Before And After

A. Before I learned game

[In bed with a woman after sex, starting to fall asleep]

Me: *yawn*
Her: Hey, I feel weird. I think I’m going to go.
Me: Huh? What do you mean “weird”?
Her: It’s not a good or bad feeling. Just… I don’t know. [She slides out of bed and patters to the den]
Me: [Calling from bed] You OK? So, like, what’s wrong?
Her: [Putting on her clothes and digging through her purse] Yeah, I’m fine, I’m just gonna go.
Me: [Hopping out of bed, putting on my boxers, and joining her in the den] “You can stay the night, you know. You want a drink or something? You don’t have to rush out.”
Her: No, really, but thanks. [She walks to the door and fumbles with the locks] See you, bye.
Me: [Standing in my boxers and watching her leave] Um, sure. All right, see you then.

B. After I learned game

[In bed with a woman after sex, starting to fall asleep]

Me: *yawn*
Her: Hey, I feel a little weird.
Me: [Turning my head to look at her with one eye] You don’t say.
Her: Yeah, I think I’m going to go.
Me: OK.
Her: I mean, it’s not a bad feeling, I just feel kind of weird, you know?
Me: Sure, no prob.
Her: [Sliding out of bed to dress herself in the den and rummage through her purse]
Me: [Fluffing my pillow]
Her: [Some time passes. She is unlocking the door] So, um, I’m gonna take off. See ya.
Me: ZZZZZzzzzzz…
Her: You asleep?
Me: [Lifting my head off the pillow] Oh… yeah. You know how to get home from here?
Her: Yes, thanks, I do.
Me: Cool, take care. Hey, give the door a good pull when you close it.

I get a text message from her the following morning:
‘Sorry for my bad mood last night. Want to meet up later this week?’

******

If you thought A was the superior reaction, you get *NO GIRLS*. You lose! Good day, beta!

PS: Give or take a few minor word substitutions for illustrative purposes, I experienced these two nearly identical conversations and post-coital scenarios from two different girls three years apart, pre- and post-game. Women really are all the same underneath the hood. It’s a miracle of triumphal hedonism over cynicism that I unreservedly love them so deeply, madly, truly.





Comments


  1. Indifference is ridiculously effective. The game has made me so much happier, and better. At the start you do it for the effect, but soon you become it. ie. GENUINELY preferring to sleep than be bothered with her rather than doing it because it will make her like you more.

    Like


  2. Nothing like a good nights sleep after a good workout

    Like


  3. I’m still finding it difficult to break the beta ways

    Like


  4. on September 23, 2008 at 3:38 pm Usually Lurking

    Who cares how you got her to come back, how did you get her to leave?

    Like


  5. At 23, I stumbled across Game when I said something “insensitive” to a girl I just made love to, and she got upset, and threatened to leave. I just looked at her with calm indifference. She moved toward the door. I just sat there. She moved closer to it. Me, nothing.

    She then burst out crying, and ran back into my arms, saying that she can’t leave me.

    Three more times, sweet love, that evening.

    What’s interesting, is that those were the early ’90s. No internet. No inkling that such thing as Game existed. All that happened is that my temporarily cocky mood overruled my internalized “be a nice guy and treat girls with respect” lessons.

    Until I figured things out almost ten years later, that moment always gave a bit of cognitive dissonance, every time I flamed out with a girl, despite my being so nice her.

    Like


  6. I was in bed with this girl & she asked if she should get breast implants & instead of saying “youve got fake hair might as well have fake tit’s” My beta side came out & I babbled shit & guess what I didn’t get a 2nd showing

    Like


  7. Women really are all the same underneath the hood.

    Was that an intentional clitoral pun or am I just reading too much into this? 😀

    Like


  8. You don’t have to be exposed to a PUA school to learn game. I am preferring the term “swagger” nowadys for those of us who learned it old school. Indifference to women comes from experiences very early in life, when you realize any one girl is replaceable and your eye is on the next one. For some that experience comes a little later in life but I suppose it doesn’t matter how you learn it as long as you apply it.

    Like


  9. Scenario A will always play out for me because it’s just simply my nature. If it ends up driving women away, then it’s probably better for the long-term, especially if she finds out about the porn collection or railfanning…

    Like


  10. I get a text message from her the following morning:
    ‘Sorry for my bad mood last night. Want to meet up later this week?’

    Haha. Anecdote time:

    Earlier this year I was “dating” this cute, sweet (seemingly), schoolteacher type. I actually did like her, but she was just a hair’s breadth away from making it over my bar for wanting a relationship. (I’m sure you gentlemen know what I’m talking about). Because of this, and my own compassion *for her*, I never did any sweet, lovey-dovey type things with her that might lead her on. It was just fun times and sex. And the sex we did have reflected my attitude.

    A few weeks in, we went out clubbing. As we’re chillin’ at the bar, she starts in out of the blue about our “lovemaking” and how that, as much as she enjoys it, she would like me to be more “romantic” and tender, i.e., boyfriendish. I saw it coming from a mile away. I knew I had to head this one off at the pass. With a heavy heart, I sympathetically gave her The Speech (again, I’m sure some of you know what I’m talking about): “Baby, I like you a lot too. But I’m just not at the place in my life where I’m looking for something serious. I think things are great as they are. Do we really need to push things?” I had been staring off at the shiny lights as I delivered my monologue, but when I turned to face her — OH CRAP, had the waterworks been turned on big time. Then came the hitting. To my shoulders. My chest. Then the accusations of “asshole.” I tried to hug her to comfort her, but she ran off to sit with a group of five guys around a table and started flirting with them. But Tupac knows the score. Tupac knows what time it is. I just kept still, finishing my drink (didn’t even have to use the “flirt-with-other-girls” gambit as I knew I had her where I wanted her).

    When I was ready to leave, I couldn’t find her. I spent the next half-hour tearing that club apart (even went into the ladies room) to no avail. I had been texting her the whole time, recieving the most garbled, incoherent nonsense in turn (she had been drinking a fair bit at this point). Finally, my patience at an end, I texted her: “Look, this isn’t funny anymore. Either tell me where you are or you can find another ride home. I’m leaving.” As I was walking back to my car I got a call from my boy who runs a hipster hole-in-the-wall a few blocks away (we had been there earlier that night). He tells me that I can find my girl outside of his place. He couldn’t say more at that time because he was busy. When I get there, the poor thing was half-sprawled on the curb, completely BOMBED. I picked her up and took her home to sleep it off.

    In the morning she was begging me to put it in her ass.

    I come to find out later she had walked into that hipster joint and starting yelling at random patrons AND staff (including my friend), “Asshole! Faggot! You’re all ASSHOLES! FAGGOTS!” My friend had to have her “removed” from the club for causing a disturbance!

    Now here’s the thing. Before I had found out that part of the story, I still had some affection for her — she was cute, mostly sweet, a professional (schoolteacher) and was potential wife-material. I just wasn’t gung-ho (yet). So I wasn’t averse to keeping her around, even after she tried to play me at the club. Tupac is compassionate, he knows how hard it can be for girls. But the flipping out part? Man, I’m aware of the dangers of keeping things casual with a girl for a while only to break things off later, but THIS chick had me worried I would come home to find my cat boiling in a pot a la Fatal Attraction.

    So I consulted my friends. Their answers split evenly along gender lines. The women (even those in my family) played it down like “Oh, she was drinking, it doesn’t mean anything. Let it go.” All my guy friends were like, “Kick that crazy bitch to the curb!”

    I’m curious what the peanut gallery here thinks.

    Like


  11. The whole “her” side of the conversation…jesus. I could never switch teams in any serious capacity. EVER.

    @Tupac – you can’t get rid of that crazy bitch fast enough. What if you hadn’t found her? Where would her ass have been then?

    Like


  12. @ 12 Tupac Chopra

    The “crazy bitch” alarm has been set off, so I would refrain from having any sex with her. She’s the type of crazy woman who can melt condoms in her vagina and saddle you with child support payments for life.

    Like


  13. then what else is there beyond sexual conquest?

    love.

    How do you define that for yourself? What kind of relationship would that be?

    Like


  14. “You don’t have to be exposed to a PUA school to learn game. I am preferring the term “swagger” nowadys for those of us who learned it old school. Indifference to women comes from experiences very early in life, when you realize any one girl is replaceable and your eye is on the next one.”

    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    – MPM

    Like


  15. on September 23, 2008 at 4:57 pm anonymous_coward

    Indifference only works if she’s attracted to you to begin with. That’s obviously not a problem in this scenario, but it does limit the usefulness of indifference in general situations.

    Like


  16. 19 – Wrong. Go out and take a seat at the bar. Be relaxed, social and fun but ignore the hot girl next to you. See what happens.

    Like


  17. I’m curious what the peanut gallery here thinks.

    She is insane, and you may have triggered/aggravated her condition, you scoundrel.

    When you said she was not your girlfriend, a normal reaction would be to cuss you out, maybe throw a drink at you, block your number and avoid your kind for life.

    People who take things like that out on their body by drinking to excess are full of self hate, and that is likely why she let you mistreat her in the first place. Directing the anger ineffectively and then going home with you again means serious lack of self respect and self control. This is a girl who clearly needs a shrink, not a drink.

    Sleeping with someone like that is about as ethical as sleeping with a 16yo or a girl with Down, it is taking advantage of someone very vulnerable, only human vultures do that. Especially after a scene like that, you have sex with her?

    Like


  18. Tupac – I think if she could have flown under your radar for just a while longer she would have been in like Flynn, because you were getting used to her – but she fucked it up. She showed disloyalty so that’s it.

    Like


  19. on September 23, 2008 at 5:07 pm anonymous_coward

    20 – Unless you’re the center of attention in the bar, you are unlikely to register on her radar (too busy beating off other guys, don’cha know.) Even the subtlest PUAs recognize that approaching comes first.

    Like


  20. 24 Raw: harsh response, but spot-on. The moneyshot:

    This is not about you really selflessly caring about the feelings of women, this is about you trying to discredit one mating strategy with your own by trying to sell it as a choice between evil and good rather than a choice between strength, independence and leadership versus wishy-washiness and ass-kissing.

    Like


  21. 23 – Wrong again. Revealing, though, that this comes from someone with that nick.

    Like


  22. on September 23, 2008 at 5:28 pm anonymous_coward

    26 – Ironic, more like, since I’m advocating approach rather than sit-and-wait. My position is that indifference is powerful, sure, but it ain’t all-powerful and has to be applied in the proper situation. Would you care to explain yours in greater detail?

    Like


  23. I like comments #7 and #21. #7 is good because many women do need men to be stable (but not brutal) while they figure out what they want. As for #21, while I don’t think that Tupac aggravated the young woman’s condition – she’s clearly a mess, poor thing – I think it would be both imprudent AND unethical to see her or sleep with her again. “Imprudent” = letting yourself in for a great deal of trouble and fuss.

    Clio

    Like


  24. Uh, no, not quite. T. paints a false dichotomy. In reality, both affected concern and affected lack of concern are, well, affected, both pander to whims and weakness, and both are therefore two sides of the same coin.

    The true choice is between playing to people’s weaknesses and playing to their strengths.

    Like


  25. T, goddamn. That was epic.

    Like


  26. And with one post…

    T has destroyed most of the bullshit that goes on in these threads.

    –Dracian

    Like


  27. 27 – Point taken. What I meant was that if your attitude is of an anonymous coward while at a bar, even approaching won’t make up for that.

    What I outlined originally was not to be a wallflower. Neither was it to be the center of attention (you can and should do that at a house party, but it is close to impossible at a large bar or club).

    But showing zero interest in the girls who are there to get male attention works – as long as you have a certain degree of handsomeness, the right body language and social proof yourself by being social while remaining approachable.

    Sooner or later, she will squeeze herself next to you at the bar to order a drink. If you still don’t approach despite following the the above advice, she might ask you what to get or something even stupider than that.

    I am far too lazy to run around in a club, approaching and entertaining girls who believe that I should be the one chasing after them. The above technique works every time I go out. You avoid being reactive by using eye contact. Remove the bar stool next to you, which will ensure that you are sitting next to the only spot that is convenient to order a drink. Try it. It’s fun.

    Like


  28. on September 23, 2008 at 5:52 pm Usually Lurking

    The true choice is between playing to people’s weaknesses and playing to their strengths.

    We are so fortunate to have you as our one true guiding light.

    Finally, I have found the true choice.

    Like


  29. David, if you’re 24, chances are you haven’t had your testosterone surge yet, which can explain your “nice guy” manner and arguments. I saw your photo, and you do look kind of young.

    Guys change over the course of their 20s to early 30s, and chances are you’ll toss aside your “nice guy” persona. I kind of saw this happen to another frequent commentator, who “evolved” from a self-deprecating, slightly whiney nerd, to a mad-raging buffoon, in an apparent act of major overcompensation.

    Hopefully, your asshole phase, if it comes, will be brief and less obnoxious, as you are enjoyable to read.

    Like


  30. You are overstating the impact of the exit.

    Whether or not a woman contacts you, or responds to your contacts, is a function of the hundreds of little impressions made during your time together. It was the gestalt, nor the particulars of the exit.

    Like


  31. Scenario one is passive. Scenario two is passive aggressive. When you grow up, rossy, let us know what the right way is.

    Like


  32. UL, you have found nothing – that would require pulling your head out of your ass. But, hey, a guy’s GOT to get some action SOMEHOW.

    Like


  33. Sara, exactly.

    But pandering to infantile impulses (one’s own and other people’s) is the name of THIS particular game.

    Like


  34. on September 23, 2008 at 6:21 pm Usually Lurking

    Gordan, don’t short-change yourself. Even with my head in my ass I can see that you have provided the absolute truth. I am a believer.

    Like


  35. “Indifference only works if she’s attracted to you to begin with.

    Unless you’re the center of attention in the bar, you are unlikely to register on her radar (too busy beating off other guys, don’cha know.) Even the subtlest PUAs recognize that approaching comes first.”

    I agree with Czar that both the above statements are incorrect.

    Of course, approaching girls is a necessary part of Game.

    Getting girls to approach you is a higher level of The Game.

    – MPM

    Like


  36. I saw your photo, and you do look kind of young.

    Per the EXIF on the original photo on my hard drive, I was 22 when that last photo I linked to was put up. I would say that I’ve aged somewhat, and according to my family, I’m maybe an inch or so taller. In about a month or so, I’ll be 25, and thus legally washed up…

    Guys change over the course of their 20s to early 30s, and chances are you’ll toss aside your “nice guy” persona.

    I have always been a nice guy, and I’ve always seen myself from this perspective, so I’d prefer to stay this way than to become some jerk. Sure, it doesn’t win sex, but it’s good at not scaring away people, and my niece and nephews love it. 🙂

    you are enjoyable to read

    I assure you that there are better people who are worth your limited time…

    Like


  37. on September 23, 2008 at 6:27 pm Hadron Collider

    After a hot date I’ll cool off with liquid helium

    Like


  38. re # 12.
    Tupac reveals himself as a drama queen. She sounds perfect for you.

