November 2008 Comment Winner

November was chock full of terrific comments (and chock full of shit from the usual suspects), so picking a winner wasn’t easy. At least here at the Chateau you will never hear the tepid Oscar-uninspired words “And the Comment award goes to…”. Nope, as nature intended, it’s all about winners and losers under the harsh klieg lights of reality I daily shine in your faces.

Commenter Thursday wins the November 2008 Comment Winner award with his pithy aphorism in the comments section of the post about Obama’s women:

Success with women is more disillusioning than failure.

The truest observations often require the least explication.

Comment Winner Runner-up is Dave from Hawaii who aptly illustrates with an example from his own life the importance of game to healthy, loving long term relationships, including marriage. Even though the original post was about former fatties resenting men’s desire, this unfounded belief that game is an impediment to loving relationships seems to crop up in almost every thread.

The married or long term relationship man that [runs game] is least likely to suffer her “getting bored” or “falling out of love” with him, ending in divorce because she began cheating on him and deciding to cash out and chain him into servitude via the alimony/child-support enslavement institution that is U.S. family law — while she jumps into bed with the next bad-boy thug that gets her hot and bothered like he used to when they first began dating.

I got married young, and simply did not understand anything about game, or the benefits of assertive masculinity. I put my wife on a pedestal and spent 7 years or so of a very contentious, walking on egg-shell type of relationship that teetered towards divorce more than a few times.

I discovered PUA/Game sites like this one a few years ago, and after a bit of reading on shit tests, and the subconscious mating desires of females, I began to “run game” on my wife.

The transformation of our relationship is astounding.

Yes, she put on a good 40 lbs. a couple of years after we got married.

Once I learned to game her subconscious, competitive instincts and began to plant suggestions in her mind that I was desirable to other women…she’s gotten motivated and lost the weight, and her affection towards me reverted back to the way she was before got married.

Once I started recognizing her shit tests and began to not just “pass them” but literally blow them up, the passive-aggressive emotionally driven conflict that had been the hallmark of our relationship has all but disappeared.

We don’t fight anymore.

My wife, who used to grumble and complain and tell all her closest friends and family that we had a “difficult relationship with lots of problems that needs working on” now tells everyone she’s happily married without blinking an eye.

And she has no idea that the real reason why…that I basically educated myself on the realities of the male-female relational dynamic in terms of mating strategies as broken down by Pick-Up Artists et al, and realized that my previous actions and behavior were based on the feminist zeitgeist that programs most of us who are raised in Western culture to put Women on pedestals and try and be the “nice guy” beta as the key to a happy and fulfilling relationship.

Many pickup artists will often say that their advice is simply for men wanting to have the alpha  “sex-with-as-many-hot-women-as-possible-without-getting-trapped-into-commitment” lifestyle.

However, the insight you can glean from the PUA on the principles dealing with females biological imperatives and their base motivations is quite instructive on learning to maintain a steady, monogamous relationship as well.

Game: It does a marriage good.

Following are the commenters who received Honorable Mentions for the month of November.

Tupac Chopra wins the zinger award responding to another incredulous commenter in the previous Comment Winner post.

*picking jaw up off of floor*

You’re going to have to leave it there if you wanna fit that bad boy in.

The award for most self-delusional comment goes to Keith, AKA bottom who poses as a top.

I slapped you around the room like a sorry little bitch,  leaving you crying and shitting yourself in the corner like the syphilitic little cunt you are.

The TMI award and the “Thanks for the visual” award go to supertroll David Alexander in my post about using wedding rings to game girls.

I shave down there for the girls who will never use it.

Joe T. earns the award for best intuitive grasp of the mechanics of the sexual market.

If a DC area girl is “plump” and decent looking, not ugly, she will typically inflate her own value in the dating narket. If she’s a 5-6, she’ll act like an 8.

American men are so inured to dealing with overweight females that “plump” now equals “svelte”.

In order for weight to have *any* negative impact on an American woman’s dating value these days, she has to be downright morbidly obese.

Anything less, along with a marginally cute face, and she’ll be prancing around like she’s Reese Witherspoon.

I would like to add that the monstrous obesity epidemic in America and its effects on mating dynamics has not gotten the attention in the culture media that it should get outside of this blog. While I agree with Joe T. that the lowering of men’s standards in response to the reality of a skewed dating pool where half the female prospects are overweight results in the “Reese Witherspoon” prancing effect among chubby single women, I don’t see that meaning men have become “inured” to fat chicks and hit on them regardless. The desire for slender babes is hardwired in men; it’s not a malleable lust that changes in relation to the number of fatties in society. There is no fat “tipping point”. What it means instead is 1. more fat chicks getting pumped and dumped, and 2. more ego inflation among the thin girls. Much balance will be restored to the force if women would just push away from the table.

El Guapo explains why sluttiness can make girls bad relationship prospects.

There are two factors at work in promiscuity and must be properly evaluated before getting into relationship territory.

One factor is the economic commodity factor.  A girl that has many more partners than average has diluted her sexual value and many men see it that way.

The other factor is whether or not the bonding mechanism has been damaged.  Sex is the bonding force behind romantic relationships.  If the promiscuity has made the male “just another man”, the relationship will self-destruct.  If on the other hand, the woman still sees the man and his individual value, and helps create and maintain that electric spark, the magic of passion, sweetness, innocent spirit as you say, then the relationship will prosper.

I once dated a former high-end fitness model escort.  In this market she commanded $4000/hr.  She was and is spectacular.  Only she can’t bond.  And is a serial relationship girl.  She goes from broken heart to broken heart because she can’t bond and repeats, like a broken record to her sister, “he’s not the one.  I don’t feel it.”.

Kick a Bitch gets all philosophical on my post about the omega dude marrying the wildebeest.

damn that bitch fell out of the ugly tree and smacked EVERY branch on her way down.

you couldn’t crack that head with a sledge-hammer.

Cannon’s Canon highlights the versatility of the neg.

Personally, I like to neg Mother Earth by using the air conditioning WITH the windows down in my car.  Now that’s a DHV!

…and scores a two-fer with his comment confirming my observation that Asian women are fixated with the anus.

haha, gotta tell ya… went to west garden last year with some coworkers, a rub-n-tug around midtown manhattan… not usually my scene, but anyway… the massage was legit, but the asian chick starting using all her techniques as soon as she rolled me over for the finale: tight grip, high speed, etc.  i figured i’d be playing it cool to tough it out a few minutes mentally and enjoy my wank, little did i know!  there was a whole lot of lube going on down there and the lights were so low i couldn’t make out what was happening, not necessarily a visual image i’d savor for later anyway… BUT SUDDENLY!  a cold hard index finger slipped its way beyond the sunshine, and lo and behold, i was on a massage table getting fingerbanged by a “crazy asian handjob masseuse.”  anyway, the sensation was minimal, and the excessive lube was positively numbing.  after about ten+ minutes, she said to me, “yoojah!”  i said, “what?”  she asks, “yoojah?”  i say, “no, i don’t want a drink.”  she counters,
“no, you jahhk now.”  so i started cranking that souljah boy while she two-fingered my asshole (in my defense, her hands were the size of compact discs).  when i got ready to pop, i told her to take over, and i laid back while she one-handed the mic and two-fingered the turntables.  as per usual in the rub-n-tugs, she laughed when i popped and said, “OHHH STWONG BOY!” then literally ran out to wash her hand which i am sure, despite the dim lights, was stained brown with my poo.

and that, my friend, is why asians are obsessed with the anus.

Finally, Shouting Thomas unloads the hate as my words push him to the brink.

After posting, I realized that you fucking morons may not realize the moral problem in this disgusting bit of fun you’re having.

Ridiculing those who are less fortunate than you… well, it’s about as low as another human can go.

You are a contemptible stupid fucking son of a bitch.  A real Alpha would take you out in the back yard and beat the shit out of you.  You’ve got it coming.

One of the most important marks of the true Alpha is a sense of decency and kindness.

There’s something about the internet that encourages worthless assholes to disgrace themselves.

Shut down this site and find a job as a bicycle messenger… if you can.  I doubt that you can do any better than that.

What a little cunt you are.

I was telling one of the other bloggers how envious I was of his haters, that my haters were too timidly cerebral and rational. Thank you, Shouting Thomas, for bringing a level of professionalism back to the dark art of hating. But one word of advice: Don’t come charging out of the hate gate at full steam. You want to lull your target into complacency, subtly building up to a passionate crescendo of hate, and unleashing your righteous vitriol when least expected, after you have ensnared him in reasonable discussion. A powerful dose of hate is most devastating when your foe cannot readily dismiss you as an overwrought raving lunatic.





Comments


  1. roissy = a true classic, a voice of our generation

    Like


  2. on December 3, 2008 at 1:09 pm josh randallt

    The Tupac comment was genuinely funny. I appreciate some sly wit among all the sledgehammer blows against male feminists,betas and fat chicks!

    Like


  3. Knowing David Alexander exists makes me feel better about myself. On the Beta Of The Year discussion board his comment “There’s a likely chance of me never having sex again” had me rolling on the floor laughing.

    Kick a Bitch always provides comedic relief as well.

    Cheers to an actually entertaining blog (99.99% of blogs I just don’t care what the writer has to say).

    Like


  4. On game working for relationships:

    I have a buddy, probably conceives of himself as alpha, probably not there yet, but has been reading this blog and taking the shit to heart. He was all into this girl who was definitely into him, they fuck pretty regularly.

    She toyed with him a bunch still though, told him she just moved to the city and didn’t want to get into a relationship. At first, my buddy just said OK but liked the sex, and liked the girl also. Within the last week or so though, he finally sacked up. She’d tell him she went on a date, he told her that he didn’t care, that he knew he was better. He had other shit going on. Finally he DHV’d strongly and told her that her shit was done, and if she wanted to be with him, she’d be with just him.

    Friend “I think she was turned on”
    Me: Of course she was.
    Friend: she busted out her toy

    She apparently said “I think I’m seeing things more clearly now.”

    Well of course, my friend told her he didn’t really care about her specifically that he could fuck other girls if he wanted to, which is true. I assume it’ll be another week before she tells him she wants to be with him. Roissy’s strongest point: Alpha is about being able to fuck if you want to.

    Game: creating monogamy if somebody wants it.

    Like


  5. “Success with women is more disillusioning than failure.”

    Great comment.

    But Success with women is more life enhancing than failure.

    I am mildly surprised none of my drug reference or Ecstasy related comments didn’t win.

    I guess the world is changing.

    Although it doesn’t mean I have to like it.

    – MPM

    Like


  6. on December 3, 2008 at 1:55 pm Peregrine John

    Hawai’ian Dave, I would love to find out more of your specifics. It’s something people mention in general but rarely if ever get into details on.

