Asshole Game” is for early part of a relationship. If you want a girl for anything beyond a short term hook up you’ll need to step beyond that.

      Like


  24. Samson,
    on issues of sex and relationships, Pete is 100% correct. Women have no functioning reason once hamster-powered hypergamy is triggered. Yes, Renee, you women have a massive human brain, but mother nature has ensured that it doesn’t work. If you could think, you would chase beta sperm, not alpha.

    Well for one, I think it’s problematic to always think beta=good, alpha=bad. My idea of a true alpha can be dominant, a leader, assertive, and not have to be a bonafide a-hole or jerk, always having to prove himself. Not to mention one that’s a player/thug/etc. That type of alpha is not attractive to me.

    Like


    • @ Renee:

      Totally agree with your comment above. This was something I tried to bring up on this forum a while back…the idea that what is truly *most* attractive to women is a real alpha, a.k.a. a leader among men. A true alpha doesn’t need to prove himself in any way…he’s already supremely confident, without being egotistical.

      The egotistical “player” alpha has a certain draw, but immediately puts my guard up. I might find him attractive, but he doesn’t make me adore him, as the true leader alpha does.

      This thought was wildly unpopular on here and many of the men tried to argue that a “leader among men” is actually a beta “white knight”. WRONG. One savvy reader of this forum (I think it was Shmoe) finally pointed out that part of the issues is most of the guys who trawl this blog are very unlikely to be *either* type of alpha, since a real alpha would have no draw to the information here. There *is* a lot of truth to what is commonly referred to as “game”, but the very notion of “game” would probably be scoffed at by a real alpha…(again, he’s already got it…”game” to him is like breathing).

      I would guess that the notion of the “leader among men” is probably much more threatening to men. They might be able to use game to get some women into bed, and then (laughably) apply the term “alpha” to themselves when they’ve racked up a few notches on their bedposts. But maximizing their male potential and being true leaders? Nah. Most are far, far too weak-minded for that.

      Interestingly, Heartiste himself is intelligent enough to explore some of these subtleties and has made it clear that within the notion of “game” there is a place for committed LTRs in the grand scheme of things (he eschews the idea for himself, of course),

      [Heartiste: News to me.]

      hence the example of the mantle in the post above. But this subtlety is lost on many of his readers, who really are just desperately trying to get laid, one way or the other…or else expend their pent-up rage and vitriol towards all women.

      Like


      • “Shmoe) finally pointed out that part of the issues is most of the guys who trawl this blog are very unlikely to be *either* type of alpha,”

        Schmoe may be wrong. There are lots of natural alphas (both types: to men and women) in the seduction community.

        “the very notion of “game” would probably be scoffed at by a real alpha”

        Wishful thinking. Game is only criticized by white knighting manginas on the male side.
        And you’re assuming that alpha leaders (to men) like military, political or economic leaders have no problem interacting with women. You are dead wrong. Many leaders among men are clueless when it comes to women. The ladies may even throw themselves at them, but their lack of game makes them rationalize their inability to create chemistry with a self righteous imaginary craving for monogamy.

        “I would guess that the notion of the “leader among men” is probably much more threatening to men.”

        No, not at all. Some may find in game the final spark to realize their hidden potential. But most guys realize that being a leader of men requires much work, much more work than being an alpha to women.
        A man trying to achieve great things, is actually subconsciously trying to impress women. Men are hardwired to build, create and innovate in order to insure their reproductive success. Learning how to seduce women is a shortcut to fulfill men’s true desires.
        Pursuing greater achievements at that point is up to the man. Learning game and improving one’s life are not mutually exclusive.

        “there is a place for committed LTRs”

        In Heartiste’s world, there is a place for LTRs, not for commitment. Marriage is viewed as a bad (stupid?) decision.

        Like


    • Yeah, and I’ve met beta jerks. And good alphas. It’s just that it’s so much easier for an alpha to turn shallow in today’s world. I think it’s even easier. What’s the point of developing virtues when you can get everything you want by being an asshole?
      And since true alphas are kind of rare, if all women chased them, you would sink the productivity of men in your country significantly by your behavior. The alphas wouldn’t have to work or build anything in order to get a girl… All those betas would be alone and bitter, slowly turning to jerks because that’s the easiest way to get laid (instead of being providers/builders). Those might be the long-term consequences.
      And the long-term consequences for the woman alone could be: dating lots of alphas and not getting married with any of them, or settling down with one and then getting cheated on. Of course some alphas would be good and moral, but I have doubts over how likely it is to get one of those…

      Like


      • on September 5, 2011 at 2:47 pm Eyelash in Gaza

        Pretty good description of the state, and fate, of American life.