    Like


  39. Pupac —

    My take on your school teacher semi hottie is that she’s semi-crazy. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, depending. Depends on what you want. She’s got a lot of anti boredom built in, if you tap it, which doesn’t look hard.

    First let me say I’m assuming you’re sure, for good reason sure, that she didn’t go and get herself laid during her little ‘journey off the deep end for not such a huge reason’ that night, when you didn’t cave in loving embrace to her watery plees for more emotional committment. If she did, that would change everything. If she came damn close and would have but for circumstances, that also changes everything pretty much the same way. In those cases, waste no time losing her. It’s modo easy for a girl who goes slut upon upset to get laid every damn time she does or feels like it. If married you also get to punish her by bringing her divorce theft down upon YOUR head in these uber Feminist United States. Great disincentive and discipline, right? Compare the reverse. ‘Nuff said. Run, don’t walk.

    But I’ll now assume you are sure she didn’t go slut or nearly slut on you that night.

    Life with her would be a never ending game (in addition to her needing lots a love), but it sounds like a pretty easily maintained game to me.

    The main problems I would think are that she isn’t outstanding enough, looks wise. For me she doesn’t sound outstanding enough IQ or interest wise either, but that’s me.

    She could be long term fun though. She sounds to me like a girl that really wants to be taken emotionally in hand — who needs that in fact.

    Put her in a hotter body and then think again. You might well come to a diff. conclusion.

    What I’m saying is that this girl can be kept wanting you and wanting it big time, endlessly, by playing her a little. Consider all the “marriage is the end of sex” type women who you didn’t think were gonna be like that. I sniff that this girl really and truly won’t be — if you keep her afraid of losing your heart, or it slipping away form her a little or a lot, and so on. But then give her heart in addition to a stiff ones. Then pull away – a little.

    Hey girls, if easy and relaxed worked better than it did, then call me and we could talk. Until then ….

    Like


  40. Hadron Collider 45 —

    After a hot date I’ll cool off with liquid helium

    OK, credit where it’s due. You had me chucklin’ out loud.

    Pretty damn funny in an uber nerd kinda way.

    Like


  41. on September 23, 2008 at 7:54 pm Glengarry Glenpoon

    @12: Do you enjoy the Crazy? Then keep playing.

    Oh hell, okay, unless you got a bunny boiler here’s the real advice: Date at least one more girl and don’t keep it a secret. Hey, apart from everything else PUA 101 it might feed her need for drama => unexpected rewards.

    Like


  42. 41 and 42

    But pandering to infantile impulses (one’s own and other people’s) is the name of THIS particular game.

    That’s just fucking terrific, and why we live in a place that is akin to Hell. 🙂 Enjoy.

    Like


  43. To DA @ 34:

    Damn, I may rarely ever agree with you, but I have to give you props, you are more brutally and unflinchingly self-aware than most.

    Like


  44. This “game” is just a fact of life. You get older, you get better at it.

    Scenario A — (senior year of HS) “ah… can you, you know… give me a blow?”

    Scenario B — (post college graduation) no words exchanged, girl makes B-line for blowjob while you’re watching Monday Night Football.

    Like


  45. Depending on my mood, if the girl decides to leave because she “feels weird,” I probably would have just confronted her straight up. (“Please, lady, don’t fuck with me – if it’s over, TELL ME. If you’re gonna flake on me, I don’t need you THAT bad!”)

    So, everybody – would I be wrong for reacting like that? My reaction, to me, isn’t so much “beta-ism” so much as it is just trying to break through the bullshit. I’m open to advice…

    Like


  46. …I should add that it’s not like I want her to come back – if she does, kool, but I just dont want her wastin my time

    Like


  47. This is just simple human nature, equally applicable to male or female. Czar has it in comment #7. You freakout and want space to be alone. In the scenario A, your partner freaks out that you’ve distanced yourself and chases you around wanting to get closer. In Scenario B, your partner is secure enough to just accept you need space for a bit and wait for you to come back. I wouldn’t say it takes a Jedi mastery of “Game!” to understand this, it’s just simple growing up.

    You could rewrite this post:

    A. Girl before I learned how to handle men

    I wanted to cuddle with my man on Saturday morning, but instead he just grunted and went off to get his golf clubs. I followed him in tears asking “what’s wrong?, what’s wrong? don’t you like me any more?”, and then he disappeared for the whole weekend!

    B. Girl after I learned how to handle men

    I wanted to cuddle with my man on Saturday morning, but instead he just grunted and went off to get his golf clubs. I just laid in bed and said, “cool, see you, baby” and then he came back and took me out to dinner that night!

    Exact same phenomenon.

    Like


  48. Mu’Min — I agree with your assessment. Though most of our time on Earth, from a bio-evolutionary standpoint, was pretty monogamous.

    So far, the consensus scientific view is that behaviorally modern humans emerged from Africa around 70K-50K years ago, and lived in hunter-gatherer societies. Which by definition were fairly monogamous, given the need for even the strongest, best hunter to depend on others when luck turns bad. And alliances ala Survivor among family members, the ability of even the most beta man to stick a spear into the sleeping Alpha — or a woman for that matter.

    Life then was pretty violent, around 4% annual population loss due to murders.

    Polygamy only came into wider use when resources were more abundant — first nomadic herders then agriculturalists. Which as you note has huge implications in violent revolts. Monogamy in the modern world dates to around 900 AD with Charlegmagne in the West.

    Like


  49. 51 T:

    To DA @ 34:

    Damn, I may rarely ever agree with you, but I have to give you props, you are more brutally and unflinchingly self-aware than most.

    I’ll second that.

    Like


  50. 34:

    I felt guilty and sad for being so mean and spiteful

    That’s the problem. Scenario B is not mean and spiteful. Reread scenario A. At some point she says, “Yeah, I’m fine, I’m just gonna go.”. Letting her go is the most respectful thing you can do at that time. It’s not like you say ‘Fuck off bitch’. You just respect her decision to leave. It’s her decision, not yours. Your ‘caring’ has much more to do with your self esteem than we actually trying to make her feel better. And that’s what she picks up on.

    Here’s a test. Next time your girl is acting like she’s in a bad mood, ask here if there’s anything wrong. If she says ‘No, I’m fine’, just say ‘OK’, and don’t ask again. She told you she’s fine. That’s all you need to know.

    Like


  51. 28 Clio:

    As for #21, while I don’t think that Tupac aggravated the young woman’s condition – she’s clearly a mess, poor thing – I think it would be both imprudent AND unethical to see her or sleep with her again. “Imprudent” = letting yourself in for a great deal of trouble and fuss.

    “Imprudent”, yes. Which is why I broke things off after that incident. I didn’t want any Fatal Attraction scenes had we continued on. You know, letting the bond grow before I might have had to finally rip the band-aid off.

    And, what does “unethical” mean again?

    😉

    (for the record, Clio: if you were mine I would cherish you like no other)

    Like


  52. I think it’s only normal for a woman to feel weird after sleeping with a man she doesn’t know. You could of raped her or at the worst, you could of killed her & dumped her body in the river. Pregnancy and disease are also things said chic maybe worried about.

    Like


  53. Tupac Chopra 57 —

    to T 51 —

    about DA 34 —

    I’ll second that.

    I’ll third it.

    We do have to recognize as well that David Alexander has carved out a niche that sorta works for him. It doesn’t get him laid (but for one time one girl), but it does get him quite a bit of female attention, concern and solicitation re: his mental welfare. IT does get him a kind of acceptance, and it keeps the pressure off him. He neatly short circuits derrision, which probably happens way more here than in his real life, by being out in front of it.

    It actually just might get him a gf of sorts one of these days. I say of sorts because I imagine DA forming a relationship, if he forms one at all, with a fairly good looking slutty girl where the understanding is she’s gonna go on being slutty, but also let him have some too, in one way or another, ’cause he’s there for her in dependability, loyalty, someone to share love challenge stories with, and what not. This will require that DA has some kind of dependable but not necessarily high paying job. The sort of lower or at most mid level government work he’s hoping for could fill that bill.

    That’s where he’s headed. It’s probably more or less where quite a few betas are headed as this gen Y generation of quasi emasculated betas go searching hard for wives, and as female 6’s and 7’s decide they’d like some stability and another paycheck to share, in addition to their continuing alpha and kinda alpha slutting/adverturing.

    Like


  54. Ever read Chthon by Piers Anthony? I was woken up by that book, though I was too young to understand the lessons. The Minionette is an exaggeration (hey, it’s sci fi by Anthony) but instructive nonetheless.

    If you have not read it, and don’t understand the points made in the original post, you might want to check it out.

    Like


  55. A moment of perspective from a doddering old observer?

    Back in the day, two assumptions were commonly shared:

    1) A male had to learn how to be a man. You might chuckle a bit irreverently over Cary Grant, James Bond, John Wayne. But ultimately you had to learn how to step up to the plate yourself. Total irreverence, total unformed-ness — that was either for (some) gays or for boys.

    2) Part of Becoming a Man was learning how to Treat a Woman Like a Woman. What this basically involved was a recognition that women are basically organic/emotional/religious/irrational creatures, no matter what their other gifts. Treat ’em right and they’ll purr and do nice things for you. Treat ’em wrong and man will they make you pay.

    “Right” here didn’t mean “be a nice guy” let alone “be a wuss.” It meant “be a man” — to have some daring, recognize the woman inside her, have the guts to reach inside her emotionally and massage her buttons, and to guide and steer her when necessary. The potential reward: sex and fun, but maybe also love and loyalty. Nothing wrong with the first without the second, but all together is nice too.

    Incidentally, it was understood that there were honorable and dishonarable ways of Being a Man and Treating Her Like a Woman. Just having a way with the babes wasn’t enough. You also didn’t abuse the power.

    Anyway: what surprises me in these discussions hereabout isn’t the enthusiasm about trading ideas and info about how to Treat The Ladies Like Ladies. It’s the vehemence and anger. What’s that about?

    My guesses:

    1) You younger dudes were raised post-feminism, thus it’s a *complete* mind-fucker to discover that what you were told corresponds to reality barely at all.

    2) You were raised to think that the man’s role was to play support staff to the ladies. Thus you’re delighted to discover that the guy can sit at the steering wheel too, and enraged to realize that this info was kept from you.

    3) You’re waking up to the fact that your balls were taken from you early on — and that you’re entitled to have ’em and put ’em to use.

    Something like that?

    BTW, it seems to me that back in the day we didn’t have “Game,” we had “Courtship.” Learn how to do it and you could both have a mighty good, and rewarding, time.

    (In fact, the reality of a lot of the ’60s and ’70s was smoking a lot of weed and falling into bed together. But the two assumptions were still widely shared.)

    Anyway, guidance about the vehemence and anger thing would be appreciated.

    Like


  56. Clio 28 —

    As for #21, while I don’t think that Tupac aggravated the young woman’s condition – she’s clearly a mess, poor thing – I think it would be both imprudent AND unethical to see her or sleep with her again

    Like Tupac I have a hard time seeing “unethical” here as well. I have a hard time seeing it in sex relations generally, outside of clear fraud.

    “Unethical” sounds like “it’s a man’s world” stuff. Well it isn’t anymore. We men have let it cease to be. We could maybe (that involves predictions about solidarity) take it back but we haven’t and it don’t look likely any time soon. As of now in the realm of dating it’s a lot more a woman’s world, with yeah some star male players, and a lot more women than men that are really actively and successfully in the game.

    If you mean “unethical” because she’s obviously able to be fairly easily manipulated, where does that leave the far more common, stock in trade, female games of manipulating males, both in relatinships and getting them into them?

    Like


  57. What this basically involved was a recognition that women are basically organic/emotional/religious/irrational creatures, no matter what their other gifts.

    How are men more rational or less emotional than women? They have different ways of expressing it — when men become irrational and emotional they tend to get into fights, break their fists on walls, and crash cars instead of crying and pouting — but it’s still pretty damn irrational. Lots of men have no common sense at all.

    Like


  58. the more you like her, the less interested you should act. predictably, the more you try to brush off most women, the harder they cling to your pant leg like some broodish offspring as you attempt to vacate the rabble known as a home after 7 years of “marriage”.

    Like


  59. DA will get a girlfriend like Forrest Gump did.

    Like


  60. MQ said:How are men more rational or less emotional than women? They have different ways of expressing it — when men become irrational and emotional they tend to get into fights, break their fists on walls, and crash cars instead of crying and pouting

    Good point MQ. I think men cry in private unlike women who can cry anywhere at anytime.

    Like


  61. Scott in ATL
    DA will get a girlfriend like Forrest Gump did

    And he will enjoy the hand of his girlfriend’s girlfriend like Forrest did as well.

    Benedict Smith- The same thing works for men too. It’s funny how much alike the sexes are at times. Or maybe it’s just wanting something you can’t have.

    Like


  62. Michael Blowhard 64 —

    Just having a way with the babes wasn’t enough. You also didn’t abuse the power.

    I think the starting point today is “what power”.

    The first order of business for many young men today is to get some, the kind that can be cashed in on the mating and sexual attraction market that is. It has after all been trained out of them their whole lives.

    To just assume it’s naturally there rings hollow. Hence game.

    Like


  63. Did Forrest have a three-some? Trying to remember the movie.

    Like


  64. re: dougjnn 71 —

    BTW, the “trained out of them” above is FAR more true of white men in America than black men. Feminists have tried to intimidate black culture and black men, e.g. in the aborted media wars against black rap calling women “bitches and hoes”, but basically were themselves intimidated by the greater authority of “the race thing” over “the gender thing” in the politically correct leftist hierarchy of guilt tripping and moralist status whoring. So black men are now largely left alone by feminists, but also regarded as usually too economically marginal to be much of a treat to the overall “what’s good for feminists” hegemony in elite culture.

    Like


  65. Scott in ATL
    Did Forrest have a three-some? Trying to remember the movie.

    No

    Remember the scene when Forrest goes looking for Jenny at her apartment, and Jenny’s roommate invites him in. At least I think it was the roommate and not Jenny. Well, the roommate played with the chicken and sent Forrest into a sea of ecstasy. He was choking & coughing to get catch his breath and he complained of feeling dizzy.

    Like


  66. So I consulted my friends. Their answers split evenly along gender lines. The women (even those in my family) played it down like “Oh, she was drinking, it doesn’t mean anything. Let it go.” All my guy friends were like, “Kick that crazy bitch to the curb!”

    I’m curious what the peanut gallery here thinks

    My .02 cents. I hope you ran like hell. In a number of cultures there is a saying about how you can get to know a person when he/she is drunk. That girl showed you her true self when she was drunk.

    Like


  67. Whiskey 57 —

    Monogamy in the modern world dates to around 900 AD with Charlegmagne in the West.

    Charlemagne had many simultaneous wives throughout his reign. He was clearly polygamous. The church was not about to make an issue of this, since he was the first ruler since the fall of Rome who would both recognize the equal importance of the Church in Western Europe and had the military and political strength to be or become a true Emperor of the West. Hence the rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne.