    Like


  7. On Game in Marriage:

    For what it’s worth, my husband either purposefully or naturally “runs game” on me all the time. He has made it quite clear there is some bullshit up with which he will not put, like bitchiness, “pms” and and any manner of overt friendliness with other males in any capacity–he has made it clear he would leave, period. he has no problem yelling at me or telling me when i do something wrong or telling me what to do. he doesnt let me dress provocatively and a whole host of other things. i suppose most Oprah-ized women would call him “controlling” and “emotionally abusive”.

    why have i never been happier or felt more feminine in my life? because in return for submitting for the first time to a man’s masculinity i now have a faithful, devoted man who would both kill for me and die for me, because he actually feels that i BELONG to him. thats what women don’t realize they have lost. That man you browbeat into letting you hang out with male friends and act like a belittling shrew towards, that man you withhold sex from, get fat on and don’t “let” go hang out with his friends–he’s jerking off in his “man cave ” every night and waiting for your last kid to turn 18 so he can drop you like a hot potato–he doesn’t “own” you, so he doesn’t treat you like a prized possession. Look how he treats his car, or his boat, or whatever he beloved possession is–you complain “he loves that car more than me!” He OWNS that car–its his, lock stock and barrel. maybe if he felt that way about YOU he’d treat you better.

    this probably wasn’t the right place for this rant, and i could go on for days but roissy, you are RIGHT. the tyranny of women and their beta cohorts is killing this culture–i can’t stand it.

    Like


  8. I would love to find out more of your specifics.

    One specific: when she is PMS’ing or otherwise in one of those stormin’ womanese hormonal moods, make no attempts to placate her or apologize for whatever she claims you did or didn’t do. Walk away — even if she’s in mid-bitching-sentence — when she’s cranky about something. In an extreme situation or in a situation of borderline disrespect, don’t be shy about calling her to order.

    Another specific, again, in an unpleasant context: let her be the first one to approach you or touch you when you’ve been arguing. Many guys in LTRs make the mistake of thinking that trying to hug her, etc. will make her mood better. It won’t. She’ll come to you when she’s ready and she’ll appreciate the space you gave her in the meantime.

    Another one: establish very early on that under no circumstances will she criticize you in front of other people, even kiddingly.

    Another specific, this time in a good context: when she says she loves you, don’t automatically parrot the words back to her every time. Sometimes, especially when the mood is fun and sexy, just grin mischieviously and reply in your best Jack Nicholson voice: “I didn’t ask.”

    A good mental picture to have in your mind with regards to make/female LTRs is that the woman is a whirl of energy and you are a pillar of stability that she relies on.

    Like


  9. A better description: Sometimes, especially when the mood is fun and sexy, just fix her with an icy stare, and reply in your best Jack Nicholson voice: “I didn’t ask.” Then wait a beat, and grin mischieviously.

    Like


  10. I think dana’s comment should be a contender for December’s comment of the month.

    Like


  11. I think dana’s comment should be a contender for December’s comment of the month.

    Agreed.

    Like


  12. I was about to say the same thing Ricky Raw said but I see he beat me to it. Even though it’s only December 3rd, it’s definitely got to go on the short list for COTM.

    Like


  13. @PA

    my go to response for the ‘i love you’ comes straight from han solo:

    Like


  14. word up nog…

    WOW, i SO want a rub-n-tug from a little asian that comes complete with an anal fingerbang. i’m DEAD SERIOUS. that shit would be fucking AWESOME!

    kudos to Cannon and his glorious poop-shoot! i am indeed envious…

    and Shouting Thomas, could you BE a bigger bitch?

    Like


  15. A good mental picture to have in your mind with regards to make/female LTRs is that the woman is a whirl of energy and you are a pillar of stability that she relies on.

    with every day that my latest current LTR accrues this has become only more and more true.

    Roissy put it best when he said:

    IV. Don’t play by her rules

    If you allow a woman to make the rules she will resent you with a seething contempt even a rapist cannot inspire. The strongest woman and the most strident feminist wants to be led by, and to submit to, a more powerful man. Polarity is the core of a healthy loving relationship. She does not want the prerogative to walk all over you with her capricious demands and mercurial moods. Her emotions are a hurricane, her soul a saboteur. Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest. When she grasps for a pillar to steady herself against the whipping winds or yearns for an authority figure to foil her worst instincts, it is you who has to be there… strong, solid, unshakeable and immovable.

    XV. Maintain your state control

    You are an oak tree. You will not be manipulated by crying, yelling, lying, head games, sexual withdrawal, jealousy ploys, pity plays, shit tests, hot/cold/hot/cold, disappearing acts, or guilt trips. She will rain and thunder all around you and you will shelter her until her storm passes. She will not drag you into her chaos or uproot you. When you have mastery over yourself, you will have mastery over her.

    Like


  16. Success with women is more disillusioning than failure.

    “Disillusion:

    disappointment resulting from the discovery that something is not as good as one believed it to be : enthusiasm for the government evaporated into a more cynical disillusion.

    verb [ trans. ]
    cause (someone) to realize that a belief or an ideal is false : if they think we have a magic formula to solve the problem, don’t disillusion them.”

    Roissy, could you possibly BE more cynical? Wow.

    Like


  17. It’s all about your definition of success, roissy, and yours is as shallow as it gets.

    Like


  18. Dana – Where ARE all the enlightened women like you? Iowa? Your comment was the most concisely written explanation I’ve read that makes plainly clear why feminism sucks – for men AND women. Thanks!

    Like


  19. To those who feel that marriage is a raw deal for men… Having read Dana’s comment, isn’t it clear that it is a great deal, provided you do it right?

    Like


  20. Dana sounds like the kind of woman that would finger-bang her man while jacking his dick furiously.

    Hats off to ya babe… you’re my kinda gal

    Like


  21. It’s amazing how one comment from dana did what a million self-absorbed spammy delusional comments from sara never could…got the men here openly celebrating marriage and women. it’s just more proof that being antifeminist is NOT the same as being anti-woman.

    Like


  22. Dana,

    Do you have a younger sister that’s single???

    HOLLA

    Like


  23. P.S

    Dana, let her know that I’d have to wait till Spring to holla back… cause I’m a little bunned up at the mo

    Like


  24. Sarah,

    what do you consider success with women for a man? what would the non-shallow definition be?

    Like


  25. The ownership analogy was simple, and brilliant.

    Like


  26. The ownership analogy was simple, and brilliant.

    wasn’t it though? i’m not ashamed to say it made me jealous. i plan to rip it off and use it shamelessly.

    Like


  27. you realize, right, that while you may have haters, you are yourself a hater. You hate the majority of women, you hate a lot of betas/omegas/etc. You do respect alphas, thats about it though.

    Like


  28. on December 3, 2008 at 4:15 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Great comment, Dana…

    One of the main points Roissy, and the other PUAs, have been most blunt about. Women want Men to LEAD, regardless of what the say they want.

    A great quote from the legendary Anais Nin backs the point up:

    “I do not want to be the leader. I refuse to be the leader. I want to live darkly and richly in my femaleness. I want a man lying over me, always over me. His will, his pleasure, his desire, his life, his work, his sexuality the touchstone, the command, my pivot. I don’t mind working, holding my ground intellectually, artistically; but as a woman, oh, God, as a woman I want to be dominated. I don’t mind being told to stand on my own feet, not to cling, be all that I am capable of doing, but I am going to be pursued, fucked, possessed by the will of a male at his time, his bidding.”

    She was no shrinking violet either. She owned her sexuality. She is a thousand times more honest about her sexuality than most modern women will ever admit.

    Like


  29. on December 3, 2008 at 4:27 pm Peregrine John

    No kidding. Anais was the sort of woman that terrifies the repressed and repressive men of Certain Cultures, driving them to apoplectic, woman-stoning, head-severing fury. But that paragraph is far, far from an exception in her writings.

    ‘Course, she also had a functional sex drive. I strongly suspect that the most obnoxious sort of feminist, who cannot remotely begin to comprehend the supposed (but false) dichotomy of Anais Nin’s viewpoint, are very much lacking in that department.

    Like


  30. Where is that Anais Nin quote from? Which book?

    Like


  31. on December 3, 2008 at 5:12 pm Marvelous Bastard

    I don’t know what book the quote’s from, I found it on her Wikipedia entry. It seemed apt for this site.

    Like


  32. on December 3, 2008 at 5:40 pm Dave from Hawaii

    Hawai’ian Dave, I would love to find out more of your specifics. It’s something people mention in general but rarely if ever get into details on.

    I have to say that it does help that in my case I married a virgin (we were both virgins in high school and got married in our early 20’s) , and she comes from a large, intact family with parents who are still “in love” and still married after 30 years.

    I think this is why our marriage survived 7 years of my failing her shit-tests – she subconsciously internalized the principle by her upbringing that marriage is sacrosanct, that you don’t run out on your spouse when you are having “problems.” Our relationship is basically a throwback to how things were prior to the sexual revolution. Had she been a typical girl from a broken home, we would’ve divorced inside a year…or not even married in the first place.

    And in retrospect, after learning what I learned from the PUA online community, I can look at her parent’s relationship and realize that her Father basically “runs game” on not only her Mother, but her and her sisters as well…the backhanded compliments, playful teasing, and saying NO when it needed to be said. Not trying to cater to all the women in his family, but essentially leading them.

    Once I started “running game” and acting like her Father, we just don’t have “problems” anymore.

    To be more specific, I changed our relationship dynamic after learning about game.

    I stopped always asking her what she wants and started being decisive while playing up the mysterious angle.

    Here was a typical scenario back than:


    HER: “I’m hungry.”

    ME: “What do you want to eat?”

    HER: “I don’t know…”

    ME: “How about McDonalds?”

    HER: “I dunno.”

    ME: “How about Taco bell?”

    HER: {shrugs}

    ME: “KFC? I know you really like the original recipe chicken dinner…”

    HER: “well yeah…

    ME: OK, great, let’s go!

    Drives to the KFC drive-thru.

    ME: I’ll have the Zesty Crispy Chicken Wrap…what do you want, honey?

    HER: “I don’t want to eat here.”

    ME: “What? I thought you said…”

    HER: “I never said I wanted KFC.”

    ME: “But…what do you want then? Whatever you want, just let me know, and we’ll go there!”

    HER: “It’s too late, you’ve already ordered here.

    ME: “Fine than. So what do you want?”

    HER: “Nothing, just take me home. I’ll figure out what I’m going to eat later. {Said in a grouchy tone}.

    ME: “Why do you have to be like that?

    HER: “Be like what? I never said I wanted KFC!”

    ME: “Well what do you want then?”