        Like


      • all you chicks need to come get with the Demon. I won’t cheat on any of you 😉

        Like


      • @AlphaDemon:

        Your comment wins. Women have no clue what attracts them, even if they are so smart that they comment on heartiste.wordpress.com.
        Especially crumptess above, who, in a previous thread, openly admitted to slut/whore behavior (i.e. sleeping) with an asshole alpha.
        Unfortunately, I still have the bad habit of (occasionally) breaking my head against the hamster – you win bro!

        Like


      • Ok so did crumptess sleep with a whole bunch of alphas, because sleeping with ONE, SINGLE alpha doesn’t make you a slut.

        Like


      • Thanks Renee, and no, I certainly have not. And the one guy is the ONLY one I’ve ever mentioned on this lovely forum. But good luck convincing the shrieking imbeciles…

        Like


    • That type of Alpha is rare, and you deceive yourself. Only a few men can be leaders, by their very nature. You’re Exhibit A on the innate Hypergamy of women. You want (like nearly all women) the leader, the big shot, the dominant male. To put it in female terms that’s like every guy wanting every woman to be say, Scarlett Johanssen or Katy Perry. It is unrealistic.

      Only a few men can be the Alpha you desire, just as only a few women can be as naturally endowed and thin and YOUNG as Perry or Johannssen. But women can plastic surgery it up, and men can thug it up. That’s not the genuine article but the individual Alpha craving writ large creates jerks, thugs, and a-holes. Joe Average working in a cubicle beside you is not ever going to be the Corner Office Big Shot you crave. But he can pump up, be an a-hole, a jerk, act like a thug as much as possible. Its a straight line from wanting Mr. Big to creating the Situation.

      Like


      • @Whiskey:

        Hear, hear.

        An additional point – women’s actions speak louder than words. Crumpetess above admitted in a recent thread to sleeping repeated with an asshole alpha – her so-called beta attraction is simply balderdash – or in french, bull shit.

        All women want from betas is their resources. The children betas manage to pump out of women are inspite of what women really want, not because of any feelings women have for betas. The proof is in the genetic record – in every generation twice as many women have reproduced as men – but you can be damn sure that the men who did not reproduce were sucked dry of their resources by the women of their generation.

        After the knowledge of game is revealed to men, pumps and dumps are a logical consequence. Its check-mate time: science has blown the cover off of the beta-duping program that all females have as their genetic legacy.

        I say all this not bitterly – however, even a positive and bright future for both sexes must be built on facts, not fantasy. And from the women’s comments on this thread it is clear that it is the men, not the women, who must build it.

        Like


      • After the knowledge of game is revealed to men, pumps and dumps are a logical consequence.

        Game will allow you to wholly ensnare a womans heart, mind, body and soul and create for you a personal love slave.

        Why would you pump and dump a love slave?

        Like


      • Because she gets old and you want a younger one?

        Like


      • @ Samson:
        My “so called beta attraction”?!? So now “leader among men” is equivalent to beta”?

        Check this out, everyone. This little exchange is too amusing:

        First, from Whiskey: Hypergamy is causing me (Crumpetess) to aim unrealistically high, and the alpha of which I speak is so rare that it is the equivalent of men wanting Scarlett Johanssen. Ok. Fair enough.

        Then Samson pipes in, saying he AGREES with Whiskey, but then completely contradicting what Whiskey says, because Whiskey has just conceded that the alpha of which I speak DOES exist (but it’s unrealistic to want that), but little ol’ Samson then turns around and says that no, this is actually beta.

        Samson: fail.

        Whiskey is at least logical. Yes, it may be aiming too high to want a “real” alpha. However, what men REALLY don’t want to admit is that, if I am content with the possibility of either never having children or adopting, then *I can afford to be as picky as I damn want*. Companionship? Already got it. Money? Already got it. Sex? Meh. For now, got it. Later…that’s what Babes in Toyland is for. Given the hell that is 95% of all marriages, WTF would I settle for anything LESS than the alpha I want? Women have no more reason to “settle” than men do.