    Monogamy’s roots were in Greece and esp. Rome. Note, monogamy NEVER meant no adultery for men. Not whatsoever, ever, period — until modern times. The degree to which it was expected for women in Rome varied. Generally it was expected, but violation was often winked at in the upper classes, particularly in longer marriges where the man’s interest was elsewhere. The Christian/Catholic church was monogamous because it became the state religion of the Roman empire in it’s waning years, and a domiant force in the post Roman world in large part due to the Church’s preservation of Roman ideals and echos or shards of continuing greatness, in a religious and spiritual envelope.

    The main kind of monogamy the Church required among Christian rules and aristocracy, which is the only place it much focused for quite a while, had to due with the legitimacy of some heirs but not others. Only the legitmate were entitled to inheritance, and only within Church mediated rules. That was the central point, and a good lot of the reason by monogamy of breeding females was of key importance, but not that of men, so long as they didn’t try to promote the children of mistresses ahead of those of their legitimate Christian wife.

    Like


  68. 73 Mu’Min

    And in China, where the “one family, one child” policy has been in effect for decades, they now face a harrowing prospect-millions of young and horny and ANGRY Chinese men who can’t get wives, because so many of them were aborted in an effort to get a son

    Yeah, and it’s not just China. There are some provinces in India where there are three girls born for every ten boys, thanks to gender-based abortion.

    I think it’s interesting that gender-based abortion doesn’t come up more in the abortion debates. Probably because it doesn’t happen that much in America; women here get abortions for other reasons.

    76 chicnoir

    That girl showed you her true self when she was drunk.

    Hee. So can I claim to be really easygoing, giggly, mellow and cheerful, because that’s how I am when I’m drunk?

    Like


  69. @52 Mu’Min –

    Thank you for doing a good job of writing what I’ve been thinking for quite some time now. Unfortunately, there are a whole lotta spoiled people out there who don’t realize what they have here. It’s good to know there are fellow like-minded conservatives out there.

    Like


  70. Doug 74:
    Just wanted to chime in real quick wrt Hip Hop and Feminism.

    I think you’re right to a certain extent, the real deal though is that most rappers simpl ignored the Feminists, or didn’t realize who they were in the firstplace. I don’t think it was as much a racial angle insofar as they were concerned-I think what happened, and T talked about this earlier this year on his blog The Rawness, is that the Left got themselves all tripped up over their own rap, ie, diversity and so on. When it came time to lay the law down on the rappers, they, meaning Feminists, really couldn’t go raw dog on em, because if they did it could and would be seen as an assault by upper crust White females against inner city, in the main, Black males trying to make it. So, like good Lefties, they caved.

    But you are right about fierce gender roles and the like in Black America. In this I make no bones about it, I was not and am not, looking for another dude. Only room for one breadwinner in the house, and that’s me. Things will go such and such way in my home. And so on. I honestly think a major reason why things done got so screwed up along these lines in White America is because too many White boys done lost they nerve. And if its one thing women of all hues don’t like, its a chump or a punk.

    More later.

    Salaam
    Mu

    PS: Great points wrt Charlemange!

    Like


  71. in Iraq, most of the people there marry their cousins. How many of us have ever done something like that? Know someone who has?

    The only person I can think of is Rudy Guillani(tp).

    I’ve read about Chinese men marrying women from ‘Taiwan and even going to Ethiopia looking for wives.

    Like


  72. dougjnn, rappers have been called out by black feminists and womanists. Read about what happened to Nelly after his Tip Drill video, the women of Spellmen riped him a new one.

    Like


  73. I think it’s interesting that gender-based abortion doesn’t come up more in the abortion debates. Probably because it doesn’t happen that much in America; women here get abortions for other reasons.

    Girls were more often exposed then boys in Rome, no? And with a good portion of women dying in childbirth, the ratios must have been rather skewed. Of course, a large number of men were enlisted.

    Like


  74. Mr. Blowhard,

    I think there are numerous reasons why young men are angry,
    the first reason you listed certainly rings true. I am an undergraduate now, so coming of age my cohorts and i were brainwashed with two diametrically opposed interpretations of love, neither of which are reality. The first type could best be seen in disney movies, where women are flawless and infallible morally. The second type could best be seen on MTV or BET(music television channels), where men and women are hyper-attractive amoral nymphomaniacs.

    Like


  75. @66 MQ –

    Allow me to explain. Women and men are about the same when it comes to logic on what I would call a “micro” level. By “micro”, I mean day-to-day activities we all do to keep well. “I had better close the windows, because it’s getting cold.” “If I don’t get this project done my boss is gonna kill me.” “This is how a can opener works.” Members of both sexes seem to have the same mental approach to things in these areas. The irrationality difference between the sexes exists in in what I call the grand “macro” scale of who we are, how we fit into the world, and how we communicate with each other about these things. Men are more willing to question their fundamental beliefs, individually and with each other. This can lead to some self-loathing, or to some anger between friends while a guy comes to terms with the new perspective he’s having. But ultimately he considers it on its merits. As a guy, I can’t imagine what it’s like to NOT occasionally tell my guy friend when he’s full of shit. If I don’t, I’m just not being his friend. That’s just what guys DO. Women, on the other hand, do the opposite. Gals talk to one another a lot more about more intimate things, but they bend over backwards so as not to criticize things involving their core identities. In fact, they expend great effort propping up each other’s fundamental misconceptions (to do otherwise would be “judgemental” or “mean”). But none of us can see the forest for the trees on our own. We all occasionally need constructive criticism about the fundamental course of our lives so we improve as people. Since this happens less with women, there is a much bigger gap between what women ARE and what they THINK THEY ARE, when compared to the gap in men. And on a fundamental level, women are aware of this disconnect. This leads women to do such irrational things as post on match.com that they want a guy who’s “sweet and funny and nice and kind and BLAH, BLAH, BLAH”, but then fall in love with the ex-convict bad boy. Having been a life-long beta, and having read this blog for a few months, it’s finally starting to sink in that the reason alphas with game are successful is because they deliberately ignore all that fantasy self-delusional shit that’s flying around women’s brains and only choose to react to, and interact with the person she really is. Isn’t that all what we want? To be with people who see us for who we really are and not who we or anyone else thinks we are? The purpose of Game is not to deceive women or lead them on – it’s to see them for who they really are and treat them accordingly. Do it well, and they’ll love you for it.

    Comments?

    Like


  76. Mu’min 80 —

    Interesting post.

    Thanks for the finer resolution.

    Back at yah.

    Like


  77. Dougjnn, I called it “unethical” to get any more deeply involved with this woman, not because she would be fairly easy to manipulate, but because she’s clearly unbalanced and unhappy, and such an involvement, with someone who wasn’t serious about her, might make her worse.

    clio

    p.s. I don’t buy your suggestion that women are more manipulative than men. I think the sexes are about equal in that respect. But it’s not really germane to my point. I don’t think people of either sex should pray on the vulnerable. I do think, though, that the difference in the way men and women experience casual sex – the former usually as something worthwhile, the latter often with a certain sense of distaste and loss of self-respect – suggests that women may not need to worry too much about damaging a casual partner’s vulnerable ego by saying “yes” to him.

    Like


  78. Plus, along the same lines as what dougjnn-71 says, young men basically have no hand unless they are Alpha because of the situation. I see Game as a way to feign status for those without sufficient status

    Like


  79. Clio, I couldn’t disagree more. No doubt men can be and often are manipulative, but women take the cake on average, and please note that I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing accross the board.

    Chic Noir, in my view, a woman’s behind should be round to the side view, and wide from the back angle. Zaftig, not Zeppelin. There’s a huge difference.;)

    Fabian, thank you sir, for your kudos.

    Doug, your most welcome.

    Elizabeth, yes I’m familiar w/the situation obtaining in India. Very similar to China insofar as the high value placed on boys is concerned. My guess as to the reason why Western feminists don’t holler more about the situation in China has a lot to do w/Ideology. Many Feminists are out and out Socialists, if not Communists, and this blinds them to the harsh realities of day to day life, especially for lower and working class Chinese women, for whom it is not unusual to be forcibly sterilized, made to undergo abortion procedures, etc.

    As for Tupac’s crazy date, while I’ve seen my fair share of headcases, thank God its never been as bad as he reports. As to whether its “unethical” for him to have sexual relations w/such a person…well…what’s the old saying about being blind, deaf, crippled or crazy?

    LOL

    Holla back

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  80. on September 24, 2008 at 1:49 am Marcus Halberstam

    Its interesting that so many people on here see behavior “A” as being desperate and pathetic. I suppose thats how many “alphas” and women see it. To me and many other people however, its as much a test as anything else. I have no desire to spend time with women who require such obvious mind-games to be attracted to me. If they leave because they mistake genuine concern for being desperate, low-status or emotional instability, then good riddance.

    I was born in 1981, and I never experienced any of the “feminism” some people talk about here. No one I know ever thought that being a “nice guy” was a good way to attract women. Being nice instead of the stereotypical chest-pounding status-seeking jock was actually less common where I went to school.

    Like


  81. Clio 89 —

    I don’t buy your suggestion that women are more manipulative than men. I think the sexes are about equal in that respect.

    I very, VERY much disagree.

    Further I think all kinds of female manipulatin in relationships and marriage is pervasively and extensviely endorsed by American culture, while male varieties are generally pointedly condemned.

    The largely one way endorsement and even encouragement is so utterly pervasive and commonplace that I guess many people cease to see it, just as New Yorkers don’t much hear run of the mill traffic noise when they’re walking around, and country people stop hearing the crickets on warm nights.

    TV is a good popular culture place to start.

    As far as the ethics of manipulation goes generally goes though, it depends heavily on the purpose.

    If a man manipulates his gf into staying with him even though she’s miserable in the relationship and quite evidently might not be elsewhere, that’s not good. If he manipulates a highted level of sexual tension in a relatinship that otherwise grow a bit sexually stale, that’s sounding pretty positive to me (and very much vice versa if she does with that limited intent and result).

    Life is rarely that pure, but that’s maybe illustrative.

    Like


  82. 89 Clio:

    p.s. I don’t buy your suggestion that women are more manipulative than men. I think the sexes are about equal in that respect.

    Yes and no.

    Both sexes attempt to control the people around them to satisfy their goals. But the difference is men manipulate primarily to obtain sexual favors. While this is no doubt disheartening to females, it dwarfs in comparison to the female gambit of snaring a man into marriage — a man she may have no romantic feelings for, nor even sexual feeling as she might have for an alpha male. The man who interprets such a woman as “loving” him (when he’s merely seen by her as a babysitter/ATM machine) is a devastated man indeed when he realizes his whole marriage was a sham.

    See:

    http://womensinfidelity.com/

    Like


  83. [i]As I’ve said, every man has his breaking point.[/i]

    So there’s a lot of talk here every so often about how current trends are going to leave us with a whole lot of pissed off betas, and how that will degenerate into something much worse.

    At the same time, I look at my friends, most of whom are either betas or omegas. (I’m a recovering omega myself.) If they’re pissed off at women, they certainly don’t talk about it. They’re much more interested in talking about computer games than about women. In fact, “women” seems to be the rarest of all possible topics of conversation among betas. Anything else — money, politics, sports, science/technology — but never women. (Now that I think about it, perhaps I need to start a few more “so the other night I made out with this hot chick” conversations and see how they react…)

    Some are married, some have girlfriends, some are perpetually single; but regardless of their status, I don’t see any signs of rage. (In case you couldn’t guess, the girlfriends/wives are generally not hot.)

    It almost seems as though the betas/omegas have accepted their place in the world. That, or the anger is hidden *very* deep.

    Where are these angry betas?

    Like


  84. 97 zorgon:

    At the same time, I look at my friends, most of whom are either betas or omegas. (I’m a recovering omega myself.) If they’re pissed off at women, they certainly don’t talk about it. They’re much more interested in talking about computer games than about women. In fact, “women” seems to be the rarest of all possible topics of conversation among betas. Anything else — money, politics, sports, science/technology — but never women.

    They’ve taken their soma.

    Ignorance is bliss.

    (Now that I think about it, perhaps I need to start a few more “so the other night I made out with this hot chick” conversations and see how they react…)

    Good luck with that. Heh heh heh

    Like


  85. on September 24, 2008 at 5:58 am Milton Freedman

    PA: You said in another thread you wound up going to prom with the hottest girl in your high school. How’d that happen if you were such a nice guy.

    Also who’s the commentator you were referring to that went macho.

    9/11 theorists: Most of the hijackers had ample opportunity to get some skin. They lived in America. Also Saudi Arabia has limits on its polygamy (Max of like 3-4 wives and the hijackers were from the upper ranks). That theory doesn’t fly.

    Like


  86. @ 62 Doug and 57 TC & 51 T

    I appreciate your compliments. 🙂

    Admittedly, I do like the female attention that I get. While female friends aren’t substitutes for girlfriends for most men, it’s still a workable solution for me since it gives me quite a bit of leeway. I get to hang out and spend time with her and possibly do exciting things, and I have somebody to have a conversation with, but there’s very little of the responsibilities that a boyfriend has. I have both male and female friends, but it’s much easier to blather on about the daily minutia of my life to a female than a male, and male to male conversation doesn’t fill the attention whore within me. In other words, around men, I put on a fake face, but around my female friends, I expose the real me.

    The relationship that you described may not seem like the traditional ideal, but it’s rather workable, and it gives the benefits of having sex, but without the stifling atmosphere that marriage provides, and plus, it fuels that need to be *useful*. One could say that it’s simply a logical extension of friends with benefits concept. The real clunkiness is if kids are around, and while, it’s one thing to be a nice guy and buy some kids gifts for birthdays and Christmas (aka uncle), it’s another to be the actual dad to some other alpha’s kids.

    I’ve read about Chinese men marrying women from ‘Taiwan and even going to Ethiopia looking for wives.

    I wonder if the Chinese men working on mineral extraction in Africa are marrying the local women. I wonder what these half-Chinese, half-African kids will be like. Oh the fun of guessing their future IQ and other skills. Go violin playing, gymnastics winning, computer programming, track-race winning elite children of the future?

    So the beta males will substitute with pr0n and diverting entertainment and indulge misogyny in a casual way.

    I’m not getting any sex right now, and I’m not a misogynist. So am I a fluke or did I swallow the soma as stated bt TC?

    Like


  87. Dougjnn, I agree that society appears to encourage women to be manipulative. As for whether women are by nature more manipulative than men, I don’t know. After all, on thinking it over, I suppose it’s possible that you’re right. I suspect that my initial response to your comment was instinctive, based on the fact that I’m not particularly manipulative myself. I’m rather guileless and straightforward by nature.

    However, what also occurred to me as I reconsidered the point is that many wives I’ve known (old style traditional wives) have had to be manipulative because their husbands simply paid no attention to their views at all. So such a wife might, for example, steer a dinner-party conversation around to a subject like, say, buying a particular make of car that she wants for its mileage, because she knows that one of the male guests likes that make, and his views might persuade her husband to agree to buy one.

    Clio

    Like


  88. on September 24, 2008 at 6:57 am Glengarry Glenpoon

    @100: “I wonder what these half-Chinese, half-African kids will be like.”