    HER: “Don’t worry about me already! Just get YOUR food and take me home!”

    ME: “I’ve asked you how many times to tell me what you want and I’ll take you there! Why do you always have to act like this?

    HER: “Act like what? Nevermind already! It’s obvious you don’t really care about what I want…it’s only about what you want! I didn’t want KFC and yet you’re trying to make like it’s all my fault just because I don’t want to eat here! I never wanted to eat here in the first place!!!!”

    ME: “$*%^([email protected]#($)(#&!!!!!”

    Same scenario, now:


    HER: “I’m hungry”

    ME: “So am I. Let’s go.”

    HER: “Go where?”

    ME: “You’ll see.”

    HER: “C’mon, tell me…”

    ME {Rolling my eyes and turning away from her, getting ready to head out with or without her.}: “Are you gonna sit here and play twenty questions like a spoiled little princess or are you gonna come along and eat with me?”

    HER {Now she starts getting ready to go.} :
    “C’mon…why don’t you tell me…”

    At that point, I could take her to a fine-dining restaurant or McDonalds, it doesn’t matter.

    What mattered was that I passed her shit test and played the role of the ‘provider.’

    I stopped treating my wife like I was an enslaved sycophant willing to do whatever the goddess desired and started treating her like the kid sister with the backhanded compliments, light-hearted teasing, and over-the-top sarcasm to deal with her shit-tests…all within the “frame” of subconsciously reinforcing the notion that I’m attractive to other women.

    For another example, I remember one instance where we went to a dinner party, and there was a, beautiful, blond girl that was a friend of a mutual friend, and it was the first time we met her. Her and I hit it off immediately on a conversational level.

    After the dinner, on the ride home she started in…

    “So tell me, is _______ better looking than me?”

    Now the reality is that why yes, she was…and we both knew it. (Turns out, she was a former swimsuit model…)

    I was scared to death to admit this to her. I immediately and reflexively lied to her. She became infuriated.

    “Why’d you keep talking to her all night long? Where you attracted to her? Don’t lie, I saw you looking at her while you were talking!”

    I uncomfortably whimpered “Well, she was sitting directly across from me all night long…”

    Needless to say, the conversation continued to escalate in that vain, with her continually getting angrier and angrier as she played the role of hostile interrogator, and I, the hapless idiot husband, caught doing something wrong…trying to squirm out of the pending punishment.

    She “dominated” this conversation from the beginning, she set the frame and I unwittingly relinquished my backbone.

    Eventually it turned into a full blown argument as I got angry at her for getting angry, because in reality I had done nothing wrong but have the temerity to have conversation with a beautiful woman at the same dinner table.

    Contrast that with how I handle a similar incidents now, after I had figured out the underlying dynamics behind why we would always get into those types of fights and arguments…

    (generic paraphrasing of a typical situation}

    ME: “Of course she was talking to me! Most beautiful women do! That’s EXACTLY why you married me! What lady can resist these?” (Than I would just flex my biceps and like I’m the world’s baddest man…all with a smirk on my face.)

    HER: She rolls her eyes, chuckles and responds ” Yeah right…no woman would want you if you were the last guy on earth.”

    ME: “That’s not what your {name of her best friend} said the other night when she was begging me to kiss her…”

    HER: {giggling} “You’re so silly…”

    In other words, I learned to turn those “shit tests” into playful banter with a subtle frame of reference (treating her like she’s the “younger sister w/ cooties” instead of the goddess who I’d be most fortunate if only she’d let me kiss her feet), rather than address them at face value. In short, learned to “lead the conversation…i.e. “dominate.”

    I used to tell her the typical lies of a cowed and fearful married man that is the ubiquitous caricature of men in today’s feminist warped mass media… “No honey, I ONLY have eyes for you! I promise! I don’t even LOOK at other women!”

    In retrospect, I can’t believe I spent YEARS protesting innocence and begging her to not get upset, and never realized that taking that tact ALWAYS resulted in bad feelings and “relationship problems.”

    At the same time, I reinforce the notion that I’m desirable to other woman (remember – no one wants to go to the club that is empty…everyone wants to get in to the one with the line around the block.)

    And I tell you, I really REALLY felt silly and ridiculous when I first started acting like that whenever the “sh*t tests” came up.

    Now, it comes to me like a second reflex. I have fun with it, trying to get as ridiculous and over the top as I can.

    This is the ‘agree & amplify’ approach to shit tests, and it was like magic when I first discovered how it worked.

    Funny thing is, after about a good year or so of this sort of thing, she rarely shit tests me anymore. She still does it every once in awhile, but for the most part, we now have a relationship that is no longer predicated on her emotional state. She doesn’t “lead” the conversational tone…whenever she tries, I take it over and lead the direction I want it to go.

    as Roissy wrote:

    Game: It does a marriage good.

    Like


  33. on December 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Agreed John,

    I think that a lot of what Roissy, and others, are doing is de-programming much of the feminist BS that modern men are fed from birth in this country.

    Young men need this discussion. It is rare to hear counter arguements to the dominant feminist/gay narrative that dominates our culture.

    We don’t have to go very far back in pop culture to see natural men with natural alpha characteristics. Now, everywhere you look beta boys wimper and snivel and plead and whine about how they don’t have any luck with women.

    Somewhere the typical path for boys to mature into young men was diverted into brainwashing boys to become feminized men. Betas.

    I think it occurred as a by product of the feminist movement of the sixties and seventies. The ‘free love’ movement was the atom bomb that destroyed the path boys once travelled to become Men with Alpha characteristics. In the early sixties men had normal male characteristics, but by the end of ths decade, they weren’t getting laid anywhere near as much as the hippies. The more feminized man were getting huge amounts of poon, flipping the old paradigm on its head.

    The hippies of the sixties and seventies were raised mostly by nuclear families with alpha fathers. Although they expressed their feminine side, they were raised as real men.

    But the idea that feminized men can still get laid like they could in the feminist hey-day died in the era of Aids. Somehow, the idea that being a femine male improved your desirability to women has persisted to this day in popular culture, due in large part to the domination of the culture by the baby boomers who came of age in the sixties and seventies.

    Modern game teaches men how to act like real men. It works for single men and for married men. Roissy and crew use it to plough through acres of fresh ‘tang, but it helps all men understand women better, increasing their dating prospects.

    Like


  34. HER: “I’m hungry.”
    ME: “What do you want to eat?”
    HER: “I don’t know…”
    ME: “How about McDonalds?”
    HER: “I dunno.”
    ME: “How about Taco bell?”
    HER: {shrugs}
    ME: “KFC? I know you really like the original recipe chicken dinner…”
    HER: “well yeah…
    ME: OK, great, let’s go!
    Drives to the KFC drive-thru.

    Christ, did you two ever hear of cooking?

    Like


  35. he doesn’t let me dress provocatively and a whole host of other things.
    I would think that most married women would not dress provocatively because of the negative attention that dressing in such a manner brings. Wearing a simple dress seems to bring
    i suppose most Oprah-ized women would call him “controlling” and “emotionally abusive”
    I would call him both of those words but at the same time I can understand why he would want you to cover up.
    That man you browbeat into letting you hang out with male friends
    I think the only way it’s acceptable to hang out with friends of the opposite gender is when you and your spouse do it together. I hope you have the same limits on your husband when it comes to his hanging out with his female friends if he has any. Men are not to be trusted around attractive women friend or not.

    He has made it quite clear there is some bullshit up with which he will not put, like bitchiness, “pms” and and any manner of overt friendliness with other males in any capacity–he has made it clear he would leave, period.

    A nag, I can understand how he feels about that. I hate people who talk to much. BTW some men nag too much as well. Dana, what are things you refuse to put up with???

    Like


  36. Peregrine John & Marvelous Bastard

    Anais Nin was a very screwed up individual. She had a sexual affair with her farther not step-farther but her biological farther as an adult. She had 9(?) abortions and she constantly cheated on her husband. According to Roissy’s definition, he was a beta to the T. He was the type of man that not many women can appreciate (excluding myself). Anias would take her husband’s money and give it to her lover, Henry Miller.

    Like


  37. Roissy:

    Tupac Chopra wins the zinger award responding to another incredulous commenter in the previous Comment Winner post.

    I’m feelin’ the love.

    The award for most self-delusional comment goes to Keith, AKA bottom who poses as a top.

    It’s too bad Dizzy doesn’t post here anymore. She and Keith would make a great couple when their menses sync up.


    I was telling one of the other bloggers how envious I was of his haters, that my haters were too timidly cerebral and rational. Thank you, Shouting Thomas, for bringing a level of professionalism back to the dark art of hating.

    In spite of my jabs at ST, I do admire his passion.

    Like


  38. The TMI award and the “Thanks for the visual” award go to supertroll David Alexander

    I thank you for the award. 🙂

    because in return for submitting for the first time to a man’s masculinity

    Shudder.

    reply in your best Jack Nicholson voice: “I didn’t ask.”

    I tried that, and apparently, she her smile disappeared and frown developed…

    Having read Dana’s comment, isn’t it clear that it is a great deal, provided you do it right?

    Having read her comment, she doesn’t make marriage appear to be any better, and she just makes women out to be pathetic little useless creatures incapable of running their own lives in a competent manner. If most women are like that, then I’d rather stay single than become a douchebag to “keep them in line”.

    Here was a typical scenario back than:

    I actually wrote off a girl because of that idiotic behaviour.

    Like


  39. he doesn’t let me dress provocatively and a whole host of other things

    I’d actually want my wife to dress provocatively because it’s why I chose her in the first place. What’s the point if she’s in a burka 24/7?

    Like


  40. Speaking of Dizzy/Keith types, I was thinking a nice, warm welcome message Roissy could have playing on his blog is this little ditty by Tool:

    My warning
    meant nothing
    You’re dancing
    in quicksand.

    Why don’t you watch where you’re wandering?
    Why don’t you watch where you’re stumbling?
    You’re wading knee deep and going in.
    And you might never come back again.

    This blog is thick and
    easy to get lost in
    when you’re a stupid beligerant fucker.

    This blog is thick and
    easy to get lost in
    cause you’re a dumb ass beligerant fucker.

    I hope it sucks you down.

    Wander in and wandering
    No one even invited you in
    But still you stumble in, stumbling
    So suffocate
    Or get out…while you can.

    No one told you to come.

    I hope it sucks you, fucker.

    I hope it sucks you DOWN — Swamp Song

    Like


  41. T.:

    It’s amazing how one comment from dana did what a million self-absorbed spammy delusional comments from sara never could…got the men here openly celebrating marriage and women. it’s just more proof that being antifeminist is NOT the same as being anti-woman.