        As for the “alpha” I was fucking recently…he may not have even been alpha in the first place. He was hot, macho and tough, but also way below my own socio-economic status (he had money…but it was new money, and he was a bit ghetto, overall). Which clearly is not in line with hypergamic principles. So…he’s now out of the picture. Interestingly, and probably enragingly to some, I’m now being pursued by a very successful, educated, witty, sexy 43-year-old (see Jerry, I told you I did like older guys), who is quite intent on building an LTR. Score.

        Like


      • And just to clarify one more time…I am 100% fine with the notion of “hitting the wall” and being single for the rest of my life. I would WAY RATHER do that then settle for a weakling beta, or a pseudo-alpha. I don’t need that nonsense. Marriage to the wrong person is just as hellish for women as for men.

        Like


      • Women are also always arguying that men had better marry, otherwise they’ll die old and alone.

        For some guys, we have no worry about that. We have the skills needed to date well into old age, and the savvy to know when is the time to settle down.

        Yes, there are women who lack the skills, looks, and savy, who get fucked over as they miss their sell past date.

        But there are also women who guage it precisely, and get maximum dick out their adventure in life.

        Like


      • Women are also always arguying [sic] that men had better marry, otherwise they’ll die old and alone.

        Funny. Considering an old hissing harpy that is often a result of a lifelong marriage, to die alone in tranquility when old may be a blessing. A better option is to have a young giggling sirene at your side when you time comes.

        Like


      • Lots of women from my cohort express these same sentiments. Why just the other afternoon I observed them all hunched over a table at a party, clucking self-assuredly about their latest boytoys, oblivious to the sad desperation and encroaching wrinkles that marked them all as used up, in body, mind, and spirit. Oblivious to the fact that none of the guys at the party gave them an ounce of attention.

        The thing that sticks in my craw about your attitude is that, rather than the tough, go-it-alone, renegade independence you’d like to impart, it is actually all reliant on male surplus and generosity.

        I guarantee that every dollar you “earn” and/or spend, is only made possible by the direct brow sweat of a man somewhere. Whether it is in surplus taxes and government jobs, or consumer-driven jobs made possible by male earnings….or just enjoying the fruits of growing up with a wealthy daddy. Women just don’t create much wealth on their own, and therefore the wealth they have is largely ill-deserved.

        Put simply: in a sane, fair society, women would NEED men to get by, and would do whatever necessary to express their gratitude for the care they are given.

        Like


      • Crumpettess, many here have sand in their regarding the battle of the sexes.

        Unfairness still bothers them.

        Yes, it happens every fucking day that women feast on all the dicks they can eat, and then only when they so deign, score an excellent mate to settle down with.

        Men see that this is unfair, and so argue that it does not happen.

        It happens.

        Women who are hot and hold onto their looks well and who are very socially cunning can get away with murder. They can, they do, they will.

        Like


      • stop talking, slut. you’re turning me off

        Like


      • Ditto, beta moron.

        Like


      • Tell that 43 year old successful guy to enjoy the sloppy seconds of a ghetto thug. Bitch!

        Like


      • Great thought, loser. Thanks for your imbecilic two bits. Keep ’em comin’.

        Like


      • whiskey wrote:

        Only a few men can be leaders, by their very nature. … To put it in female terms that’s like every guy wanting every woman to be say, Scarlett Johanssen or Katy Perry. It is unrealistic.

        Only a few men can be the Alpha you desire, just as only a few women can be as naturally endowed and thin and YOUNG as Perry or Johannssen….

        There isn’t an alpha quota. They are rare in this day and age, sure, but that is rarity by design, an artificial limit on manliness brought about by deliberate feminist cultural policy.

        Nor are “only a few women as naturally endowed” as Katy Perry or Scarlett Johansson. There are throngs of them clustered on college campuses and urban centers — maybe not with all of your idiosyncratic preferences, but certainly the equal (and better) to those two tartlets you randomly cite.