    Naomi Campbell. In fifteeen years, African cellphones will be hurled with intent.

    Like


  89. 101 Clio:

    As I quoted in another thread:

    What teeth are to a tiger, deception is to women and children. Deception is always the price of slavery

    I think that sums it up.

    Men can afford to be direct.

    Dependents can’t. But they have to secure their needs as well…

    Like


  90. #73: Although lots of yammering has gone on about the reason why current day Islam (and some would argue, the whole of Islamic history, but that’s another discussion/debate for another time-I hope?) is so violent. Well, when one factors in the de jure and de facto prevalence of polygamy, one can easily see why so many young men, w/no hope of finding wives, end up killing themselves, for the hope of getting some or all of the 72 virgins in the hereafter. Although lots of yammering has gone on about the reason why current day Islam (and some would argue, the whole of Islamic history, but that’s another discussion/debate for another time-I hope?) is so violent. Well, when one factors in the de jure and de facto prevalence of polygamy, one can easily see why so many young men, w/no hope of finding wives, end up killing themselves, for the hope of getting some or all of the 72 virgins in the hereafter.

    Calling Islam violent is like saying Christianity is about hunting witches. You can find examples, but it’s not typical.

    Likewise polygamy is not typical. Of all the Arabs I have known there were only two polygamists. One was living in a divorce type situation with his ex next door. He provided financially for the children of both wives, but only lived with the second wife. The other one was just plain weird and was regarded as weird by the Arabs as well. In fact, that was a way to taunt someone, by saying he was weird enough to have more than one wife.

    No hope of finding wives? Not from a shortage of women. But Arab women need a dowry, and a man may be in his 30’s before he is economically stable enough to bring a woman home to live with his parents and brothers, or to afford built a second story on his father’s house for his own apartment.

    The jerks get the women? Not from my standpoint. The nice guys are all taken–by women who are younger and cuter and more talented. I have no hopes of ever competing with them. I am stuck with the losers–my choices are to play with the jerks, players, and drama queens while avoiding all commitments or to just stay home and blog.

    Like


  91. You said in another thread you wound up going to prom with the hottest girl in your high school. How’d that happen if you were such a nice guy.

    I didn’t say I went to the prom with the hottest girl in the school. I went with a very pretty girl.

    In my mid-teens, I was new to the US and very intimidated by the new environment and bullied somewhat by the preppies, certainly wasn’t dating girls. A few months or so later, I quickly adjusted, beat up two of the bullies, started playing sports, and my naturally high-agreeableness personality allowed me to do well socially. Being decent-looking and tall helped.

    By my senior year I was confident with girls but I would often screw up by overriding my better instincts through “acting nice” because that’s what I thought I was supposed to do with girls who are “special.”

    Also who’s the commentator you were referring to that went macho.

    He hasn’t been obnoxious here lately, but I’ll call him out on it if he starts doing that again.

    Like


  92. As for #21, while I don’t think that Tupac aggravated the young woman’s condition – she’s clearly a mess, poor thing – I think it would be both imprudent AND unethical to see her or sleep with her again. “Imprudent” = letting yourself in for a great deal of trouble and fuss.

    He slept with her again that morning, didn’t he? That is the possibly aggravating part. I also think that for most women, casual sex is rather unhealthy, though I understand that this is not a popular opinion. When Tupac was unclear about things being casual, that was a choice he made. When the girl chose not to question her assumption that there was a relationship, she made the choice to delude herself and risk disillusionment. Smashing illusions is always a powerful emotional experience.

    While I do think what is happening here is mostly a girl committing self abuse, volunteering to be the knife she uses to cut herself is something I consider unethical. Now if someone wants to do unethical things, that is mainly his own business, he is the one who has to look at himself in the mirror. If he wants to make the choice to help a labile person create illusions in order to get laid, that is his decision and it is not at all illegal. But our opinions were asked, so I gave mine.

    I’m pretty shocked at that her behaviour is considered to be within the realm of normalcy. Do the men here who sleep a lot regularly encounter this sort of behaviour often?

    Like


  93. I also think that for most women, casual sex is rather unhealthy, though I understand that this is not a popular opinion.

    I think most PUAs know that for most women, casual sex is rather unhealthy. Yes, casual sex is healthy. For men.

    Like


  94. So you are consciously choosing to contribute to the bad health of these women?

    Is this because you don’t care about how this affects the world at large or is it a choice to but your own short term benefit before that?

    Do you willingly accept the risk of having unhealthy people in close relation to yourself, in that they may lash out?

    Do you tell women, outside the internet, that casual sex is okay, not to go by double standards etc. just to get laid more?

    (I’m mainly just wondering about the motivations and line of thought.)

    Like


  95. It actually just might get him a gf of sorts one of these days. I say of sorts because I imagine DA forming a relationship, if he forms one at all, with a fairly good looking slutty girl where the understanding is she’s gonna go on being slutty, but also let him have some too, in one way or another, ’cause he’s there for her in dependability, loyalty, someone to share love challenge stories with, and what not. This will require that DA has some kind of dependable but not necessarily high paying job. The sort of lower or at most mid level government work he’s hoping for could fill that bill.

    Dougjn,

    you have brought up your obsession/fetish with cuckoldry many times before. David Alexander has said many times it’s not his thing. Why do you keep peddling your private sexual perversions time and again?

    Like


  96. Speak for yourself, PA.

    Certain men can’t blithely accept knowingly and willingly leaving a bad taste in another’s mouth, or deceive themselves about the likelihood that that would be the outcome.

    (Yeah, yeah, cue the jokes about “my spunk tastes like the rarest of caviars.”)

    Other men can’t blithely dilute the value of their own sex by wasting it on their inferiors. Pearl necklaces before swine, and all that.

    Call it the ultimate in arrogance or whatever you will, but do acknowledge that men are not all cut from the same cloth.

    Like


  97. That’s where he’s headed. It’s probably more or less where quite a few betas are headed as this gen Y generation of quasi emasculated betas go searching hard for wives, and as female 6’s and 7’s decide they’d like some stability and another paycheck to share, in addition to their continuing alpha and kinda alpha slutting/adverturing.

    That kind of thing won’t fly. As the number of internet connections continues to skyrocket around the world, more and more beta males in rich countries will go for foreign brides instead. In time, that will bring about a shift in demand and supply forcing Western women to reconsider their priorities.

    Like


  98. Other men can’t blithely dilute the value of their own sex by wasting it on their inferiors. Pearl necklaces before swine, and all that.

    Call it the ultimate in arrogance or whatever you will, but do acknowledge that men are not all cut from the same cloth.

    Bravo Gordan!

    Your courage in stating this here is most admirable, as is your respect of your own sexuality.

    Like


  99. So you are consciously choosing to contribute to the bad health of these women?

    I don’t contribute to the bad health of these women because I am out of the Pick-up Artist market, to the extent I ever was one.

    Like


  100. Should have said “to the extent I ever was a PUA.”

    Like


  101. Calling Islam violent is like saying Christianity is about hunting witches. You can find examples, but it’s not typical.

    One should always distinguish Muslims from Islam. Muslims are a large and diverse group of people, often influenced by things many other than Islamic theology. Doctrinally, however, Islam is fundamentally hostile to non-Muslims. Fortunately, an awful lot of Muslims do not subscribe to Islam completely and/or literally. Under Islamic law, non-Muslims may only exist as a defenseless, humilitiated, and protection money-paying dhimmis, if they are Jews or Christians, or be killed, if they are neither.

    I have no problem with Muslims who also subscribe to secularism and freedom of religion, but Sharia law has no place in the West, not to any extent. Naturally, any and all Orthodox Muslims should be rejected from being given refugee or immigrant status in the West.

    Like


  102. YT,

    It takes no great courage to say so here, in this anonymous or nearly anonymous forum. The worst that can happen is that I’ll be thoroughly verbally thrashed by a bunch of self-proclaimed experts on sexual dynamics. It’s been a long time since I’ve dismissed the notion that the law of averages has significant bearing on my own choices, so that won’t hurt at all.

    Like


  103. Dougjn,

    you have brought up your obsession/fetish with cuckoldry many times before.

    I think a number of guys here are actually somewhat submissive types who are afraid of revealing their softer or more passive side to women, and are therefore overcompensating in the other direction.

    Like


  104. Really loving someone means that they are really hard for you to replace. It is an essential quality of love.

    Exactly. This implies that love means giving up some power. There is an essential equality in love, because both people are dependent on each other. If you’re not willing to give up some power, you’ll never find love, period.

    Like


  105. Tupac 12,

    You are a nice man. A responsible thing to do for yourself and for the gal is to give it a good 50 years before you get in touch with her again.

    Like


  106. Women,feminists, and prissy little Christians dont like Game for the same general reason burglars dont like locks or alarm systems.

    The purpose of deception is, of course, to deceive.And the deceived male is an easy target for female predations.Even as an unlocked door is an easy target for burglars.

    The female instinct is to raise the cost of sex.She accomplishes this by limiting its supply,thereby raising its value.As vendors of sex they are in a position to set the terms of the market-place much as OPEC sets the terms of the price of petroleum.

    “Morality”, and its close cousin,feminism,are propaganda campaigns designed to enhance and buttress this female control of sexual matters.

    Through the power of sex the female herd is placed ahead of, and above, the generality of men.Because women cannot accomplish this feat entirely by themselves, select male cohorts are co-opted by the herd to help maintain the herds dominion.Preferential treatment, ladeled out like soup during a famine, creates a subservient class of RELATIVELY privileged males while splitting the enemy i.e. the generality of men.Divide et impera,as the Romans used to say.

    The Clergy is one such group of servile men.They– the Clergy — know this full well.If they ever begin scrutinizing the nature and behaviour of women instead of wagging their fingers at playboys and thundering against “pornography”,their tax-exempt staus and the rest of their privileges would be withdrawn overnight.As I say the Clergy know all of this full well, and wisely chose to remain on the good side of the female herd,the ultimate source of their power.

    Like


  107. In the kind of households I’m thinking of, the men weren’t truly “overly powerful”. (I don’t think that’s really been true of men since the early 20th century, when men in the Anglosphere lost the right to automatically claim the children of their marriage in the event of a divorce.) They were, however, oblivious and inclined to complacency, always something of a problem for most men in their relations with women in the “old days” before feminism got them all so confused. My father often appeared to be incapable of hearing, or else understanding, a thing my mother said to him. That was very common at one time.

    Clio

    Like


  108. Yours Truly 108 —

    I’m pretty shocked at that her behaviour is considered to be within the realm of normalcy. Do the men here who sleep a lot regularly encounter this sort of behaviour often?

    The only thing that was unusual about her behavior (which TC describes @12) was it’s amplitude, and that it came on with that amplitude so early in their dating career and the first time he didn’t cave to her attempted manipulations for greater intimacy / committment (by turning on her floodgates).

    I’ll be specific. For her to hit him on the chest as her next move following waterworks isn’t unusual. For her to pummel him repeatedly is getting out there.

    For her to leave to flirt with other guys as her follow on move isn’t so unusual either. It’s pretty blatant to do it moments after The Discussion, as opposed to starting the next time he saw her or some such, which is a more subtle and less “tit for tat” and therefore less easily dismissed move.

    Her running off to another table of five guys as part of that immediate flirt elsewhere gambit is yeah out there. It’s kicking common female behavior up several notches — and making it less effective against any confident and knowledgeable guy.

    Her then leaving the premesis and hanging out with another group of guys invites suspicon that she actually went to screw them. That is not how you secure greater committment from your main man. The way Tupac tells it she didn’t go screw, instead she had an “all men are shits” fit directed at random more or less manly men instead.

    All of which means she’s some combination of kinda crazy and very uninhibited. Really hot girls tend to be very uninhibited, cause they’re used to what they feel being catered to and considered of prime importance all the time. People adjust to them (which means it’s good not to, but that’s another subject.) This girl isn’t really in that category, but maybe feels she is, and besides people vary a lot. As I said first time I talked on her, she’s kinda crazy — and definitely unrestrained big time. (She might or might not be able to reign that in if she decides it would do her good to do so.)

    Your notion that TC shouldn’t have slept with her again if he felt like it, due to some moral obligation incumbant upon him and all other upstanding men, is I think rather completely out of touch with the freedom and power women have in the sexual markets today. If you want men to feel that kind of responsibility you’ll probably have to bring back notions of women being ruined if it gets out they’ve ever slept with a man they didn’t love, or more than a very few times AT MOST before marriage. You’ll have to bring back notions that there’s a bright and very consequental line seperating sluts from good girls/wife material/madonnas, and that for men to do anything to encourage the later to fall into the former category of treatment is an act of male turpitude.

    Those are olden days. If you’re gonna bring it back you have to bring it all back, not just the male gallantry towards too easily tempted and seduced women part.

    Yet so often we see women wanting to have their cake and it too, in all things gender. In fact, that seems to be one of the constants of our age.

    Like


  109. Clio 126 —

    In the kind of households I’m thinking of, the men weren’t truly “overly powerful”. (I don’t think that’s really been true of men since the early 20th century, when men in the Anglosphere lost the right to automatically claim the children of their marriage in the event of a divorce.) They were, however, oblivious and inclined to complacency, always something of a problem for most men in their relations with women in the “old days” before feminism got them all so confused.

    I take that correction and think you’re largely right. “Oblivious” and “complancency” were certainly there and big tendencies.

    The sole or anyway primary breadwinner was important though, especially when that meant upper middle class status or above. It’s still true that women in those times had an awful lot more power and influence than is currently admitted by feminists, who prefer to see a vast wasteland of female oppression before they gained political power as a movement.

    As well, I fully agree that divorce law changes were in many ways more important than women getting the vote in changing the relations between the sexes. Custody of children was only the beginning. There was a big popular culture campaign to make male adultery (despite the infrequency with which men with children actually left their wives on their own accord) into a crime against nature, as opposed to an age old cross that women had to bear, and could if the man was worthy enough and his actions were discrete enough. Heavy financial settlements in favor of women, including automatic child custody and heavy alimony and child support, became any woman’s just deserts upon discovering even a single instance of just sex adultery. It was made into an unquestionable crime against the dignity of women, in ways it had never been before.

    That remains a bedrock conviction of American, as opposed to e.g. French or most continental, feminism.

    Like


  110. Darn it. The second further indented blockquote shouldn’t be a blockquote at all, but my words, placed at the left margin.

    Like


  111. #117 Marku
    Doctrinally, however, Islam is fundamentally hostile to non-Muslims.
    No way. Just as you can find Christian scripture to back whatever nefarious scheme you might have, you can also read the Koran in many ways. Was is Shakespeare who said the devil can cite scripture for his purposes? If you look at Baqara 2:62
    http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html
    the Koran says Allah created all religions and has a place in the afterlife for ALL of them. It goes on to name Christians, Jews, and others I’ve never heard of as having a place in heaven reserved for them. Of course you can find plenty of ayas to justify religious persecution too, if that’s your purpose.