    None of this is surprising to me. I’ve been saying this for years. At parties and such, when the crowd would get around to discussing these issues, I would hold forth on the natural dynamic between women and men. Inevitably, someone (usually a woman) would accuse me of looking at women as property, as if they were dogs. I would point out just how incredibly cherished dogs are by their owners. The bond between a loyal dog and his owner is a strong one, and if current stats on divorce are any indication, stronger than what normally occurs between today’s husbands and wives.

    That notion didn’t usually go over too well. Heh.

    Like


  42. Actually, I also zinged Roissy, but he deleted that post. He’s omega to my alpha.

    Like


  43. Dana and her husband have their style, and everyone else is welcome to have their own style. If the people fit together, I can’t really judge them harshly because it’s consensual.

    If you personally like your women with more moxy, then there’s no problem with that, so long as you know how to handle an assertive woman in a way that acknowledges both her femininity and her spiritedness.

    …like a good horse. :: ducking ::

    Like


  44. Tupac Chopra
    Roissy:

    Tupac Chopra wins the zinger award responding to another incredulous commenter in the previous Comment Winner post.

    I’m feelin’ the love.

    I concur. You put me in a coffin with that comment.

    Like


  45. Nicole:

    …like a good horse. :: ducking ::

    Actually, that’s quite an apt metaphor to distinguish between true submissives vs. more spirited women who still yearn to surrender to a worthy man.

    Puppy Dogs = subs who cuddle up to you of their own accord

    Horses = feminine women who shit-test strongly before they relent

    Both are worthwhile, but in either case I prefer having the upper hand.

    It’s all good.

    Like


  46. Tupac, I’m, er, flattered by you serenading me like that. And while I respect your right to feel attraction to the same gender, I must let you know that my proclivities do not swing in that manner. I’m sure you’ll make some nice boy very happy. Best of luck to you.

    Like


  47. Tupac is into S&m.
    *faints*

    I just had a feeling that you were into something beyond the Vanailla.

    Like


  48. on December 3, 2008 at 8:27 pm Jason Campbell

    I’m a complaining woman. Start Colt Brennan b/c I am gay. kthxbye

    Like


  49. PA – Marriage is a raw deal.

    I can have exactly what Dana described minus the legal risk of losing a large chunk of my assets (even with a pre-nup) if I have solid game, know what I want out of a relationship, know how to scope and qualify my women, and then just keep things at the LTR stage.

    I have never had someone dump me for refusing to get married; in fact, my steadfast refusal just seems to make them try harder, which is no surprise.

    Like


  50. on December 3, 2008 at 8:44 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Chic,

    Isn’t every great artist messed up? Neurotic? Twisted? Tormented souls create the world’s masterpieces.

    Great art usually comes from a soul with serious issues, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t address subjects that we know but can’t put into words or pictures or music.

    Whether or not she cheated on her beta husband isn’t very extraordinary. Especially given the current state of affairs. Maybe she was just ahead of her time? Henry Miller cheated on his wife also. He’s still a gifted writer.

    Like


  51. Rain and, for some reason I thought it was cute. At his age and level, it has progressed to an extreme douche bag level. We can only hope that he does not go off the deep end the first time he has his heart broken.

    Why is it that a large number of men grow to hate women after having their heart broken the first time? They seem to forget the eight girls whose hearts they broke in the pass before girl number nine did them in.

    Like


  52. Marvelous Bastard
    Chic,

    Isn’t every great artist messed up? Neurotic? Twisted? Tormented souls create the world’s masterpieces.

    Very true and a good point. I read a biography on Nin four years ago and I still find to diffcult to understand how she had a sexual affair with her own father.

    Whether or not she cheated on her beta husband isn’t very extraordinary
    Oh, Miller wasn’t the only one. She had multiple concurrent affairs. She was even a cougar before the rest of America discovered what a cougar (slang def) was/is. Not only that, Anais took her husband’s money and gave it to another man. How disrespectful is that? There is no way in hell I could take my “husband/boyfriend’s” money and give it to another man. If I was a divorced woman, I couldn’t bring another man to sleep etc.. in a house that my former husband pays the mortgage for.

    FYI, T and MU 50’s bm did that. It’s a big part of the reason he had her evicted from his million dollar house & her child support payments cut.

    Henry Miller cheated on his wife also
    nonstop according to Tropic of Capricorn. If I’m not mistaken, I think he even gave his wife the clap too. His wife was a bit of screw.
    Miller also helped me understand men and how they think in relation to women and sEx.

    *my dear sweet chris and keith aside*

    Have you read Tropic of Cancer? Is it similar to Tropic of Capricorn?

    Like


  53. dana

    That man you browbeat into letting you hang out with male friends and act like a belittling shrew towards,

    I think we have different tastes in men. When you love you love and to love a man as a friend “should” be no threat to your husband. Perhaps he feels there is not enough love to go around? There is a shortage? I love my male friends. They have been there for me through thick and thin and to have to give them up for an insecure, controlling asshole ain’t going to happen. Neither would I expect or want him to give up his woman friends. If he loves me TRULY, he loves all women and why not? Enjoy it while you can, and hopefully forever. We all have the right to create what we want.

    Like


  54. Sara,

    In your case, you also have the right to live in a delusional dreamworld wholly detached from the reality of things like evolutionary biology, apparently.

    I would suggest that the evidence in reality does not bear out your viewpoint very well, like it or not. (I am guessing not, but reality is notoriously unconcerned with what people think of it)

    Like


  55. dana,

    Success with woman can mean many things. To roissy it seems to equal anal sex; though he does go on and on about the joys and benefits of game via his comment of the month for Nov., but for some reason, I don’t hear of HIM enjoying the evolved and magnificent benefits. It’s just the same old complaints about the cheating whores, feminists, etc.

    I think to guys like roissy, it’s way more important to LOOK successful in other men’s eyes, than to actually BE successful which to ME would equal a true love of life, sex, and the women they have it with. It would equal a true joy of experience in sexuality, not a very temporary feeling of ego gratification. Not a temporary relief from sexual tension.

    I agree that most red blooded women (of which I am definitely one) do not like pansy-boys and yes men. I would kill for a man who would stand up to my bullshit when I need them to, but there’s a fine line between insecure asshole and a loving confident man. My first husband definitely did NOT put up my bullshit, but he was as controlling as they come and eventually I left him; much to his dismay.

    Like


  56. “I think we have different tastes in men.”

    Yes, Dana prefers the sort of man who’d kill and die to protect her.

    You prefer the sort of guy who will almost certainly pump and dump you. Ironically, the women who are most vehemently opposed to ‘game’ are often the most susceptible to it.

    “If he loves me TRULY…”

    I’m afraid you’ve made that very difficult indeed.

    Like


  57. on December 3, 2008 at 9:59 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Chic,

    …she had a sexual affair with her own father.

    Ok, you got me on that one…
    that crosses all the lines. Yechhh.

    As far as the rest of the cheating goes, I certainly don’t excuse it, I just don’t think that it is all that extra-ordinary. Especially in light of today’s world where married women are giving it up in stadium restrooms.

    Regarding giving money to Henry Miller – lots of rich women support starving artists. I imagine that a significant number of them sleep them as well if the opportunity presents itself.

    I wish all women were as classy as you, Chic. Have you been in a loveless marriage to a rich man?

    Miller also helped me understand men and how they think in relation to women

    Oh my, if you’re getting your information on male sexuality from Henry Miller, us men should be getting our ideas about female sexuality from Anais Nin, no? I love Henry Miller’s writing, but I wouldn’t say he and I see eye-to-eye regarding women.

    In my opinion, Tropic of Capricorn is better. Both books are similar and both are excellent.

    Like


  58. “I do not want to be the leader. I refuse to be the leader. I want to live darkly and richly in my femaleness. I want a man lying over me, always over me. His will, his pleasure, his desire, his life, his work, his sexuality the touchstone, the command, my pivot. I don’t mind working, holding my ground intellectually, artistically; but as a woman, oh, God, as a woman I want to be dominated. I don’t mind being told to stand on my own feet, not to cling, be all that I am capable of doing, but I am going to be pursued, fucked, possessed by the will of a male at his time, his bidding.”

    Killer quote; if Anais Nin were alive I’d think she was a mind reader. Yes, Chic, Anais Nin was truly fucked up (and down and backwards) but artists and philosophers still have great wisdom despite their pathetic lives.

    “I would point out just how incredibly cherished dogs are by their owners. The bond between a loyal dog and his owner is a strong one, and if current stats on divorce are any indication, stronger than what normally occurs between today’s husbands and wives.”

    Believe it or not, I actually agree with you here *shudder*

    “The other factor is whether or not the bonding mechanism has been damaged. Sex is the bonding force behind romantic relationships. If the promiscuity has made the male “just another man”, the relationship will self-destruct. If on the other hand, the woman still sees the man and his individual value, and helps create and maintain that electric spark, the magic of passion, sweetness, innocent spirit as you say, then the relationship will prosper.

    I once dated a former high-end fitness model escort. In this market she commanded $4000/hr. She was and is spectacular. Only she can’t bond. And is a serial relationship girl. She goes from broken heart to broken heart because she can’t bond and repeats, like a broken record to her sister, “he’s not the one. I don’t feel it.”.”

    This sounds reasonable, but can you produce any studies that prove it? I rather suspect that a woman inclined to become an escort in the first place already has issues. And how does promiscuity affect a man’s ability to bond?

    Like


  59. The idea that someone in a monogamous relationship can’t have friends of the opposite gender is absurd. Of course they can and these relationships can be rewarding. Most men don’t have sex with 14 year old girls, and don’t rape women. Both activities on the part of men are arguably part of our evolutionary heritage but in both cases it is pretty easy not to be a sociopath.

    Evolutionary biology is a part of the story but socialization and culture clues matter too. As pretty as the “kill and die for sentiment” is Dana’s husband almost certainly has the luxury of having that promise remain empty indefinitely. It’s hilarious that you treat this sort of melodrama as the revealed truth and dismiss the idea that being controlling can be a problem as some kind of fairytale. You guys can do your little school girl swooning about ye olden caveman romance but such sentiments are probably not conducive to having a happy romantic life.

    Like


  60. @Hello

    Surprised as anyone that comment made the honorable mention role. Thought comment redundantly self-evident.

    Comment hardly meant to be scientific evidence. Because of the big deviation between my experience and what literature typically says, I toss the literature on the grounds that reality always trumps paper.

    It’s a sample-of-1. Your mileage may vary. But I tend to believe in the validity of induction and generalization.

    Like


  61. El Guapo,
    As far as sample-of-1 goes, I avoid promiscuous men for similar reasons. I wonder how, these days, such a study could ever be funded but it’s a vital topic. I’d far prefer we study that than clone glow in the dark cats.