        What’s more, their beauty is celebrated and encouraged by the Cosmo Industrial Complex while manliness is actively ridiculed and demonized. The result? Highly concentrated oversupply of young hot & available girls, an arms race escalated to mutually assured destruction levels. Regular commenter A.B. Dada has articulated these facts-on-the-ground better than anyone. Returning to my semi-urban college campus every year, I’d marvel at how many shit-hot freshmen kept flowing into our overstocked pond. Swing your dick around at the library and you knock over a dozen 8s and 9s. It would take weeks getting used to when we got back from summer break.

        It is true about leadership: there can only be one king, one sovereign. On the relative scale there will always be superiors and inferiors. And yet the existence of Bill Gates’s $56B doesn’t make it sucky to be Warren Buffett at $50B — much less being officially classified as “poor” in a country as rich as the U.S. http://tinyurl.com/3b9okou .

        The ranks of nobility are not closed off, and there is no natural barrier to entry in a club based on self-improvement. By the law of sheer statistical improbability not every man will exhibit alpha traits, but there is so much room for improvement that preemptively declaring it a locked-in rarity only further accommodates the present beta-bloated environment.

        Recovering betas rev up the asshole quotient because that’s the quickest path to radical reform — like some kind of capillary-bursting penis pump bought from a Russian sexsite. And, true, docility and niceness are indeed the distinguishing characteristics of the chump. But that’s where superficial students of game blow a huge opportunity: the magnetic pull of generosity. If your beneficence comes from your fear and servility, you’re not fooling anyone. If it comes from a position of strength, that’s called magnanimity. You want to be an asshole from time to time to prove it is well within your power, but the greater trick is to never need proving. I don’t do beneficial deeds for someone to bribe them into disregarding my weakness; I give charity out of largesse.

        So all these half-tutored gameboy halfwits who howl that every mitzvah is the mark of a “white knight” or “mangina” just don’t have a good grasp of the dynamic above their pay grade. When one must hoard his personal resources out of scarcity, every act of generosity will seem like foolishness. In other words, equating self-giving with foolishness is a sign that you’ve never been rich enough to know the feeling of spontaneous and unconstrained donation. This brand of complaint is a sign of the miserly critic’s true station. Paupers can’t conceive of noblesse oblige.

        Like


      • Amen and Amen. Extraordinarily, well said. I have often wondered why so many extoll the virtues of asshole game (Yes, it’s great if all you want are ONS’s) over what many of the women here see as a ‘true” alpha. I mean, I understood to a certain extent but would never have been able to verbalize it so well.

        Gentlemen of CH, especially those not exclusively seeking ONS, read Kind A whenever possible. Asshole game will get you laid. Alpha’s like King A will help you find and aid you in teaching the woman of your dreams.

        Like


      • We don’t have a “woman of (our) dreams”. Most guys here discovered female psychology and went through the five stages of grief:

        Denial: Women are all wonderful.
        Anger: Women are all bitches.
        Bargaining: Women are all bitches except for that one special girl I just need to find.
        Depression: Women are all bitches, so I’m not going to bother with them.
        Acceptance: Women are women, I might as well just game them into sex without developing an emotional attachment while my prostate still works.

        King A is a great writer. He may be a natural alpha, or a total religeous keyboard jockey. Either way, he has little in common with those who fully agree with Heartiste.

        Like


      • Point taken Matador, though I still hold out hope for those that took the red pill to find happiness. I realize that that happiness will most likely come from gaming women into sex, but I do hold out hope that a few will find good women and be able to train (man that’s a hard word to type, but it is very true) them into being good wives for them. The few women I know that are in this type of marriage have the happiest ones and the ones that actually last. Feminists hate us, but we are happy. I think that is what pisses them off the most.

        Like


      • I realize that that happiness will most likely come from gaming women into sex, but I do hold out hope that a few will find good women and be able to train (man that’s a hard word to type, but it is very true) them into being good wives for them.

        When a woman can write the above and say this:
        “I have been graced by the training my husband gave me”;
        and not find said training a hard fact to accept;
        then said woman is a good girl, and if enough men take the red pill, she will find such a husband easily.

        Like


      • on September 9, 2011 at 3:12 am old guy, lower case

        True.

        I’ve been rich and poor, hard to grasp one state of being from the other.

        Like


      • I’m not asking for a “big shot” though. Just someone who will be the leader or the assertive one between the two of us. That’s it. He doesn’t have to be the alpha in the bunch. I don’t want someone who “thugs it up” or someone who “pumps up”.