    Sharia law: I know there is a country somewhere that still uses it–can ‘t remember which one (Samolia?)–but most countries with a majority Islamic population have found it simply unworkable as a political system.

    Polygamy is at heart about ownership, as is slavery. There were slaves in the Prophet’s time, also much polygamy. The Prophet’s approach was to limit the polygamy to four instead of an unlimited number of wives. Some also recall his injunction to have more than one wife only if you can treat them all equally. As many say it is impossible to treat all wives equally, they claim this amounts to a prohibition. It is so funny to see those who try to have more than one wife with the wives all wearing exactly the same thing–if he buys one slippers he has to buy exactly the same slipper for the other, right? And they are all simmering at each other day and night to see if the other has more than them–the tension is palpable. In the meantime they have absolutely no individuality or uniqueness. How sad. Oh, and they’re supposed to be treated all the same in the bedroom too. An acquaintance of mine asked one of these multiple wives how they decided who got to sleep with the husband and she answered “Gets to? No, you don’t understand–has to.”

    Polygamy is not normal. Sure you will find plenty of players in western culture, male and female, but what relationship will survive that type of disloyalty, that type of signal that no, dearie, you are not really special? Show me a married person who is cheating and I will show you some one who five years from now will not be married. The only exceptions are for extreme financial dependency. Divorce is a financial disaster for anyone who undergoes it, male or female, they all take a hit in the bank account, but so many still think it’s worth the price.

    All in all, I find your game theory rather depressing, cynical and manipulative. How self-limiting to consider sexually as a commodity that only the female produces and only men want. Aren’t men sexual? Aren’t men capable of being desirable? And why must some men think they have to continually compete with each other to fulfill some obscure gaming theory? How disruptive to have to be around someone like that. Someone who is so immature they are always playing games and trying to dominate someone else in order try to bolster their puny self-esteem. How do we get to a cooperative model of working together as partners towards common goals?

    Like


  112. to Nijama # 130.

    “Polygamy is at heart about ownership, as is slavery.”

    Wrong. Polygamy is about survival, just like any other mating system.

    It is preferable for a man with resources to mate, and to provide for his children, than a man with no resources. In the arid desert of Tanzania, I met a wealthy Maasai man who had purchased 8 wives, at 4-5 cattle/wife. He had more children and grandchildren than he could count, but he could provide for all of them. This is preferable to many ghetto daddies in our country that have no resources to provide for themselves, much less any children. I spoke to the eldest wife, who seemed content because her children were provided for . Most Masai men had one wife, because they had few cattle to afford them. Obviously, some had none.

    “Polygamy is not normal.”

    Wrong. Resource-based polygamy would benefit our children. Our pseudo-monogamy leaves many children with only the mother, or government-substitute to provide for them.

    Like


  113. Your notion that TC shouldn’t have slept with her again if he felt like it, due to some moral obligation incumbant upon him and all other upstanding men, is I think rather completely out of touch with the freedom and power women have in the sexual markets today. If you want men to feel that kind of responsibility you’ll probably have to bring back notions of women being ruined if it gets out they’ve ever slept with a man they didn’t love, or more than a very few times AT MOST before marriage. You’ll have to bring back notions that there’s a bright and very consequental line seperating sluts from good girls/wife material/madonnas, and that for men to do anything to encourage the later to fall into the former category of treatment is an act of male turpitude.

    There is a difference between unethical and irredeemable in my opinion.

    If I had a used fridge that was worth 50$ and did not have much life in it and my casual friend needed a fridge. He was a gullible, soft-natured guy who had a very small income and two kids to take care of. If he offered 100$ for the fridge, and I told him I could not take less than 150$ and sold it to him. Sold it to him knowing that he was going to suffer because of the money it cost him for the next few months. That is an unethical act.

    By no means is it my responsibility to take care of a casual friend financially, but I would feel a bit guilty about doing something like this, even if I could use the money well. I also think a person should avoid being gullible, but that does not mean that I would like to see all gullible people being exploited.

    What Tupac did is comparable. I don’t think the girl is ruined for life, but she will be licking her wounds for a few months, maybe years. Hopefully she will have learned from her mistakes and turned Tupac into the deliverer of a valuable lesson. She may then very well become a decent wife to someone, if she learns to also love herself and not to be founds drunk sprawled across the pavement. If she continues with this behaviour for long and never learns something from it, she will end up psychologically bankrupt.

    And while I think she is 100% responsible for her life, the men who have helped her to her misery are responsible for creating the world around himself. A world in which women cannot trust a man without seeing substantial evidence of his lasting love for her, a world in which one will meet many psychologically bankrupt women and a world in which one will meet many women who have turned predatory and milk a man financially in anticipation of being dumped. This is the world he has to live in, that he created with his actions, for he is responsible for his life. I think myopic thinking is a sign of immaturity.

    That said, I don’t think that unethical actions may never be performed or that one must take care of others at the sacrifice of oneself. If I had small children that would starve if I did not, I would sell the overpriced fridge, though rather to a stranger than a casual friend. I would rather make the world a tiny bit less innocent than to see my children starve so I could keep my hands clean. I would still feel responsible for how my actions affected the world, but that does not mean I would regret my decision. Sometimes one must make hard choices, some things are worth hurting other people for and sometimes we make mistakes. That is life.

    Like


  114. So I am not saying Tupac should not have slept with her again, just that it was unethical to do so in my opinion.

    Like


  115. @Nijima- Northern Nigeria uses Sharia law. It was instituted a few years ago(5<). The North of Nigeria is where most of the country’s Muslims live (Hausas&Fulanis).If VK is here, maybe he can elaborate.

    Marruku said:As the number of internet connections continues to skyrocket around the world, more and more beta males in rich countries will go for foreign brides instead.

    And we will have wars over Pu*sy. You know most men don’t take kindly to having their women taken by outsiders. I was reading an article about how Chinese &Korean men going into the Philippines &Vietnam to find wives. It seems that sending money to the wife’s family is the most important part of the marriage for the wives. Of course more and more women from the village are being encouraged to marry foreigners so they can help their families. The local men in the village are very pissed about it to.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/world/asia/22brides.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

    that may be the correct article.
    Glengarry Glenpoon
    @100: “I wonder what these half-Chinese, half-African kids will be like.”

    Naomi Campbell. In fifteeen years, African cellphones will be hurled with intent.

    FYI,Naomi is less than a quarter Chinese.

    Other men can’t blithely dilute the value of their own sex by wasting it on their inferiors. Pearl necklaces before swine, and all that.

    Call it the ultimate in arrogance or whatever you will, but do acknowledge that men are not all cut from the same cloth.

    Bravo Gordan!

    Your courage in stating this here is most admirable, as is your respect of your own sexuality

    *standing ovation*
    It’s so nice to know that you can still find a man out there who is not a ho.
    MQsaid: I think a number of guys here are actually somewhat submissive types who are afraid of revealing their softer or more passive side to women, and are therefore overcompensating in the other direction.

    It’s a result of lord of the flies mentality among men.


    Like


  116. then you agree that it is unethical for a girl to not give it up after her date has spent money on her?

    What do you mean by spend money? Paid for a dinner or offered to buy her a new car or something in between?

    Like


  117. Why so?

    Like


  118. Yours Truly 132 —

    What Tupac did is comparable.

    It wasn’t comparable at all. He didn’t commit any kind of fraud with her. Not only did he not actively defraud her by e.g. telling her he was falling in love with her when he wasn’t, he also rather stictly avoided passive fraud, comparable to your knowing the market value of your old fridge is 50 but saying nothing when it’s obvious your poor friend thought it was worth $150 and paid you that. Instead our friend TC avoided giving her the full affectionate girlfriend treatment just so she wouldn’t be mislead. (He was also probably having fun with not doing it, but that’s another discussion.)

    But that’s not the most fruitful way of getting at what you’re fundamentally missing. Let’s try this:

    I don’t think the girl is ruined for life, but she will be licking her wounds for a few months, maybe years.

    Projecting much? This is a wild exaggeration. I dare say it’s even a wild exaggeration as applied to yourself — certainly the years part is.

    Ok, let me say this. If I thought that sleeping with that girl one last time ran any kind of real risk of traumatizing her for years afterwards, I not only wouldn’t dream of doing it, I’d morally bitch slap any man that did. ‘Kay?

    I just think it’s wildly wrong. Weeks or at most months is more like it, and that’s to get over TC and move on, not trauma over his sleeping with her that last time after her meltdown.

    Now lets discuss the real source of her upset. Is it that she’s been deceived? No. Any deception has been self deception, and that’s pretty hard to argue for as well, in a world where a decent man’s sleeping with a woman doesn’t mean he’s on the verge of asking her to marry him. We all know we’re 1) not in that world today and 2) most actively dating girls, particularly more attractive or alpha or arguably alpha girls don’t want exclusively that world either. It’s the proclivities of competing females, and really only that, that has taken us out of thta world. Devlin is right when he claims that it’s women, largely feminists, that gave us the sexual revolution (aided yes by technology), not men.

    So what is it then?

    It’s that it’s hard to find the sexually most thrilling guy for her and one who will readily commit to loving her and only her, for now and evermore, all in the same package. Note it’s not impossible, but it does take awhile, and it also usually involves compromising a little on what you can get hotness wise on a low commitment fucking basis, versus a lifetime monogomy basis. Welcome to one of the central themes of this blog.

    Now if you ask me if this girl should be shielded from all upset over this basic dilema, I’m going to give you a resounding no. It’s a way tougher wolrd for men out there in all kinds of ways, but you know sometimes it’s also tough for women. To which I say tough.

    Another way of looking at is that women regularly dangle easish sex as a way of attracting maximally hot guys they otherwise couldn’t if they were upfront about only wanting committment and life love, and then try to convert great sex and a growing communication on other levels into the full thing. The more they go after the toughest to pin down guys, esp. from a position of less than the hottest female alphaness but rather pretty hot but you know, great personality and smarts etc., the longer it’s likely to take and the more times they’re likely to be “screwed over” before they 1) find a fortuitous match with a really hot guy or 2) get more realistic about the diff between what will screw them and what will marry them or 3) mostly likely, some combination weighted towards 2, but claimed to be 1.

    That is a much fuller explanation, seems to me.

    Like


  119. I a man is asking me out, I expect that he expects to have my undivided attention, pleasant company and sincere appreciation, which I will give him, naturally. I expect he also expects to have a chance of becoming my boyfriend if there is a click and we fall in love down the line. I expect that he expects sex somewhere down the line if all works out.

    If I expect a man will never be my boyfriend, I will stop dating him.

    If I expect a man is expecting sex at the end of a date, I will not date him.

    Sometimes my expectations may prove wrong once in a while and I may hurt someone inadvertently. Unfortunately, this can happen. I do not consider this to be unethical because I did not expect to hurt that person.

    Now if a man is offering to buy me a car, I expect that he is expecting something more than my sincere gratitude. I also expect that he may be deeply disappointed or fiercely angry if he does not get what he wants. It would be unethical for me to take it and offer nothing but my gratitude. Therefore, I would decline his offer.

    Like


  120. Tupac 12–

    Are you enjoying having had a tale from your life become a case study? 😉

    Like


  121. Projecting much? This is a wild exaggeration. I dare say it’s even a wild exaggeration as applied to yourself — certainly the years part is.

    2 years.

    Finding out that what I thought was real love was nothing more than interest and infatuation put me in agony. I did not act crazy and to this day he does not know to what extent he has hurt me. My heart was seriously wounded and it took a year for the wound to close and two years for the scars to be faded. What was most painful was that he continues the relation after he knew he did not see a future. Life decided that we would work together closely after I was healed, and I have discovered that he also has some very positive sides to his character, so though what he did was unethical, I don’t see him as an evil. Besides that, I have learned much from the experience and have rebuilt myself better than if I had never been broken. But he will never get to touch me in that way again, even though he has tried. The irony is that he is now looking for a good woman to settle down with(He is older than me), and realises he missed out on a formidable one. That too, is life.

    With my first boyfriend, it was less painful, for when we were together, he loved me with all his heart and as soon as it was clear that, even though we still felt love for each other, a future for us was not in the cards, he did not make sexual advances even though we were on vacation together. Perhaps it also helped that it was a mutual decision, but I could accept the loss of love. It took some time to get over him, but I felt sadness, not agony. The memories I have of him are still good. With the second one, all the memories turned into dark ugly thing that woke me in a sweat at night, until I resolved them. Now they are neutral for the most part, I welcome the tiny sting as a reminder of what the price is for being too trusting.

    So here is my history, hope it broadens your world.

    Like


  122. Oh, I’d like to tell Tupac that even if I think what he did was unethical, I don’t think of him as a bad person in totality. Sometimes decent people make choices that hurt others and sometimes they make choices that bring others joy and heal them. This is just one of the many things you did in your life, most of which I will never know.

    Like


  123. Doctrinally, however, Islam is fundamentally hostile to non-Muslims.
    No way. Just as you can find Christian scripture to back whatever nefarious scheme you might have, you can also read the Koran in many ways. Was is Shakespeare who said the devil can cite scripture for his purposes? If you look at Baqara 2:62
    http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html
    the Koran says Allah created all religions and has a place in the afterlife for ALL of them. It goes on to name Christians, Jews, and others I’ve never heard of as having a place in heaven reserved for them. Of course you can find plenty of ayas to justify religious persecution too, if that’s your purpose.

    Are you aware of the abrogation principle? Islamic scholars created it a thousand years ago (with justification from the Quran itself) to sort out contradictions in the Quran and the hadiths. According to it, when two verses contradict, the earlier is abrogated by the later. The more belligerent suras revealed during of the era when Muhammad was driven out of Mecca to Medina thus abrogate the earlier tolerant suras.


    Sharia law: I know there is a country somewhere that still uses it–can ‘t remember which one (Samolia?)–but most countries with a majority Islamic population have found it simply unworkable as a political system.

    Sharia is a major source of law in most traditionally Muslim countries. Saudi-Arabia and possibly Jemen come closest to implementing it in the full. The constitutions of Afganistan and Iraq state that laws that contradict Sharia may not be passed. Some Muslim majority countries such as Turkey and Tunisia are constitutionally secular.

    Like


  124. Dougjnn #128,

    Nothing is going to change my conviction that male adultery does insult women’s dignity. First, it means that she has to endure the possibility that family money (and in dowry-based societies like the ones to which you refer, it might well be her family’s money) is likely to go to the support of children that are not hers; so, too, would the time and attention of her husband. Second, children who are aware that they have an adulterous father often become estranged from and contemptuous towards him. Third, it’s not really possible for two parties to a marriage to tell lies/wink at lies without becoming contemptuous towards each other.

    In any case, in the societies you’re thinking of (France, Italy, Portugal, Spain etc. – basically all of Catholic Europe), adultery was tacitly accepted in women as well as in men. It’s actually rather more complicated than many people realise: the Church, and the courts, saw double adultery (in which both parties were married) as a far more serious sin than adultery committed with an unmarried woman. Socially, however, to seduce the unmarried daughter of a respectable family was a huge faux pas, worse than an affair with a married woman, and one which might get a man ostracized.