    Did you say you’re Italian? I know that Joe T. is, and I have an Italian mom. How many Sons (and daughters) of Italy frequent this blog?

    Like


  62. @Hello

    Yep. Half-italian from mother’s side. I even lived in Italy several times for quite a number of years when I was much younger.

    And yep, I have no idea how a study could be done on this matter. Selection bias would be a horrible confounding variable.

    Like


  63. “The idea that someone in a monogamous relationship can’t have friends of the opposite gender is absurd.” – Gunner

    I’d call that an overstatement. It’s absurd if buy into wishful thinking ‘feel good’ platitudes. A man can be friends with a woman in only three situations:

    1. He’s not physically attracted to her.
    2. He’s already nailing a woman (or women) more physically attractive than her.
    3. He’s gay.

    See the ladder theory: http://www.laddertheory.com/
    Although not scientific by any means, it’s elegant and confirmed by most people’s anecdotal evidence and experience.

    Like


  64. i thought feminism died with punk rock, ronco’s electric food dehydrator and reese’s last notable role in ‘the man in the moon’

    Like


  65. on December 4, 2008 at 12:22 am ironrailsironweights

    Today’s GNP shows that a bit of trimming is okay so long as it doesn’t go too far.

    Peter

    Like


  66. [email protected] at finefantastic. “The man in the moon” was a great movie though.
    -Grace.

    Like


  67. on December 4, 2008 at 12:26 am ironrailsironweights

    On the other hand, this GNP is trimmed a little too far.

    Peter

    Like


  68. Roissy, love your work. But can we please dispense with this obesity “epidemic” nonsense? You cannot catch fat from someone. It’s not a public health issue. It’s a personal health issue.

    Like


  69. @Tug

    You might be wrong, so keep an open mind. There is mounting evidence that adenovirus might be at the root of the obesity epidemic. The other thing is that the pattern of spread of the obesity is not fully random, but follows patterns of association, behaving in a similar way as if there was an infectious vector.

    Additionally, we have plenty of people who eat healthy and regardless of excersize, diet and calorie control, are unable to lose the weight.

    Like


  70. D. Hawaii — it’s amazing how universal these traits of female behaviour are. I recognise aspects of that pregame conversation you write up in -even my mother-.

    Like


  71. @ El Guapo

    Thanks for the info. I’ll do some googling. But I have to tell you, at face value, the last thing the fat chicks need is to be told they’re not responsible and it is some virus’ fault.

    Like


  72. @Tug

    Agreed. But is it their fault? The jury is now out on this matter — as a former healthcare professional the difference between obesity and thin-ness can be as little at 100 calories per day. So let’s realize that lifestyle accusations and biases and moral grandstanding on medical issues are mostly invalid. Some women are overeating porkers, are not, and social stigmas are unwarranted.

    Thankfully there are new weight loss supplements on the way that are spectacular. One in particular pulled an average of 28 pounds off the test subjects while preserving lean mass over about 16 weeks if memory serves.

    Like


  73. Sorry. That should have read: Some women are overeating porkers, many are not, and social stigmas are unwarranted.

    Like


  74. dana, nice winston churchill reference.

    Like


  75. Day late and a dollar short out here on the West Coast.

    Bastard — There are plenty of artists who led utterly conventional lives, William Blake (devout Christian poet and engraver), Mark Twain, William Shakespeare (by all accounts) and Thomas Eakins, the American impressionist come to mind.

    Most artists find chaos and despair counterproductive to the business of churning out work for sale after work for sale. For every guy like Philip K. Dick, there were Asimovs and Michael Chrichtons.

    As for women, Western men have traditionally liked and desired “strong” women who are independent, self-minded, assertive, sassy, funny, tough, and no shrinking violet. The Sarah Shahi character on “Life” is probably a good picture of most guy’s ideal woman. She’s not a shrinking violet, that’s for sure.

    But what Sara misses, and I think Dana and yourself also miss, is the expectation of … loyalty. That in a relationship the woman will stick with the guy if he gets sick, or loses his job, or ages and is not as hot as he was at 25, or any of those things. Largely, that’s gone. On the other side too, of course, but only one side gets talked about. When a mother of three can fool around with her husband and kids yards away, that says something. Also her evasions.

    Men prefer the stronger women because they expect with it comes not only emotional excitement but also loyalty. Sadly lacking now.

    As for the girly men, that stuff started like much else in the toxic 1990’s. That decade saw the rise of Ashton Kutcher, Brad Pitt, and the rest of the blow-dried pretty boys. ALL of which is driven by women not “feminism” or hippies or anything else. Let’s be clear: WOMEN WANT THE PRETTY BOY “feminized” Alpha, and want the rest of the guys to be wimpy betas who are even more deeply feminized.

    You guys really should TIVO/watch “Life” on NBC, I think tonight’s episode is going to be available on Hulu or NBC’s site for a week, catch it when you can. It’s textbook. The Donal Logue character (he of “the Tao of Steve”) pursues and wins the Shahi character, who’s clearly drop dead gorgeous but needs his emotional stability. Contrary to Roissy’s view he lets her cut his hair because he doesn’t care and it makes her happy.

    He stupidly calls her “dude” in public because he’s unsure about how to treat her in public, and she shows up at his place later naked, to point out she’s not … a dude. She calls him on his jealousy (rather than admit it he reflexively says the “dude” word again) and she walks out tremendously irritated.

    Point: contrary to Roissy’s theory the idea of picking one’s battles, and conceding to the woman who sleeps with you on the unimportant things, even agreeing when they are right (Shahi’s character calls out Logue’s jealousy) is part of the compromises men must make.

    A woman gives up her prime dating time, opportunities, to be with only one guy. She ought to expect a level of compromise and open-ness to her own insights, intelligence, and emotions, none of which are trivial. A man of course earns that right also. A marriage and relationship is a partnership of equals. True equals. But that does not make them the same. [Every man should listen to their wife, she often has great insight and judgment about the people around her husband, Michelle Obama excepted of course :> ]

    The problem is that this process never happens because women have so much choice and opportunity that they demand it all their own way, deeply feminized men. The great thing about Logue’s character is that he’s the tough NYC cop who is nothing but a man’s man. In deeply weird LA.

    Like


  76. Interesting to see the Islamic idea of how to live life… “own” women, restrict women from spending too much friendly time with other men, completely protect them as they are wearker… is catching on.

    Thanks Dana and everyone else.

    I predict that with the anti-feminist wave taking the country in years more people will respect Islam for keeping it real between on gender dynamics. And world peace will result.

    Like


  77. Interesting to see the Islamic idea of how to live life… “own” women, restrict women from spending too much friendly time with other men, completely protect them as they are wearker… is catching on.

    Way to be overdramatic in your exaggeration. It takes much more than that to embrace Islam. If anything, what we’re describing here was the norm in the world, including in the Judeo-Christian west, up until a little over 40 years ago. Hardly an idea unique to Muslim.

    Like


  78. on December 4, 2008 at 6:12 am Cannon's Canon

    Jesus fucking christ, I get all jazzed up about being Roissy’s “Rookie of the Month” commenter, then I have to reread Shouting Thomas’ new testament.

    Meanwhile, I think blanket religion applies itself MOST ABSTRACTLY (least relevantly, most cult-ishly) to Game theory (the non-math subscription), but EVERY post-apocalyptic female rights H-bomb aftermath looter that revels in Alpha-ry would spurn Islam (especially!) out of the COEXIST bumper sticker blasphemes. Would ‘Kick A Bitch’ kick a bitch if that was demanded by a police state? Would Roissy bother to compare harem-size if only a deviation below the wealth axis made it less possible and more impressive? Stop, no, and don’t.

    “Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded.” Jesse “The Body” Ventura

    Behavorial science has nothing to do with it! Fingerbang in 2009!

    Like


  79. As per usual, Whiskey’s points were excellent, and really zooms in on the major factor here: Female Sexual Fidelity. Plus, the fact that, as he rightly noted, and as virtually every man here knows, should he ever lose his job or take a fall from his position, his days as a Married Man. It would be interesting to see the divorce rates in the aftermath of GM’s massive layoffs a few years back for example.

    So yea, Whiskey’s point here should get a lot more attention than it does.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  80. Chicnoir says, “They seem to forget the eight girls whose hearts they broke in the pass before girl number nine did them in.”

    A similar observation is what causes me to be unable to remain friends with some of my ex potentials. If a person is a failure as a man, he will fail to gain the rewards of being a success. If some miracle happens and he does get lucky, he’ll waste it because he’s too stupid to do otherwise.

    Like


  81. The idea that someone in a monogamous relationship can’t have friends of the opposite gender is absurd.

    One of my 0 m e g a-male friends hangs out with a married girl, a long-time friend and a fellow-gamer. They go to the movies together, she comes over alone to play video games at his house; they even share hotel rooms (all purely platonic) on amusement-park trips! … to each his own I guess, but unbelieavable to me that one one hand a married man would be fine with that, and on the other that a married woman would want that.

    There are plenty of artists who led utterly conventional lives,

    I agree with Whiskey. In fact, the idea of the artist as a deviant or eccentric is a 19th century notion, and for the most part these artists weren’t all that good compared with the truly greats – Shakespare, Milton, etc.

    Even among the English Romantics, reading the shy and conventional John Keats’s poetry is still a powerful experience, while lotharios Shelley and Byron are rarely read today by non-specialists.

    I saw a movie some years ago that nicely illustrated this point. I don’t remember the title, but it had a still-young Kim Bassinger character move around in Andy-Warholish circles full of poseurs and artistes… then she came upon an old and very plain farmer-looking guy in the country, painting something. She was transfixed by whatever it is she saw on his canvas, which was apparently more powerful that anythign she saw in her artiste circles.

    There is however a link between mental illness and some types of great art. It’s speculated, for example, that Van Gogh may have suffered from bipolar disorder.

    i thought feminism died with punk rock, [etc.]

    It died with Monica Lewisnky. Today it’s in its Brezhnev phase: lots of tanks but no faith.

    Like


  82. @ El Guapo & Tug,

    Google “Arthur De Vany” and read his blog if you want an alternate explanation for why the obesity epidemic is so ubiquitous in American society.

    Or, in short, if the medical / nutrition community screwed up the definition of “healthy” and has people eating the wrong things, would you be surprised that people are getting fatter if they follow the advice?

    Like


  83. Additionally, we have plenty of people who eat healthy and regardless of excersize, diet and calorie control, are unable to lose the weight.

    No, we haven’t.

    What we have is something wrecking the hormonal control of appetite aimed at keeping body weight in check. As little as 100 kcals per day amounts to over ten pounds per year.