        Besides, I’m someone who the first thing I notice is appearance anyway. Whether he’s alpha or beta comes after.

        Like


  25. The term “alpha” is morally neutral. Saints and sinners, great leaders and lounge lizards: you find alphas (and betas) among them all.

    An alpha is a man with traits that are attractive to women. Game is about normal folks learning to mimicking these traits. That’s all there is to it.

    Like


    • Game is about normal folks learning to mimicking these [alpha] traits.

      I think this notion is, to large degree, false. I can draw on the status of my extended family members in pre-feminist era. The majority of them were naturals, about 15% were weakling betas and about 0.4% were omegas.

      It may be more accurate to say that the Game is not about mimicking, but deprogramming the layers of conditioning that renders normal men into quivering wussy creatures.

      I can also draw from my own experience. I was a natural, but when I first married, I started accepting all sort of inane crap based on notions generated by people with a little connection with reality.–the social programmers. They remind me of the “health” industry in their modus operandi–their “advice’ is designed in a way that you have to come for more to support theirlivelihood, in other words, their recommendation is that if you find yourself in a hole, continue digging.

      Like


      • I don’t know. What you outlined is the optimal way of learning to deal with women: Learning about all the pretty lies is the first step to recovery.

        But a lot of folks, who might be a bit socially awkward etc. It can be quicker to fake it until they make it. Then, their confidence raised, they can go down the proper route of learning to be a man

        Like


  26. And prostitution is a useful safety valve for society. It was only when women got the vote that it was criminalised.

    Like


  27. Just ran across this gem: “Dating After Divorce in a City of Sluts”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/juliet-jeske/dating-after-divorce-in-a_b_944133.html?ref=mostpopular

    “I have learned I can’t be too direct, eager, needy, desperate, clingy, emotional, commitment pressuring, or baby daddy seeking. I also have to avoid looking cold, aloof, bitchy, mean, shallow, negative or distant. … Then there are the crazy games of when to text, email or call, when to answer immediately, when to act interested or disinterested and when to completely blow them off.

    I am not slutty enough for New York. … I might start talking to a guy only to see him leave with a woman who has made it perfectly clear that a hook-up is about to happen. A situation I like to call survival of the sluttiest.

    The guy will call or text when he wants to hookup but that is about it.
    You are supposed to be on call to wait for the opportunity to see him
    Don’t reveal too much about yourself, but listen to him complain
    Don’t expect commitment, or exclusivity
    Don’t expect any emotional bonding
    Don’t expect much effort on his part to impress you
    Don’t expect him to make you feel important in his life

    … What I find frustrating is that if you really want to get to know a guy first before having sex with him, it seems like there is no end to the women who will jump into bed with them. … I know there a plenty of men and women who are frustrated like myself out there. But what are we supposed to do when everyone around us seems to be whoring it up?”

    Payback. It’s a bitch ™.

    Like


    • Agreed, that’s a gem!

      Once women start making choices in the realm of sex and relationships, its downhill from there. Women have only two stark futures ahead if they want to avoid a bleak life: (1) give up control over their sexual destiny to their fathers who will find mates for them or (2) actively choose sex with men they find sexually unattractive. I cannot see any other ways, but am open to learning from others here (of course, our host, like many others on this blog, believes that the future is bleak, I, however, am trying to see a brighter path ahead).

      Like


    • She seems oblivious to the obvious solution to her supply and demand problem.

      She’s describing girls being treated as a commodity in a mens buyers market. If she wants to be treated as a commodity in a sellers market, she has to stop seeking men that all the women are seeking.

      This is glaringly obvious.

      Like


      • Xsplat, her hypergamy dictates that she hasta marry up. What would them girl friends say if she didn’t? What would really make a sense is not her primary criterion, not even a tenth.

        In the article, she dryly states that she left her husband. Let’s see…. “he is not the man I married after I tried to change him and succeeded” and/or “da chemistry, where’s that gone?”. Possibly the chemistry is represented symbolically by small strips of hemp based paper with black and green print. She’s got her own supply which got somewhat larger than his as time went by. With the increase of her supply, his dick seemed to grow smaller.