    Finally, something that many people often forget, adultery in which an unmarried man had an affair with a married woman was regarded as worst of all, socially and morally, but the punishments for both sexes were disparate: she might get stuck in a convent, he might well find himself facing a death penalty, in some areas. If you think that sounds fair enough, you’re underestimating the kind of distress some women faced when they found themselves in loveless marriages in which husbands hardly bothered even to pretend fidelity.

    No matter how unsatisfactory I find today’s marital arrangements, I can’t say I’d like to return to this state of affairs. And if ever marriage is taken more seriously again, I hope that adultery in both sexes will be regarded as equally reprehensible, if in different ways.

    Clio

    Like


  125. Tupac Chopra 146–

    Ah yes. The more detailed and esp. after math facts are far more as I was envisioning them than a whole lot of the femmes around here joined by some betas were.

    How surprising.

    Like


  126. All right, Tupac, now it’s time for me to get rough with you. I honestly didn’t think that your previous story was so bad, or that you’d done anything wrong, by today’s standards. I only thought that after you heard about her nutty reaction to you, you ought to avoid seeing her again, both for the sake of prudence and ethics. That’s all.

    But this latest piece of self-defense you wrote is truly distasteful. Complacent in your assumption that you are a “high status male” you seem unable recognise that the tick-tocking women at whom you take a jab for their failure to have landed a man in their early 20s, are in a major bind. They want a relationship with a man, they have to be willing to have sex; they have to be willing to have it with no questions asked or strings attached. Young men are usually not willing to “settle down” all that early; older men are hard to meet when a girl is only 21 and in school, unless they’re married professors.

    So a girl in that situation takes her chances with the men available to her, and perhaps they want marriage, perhaps they don’t. She gets older and hopes that the men too will be more willing to “settle” as they get older. Only perhaps they aren’t. She meets an attractive one who seems to be interested; she may deceive herself about the level of his interest, but that kind of deception is easy to fall into, when everyone is telling her that her clock is ticking and she’d better hurry up and make up her mind.

    And you see this kind of woman with contempt. No, I don’t mean in the way you actually treated her at the time – I mean the way you write about her now. Why? So that you don’t have to feel guilty for taking your pleasure with no thought of the impact it has on other people, it seems.

    As I said, your original story was fine. It’s your rationalization after the fact that I find so unpleasant. Cut the contempt for women trying to blunder through the dating world; it’s not that easy for us either.

    Clio

    Like


  127. The more belligerent suras revealed during of the era when Muhammad was driven out of Mecca to Medina thus abrogate the earlier tolerant suras.:

    There are four major branches of Islam and not everyone reads Koran the same way. My Koran classes definitely teach that all the religions were created by Allah for a reason and that Allah wants them left alone. The belligerent passages are explained by the idea that Allah only said it was okay to go after them only after they attacked the Moslems first. Compare “Bush doctrine”. Try googling “The Amman Statement” for the scholarly Koranic explanation of moderate Islam.

    #131
    Polygamy is about survival, just like any other mating system. compare:

    ~Slavery is about survival, just like any other economic system.
    ~Using young boys as prostitutes for older men is about survival, just like any other mating system.
    ~The female black widow spider killing the male spider is about survival, just like any other slavery system.

    This [being purchased as a slave] is preferable to many ghetto daddies in our country that have no resources to provide for themselvescompare:

    ~A young boy giving oral sex to older men in exchange for money is preferable to starving to death.
    ~Being sold as a slave is just fine because they are being economically cared for.

    who seemed content because her children were provided for
    Yup, dem darkies is so content-like; see dem singin’ in da fields.

    No one has challenged the assertion that men only want sex and women only want commitment? I have found the opposite to be true. You only have to look up this thread a little bit to find someone who, by his own explanation was so desperate to manipulate a woman into coming back that he was willing to act like a jerk against his true nature in order to cling to her. And this Tupac guy who broke up with someone he said he was just using for sex–after she told him he could be more successful with her if he was more affectionate and treated her less like meat. So did he really mean it? No way. When she took him at his word and said sayanara, he found out he really did care if she was talking to other men, stalked her all night, prevented her from moving on, and carried her off to his cave. Yeah, sure he didn’t want commitment.

    What really cracks me up is the way some of these guys preface their descriptions of their own jerklike behavior by claiming someone else (not a specifically named person, of course) is being a jerk. Which makes being a jerk okay because some theoretical other person did it first.

    Like


  128. Oh, and the other reason they have to be jerks is because, well, see, the world is dichotomous and is divided up into Betas who don’t want to hurt people, which is bad and jerks who don’t want to be Betas so they can hurt people, because see, being a Beta is not good, because, well, it just is.

    Like


  129. I suppose it’s time to weigh in now that I’ve had a chance to gather my thoughts on the whole torrid affair.

    First, to all the bleeding hearts out there who are beside themselves over the supposed vulnerable “victim”:

    This “girl” was 27-28 (yes, not my normal preference but Tupac is getting on in years and sometimes needs to make allowances for his waning Jedi powers), college educated, a *schoolteacher* who works with disadvantaged kids (as I said, she can be sweet), lives at home with her apparently normal family, is world-travelled (she has worked as “personal assistant” to a couple big-shot tycoons in Europe), and finally, while she was not part of my intimate social circle, she was in close enough orbit for me to gather that she was high-functioning in all other aspects of her life.

    She was, to follow, the classic globe-trotting, pinot noir-sipping hipster chick. And as such, the only “vulnerability” she had is the one all women suffer:

    tick tock tick tock

    The women who play the game of trying to catch the high-status males as they slowly pass their prime child-bearing years are playing a risky game indeed.

    The story as told is not one of cold-blooded, dirty ol’ Tupac preying upon the weak. What you read is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object, i.e., female game meets Tupac.

    What some of you seem unable to comprehend is that even the most accomplished woman can be reduced to a convulsing mass of tears when she is unable to extract commitment from a high-status male and/or feels her clock ticking…deafeningly.

    It will no doubt comfort some of you to believe that she must’ve had some sort of “self-esteem” issue. It is true that many women (some more than others) feel a strong sense of “yearning” that might be described in such terms, but that yearning is built into the machine by eons of natural selection. It’s not going away any time soon.

    As far as her “licking her wounds for years”, Yours Truly?

    After that incident, she kept gaming me, playing hard-to-get, before she took another European vacation weeks later and found somebody else to play with.

    Speaking of Yours Truly:

    She is insane, and you may have triggered/aggravated her condition, you scoundrel.

    “Scoundrel”. LOL. I like the sound of that, never got that one before. Maybe Clio could add that one to her list. 😉

    When you said she was not your girlfriend, a normal reaction would be to cuss you out, maybe throw a drink at you, block your number and avoid your kind for life.

    Exsqueeze me???

    You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. As I said in my original comment:

    “Earlier this year I was “dating” this cute, sweet (seemingly), schoolteacher type. I actually did like her, but she was just a hair’s breadth away from making it over my bar for wanting a relationship. (I’m sure you gentlemen know what I’m talking about). Because of this, and my own compassion *for her*, I never did any sweet, lovey-dovey type things with her that might lead her on.”

    We had known each other casually for a few weeks, and later sleeping together for a few more. It is a matter of personal integrity for me to avoid giving women the impression I want something serious when I do not. I actually bend over backwards sometimes to do this. I have also let a few quality girls slip between my fingers because of my adherence to this principle.

    Let me be clear: however the girl chooses to interpret the status of our relationship IS ENTIRELY HER RESPONSIBILITY.

    You, like many women, suffer under the delusion that if a man you are dating/sexing spends *any* time with you, that you are thereby on the fast track to love and marriage, eventually. It just ain’t so. Although I do understand why it is advantageous for you believe so: it gives you a moral cudgel to beat over the heads of guys like me.

    You will notice in the above quote I mentioned my lovemaking. Yes, even a well-intentioned man can fall into the trap of overly romantic sex leading a woman to believe he is in love. But, you see, Tupac is so sensitive that he has learned to avoid even that transgression (and btw, for any guys out there, this is a good acid test to see how much your woman respects you as a man — if she requires excessive candles and roses, she likes you more for your provider qualities).

    Trust me, I have a heart, and the consequences of my actions do weigh on my conscience. Oh well.

    tonight I go to hell
    for what I’ve done to you
    this ain’t about regret
    it’s when I tell the truth
    — Afghan Whigs

    You also claim I “manipulated” the girl. Give me a break. I did *nothing* of the sort. I presented myself as the attractive, engaging man that I am. We did fun things together. We had good conversations. We had good sex (Mu’Min, if you’re reading, this was my first Ares, so you know what I mean…soooooo much fun in the sack). I made no promises of future dates. I called her up at my pleasure.

    But I know why you think what you think. *She* was gaming *me*, trying to beta-ize me. We were having great sex, so why did I need to start becoming more “romantic” in bed, after 3-4 weeks no less? Because she had *plans* for me. Plans that I simply refused to acknowledge, because I was under no obligation to do so. That’s where a lot of betas fuck up.

    Your impression of me comes as no surprise, because, were I in *your* shoes, I would see it the same way. Women are wired to seek commitment from men they value. Men are wired to seek sexual variety. That’s never going to change. As an old Russian proverb puts it: it’s a woman’s job to try and gain control of her man, and it’s a man’s job to keep her from getting it. C’est la vie!

    Sleeping with someone like that is about as ethical as sleeping with a 16yo or a girl with Down, it is taking advantage of someone very vulnerable, only human vultures do that.

    Now…I have to say I take extreme umbrage at your accusations of my depravity. Seriously. I don’t normally give a flying fig what some anonymous internet entity has to say about me, but this happens to be a point of personal pride, so allow me to get a little personal.

    I was born and raised to be self-sacrificing. I developed early on an extreme sensitivity to the emotional states of others around me. It sucked. As a child, and later as an adolescent, I could never take any action without running through my mind a neurotic checklist of how my actions would impact the feelings of those around me. I had been trained to put others’ interests before my own.

    You can imagine how this impacted my early romantic “adventures.” My crippling mental state combined with the bullshit that passed for “wisdom” regarding women back then, made for a debilitating condition. It was only through sheer will and hard work (and yes, even love), that I have managed to become the man I am today. Looking back from where I started, I dare say it was something of a Herculean achievement for me. Not only because of my current skillz with da bitches, but because all along I stayed true to my compassion and empathy.

    Even as I passed though the “misogynistic” stages of the seduction community, I managed to maintain some (some) degree of empathy for women, unlike many others.

    If what I say here about women and relationships seems callous at times, it is only because — after years of earnest reflection — I have come to see that such is exactly the way of the world. And — I will not be swayed by the moralisms of the likes of you to sacrifice my interests in the service of making life easier for your kind.

    Especially after a scene like that, you have sex with her?

    I didn’t know about her flipping out at the hipster joint until the next day, if that’s what you mean. On the other hand, if you mean the way she played me at the first club, why should I begrudge her that? He actions were clearly a result of her strong desire for me, so why not indulge her? 😉

    I’ve found that it’s wise not to take the events of life, good or bad, too personally.

    Life’s too short to hold grudges.

    TC

    Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur

    Like


  130. Scenario B. pulls me back because he addressed my navigation skills. ………a real soft spot of mine.

    All the other actions/lines are irrelevant.

    Like


  131. You can imagine how this impacted my early romantic “adventures.” My crippling mental state combined with the bullshit that passed for “wisdom” regarding women back then, made for a debilitating condition. It was only through sheer will and hard work (and yes, even love), that I have managed to become the man I am today. Looking back from where I started, I dare say it was something of a Herculean achievement for me. Not only because of my current skillz with da bitches, but because all along I stayed true to my compassion and empathy.

    Look, I do see compassion in many of your posts, so while I consider you a scoundrel for that act, I do take back the word vulture, as that makes it sound like you are to blame. Being well schooled and well travelled does not mean someone cannot be an emotional wreck, but I guess you were not aware of that. People with depression, drinking problems and the like sometimes hold down good jobs. People sprawled out on the pavement drunk are not sane regardless of intelligence. That does not mean that they are not responsible for their lives any more, but it may affect how we decide to treat them.
    Also keep in mind that I have said that this girl’s life is 100% her own responsibility. You contributed to her condition, but she is responsible for accepting the contribution. You are just responsible for your actions.
    Had the girl told me this same story, and asked me for my opinion, I would have told her she acted like a nutcase, and needs to find out why she sought out a man like you, why she felt she deserved less than romantic treatment and why she lacked the self control to avoid drinking to excess. I would have told her that she could not change your actions, but she controlled how she responded to it and thus how your influence would affect her. I would also advice her some time to be celibate and focus on herself. But what was asked of me was not advice for that girl, but opinions on your act.

    I think most women, exception being those of unusual wiring, will need at least 6 months to heal from a broken heart. If she does not take that time to heal, the woman will not spontaneously combust, but her heart will be scarred, if not wounded. She will take her pain into the next relationship, which is unethical towards both the new man and herself. If this pattern repeats often enough, her heart becomes scar tissue and infected sores, making her at once insensitive and easily hurt to the point of explosion. This is what I call psychologically bankrupt.

    Have you ever imagined that many women may have the same debilitating condition that is naiveté and misinformation? Girls hear lies all the time.

    Who is telling little girls to keep their legs closed until infatuation has turned into love, and some serious proof of that love has been shown if they want to avoid being used for sex? Who is telling girls to be a bit less nice? Who is telling girls that treating a boyfriend like a husband will leave her in perpetual spinsterhood? Who is telling girls that shy men are simply not interested enough to get over their cowardice? Who is telling women that men who do not buy gifts, write poems and light candles are using and not loving the woman they are with? Who is telling women that men who expect you to pull your own weight in dating will make you pull his after marriage?

    People whose mouth is soon taped.

    Is the naive girl who believes some of these lies to be contempted? Is she someone who plays the game and loses? Does a man winning the game from her mean all actions he performs on her are acceptable?

    The combination of the lies being told in society and lack of time spent healing after a broken heart is what causes women to lose their sensitivity, dignity and their emotional balance. In that condition, they fall for men with unethical intentions over and over.

    I’ve found that it’s wise not to take the events of life, good or bad, too personally.

    Life’s too short to hold grudges.

    You are so right about that!

    Like


  132. on September 25, 2008 at 3:25 pm Comment_Just_Curious

    Many women of course say that Tupac was cruel for sleeping with her that last time.

    I’m actually curious, did that last time ACTUALLY make it worse for her?

    This is a real question. Had he said, “I don’t want you, leave!” would that have made her feel BETTER? Instead she got one last good hormone kick, and could at least leave saying “he still wants my body”. And I’m quite sure that matters to women. The swarm of beta’s around the Amazon fatale is one of the things that allows her to be an Amazon… virgin or not. Her hotness is never in question, and she has nothing to prove. I kinda wonder if a six could EVER be that type of woman.

    Back to the poor girl in Tupac’s story, would have REJECTING her body after REJECTING her personality really have helped?

    Does anyone have an opinion on that?

    Like


  133. Back to the poor girl in Tupac’s story, would have REJECTING her body after REJECTING her personality really have helped?