    It may be the sedentary lifestyle most people lead or it could be the abundance of low glycemic index carbohydrates in our diet. Or it might be something else altogether. Perhaps a host of factors.

    Like


  84. @ Sarah

    “My first husband definitely did NOT put up my bullshit, but he was as controlling as they come and eventually I left him; much to his dismay.”

    AND

    @ Gunner

    “It’s hilarious that you treat this sort of melodrama as the revealed truth and dismiss the idea that being controlling can be a problem as some kind of fairytale.”

    There is a difference between “being controlling”, and what this site, Dana, etc advocate. You make the mistake that many feminist critics make in their constant cherry picking of Game theory – isolating things like the “neg”, and treating women with some authority. You just view them as “insults”, and “controlling” instead of accurately evaluating the specific scenarios.

    I don’t long for the 50’s and the WWII generation’s (genuinely) emotionally/physically abusive, often alcoholic relationships. Many were extremely unhappy marriages, and they were partly due to the masses’ perception that the Nuclear Family was the only way, etc etc. The misery of a great many of those relationships were exactly what caused the Boomers rebellion of all that, embracing radical feminism, free love, etc, eventually leading to feminized men, as a reader has pointed out.

    There were some good things that came from all of that. But just as there were good things from that, there were good things about the relationships of the past – many aspects which are described here.

    So yes, if your boyfriend/husband is a “controlling asshole”, then sorry, you probably picked wrong. But if he confidently leads you, without putting up with any bullshit, you will respect and love him that much more, leading to a prosperous balance. But then again, some women just like to have the power in the relationship. Thats great if it works for you, but deep down, as this blog has shown, you most likely dont respect the man in that relationship.

    Like


  85. The worst thing about communicating idea via internet post is the things you have to leave out in order to make a concise point.

    The sense of ownership i have made the conscious decision to allow my husband to have over me is entirely voluntary. i in no way advocate a sha’aria rule of law demanding women behave this way. what was left out of my very short comment was the devotion i receive from this man in return for it. it is not a slavish beta devotion, something every woman who has been young once and not deformed has been on the receiving end of, but one that feels earned and heartfelt and unresented. i am vested with the same ownership over him, the same rules apply. he doesn’t carouse, ogle other women openly or flirt, there are no phones or emails i can’t look at, no secret “man cave”, probably because i have no problem with him looking at porn and he can be very open about it.

    chic noir, if he did any of the things i wouldn’t put up with i wouldn’t have married him in the first place. “controlling” and “emotionally abusive” are psychobabble feminist terms made up to specifically to pathologize traditional masculine behavior. a relationship, like a boat can only have one captain.

    david—the fact that you don’t see that when you allow your gf or wife to dress provocatively in order to “show her off” you are keeping her in a constant state of “on the market” and making her subject to the exact kind of constant male attention that keeps her ready to cheat at all times is just one of the many worthless beta attitudes i have read coming from you since you posted on half sigma all the time. good luck with that.

    Like


  86. Maybe it’s too late already.

    I liked the Anais Nin passage too, but do be aware that Anais was a ferocious self-romanticizer, not above doing a lot of lying, er, reality-embroidering.

    Like


  87. I’m not sure where Rick gets his ideas about the misery and unhappiness of ’50s marriages. I was around (if very young) in the ’50s and quite sentient in the ’60s, and my guess would be that most of the marriages of the WWII generation were happier and more solid than most of today’s marriages are.

    The ’60s were a very interesting phenomenon, but the usual way they’re portrayed strikes me as whacky. There were loads of reasons the ’60s happened, and the supposed repressiveness of ’50s style marriage seems to me like a rather small one. Remember that Playboy, James Bond, and Marilyn Monroe were all ’50s phenomena — that’s where “swinging” started, not among hippies.

    A much, much bigger reason for the ’60s was that Boomers were 1) huge, 2) prosperous, and 3) spoiled. They were the first generation of genuinely self-centered, spoiled brats. They were also the first bunch of teens who grew up thinking of themselves as a specific generation of teens, and who were catered to as a market segment. The ’50s economy, in other words, made them feel like the center of the universe. A lot of the ’60s was simply about teens saying “I demand that things suit me, and speak to me in my way.” It was quite a surprise to a lot of people that these teens actually got away with it. In previous decades, adolescent tantrums either weren’t taken seriously or were squashed instantly.

    Drugs also played a huge part in the ’60s. A big reason movies from the ’30s and ’40s feel very different from movies of the ’60s and ’70s (and beyond) is because of a very basic change. Prior to 1960, the altered-consciousness of choice was booze — “good times” meant something like “getting drunk.” Often social, convivial, humorous. After 1960, more and more “good times” meant “getting wiped out, man, just like taking acid.” Movies became much more overwhelming, solipsistic, and hallucinatory. You can see it still in today’s Hollywood epics — they’re wipe-you-out, mow-you-down, kill-you-with-effects-and-Dolby extravaganzas. That’s the legacy of the ’60s, and of the way the model of “good times” moved from booze to drugs.

    As for all those supposedly miserable marriages that broke up in the ’60s and ’70s … Well, an elderly shrink I know tells me that one of the most common things he ran across in the ’60s and ’70s was lives that had been shattered because marriages that didn’t need to break up had in fact broken up. People kinda gave up on the idea of workings things out. They often took too many drugs, paid too much attention to the popular media, bought the idea that everything should always be their way, and wound up deep-sixing perfectly good lives and marriages.

    For more on the history of the teenager, read my blog posting about it.

    Short version: the whole “teenager” thing — adolescence as a defined and desirable phase of life — is of very recent vintage. As recently as 1951 the bestselling music in the country wasn’t pop music for kids, it was musicals, opera, folk music, Tony Bennett — entertainment for adults. It’s historically very, very weird that we as a culture have put adolescence at the center of experience, and at the center of our value systems.

    And you wonder why kids today have a hard time growing up. It’s partly because adulthood has gotten a serious demoting, and ‘way too much is made of adolescence, and of adolescent values.

    Like


  88. ok sara, i’ll ask again

    what do you define as success with women, for a man?

    if you have an idea of what ISN’T success, or what is “shallow” success, you must be measuring that against an actual opinion you hold as to what constitutes success with women. One of the greatest errors in history was when women started to listen to what OTHER women thought men “should” be like and threw out 100000000s of years of female wisdom as to what men actually ARE like. “Should” is not a magic word that alters reality.

    Men think success with women is : A. having sex with as many BEAUTIFUL women as possible and/or B. Monopolizing the affection of one such woman and having her bear his children while continuing to remain attractive and provide him with sex and not ever cheat on or dispossess him. Probably both of these at the same time.

    you can deal with this reality or you can do what most women born after the boomers did, waste your fertile years getting pumped and dumped by jerks until you are bitter, angry and used up. a whole generation of women my age is going to die alone with cats. fuck that, i ain’t gonna be one of them.

    I want to monopolize my husband’s: A. Penis and B. Resources.

    In return for that he wants a few things. i give those things freely and from my heart. the benefits in love, respect, companionship and security i have received in return outweigh any and all other considerations

    Like


  89. “Men think success with women is : A. having sex with as many BEAUTIFUL women as possible and/or B. Monopolizing the affection of one such woman and having her bear his children while continuing to remain attractive and provide him with sex and not ever cheat on or dispossess him. Probably both of these at the same time.”

    So your husband wants to have sex with you and other women.

    “I want to monopolize my husband’s: A. Penis and B. Resources.”

    You want him to have sex with only you.

    By your own admission, you expect your husband to limit himself in some way, against his innate male instincts. This is fine, but then you’re establishing expectations above and beyond mere animal instinct.

    Like


  90. By my own admission?

    When did i ever say different?

    Marriage is a human institution–it involves making promises to each other for mutual benefit, and concessions. he concedes his fidelity and resources to me, i concede some of my autonomy to him, as well as my fidelity.

    all of civilization involves the both the harnessing and the THWARTING of nature. from the creation of a right angle to forswearing all others in marriage. that is why f roger devlin was so very very right that any social arrangement that allows males AND females to follow their baser desires unfettered is a threat to civilization. if civilization is what you seek. maybe it isn’t.

    Like


  91. dana,

    I think to guys like roissy, it’s way more important to LOOK successful in other men’s eyes, than to actually BE successful which to ME would equal a true love of life, sex, and the women they have it with. It would equal a true joy of experience in sexuality, not a very temporary feeling of ego gratification. Not a temporary relief from sexual tension.

    I realize that to 99.99% of roissy readers this is not nearly concrete enough, but try as I might, I cannot explain it better. The true measure of success is the degree of positive emotion vs negative emotion one experiences in daily life……end of story. Roissy and followers seem to “enjoy” quite a shit load of negativity; hence low level of success in in my very simple definition of it. Keep asking and you’ll get basically the same uncomplicated, simplistic answer. It’s the simple things that are
    hard to get.

    One of the greatest errors in history was when women started to listen to what OTHER women thought men “should” be like and threw out 100000000s of years of female wisdom as to what men actually ARE like. “Should” is not a magic word that alters reality.

    Have I used the word “should”? I hate that word. I forgive you for lumping me into some unfortunate category of “women” this and that; mostly ball busting feminists types of which I am not one. Nor am I a shrill moralists. God forbid. I love giving head and much as the next red-blooded woman, and sport a glorious natural pelt.

    waste your fertile years getting pumped and dumped by jerks until you are bitter, angry and used up. a whole generation of women my age is going to die alone with cats. fuck that, i ain’t gonna be one of them.

    This is not exactly my experience. I’ve been married twice and have a beautiful (don’t all moms say this?) teenage daughter. Bitter I am not. Worn out a bit as far as men are concerned, but there have been only two in my life who have “pumped and dumped”, yet one of them stuck around for six months and the other off and on for six years, so am not sure if that really qualifies as a pump and dump.

    What you describe sounds like jealous possessiveness as far as you’re not being allowed to enjoy your male friends. Were they in fact a threat to your marriage? Or does being a possession appeal to you? Does it appeal to him? Sounds like what you have is an agreement of sorts, which is what most marriages are. I give you this if you give me that sort of thing. IMHO of course.

    Like


  92. BTW, there’s loads of evidence that what has caused America’s obesity insanity is an over-emphasis on carbs. Google “Gary Taubes” and read some interviews with him. There are a few vids of him out there too that are pretty mind-blowing too. Learn all about the evil Ancel Keys (who came up with the “lipid hypothesis” that demonized fat), and the evil doings of meddlin’ Sen. George McGovern, who ran the Senate committee that endorsed the low-fat high-carb food pyramid.

    An EZ to get up to date with this stuff is to watch the videos put up by this guy:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/FatHeadMovie

    Michael Eades’ blog is a great low-carb resource, and Jimmy Moore runs a blog that’s a major low-carb hub — lots of links, and loads of podcasts with impressive and intersting people.