        Now she’s thirtysomething, I reckon, still thinking that she has the same “pull” like when she was 22. Her hamster is telling her so, so it must be true. Funny girl.

        Of course she’s a liberal feminist. She surprisingly decries the slut culture, which was the point of feminism past mid 60’s. An absolute control of reproductive rights. Return to the misty times of matrilineal grassy huts, when men leisurely serviced the wenches, having no stake in the outcome and thus having no motivation to exert any more effort than necessary, for 2 hundred thousand years.

        But no, she wants the partiarchal cake and eat too.

        Like


      • Westerners have an ambivalent relation with how money affects relationship. On the one hand men get it that women are attracted to money. On the other they deny that women are attracted to money, and refuse to use money as a real, honest, viable attraction trigger.

        And western men have a huge blind spot when it comes to using money as a means of maintaining attraction. As a means of having hand over a woman.

        Men stubbornly refuse to grok how money and love is intertwined in femalians. (Credit Cadnerd for “femalians”)

        Like


      • For instance you get the phrase “she only loves you for your money”.

        You don’t hear instead “One of her reasons for being so strongly attracted to you is your wealth and power”.

        Like


      • @xsplat:
        She seems oblivious to the obvious solution to her supply and demand problem.
        @Cadnerd:
        But no, she wants the partiarchal cake and eat too.

        Future projection and planning does not seem to be a female strength, so we men are going to have to chart the way forward without any female – or femalian – help. Many of the female posters here seem to be well-intentioned, only a few are real bitches, but despite their good intentions they are as far as ever from understanding what is glaringly obvious to most men.

        Like


      • Are we really supposed to get it or are we supposed to just help men on their way? I mean, I know this doesn’t happen that much any more, but traditionally, is that not our jobs? To stand behind you and support you so you are better capable of doing those things? This seems to cater to our strengths.

        There is some proof to this as well, though I’ll leave it to someone else to Google for now. There are studies that show when a man has a wife that stays home and supports him fully in that capacity that he tends to be far more successful that his counterparts.

        Like


  28. Ha! I would love to see this law implemented here. Though I gotta think that the first man who tried to sue for this would be shot down and it would only work for women in the court system. Either that, or wives would purposely make themselves fatter. Nonetheless, it would be welcome here in the states.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/8741895/Frenchman-ordered-to-pay-wife-damages-for-lack-of-sex.html

    Like


    • Sting, yea, sure, if the law is implemented equally, then I’m all for it. It would be tilted heavily in men’s favor. But, it’s unlikely. The feminazi lawyers would come up with some wrench conceit, like marital rape. So, maybe not a good idea.
      A lack of marital sexual activity in the french legal system is a justifiable cause for a divorce. The compensation is a novelty, but I presume their legal system would accept the same if filled by a man.

      Like


      • I agree. There is no way any woman lawyer would allow a law like that in the states. I can hear the hysteria now. It makes me sick. (Then, said woman lawyer would go home and cry to her cats that there are no good men out there. Boo effing hoo.)

        Like


  29. One relationship book that actually gets this right (and too bad I found it AFTER the divorce) is “Love and Respect” by Dr. Emerson Eggerichs. If you’re in (or desire) an LTR buy this book and read it now. His thesis: men crave respect (and admiration!) from their woman; woman crave love from their man. When the man feels a lack of respect, he stops giving love; when a women stops feeling loved, she nags instead of respects. Eggeriches calls it the “crazy cycle” and believes it causes more problems in LTRs than anything else, and that when BOTH parties recognize and address it LTRs become far stronger. But it does take both.

    Of course the Apostle Paul nailed this two thousand years ago when he commanded wives to respect their husbands and husbands to love their wives – a verse I’d heard all my life and didn’t really understand until a few years ago when Eggeriches beat me over the head with it.

    [Heartiste: True, but those are second order effects. First, a man wants to be turned on by his woman, and a woman wants to know she’s with an alpha male. To clarify, try this thought experiment:
    A man’s wife gains 100 pounds. But she respects him more than she ever did and never nags him. She idolizes him. Will he
    a. love her more, or
    b. love her less?
    A woman starts dating a man who gradually acts more beta over the course of the few months they are together. But he loves her and shows it. Will she
    a. love him more, or
    b. love him less?

    Eyes on the prize, people.]