    Does anyone have an opinion on that?

    I have learned it not to be very productive to speak in terms of ethical or not, so let me speak in terms of what I would enjoy seeing.

    I would prefer if a man in that situation would tell the girl “I would love to sleep with you, and have always enjoyed doing so, but I think you are harming yourself in sleeping with a man who has told you he feels nothing romantic from you.” You can buy her a scoop of Ben&Jerry’s if you want to be real nice.

    I always try to give my rejectees a compliment, a piece of advice and a refreshment, to soften the blow.

    But maybe I’m a hopeless good two shoes.

    Like


  134. Tupe, she topped you. You were “tearing the club apart” looking for her, texting her ferociously, pleading with her via pseudo-threats, picking her up out of the sewer she’d dropped herself into.

    Very sweet of you. Very compassionate. As soon as the waterworks turned on, as soon as the chest-pounding and “asshole”s began, that should have been it.

    She should have been “tearing the club apart” looking for you. She should have been texting you. While the whole time, you weren’t just flirting with other girls, but really truly putting moves on them. Moves with intent. Intent to leave that very place that very night with someone other than her.

    I haven’t read the comments other than Clio’s, so you may have heard all this before: you got beta’d by a very fucked up chick. And you’re still questioning yourself about it. What’s the problem? I am genuinely puzzled that you’ve even given her any thought at all after that abortion of an evening.

    The thing is, Tupac, for all that Clio scolded you for your misogynistic ex post facto rationalizations, you strike me as being, as evidenced by this story, too compassionate for your own good. You’re too nice a guy.

    I say without an ounce of irony that I am worried about you. I think you might actually be attracted to the fucked-up women of the world. Which means you’ve got W-N’s in your future, and a lot of them.

    I mean, I’m actually unironically worried. W-N’s have got nothing to offer men, including you. You deserve better.

    Not that you can have Clio, mind you. I like you TC, but not that much.

    Patrick

    Like


  135. 148 Clio:

    YE GODS I HAVE DISPLEASED MY MUSE

    Clio, I think you misunderstood me. No worries, you were probably just preoccupied with your Muse-ly duties and all. My discussion about the unenviable position many women find themselves in (finding love in their later years) was to make a single point to the haters here: the type of theatrics I observed are in no way uncommon among normal women, and can’t be used to infer mental illness or what have you. I have seen even worse displays secondhand. I’ll never forget the time I saw a rich, beautiful banker type reduce herself to literally clinging to the leg of a Sooper Alpha friend of mine when he had to give her The Speech in an Applebees restaurant.

    I was discussing the topic in the abstract, not directing any sort of sentiment toward my girl in particular. I take no joy in it. It is regrettable. I believe I went on to discuss at length the mental quagmire I sometimes find myself in due to my excessive empathy.

    And you see this kind of woman with contempt. No, I don’t mean in the way you actually treated her at the time – I mean the way you write about her now. Why?

    As I just explained, I do not hold her in contempt. Where do you get that? I made a conscious effort to avoid leading her on. I never lied or made promises to her. I treated her well.

    But this is where we reach the real heart of our disagreement. It seems as if you believe I have a responsibility to her — a responsibility that a less self-aware man would not have. That, because I am cognizant enough to understand the hand she’s been dealt that I should thereby tip my own. I couldn’t disagree more. To put it another way:

    Her (or your) existential crisis is not my moral quandry

    Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.

    We were both educated, intelligent adults. She could make her own decisions. Lesser men would not hesitate to be effusive in their affections, to only drop her like a hot potato when they found someone else (and I’m sure have). I hold myself to a higher standard. I mentioned ealier my difficulties as an adolescent learning to distinguish my boundaries from those of others. This is what this is about. Why should I constantly second guess her intentions and goals? People are usually unreliable in their self-disclosures anyway. As a matter of mental health and sanity I can only assume the other person is a functioning adult and can decide for themselves what they want. To do otherwise is to embark on a slippery slope that leads to self-sacrifice and failure. That way lies madness.

    So that you don’t have to feel guilty for taking your pleasure with no thought of the impact it has on other people, it seems.

    I don’t believe I did anything I should feel guilty about. A sense of sad lament for her feelings? Maybe. Guilty? Never.

    Cut the contempt for women trying to blunder through the dating world; it’s not that easy for us either.

    I know. I would bestow a single kiss upon your fevered brow if you were with me right now.

    Like


  136. 155 PatrickH:

    This is interesting. Clio thinks I’m too heartless and you think I’m not heartless enough.

    Tupe, she topped you.

    She didn’t top shit.

    You were “tearing the club apart” looking for her, texting her ferociously, pleading with her via pseudo-threats, picking her up out of the sewer she’d dropped herself into.

    I think you misunderstand. I didn’t flinch at any point during the evening. The poor girl was showing me through her actions just how much she liked me. Betas would have taken her behavior as disrespect and gotten angry. I kept my cool while she played her little games. I looked for her in the club because I knew she didn’t really want me to go and because she needed a ride (that might have been a little to noble of me — I’ll grant you that). I texted her simply to find out where she was so I could take her home. I fully expected her to break things off the next day. No hard feelings, you know?

    Very sweet of you. Very compassionate. As soon as the waterworks turned on, as soon as the chest-pounding and “asshole”s began, that should have been it.

    Patrick, when a small child drums his fists against your legs during a temper tantrum do you use your greater strength to bash his head in, or do you calmly restrain his wrists as you escort him to his room? To overreact to the outbursts of children/women belies a sense of insecurity and weakness. To say nothing of class and honor.

    haven’t read the comments other than Clio’s, so you may have heard all this before: you got beta’d by a very fucked up chick. And you’re still questioning yourself about it. What’s the problem? I am genuinely puzzled that you’ve even given her any thought at all after that abortion of an evening.

    Because her outburst was so out of character for her. She was fine in all other aspects. (I’ve been with my share of crazy party girls — this one was not like that). Now that Clio has explicated the matter further for everyone here, I will ask again: if her reaction was indeed a result of her frustrations over being able to find a boyfriend/husband in her late 20’s, should she be forgiven? From everything Clio writes, it seems like I should reconsider her if I was indeed looking for something serious. And maybe I am. I’m not sure at this point. If the girl had not done what she did, there is a good chance, as Lisa pointed out, that she would’ve slipped under my radar and we’d still be together today.

    I say without an ounce of irony that I am worried about you. I think you might actually be attracted to the fucked-up women of the world.

    Well, I will confess to being drawn to challenges sometimes. Keeps life interesting, you know?

    I mean, I’m actually unironically worried. W-N’s have got nothing to offer men,…

    …besides their lithe little bodies…

    Not that you can have Clio, mind you. I like you TC, but not that much.

    Don’t you have some heart medication to take or something?

    Like


  137. Clio

    So a girl in that situation takes her chances with the men available to her, and perhaps they want marriage, perhaps they don’t. She gets older and hopes that the men too will be more willing to “settle” as they get older. Only perhaps they aren’t. She meets an attractive one who seems to be interested; she may deceive herself about the level of his interest, but that kind of deception is easy to fall into, when everyone is telling her that her clock is ticking and she’d better hurry up and make up her mind.

    And you see this kind of woman with contempt. No, I don’t mean in the way you actually treated her at the time – I mean the way you write about her now. Why? So that you don’t have to feel guilty for taking your pleasure with no thought of the impact it has on other people, it seems.

    I’m sorry Ciio but this oration of yours seems on ifts face to owe one hell of a lot more to your projecting yourself into Tupac’s story and further elaboration, than it does to what he actually said.

    He did not treat the girl in question with contempt at all, nor did he discuss her with contempt in this second go around. He did dismiss to a considrable extent the notions of Yours Truley in particular, who’s self projections may be more wild than your own, that the girl in question was actually so terribly damaged by his, Tupac’s failure to comment.

    Clio, have you forgotten that this whole relationship was only a weeks or a couple of months in? As well the girl in question, unlike the girl you or particularly Yours Truely projectingly imagined, seems to have recovered quite neatly in a few weeks.

    Although let’s suppose she didn’t. You think maybe she should have set her sights on a somewhat different sort of guy if she didn’t want a guy who’s refused to commit exclusively to her after a few weeks of dating? Should she have perhaps set her sights on a guy that wasn’t as interesting to as many other competing, ready sex girls? Maybe she should focus on higher betas? Remember by beta we’re talking about sexual hotness, not overall worth as a mate, income, or a lot of things.

    As for the terrible pressures which girls face who want to find a permanent relationship but find they have to put out sexually early to attract very attractive men, I say take that up with their / your female competitors. If you want to take that up with men and have any impact you’re going to have to take it up with men who aren’t so good at attracting lots of women in a directly sexual way, in public meet markets.

    How is it that so many women have so little to say about various kinds and degrees of beta men (some of which have very good jobs and incomes) having what do seem to me to be a much harder and maybe unprecedently hard time attracting fairly attractive women — yet feel free to get all moral about the disinclination of the “two few to go around” pool of alpha men’s disinclination to confine themselves to one woman?

    Look to yourselve ladies.

    I’m sorry Clio, this just seems to me like one more instance of women wishing to push the primary responsibility for everything off on men, while taking nothing or only a little bit of shared responsibility, NEVER THE PRIMARY PORTION on their collective selves.

    So no, I don’t agree with your assessment.

    That PatrickH has come charing enthusiastically along in support is, well, hardly a surprise, now is it?

    Like


  138. Tupac Chopra 157 —

    it seems like I should reconsider her if I was indeed looking for something serious. And maybe I am. I’m not sure at this point. If the girl had not done what she did, there is a good chance, as Lisa pointed out, that she would’ve slipped under my radar and we’d still be together today.

    Well this is inteesting. I hadn’t seen this whole post of yours when I last commented above.

    As I said in my first long post on your tale, I don’t think what she did was THAT crazy. I called it semi crazy. It speaks more of her degree of upset over not being able to get you to commit to her than anything else. That could be because you’re that much head and toe above other guys she’s been with in her estimation (obviously the GOOD reason) or because she’s so desperate right now to find an attractive man who will commit and she’s not that experienced or good at it overall, i.e. it’s more a timing thing (not so good).

    But my main assumption in that first post is that she didn’t quite measure up so far as you were concerned. That’s why I said it would all probably look different to you if she struck you as hotter. You leave it to our imagination as to why not, but you say it before and apparently independently of her meltdown behavior. You give that prior judgement as a reason why you’d been careful not to treat her more like full on gf material.

    I’d be real careful about sliding over that judgment. Don’t just ignore it because you’re in a way kinda impressed she cared enough about you to go so nutso. You also might have been wrong about it, but I’d focus more there in the first instance than exactly how she acted that night, since it wasn’t completely outside bounds, the way going off and screwing a few randoms that night for those reasons would have been, without question (in my view).

    Overall consider this. It seems you’re feeling your own tick toc around now. Understood. It’s not as pressing, or shouldn’t be. There’s no need for panic or excessive haste, just because you’re starting to mode shift. STARTing to. Make sure you find the right one.

    Also, prenup. American marriage / divorce theft does not cease to be what it is because you want to have a committed relationship for the rest of your life. It might actually help, and in fact aid in initial filtering. I think you should reject out of hand all “you obviously don’t love me enough” arguments. Instead, no, you’re not desperate, but you do want her.

    Like


  139. Oh for goodness sake, dougjnn, when I wrote that last comment I tried carefully to emphasize that I WAS NOT referring to the “real life” scenario that Tupac discussed.

    I said in my FIRST message that I didn’t see anything wrong with the way he handled the young woman in question. I just added that if she was that unstable it would be “imprudent” and “unethical” to see her again.

    In my LAST message on the subject, I explained that I was not reacting to Tupac’s actual behaviour, but to what I saw as the rather contemptuous way he described the desperation of late-20-something women looking for lasting “relationships”. He may not have meant to have that effect, but something about the words he used rubbed me the wrong way.

    Yours, however, are even more exasperating. Look, I understand that women ignore or turn away from some good men, good “beta” men, and pursue alphas only to be disappointed. But really, the reasons women end up unmarried in their late 20s or at any other age are more complicated than that. Not all “betas” want to marry young (as I believe I said in my post). Some of them, like you, are convinced that women are out to rob them of their hard-earned money; others are holding out for perfection; others still are too truly hopeless (shy, inept, and unable to show affection) to be good husband material.

    And all this rot about women wanting to push the primary responsibility for everything off on to men is just that. I have no doubt that women’s own choices have something to do with the mess that romance is in now – but this entire blog and its commenters are almost entirely concerned with blaming women in general for everything. I just like to redress the balance by pointing out that it’s not ONLY women who have brought things to this pass, and it’s not only “betas” who suffer for it, either.

    Anway, are you really not able to grasp the simple principle that the general doesn’t always have much bearing on the particular?

    clio

    Like


  140. Clio —

    Though you want to hear something ironic Clio. When I think about it, I have a pretty good feeling based on what I know or think I do, that none of this would apply to you.

    It doesn’t apply to all women. It’s just that the marriage and family lawy system leaves men so vulnerable.

    Like


  141. Dougjnn, all I meant was that you often refer to “divorce theft” and appear to be convinced that women are all likely to practise it, once married.

    I’m sorry I missed some of the points in your comment to me but it’s hard to keep everything in mind in these discussions sometimes.

    I don’t think cohabitation is much of an option for people of either sex, and I think it’s a terrible one for any children born of their unions. I suppose if you don’t intend to have children at all it might make sense, but otherwise it opens up all kinds of complicated custody issues, and what’s more, you might find that it allows fathers even fewer rights than marriage does wrt custody, child support and so forth. What’s more, I believe cohabiting couples can find themselves stuck with helping to support a former partner when their arrangement breaks down, in some jurisdictions.

    clio

    Like


  142. 160 Clio:

    You are so adorable when you get upset.

    *kiss*

    Like


  143. 159 doug:

    That could be because you’re that much head and toe above other guys she’s been with in her estimation (obviously the GOOD reason) or because she’s so desperate right now to find an attractive man who will commit and she’s not that experienced or good at it overall, i.e. it’s more a timing thing (not so good).

    A bit of both I’m sure. Which is why I make it a point to consider anything serious with a girl ONLY after she has demonstrated proper respect for The Cock. Anything else runs the risk of being played as a provider chump. See:

    http://www.womensinfidelity.com/

    I’d be real careful about sliding over that judgment. Don’t just ignore it because you’re in a way kinda impressed she cared enough about you to go so nutso. You also might have been wrong about it, but I’d focus more there in the first instance than exactly how she acted that night…

    No, you got me wrong. When I mentioned about how I’m not sure of what I want, I was speaking generally, not necessarily about that particular girl. I’m at that stage where I’m ambivalent about my goals, but that particular girl would only take my current mystery and wrap it in an engima. It’s two different issues.

    Like


  144. 162 doug:

    Though you want to hear something ironic Clio. When I think about it, I have a pretty good feeling based on what I know or think I do, that none of this would apply to you.

    My feeling, my hope, my dream, my salvation.

    Clio, I really don’t think our age difference would be much of an obstacle.