    Fatties: Cut out the pasta, potatoes, soda, packaged crunchies, and sugars … Treat yourself to lots of fish, meat, veggies and good fats … You’ll likely slim up pronto. Easy as can be.

    Like


  93. Gunner

    Evolutionary biology is a part of the story but socialization and culture clues matter too.

    To my mind you’re talking about human animal vs human spirit, but there is no “vs” in an integrated, healthy human being. Both live in harmony and balance. If one or the other is too predominant, suffering is the result. It’s in fact a balancing act.

    Rick

    You make the mistake that many feminist critics make in their constant cherry picking of Game theory – isolating things like the “neg”, and treating women with some authority. You just view them as “insults”, and “controlling” instead of accurately evaluating the specific scenarios.

    Feminist I am NOT, I repeat…. Ugh. And trust me on this; my husband was pathologically controlling. A mad genius he was and I was his diamond in the rough. I was not allowed to have any inferiors as friends, which eventually included the entire human race, including my family. I barely escaped with the clothes on my back.

    Like


  94. Sara

    by reading this blog you are gaining almost unfettered insight into how men think, and not into the big fat lies they tell you (aka, all women) to get you to stfu.

    let’s ask THEM if they think it’s ok for men and women to be “friends” and for their girlfriends or wives to hang out with their male friends unchaperoned.

    anyone care to share?

    also, why do you type like Yoda?

    if 99.9 % of roissy’s readers think your opinions aren’t expressed in a concrete enough fashion it’s because they aren’t. women want men to take them seriously as equal intellects yet reserve the right to type in an airy-fairy hippy dippy style that goes on and on without expressing anything.

    Like


  95. Sara, exactly. You were with someone who treated you like shit. Whose fault that was, I have no idea, but it doesnt sound like a good relationship. Nobody on here is advocating that type of relationship.

    Michael, Im not suggesting that marriages now are any better than they were in the 50s. And in fact, they may be worse off. Obviously this is all generalizing, which is not exactly constructive, but I do think there were a lot of extremely unhealthy marriages, family situations, etc. Your causes for the 60s/70s are accurate as well, but Id say that a lot of it was rebellion against their parents ways too – both justified and not.

    Like


  96. on December 4, 2008 at 2:27 pm Dave from Hawaii

    From my own experience, and the experience of all of the various relationships I’ve observed in my life amongst family, friends and acquaintances, combined with the application of insights gleaned from the study of male-female relationships through the PUA point-of-view, I now believe I understand the female point-of-view and it’s differentiation between a “controlling asshole” and “a strong, alpha male that fires up my loins.”

    It’s simply this: both are guys who exhibit the same traits of dominance, only that the former is a guy whose Women fell out of ATTRACTION with, while the latter is one in which the attraction is still in full effect.

    And Sara, women like you need to own up to your own responsibilities to the messed up relationships. It’s so typical of women to backwards rationalize and seek justifications for proclaiming their innocence under the guise of being a helpless victim.

    Your ex-husbands “pathological” controlling was the result of an escalation of negative dominance that you enabled, allowed and encouraged to grow to that point.

    No man EVER immediately starts behaving that way when a relationship is new (unless we are talking about a relationship in a rigid cultural system like Islamic Patriarchy…).

    That kind of thing develops over time, and it takes two to metastasize a small tumor into the cancer of a relationship that you have to cut out of your life to survive.

    But it didn’t just “happen” because HE was a pathological psychopath.

    It happened because of the relationship dynamic you played your equal part in making.

    Until you realize this and OWN UP to the part you played in your own relationship disaster, you will always find yourself “…worn out a bit as far as men are concerned”

    Like


  97. Dave from Hawaii speaks the truth

    Like


  98. Dave from Hawaii is amazing. Brilliant and brave stuff.

    Though I will opine that — although many women play active roles in creating the circumstances they then complain about — Bad Guys really do exist. We all know that from elementary school, right? Out of a hundred boys, there was always one or two who by the age of five were picking fights, torturing animals, drinking, etc. The one or two kids you learned to avoid, and had to defend yourself against. Well, those boys grow up …

    Like


  99. Michael, there are bad guys, and there are weak guys who do stupid things…but either way, the intelligent person with good (which to me is also justified) self confidence does not allow but one revelation of crucial weakness or malice. At that point they defend themselves decisively.

    One of the reasons my life is low on drama is because I do not allow people to use me. It just doesn’t happen.

    They may lie to me, steal from me, betray me, whatever, but they don’t get the chance to do that more than once. I’m not petty. Everybody has their little quirks and so do I…but some stuff I will not tolerate, and I don’t nag, whine, or take it too personally. Nature decides who is the victor, and I view someone who attempts to harm me as a challenger. I have my gifts and they have theirs, and if they want to try to step to me, they had better be stronger than me, or they’re going down.

    So overly controlling people find out very early that they are not going to get anywhere with me. Exploitive people will find that they haven’t taken anything from me that I haven’t taken from them. When someone abuses my trust, they simply lose it.

    I think Sara understands her role in the dynamic of her bad relationship, which is why she left it. She took control of her own situation, and I’m proud of her.

    Like


  100. @M. Blowhard – Your comments about adolescence in the 20th century are dead on accurate. Most people simply don’t realize how momentous the social changes in the latter part of the 20th century were in terms of the social effects of unprecedented amounts of wealth and free time on kids. For most of human history, adolescence didn’t exist as we know it now. Most of our social problems today are the result of large numbers of people maintaining adolescent, narcissistic attitudes well into adulthood.

    Like


  101. Hmm. I see women’s relationship with men as riding rather than being ridden; riding, that is, a large and potentially dangerous animal that requires skill and courage to domesticate and guide.

    That’s a tease, but it’s not altogether untrue. Camille Paglia herself, that great evangelist for male and female difference, says that “It is women’s destiny to rule men.” Part of doing it well is never letting them know that they aren’t in sole charge.

    Like


  102. “You were with someone who treated you like shit. Whose fault that was, I have no idea, but it doesnt sound like a good relationship. Nobody on here is advocating that type of relationship.”

    Well, nobody except Roissy.

    Like


  103. “also, why do you [i.e., Sarah] type like Yoda?” – Dana

    HAHAHAHAH! My beverage just shot out of my nose. Dry I am NOT!

    Like


  104. Rick saidI don’t long for the 50’s and the WWII generation’s (genuinely) emotionally/physically abusive, often alcoholic relationships. Many were extremely unhappy marriages, and they were partly due to the masses’ perception that the Nuclear Family was the only way, etc etc
    Excellent points here Rick. I think the extended family is a better option for women who have demanding careers. Immigrant communities in the states seem to hold on to this model, at least those who are FOB. A move back to the extended family structure would complety change American culture in some good and not so good ways.

    One of the reasons why polygamy has not been in a couple of West African countries is because powerful women, usually market women, prefer having cowives to pick up the slack, giving the prestige seeking wife(s) the option to work.

    But then again, some women just like to have the power in the relationship. Thats great if it works for you, but deep down, as this blog has shown, you most likely dont respect the man in that relationship
    I’m glad you acknowledged this. There are 3 billion women in the world, all of us are not textbook examples. The Hillary Clintons and Michelle Obamas(per Whiskey) make good wives for some men. Some women really do crave power & status. There is nothing wrong with that in the same way that there is nothing abnormal about a man who has no desire to enter the rat race.

    Danaprobably because i have no problem with him looking at porn and he can be very open about it
    Dana, you are a woman after my own heart. Unless it’s one of those disgusting movies where the women are being abused and manhandled, I don’t object. Most likely I would be eager to watch it with him. I don’t understand why some women have such a problem with “movies”. I’ve noticed that some of one night st0nd type of chics are often very vocal in their dislike of “movies”. The one night girls are willing to weird things with strangers but have a problem when other women do it on camera & get a few dollars to pay the bills. SMH

    a relationship, like a boat can only have one captain
    But sometimes it takes two people to row.

    to “show her off” you are keeping her in a constant state of “on the market” and making her subject to the exact kind of constant male attention that keeps her ready to cheat at all times
    Dana, I disagree with you here. There are trousers wearing masculine looking women who do little in the traditional sense to attract men yet someone manage to have affairs. If a woman wants to cheat on her husband, her state of dress will do little to stop her. On the other hand, a half-naked woman will certainly draw plenty of male attention so she will have more options but unless she is forced, it’s her decision to step out on her husband.

    Like


  105. Point: contrary to Roissy’s theory the idea of picking one’s battles, and conceding to the woman who sleeps with you on the unimportant things, even agreeing when they are right (Shahi’s character calls out Logue’s jealousy) is part of the compromises men must make.

    A woman gives up her prime dating time, opportunities, to be with only one guy. She ought to expect a level of compromise and open-ness to her own insights, intelligence, and emotions, none of which are trivial. A man of course earns that right also. A marriage and relationship is a partnership of equals. True equals. But that does not make them the same

    Whiskey is a man after my heart and my thong!

    thinks to self
    *if only he didn’t hate michelle obama so much*

    Like


  106. “to “show her off” you are keeping her in a constant state of “on the market” and making her subject to the exact kind of constant male attention that keeps her ready to cheat at all times
    Dana, I disagree with you here. There are trousers wearing masculine looking women who do little in the traditional sense to attract men yet someone manage to have affairs (i didnt say only scantily clad women cheated). If a woman wants to cheat on her husband, her state of dress will do little to stop her (i didn;t say anything would stop a woman that wanted to from cheating). On the other hand, a half-naked woman will certainly draw plenty of male attention so she will have more options (this is what i said, and you agree) but unless she is forced, it’s her decision to step out on her husband.”

    Maybe you are unaware of what the words “disagree with” mean.

    i did not say a single thing you “disagreed with” in your 99% straw man response. the only thing i actually said you restated as “a half-naked woman will certainly draw plenty of male attention so she will have more options” and promptly agreed with. if you don’t think “her decision” is swayed by receiving the same constant level of male interest of the same caliber as when she was single than i don’t know what to say to you.

    I submit that all females should be forced to go to “symbolic logic” boot camp at age 13

    Like


  107. Michael BlowhardIt’s historically very, very weird that we as a culture have put adolescence at the center of experience, and at the center of our value systems.
    Incredibly important fact Michael. My generation is perhaps one of the first where teenagers don’t like to be told they look older. Some of us hold an idealistic view of the years 18-21 because of youth, perceived level of beauty, freedom, the many life options that one has during these years.

    a whole generation of women my age is going to die alone with cats
    Hey hey hey, I like cats. They make better pets than most dogs.

    waste your fertile years getting pumped and dumped by jerks until you are bitter, angry and used up.
    Dana there are some women who don’t allow themselves to be pumped and dumped by alphas. There really are some women who can count their partners on one hand or wait until they are married. Mind you, most of those who wait until they are married usually marry before they are 25. I have a friend who waited.