    Like


    • Response to Heartiste:

      On your first example, the woman gaining 100 pounds has disqualified herself as a sexual being. Regardless her marital or relationship “status” she will not be capable of being in a romantic relationship.

      On the second example, its much less certain. Men act more beta the longer they are with the same woman. Its natural. When a guy goes overboard, he’s toast. But “gradually” acting more beta is not a bad thing and women will actually start to demand it the more time they invest in a guy.

      Like


    • Hartiste wrote:

      A man’s wife gains 100 pounds. But she respects him more than she ever did and never nags him. She idolizes him. … A woman starts dating a man who gradually acts more beta over the course of the few months they are together. But he loves her and shows it.

      A wife who gains 100 pounds by definition does not respect her husband.

      A man who slips into beta servility by definition does not love his wife.

      Respect is not signified by a simple lack of nagging. Respect exudes out of every pore of her being to the point of complete transformation of identity, beginning with the surname change.

      Love is not a feeling or a commitment or a tingly romance novel. It isn’t the doting of a uxorious dope, nor is the the prerogative of pussies. Love is an act of the will. I see Southern Man’s St. Paul and raise him Aquinas and Aristotle. Love is “willing the good of another as other.” (Summa II.I.26.4 and Rhetoric II.4)

      To slide into sloth and lethargy, and to present herself as “wife” +100 lbs. to a great man, is a supreme act of disrespect and grounds for breach of covenant. Likewise, to cash in one’s man-card at the altar and cede authority as “husband” to a woman who 1) is not as naturally capable of decisiveness and 2) did not sign onto a deal wherein she must play both roles (e.g., Cindy in Blue Valentine) is not “willing the good of another.”

      The hellish arrangement of feminist matrimony is not marriage by any reasonable definition. She in her fatness has transformed herself into an unconcealable, walking reproach to his reputation, contempt for him personified in the flesh (upon flesh upon flesh). And he in his betatude has forced her into a unique kind of psychological torture wherein her inadequate nature must compensate for his deficiencies, and she can only compensate through an act of her will, which all by itself does violence against her nature.

      Betadom is so far below love that it comprises a kind of double-hatred for his wife, first in dereliction born of a “man’s” laziness/cowardice, and second in requiring the disfigurement of her femininity:

      Come, you spirits
      That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
      And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
      Of direst cruelty! make thick my blood;
      … Come to my woman’s breasts,
      And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers,
      Wherever in your sightless substances
      You wait on nature’s mischief! Come, thick night,
      And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
      That my keen knife see not the wound it makes….

      — Lady Macbeth, the protofeminist

      Like


  30. this alpha = good beta = bad meme has to die

    we are not in the land of morality

    repeat as long as it takes:

    alpha produces female attraction
    beta produces female comfort
    in women, attraction and comfort are AT WAR
    which creates an addled peacenik hamster

    what is so complicated here that males over 18 fail to understand?

    Like


    • How are comfort and attraction at war?
      And if women are so comfortable with their beta husbands why do they divorce them?

      Like


      • You just answered your own question. They leave because there is no attraction. And, if the find the uber alpha asshole, if they are strong enough, the will leave him because there is no comfort. There has to be both, but in a (somewhat) perfect balance for a LTR. If there is no balance, she is not happy.

        Like


      • I see now. Perhaps security is a better word than comfort? Security in his commitment, ability to provide, exclusivity etc. Comfort implies contentment, which is not always there in beta relationships. Not to nitpick.

        Like


  31. Been re reading some of the articles within the archives of the last month, great subjects and once again fantastic writing on these controversial topics within this saga of the battle of the sexes. Crux of the matter is as stated: men want respect and women want love as noted by Southern Man. Awoman’s love usually expresses itself within the actualization/attainability of emotional connection/physical protection/financial support,and of course good wood. What we as men have to remember besides having an upbeat personality,intelligence, taking care of one’s health/exercise,witticisim, fashion,ect,ect is that women have to respect the men that they love/get penile pumped by on a continous basis. A woman can not be in love with you and still respect you or admire something about you, but she CAN NOT love you unless she respect you first,that is the core of attraction. I’d rather be HATED and RESPECTED/FEARED than liked or admired by many. Once a woman knows you can not only handel her bullshit, but most unexpected situations in life, she WILL WORSHIP the GROUND YOU WALK ON. This is how a woman show her love for her man: UNWAVERING LOYALTY/DEVOTION no matter what situation you are in. Truthfully that’s what all men want from their woman any way,because men only protect what’s theirs: Wife,Children,Property. Make a woman respect you and the rest will follow.