    And all the roads we have to walk are winding
    And all the lights that lead us there are blinding
    There are many things that I would like to say to you
    But I don’t know how

    Because baby
    You’re gonna be the one that saves me
    And after all
    You’re my wonderwall

    I don’t believe that anybody
    Feels the way I do
    About you now

    And all the roads that lead you there are winding
    And all the lights that light the way are blinding
    There are many things that I would like to say to you
    But I don’t know how

    I said maybe – are you’re gonna be the one that saves me?
    And after all – you’re my Wonderwall

    I said maybe
    You’re gonna be the one that saves me
    You’re gonna be the one that saves me
    You’re gonna be the one that saves me
    Because you’re my wonderwall
    — Oasis

    Like


  145. We were both educated, intelligent adults. She could make her own decisions. Lesser men would not hesitate to be effusive in their affections, to only drop her like a hot potato when they found someone else (and I’m sure have). I hold myself to a higher standard. I mentioned ealier my difficulties as an adolescent learning to distinguish my boundaries from those of others. This is what this is about. Why should I constantly second guess her intentions and goals? People are usually unreliable in their self-disclosures anyway. As a matter of mental health and sanity I can only assume the other person is a functioning adult and can decide for themselves what they want. To do otherwise is to embark on a slippery slope that leads to self-sacrifice and failure. That way lies madness.

    Tupac, I understand what you mean and I would like to add that these are difficult decisions that we all have to make in our lives. Sometimes we regret our decision, sometimes others get hurt no matter what decision we make. Sometimes it feels unfair that a less aware person doe not feel the need to think about his decisions. Sometimes it feels unfair that another person has hurt us without realising the consequences of his actions. Sometimes it is very difficult and distressing to be the responsible person who is making the decisions that affect others.

    I’m sorry Clio, this just seems to me like one more instance of women wishing to push the primary responsibility for everything off on men, while taking nothing or only a little bit of shared responsibility, NEVER THE PRIMARY PORTION on their collective selves.

    Dougjnn, I repeated many times that this girl’s life is her own responsibility and that Tupac is only responsible for his actions. I am a bit annoyed that you seem to think that because I feel people, including men, are responsible for their actions, you imply that women refuse to take responsibility for everything. Perhaps you do not mean me, but I am also a woman and when you say women do…, it also reflects on me. I know that I take plenty of responsibility for myself and actively seek to extend my responsibility to include others around me and the world at large.

    I guess this ties back in to what Tupac called the boundaries of responsibility. Where there is an interaction, there is an overlap of responsibilities. The more of those responsibilities I take, the more I can influence what happens in that interaction. I am responsible for my actions, how I deal with the actions of others, what I inspire in others and what I do with the stirrings that others inspire in me. That does not mean I am obligated to sacrifice myself. Obligated to whom? I don’t believe in a higher power.

    If I wear a modest v-neck instead of acres of cleavage, in order not to inspire unwanted touch, I do not see this as sacrificing my freedom of choice, but as choosing with an eye on the consequences of my choices. If a 45 year old man if offering to take me shopping with the expectation that I will have sex with him at some point, and I know he will be seriously angered if his expectations are not met, I do not feel I am sacrificing myself. I am making a choice of valuing the absence of distressing dissatisfaction in another’s life and of an angry outburst in my life more than I value some new clothes.

    There is no obligation.
    I make those choices because I value my peace of mind and that of others over a few items I do not need and because I value others respecting my physical integrity over a bit of attention and a fashion statement. Other people may have other values.

    I am as free as a bird to choose to wear a cleavage down to my bellybutton and to take all the goodies that are offered to me even if this has emotional consequences. And it does no matter how hard I assume all the people I am dealing with are functioning adults. If some drunk guy at a bar pinches my cleavage, does it help to assume I am dealing with a functional adult? If one of the older guys that took me shopping for just a few weeks or months becomes uncontrollably angry, gets really drunk and embarrasses himself and then I find him sprawled across the pavement and he offers to take me to the shoe shop…

    I’d say he had emotional issues that I may have aggravated. But that is not much more than an educated guess.

    This does not obligate me to choose to act differently next time. It simply means that I have learned that men who give things they would resent giving if their expectations are not met are likely to have an emotional outburst upon discovering that their expectations will not ever be met. If, how and to what extent I choose to deal with such men in the future, depends on what I value.

    I can value a reputation as a femme fatale and conclude that this was a pretty effective way to add to my reputation and seek to repeat it.

    I can value not causing large amounts of distress in others and conclude that this was not helpful in that and decide to act differently next time.

    Failure and madness are a result of not knowing our values, not of extending the boundaries of our responsibilities towards others.

    (Tupac, hopefully this tying it back to your original case is helpful; if not, my apologies. The advice that others give is of course based on our values that we project on you. You know your own values better than we do.)

    Like


  146. dougjnn:

    Co-habit instead. It’s been working well for me.

    just make sure you watch the family law developments in your state like a paranoid hawk on hallucinogens. for instance, if you live in washington state, you may be screwed already.

    such laws regarding cohabitation aren’t imminent in that many states yet, but, if joe biden becomes veep, things will get VERY much worse, VERY fast.
    biden is proof that men’s worst enemies are not women, but idiotic feminist males.

    Like


  147. When it comes to marriage, I assume that in a lifelong commitment to a man who is my equal sometimes I will have more power than he does and other times he will have more power than I do.

    Theoretically it may be possible to have ultra tight game 24/7, but I would consider this to be an unbearably stressful situation. Working 80 hours a week gives most people a burnout, imagine working 168 hours a week! Other than that, how much fun would a marriage be if I never allowed a man to charm me, to seduce and to blow my mind?

    One of the things I want in marriage is having someone that you can trust enough to feel comfortable in being seduced by intensely and frequently. Another is that I can unleash to full extent my feminine wiles and charms, knowing that the beast I awaken may bite, but never devour me. A third is knowing that even while I have him enthralled, he never gets harmed.

    The first and the second require that I marry a man who has such values that he will choose to cherish me when he is in power and has the ability to be a master of inner beast. A man wanting to harm a woman stems from his values, a man harming a woman that he does not seek to harm from his lack of mastery over his instincts. Now, I am also an adult who is responsible for herself and as life is a long time, even an outstanding man will make mistakes. Thus, it is also required that I, myself, will have such values and self control that I can prevent harm from being done to me. When I also have such values that keep me from harming my husband when I am in power and he has such values that prevent him from welcoming harm, I also need not fear seducing my man.

    So it all comes down to trusting my own values and that of the man I marry. The more my actions are congruent with the values I think I have, the more I can trust in my values and my power to act on them. I learn this through life in general. In courtship, I will learn of a man’s values through his actions and to some extent through what he says. If his behaviour consistently shows values that I welcome in a mate, then my trust grows.

    A typical cold-hearted, calculating player will show values that allow him to harm others frequently and easily. A typical soft-headed, sacrificing sucker will show values that allow him to be harmed by others easily and frequently. Neither of these men are fit for a marriage according to what I want, therefore, if a man proves to be either, I let him go. You may want to separate these rejects into Alpha and Beta, but in my opinion, they are two sides of the same coin and you never know when the switch will flip. Lack of respect for close others and lack of respect for self are not that far removed.

    People with no self respect are not the good wives and the good husbands they are often pushed forward as. Even if one would do one’s utmost to avoid harming such a person, that person would still encounter much harm in the outside world that will then be a shared harm in marriage.

    I feel that if we both value ourselves and our near ones and we have the backbone to act on our values most of the time, a marriage has the harmony and stability to be able to contain the fiercest of passions.

    Of course I realise that men who have such values are few and far between, but I also realise that one is enough for me.

    Like


  148. TC 157: Don’t you have some heart medication to take or something?

    Now, Tupac, be nice. You really must try harder to be a better person.

    And no, I don’t think you should “overreact to the outbursts of children/women”, nor should you bash their heads.

    Tupe, Tupe, read with charity, my friend. If you’d done the equivalent of taking your own advice, and not overreacting, then what on earth were you doing chasing around after her?

    My suggestion was clearly to let her go and find someone else. Please don’t go on about dishonor, weakness, and bashing in the heads of children when no one has suggested anything of the sort.

    Like


  149. dougjnn to clio: That PatrickH has come char[g]ing enthusiastically along in support is, well, hardly a surprise, now is it?

    Since my comment to Tupac, which is what I assume you’re referring to, expressed a sentiment about Tupac that was orthogonal to clio’s, I am at a loss to understand what you mean by “support”, or by “char[g]ing”. My support for clio consists of regularly reading her comments, as opposed to those of some others here. “Char[g]ing” would hardly describe how I read those comments, which do after all deserve to be read with care.

    [Self-pity On] Which is more than I have been. [Self-pity Off]

    Like


  150. Women should not get money from the husbands they leave in divorce. (Yes, they should get their own contributions back out of marital property as happens when unmarried couples break up, but they shouldn’t profit from what their husband earned it they’ve decided to divorce.)

    It’s no accident that it was overwhelmingly women’s groups that pushed forward ready divorce combined with settlements which soak men in those divorces. The settlement part in this feminist day and age of women’s work opportunites is thoroughly unfair and must end now.

    Further, if women couldn’t continue to live off their ex husbands in significant part following divorce they’d 1) work through a lot more marriages and file fewer divorces, bringing down America’s highest divorce rate in the world by far statistics; and 2) be more careful about who they marry and why.

    What about the kids? There should be a lot more incentive for women to stay married, and chose more wisely in the first place. It should be up to a FATHER how much he continues to provide to his own kids. Why is it up to the state? I think fathers of 12 and 14 yo kids they’ve been a real dad to for years will want to stay involved and contribute to their true costs. I think joint custody is how to go about this, certainly as the usual and default solution.

    On the other hand, if the woman wants to leave when the kids are really young though, then she’s depriving the bio dad of a true father role, and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if lots of bio dads wanted to simply start over with a woman that did want him as the live in husband and father of his own new go around kids.

    No men do not want to support kids that result from sex if the woman isn’t going to stick with them and provide regular and faithful sex for them alone. That’s why and how marriage came about in the first place. Women shouldn’t continue to get he benefits of help from men in supporting their kids if they aren’t going to continue to be a wife, including sexually and emotionally, to the father of their children. That was the bargain in the first place. That’s almost certainly the only reason he got married. The privelege of having kids without the wifely services as well would almost certainly have not been enough for the great majority of men.

    American divorce, and the treat during marriage of American divorce, is hugely oppressive to men. Men should boycott it until it changes, and co-habit instead.

    Like


  151. What about divorce for “fault”, dougjnn? The four “As” – adultery, abuse, addiction, abandonment? It does happen sometimes.

    Clio

    Like


  152. I’ve been reading the exchanges btw Clio and Doug, and I must say that I again wholeheartedly agree w/the latter. Doug makes his points in a most cogent manner.

    Throughout these discussions, on this thread and others, one major theme emerges, at least for me: WOMEN HAVE CHOSEN WHAT THEY WISH TO HAVE, insofar as what is referred to as the Sexual Marketplace is concerned. As Hope notes in the Coffeehouse Girl thread, the days when a stable provider guy are gone, and this was at the behest mainly of women, who were able to both procure their own finances and as well, control their own rates of reproduction. Of course, this drastically changes things insofar as Boy Meets Girl is concerned.

    Yet, as Doug points out, women still want the man to play the role of Shiny Knight, chivalrous to the last-wait, let me amend that-they want MOST MEN to play this role. The relative few cads, whatever any of us may think of them, are exempt from this, because they have that certain something the ladies want. Hence the very reason for this space and others like it.

    Having given this thing a lot of thought in more recent times, I’ve come to the conclusion that the Law of Unintended Consequences may have finally caught up to the Feminist Lobby, and the 99.9% of American women who directly or indirectly benefit from it. And, what a heck of a price to pay for their “freedoms”. So many women end up, ultimately, on the raw end of the stick.

    As for family law/divorce and so on, I’ve been watching and following along the Marriage Strike trend and unless I miss my guess, its growing. More and more men are realizing that marriage simply isn’t a good bet for them, that they stand to lose a lot more than they gain, and that the idea of sex w/o strings, or the very least, few of them, is just as good and in many ways better than marriage. They don’t have to financially care for a woman, she can do that herself, nor does he have to even pretend to be faithful to her, or even pay her those little niceties that were still common only three decades or so ago.

    I think that ultimately all of this will take its biggest toll on women, and they will end up being the biggest losers at the end of the day. Harvey Mansfield said it best, that women’s liberation was, in essence, men’s liberation too, and not of the best in men. The feminists often like to imagine that any differences between he sexes are purely made up and kept going through traditions, but what if they’re wrong? A lot of women stand to get chewed up by the meat grinder of life. A tendency to promiscuity is in the nature of men, and the current regime that has in essence, given birth to “Game” has made it easier than ever for men to indulge their baser instincts w/little if any social sanction. Back in day, women would have known this by sitting at the feet of the older women in the family, by listening to the hardwon wisdom and experience of such ladies. Now, in the Brave New World, a lot of women are finding out the hard way for themselves.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  153. Mr Mu,

    You appear to have misunderstood the nature of my “debate” with dougjnn. Tupac was discussing a particular experience of his own and asking other readers here what they thought about it. I gave my opinion based upon his story and upon ethical principles.

    For reasons of his own, dougjnn chose to broaden the terms of the discussion and invoke the history of the relations between men and women over the last 40 years. Now, history can help us to answer the question “how did we get here?” It cannot help us to answer the question “what is the right thing for me to do in this particular situation?” It cannot even help anyone to answer a less purely ethical question like “what is the reasonable or sensible or prudent thing for me to do in this particular situation?”

    I kept trying to bring the discussion back to the original issue; dougjnn insisted on saying, in effect, that history justifies a certain kind of behaviour by men towards women. I on the other hand do not believe that history can be used to justify anything except in rare circumstances, though it may help to explain it. Thus my participation in the discussion was rather half-hearted.

    I agree that various social forces, including but not limited to feminism, are responsible for a number of regrettable tendencies in the sex wars today. I don’t agree, however, that these absolve us of personal, ethical responsibility in our actions towards our fellow creatures.

    Clio

    Like


  154. I was wondering like I always have my female under control and I always go in there keeping my eyes on the prize. But it was this one chick and she was super beautiful and everything was going well and she told me a whole lot of good things and use to call and text me everyday all day..And suddenly it stopped. So I started to think that is was another guy but she telling me that she is busy.
    But she was making time the first time and telling me that I am the exact type of guy that she wanted. So she basically gamed me..I started believing her..And then I let my feeling get involved..Then she stopped texting and calling..And she would text and call back when she feels like it.
    So basically I was in control at first and she ended up getting into control..And now I have not talked to her for 2 weeks now and I texted her 3 times out of that two weeks..So I want to know what can I do to get back in control because to make it worse is I didn’t even fuck her..And I stayed with her but didn’t try..And now I wish I would have tried to fuck her..So what can I do to get back in control…

    Like


  155. […] include: “I think BJ’s are Gross!”, Before and After, and Shit stains after […]

    Like