    Like


  32. Perhaps. The main point is that balance between the alpha and the beta. If you are searching for a LTR/marriage the two are essential. And if you end up being more of one than the other, that is when difficulty ensues.

    Like


  33. There is no such thing as a an HB10 that you haven’t slept with. That last point to half point is ALWAYS earned on performance. I’m sure you wouldn’t buy a Maseratti if it had a VW engine under the hood.

    While I will agree that a woman’s hotness is always going to be the primary factor in men’s sexual selection, I think it’s a grave mistake not to consider a woman’s sexual availability. Monogamy with a self-conscious HB 9 who’s sexual adventurism ends at the missionary position is a special kind of hell.

    Like


  34. Let’s not forget what so many dumped hottie actresses have found out the hard way: Looking sexy isn’t being sexy. To be it, you have to have a healthy libido and aim it at your partner (phrasing stolen shamelessly from an old friend). Without it, you’re just a long-term cocktease. Or short-term if the man has any options.

    Like


  35. No, women cannot control their age. They can however control relative age. Now while this age spread diminishes with time as a proportion, consider the advantage a woman has if her husband is 40 and she is 30. A 30 year old woman can look pretty darn good to any man let alone a man at 40. She can also look tempting enough at 40 to a 50 year old. Now once she reaches 50, perhaps things will finally run its course, but by then he is 60 and a lot of men are just not that eager to get back in the game at that age especially when she was loyal all that time.

    Co-ed schools are creating the expectation that men and women should mate at roughly the same age. This creates an even worse skew of men women want to date that would normally occur. One hears women complain all the time how immature men are, but it seems as if no one actually listens collectively and realizes we are putting the wrong people together in close proximity.

    Dumped at 40 or widowed at 65?

    Monogamy cannot work without young woman, older man dynamic.

    Like


    • Monogamy cannot work without young woman, older man dynamic.

      That’s an interesting observation, supported to some extent by the fact that during the past couple of thousand years, the wife has usually been several years younger than the husband. However, I would be interested to know if there are any here with statistics on how much the difference has been. If it is close to 5 years then @chi-town’s conjecture may not be correct. If it is closer to 10 years or more, than @chi-town is on the money. Anyone?

      Like


      • In many societies I believe the average was around 6 years. That is a very large gap in societies with life expectancies under 40. 5 years is still an older man, younger woman dynamic. However you have to adjust for our long life spans. We are going in the wrong direction both ways with a 2 year average and long life expectancy. Something has to give, and that is fewer marriages, more divorce and more hooking up.

        Now some bigger age gaps do appear in history when there was a high male gender ratio or polygamy. Out west men married later and women younger due to this demand.

        Like


      • @chi-town:
        Good point. Since women now live waaaay beyond their fertile years, a compensatory increase in the age gap is natural. It also means harder times for betas and more women-hogging by alphas. The rise of the hook-up culture is a logical consequence.

        Now I dont know if their is a causation here, but it does make sense and hold together.

        Like


  36. OT: Is there a compilation of the maxims of the Chateau somewhere?

    Like


  37. on September 8, 2011 at 12:32 am fat feminist troll

    Here’s a serious question:

    Let’s say you had a billion dollars to spend and could spend it on one, but not both of these things:

    1) To have Mystery (or whatever guru if you don’t like MM) be your personal coach for a year and supply you with a hidden camera and an earpiece and give you direct feedback and prompting in every single interaction with a woman you have that year

    2) Liposuction

    Which would seriously make you better with women?

    My money is on #2.

    [Heartiste: That’s money flushed down the bowl.
    ps liposuction is something women get done to improve their chances with men.]

    Like


  38. ^ Feminist psychological projection exhibit 149535525.. oh fuck it.

    Like


  39. […] and many MRAs alike.  Denied or not, it remains the truth.  Heartiste touched on this in a recent addition to the collection of Maxims: Maxim #1(a)(2): Men want to be turned on by their women. Women want to be proud of their […]

    Like