    I love giving head and much as the next red-blooded woman, and sport a glorious natural pelt
    My blood is blue 😦 no pelt for me

    Sara saidWhat you describe sounds like jealous possessiveness as far as you’re not being allowed to enjoy your male friends. Were they in fact a threat to your marriage?
    I don’t have a problem with having friends of the opposite sex per say, but going off to spend time alone with them is a no no for married people. Why give your spouse reason for the even the smallest doubt to enter their head when it comes to your fidelity. To honest, I don’t like the idea of my boyfriend’s/husband’s friends around me when my boyfriend is not. My “friends” know to stay far away from my boyfriend when I’m not around.

    Like


  108. if you don’t think “her decision” is swayed by receiving the same constant level of male interest of the same caliber as when she was single than i don’t know what to say to you.

    I really don’t. I think for most women, if they are going to cheat it’s something that they think about and plan. It’s one of the reasons why we don’t “get caught” cheating as often as men do.

    For a woman* to find herself swept away with lust so strong that she breaks down morally, the guy she cheats with must have the Clinton factor. Very few men have the Clinton factor.

    *most women

    Like


  109. chic noir, a good deal might change if extended families were to make a comeback in modern Western life – but not necessarily in a way that anyone would like.

    I keep hearing this praise for the extended family in all kinds of sources, and I always wonder if the people calling for this form of alliance really understand what it means. I’m about 99% certain that they don’t.

    Extended families are perhaps the most demanding, most eagle-eyed, most unrelenting, most unforgiving form of surveillance ever invented by human beings. Does anyone realise that if we were to return to the extended-family based model of society that we wouldn’t be free to marry whoever we liked (because we’d have to marry someone who could get on with our relatives)? Or that we wouldn’t be able to take whatever job we liked (because we couldn’t take one that would involve moving)? Or that in order to keep the peace, our parents and other relatives would have to be consulted about how we chose to nurse/feed/educate our children?

    And of course if we do choose to live far away from our relatives to escape this all-pervasive influence, we would still have to be prepared to feed, house, clothe, and find jobs for them if they were to choose to move to our neighbourhood, if we were trying to maintain the concept of the extended family?

    I am not joking abou this. That’s how people have to learn to live in those countries – and there are still many of them – in which extended families are commonplace.

    Like


  110. yeh, uh, clinton…no alpha male there.

    Like


  111. Unless you were quoting someone else, Chic did not misquote you…

    Here is the entire thing:

    david—the fact that you don’t see that when you allow your gf or wife to dress provocatively in order to “show her off” you are keeping her in a constant state of “on the market” and making her subject to the exact kind of constant male attention that keeps her ready to cheat at all times is just one of the many worthless beta attitudes i have read coming from you since you posted on half sigma all the time. good luck with that.

    Like


  112. where did i say she misquoted me? i said none of her expressed disagreements disagreed with anything i actually said.

    Like


  113. Fabian
    @M. Blowhard – Your comments about adolescence in the 20th century are dead on accurate. Most people simply don’t realize how momentous the social changes in the latter part of the 20th century were in terms of the social effects of unprecedented amounts of wealth and free time on kids. For most of human history, adolescence didn’t exist as we know it now. Most of our social problems today are the result of large numbers of people maintaining adolescent, narcissistic attitudes well into adulthood.
    Fabian your comment is dead on as well. In most agrarian cultures, you go from childhood straight to adulthood. The adulthood stage usually starts when you begin puberty. I believe it’s from agrarian societies that we get the saying, “old enough to bleed old enough to breed” in relation to women. Of course that system can’t/won’t work in America for a number of reasons. One of which is the fact that female physical maturation happens on such a wide scale in terms of age. Some American girls their get their first period/breast growth as young as 8(I’ve heard/read 6 ) or as late as 18.

    Like


  114. apologies – didn’t see where you both agreed that women in relationships shouldn’t dress provocatively…

    Like


  115. Clio saidExtended families are perhaps the most demanding, most eagle-eyed, most unrelenting, most unforgiving form of surveillance ever invented by human beings. Does anyone realise that if we were to return to the extended-family based model of society that we wouldn’t be free to marry whoever we liked (because we’d have to marry someone who could get on with our relatives)? Or that we wouldn’t be able to take whatever job we liked (because we couldn’t take one that would involve moving)? Or that in order to keep the peace, our parents and other relatives would have to be consulted about how we chose to nurse/feed/educate our children?

    Your right Clio, that’s why I mentioned living with the grandparents is no walk in the park. Some elderly people are cranky, judgmental, and very bothersome.

    For working mothers, having their parents around would allow them to leave their children with someone they trust versus an anonymous daycare center. Most people raise their children with most of the values, mores and types of discipline (*) that they were raised with. I don’t think a large part of the American public does a drastic change in child rearing because some pop psychologist with no children of his/her own, writes a book that is heralded by The New Yorker as “the go to” book on child rearing.

    The surveillance can be a good or bad thing. Good in that the wife and husband will probably curtail their arguments/fights so they don’t let it all hang out. If the husband and wife are living with the wife’s family, can certainly work in her favor if the husband has the potential to be abusive. At the same time Clio, we all want to be alone some times.

    Clio, I’ve read a couple of articles on arranged marriages amongst American born and raised Indians. Some Indian Americans believe that their parents know them better than they know themselves and have better insight as to who would make a them better partner. Parents will not me blinded by the person’s good looks or lust in the same way that you and I would. Dare I say some parents would be blinded by money. The articles for the most part mention that the marriages turn out well for both parties, or at least the couples usually stay together.
    With so many family members living in close proximity, I would guess that financial burdens/pressures might relax.

    *spanking is an exception

    @ Dana
    Unless you were quoting someone else, Chic did not misquote you…

    Dana thinks we agree but I think we disagree for the most part.

    dana
    yeh, uh, clinton…no alpha male there
    It’s the aura or effect that Clinton has on women. Bill Gates is an alpha to some but I’ve never heard of women having a powerful urge to suddenly drop their draws for him just because.

    Like


  116. Nicole saidThey may lie to me, steal from me, betray me, whatever, but they don’t get the chance to do that more than once. I’m not petty. Everybody has their little quirks and so do I…but some stuff I will not tolerate, and I don’t nag, whine, or take it too personally. Nature decides who is the victor, and I view someone who attempts to harm me as a challenger
    Yea, too many women view men as projects or works in progress & are willing to stay around so they can “fix” him. A big no no. I
    feel you on the nag and whine stuff, I try to avoid it, but have found myself with a man who naged and whined.
    *shudders*

    I have my gifts and they have theirs, and if they want to try to step to me, they had better be stronger than me, or they’re going down
    *high fives*
    Ha
    My girl

    Like


  117. on December 4, 2008 at 8:51 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Great point M. Blowhard, you got closer to the point I was trying to make than I did.

    People growing up today experience an ever increasing period of adolescence in their young lives. This turbulent period that used to last a forgettable 5-10 years is now a celebrated 15-20 years. Some people never reach ‘adulthood’ as compared to the adults of prior decades.

    Culturally, we glorify the youth, energy and immaturity of adolescence to the detriment of more adult values.

    Like


  118. on December 4, 2008 at 9:26 pm Marvelous Bastard

    Whiskey –
    There are plenty of artists who led utterly conventional lives

    Sure, but a lot of neurotic people become exceptional artists. Compare – Kurt Cobain or Dave Grohl? Dave has made a real name for himself after Kurt’s death, but I doubt he would have been as successful without the Nirvana springboard.

    Regardless of Anais Nin’s personal life, I haven’t heard anyone disagree with her assessment of what women desire sexually. I think she uses her ability to write to describe something modern feminists want to deny.

    As for the girly men, that stuff started like much else in the toxic 1990’s. That decade saw the rise of Ashton Kutcher, Brad Pitt, and the rest of the blow-dried pretty boys.

    I disagree, that shit started in the mid-eighties. Remember college rock? New Wave? Those crappy coming of age movies like Say Anything? Fast Times? F’ing John Cusak is responsible for more betas than anybody else. Roissy could do a series on what men should not do based solely on John Cusak movies.

    And the music scene of the eighties? The Cure? REM? Tears for Fears? The list goes go on. How can you learn to be a man listening to that shit? I agree the pop culture in the nineties was worse, but by then the damage was irreversible.

    Like


  119. “Clio, I’ve read a couple of articles on arranged marriages amongst American born and raised Indians. Some Indian Americans believe that their parents know them better than they know themselves and have better insight as to who would make a them better partner. Parents will not me blinded by the person’s good looks or lust in the same way that you and I would.”

    Among the Indians I’ve known the mothers were pickier about the looks of prospective daughters-in-law than the sons.

    I think they stay together more because their expectations of marriage (and re M. Blowhard) adulthood are more realistic.

    Like


  120. I imagine that a lot of the divorces of such couples are caused by sexual incompatibility

    Like


  121. i have no problem with him looking at porn

    If a husband is looking at porn, isn’t it really a sign that his wife has failed at arousing him? Mind you, that if you presume that porn is a replacement for females instead of a supplement.

    the fact that you don’t see that when you allow your gf or wife to dress provocatively in order to “show her off”

    Dana, I want her to dress provocatively in order to desire her sexually. Otherwise, she’ll eventually get lumped into the sexless category of women. The last thing that I want is to have a relationship end because I returned to porn because the porn was better looking and more sexual than her, and I turned the girl into a platonic friend.

    Like


  122. on December 5, 2008 at 3:59 am random passerby

    @Sara: Looking successful in other people’s eyes is a success in itself 😛

    Like


  123. dana,

    let’s ask THEM if they think it’s ok for men and women to be “friends” and for their girlfriends or wives to hang out with their male friends unchaperoned.

    You seem to have a lot of respect for the average male opinion on this site. I do not. Neither do they respect my opinion by and large. It adds to the charm of our interactions.

    if 99.9 % of roissy’s readers think your opinions aren’t expressed in a concrete enough fashion it’s because they aren’t.

    See above.

    I type like Yoda? Does he type? LOL

    Speaking of Yoda, please allow me to quote the master. One who is much wiser than I if that were possible….on the subject of possessiveness. My last mistake was highly possessive. All it took was a word from me that I was dating or considering dating another man and voila; he would suddenly come out from his hiding place. Boring!

    Whenever you are possessed by somebody there is a dichotomy in you: you want to be possessed and yet you want to be free. There is a conflict in you: you want to be possessed because that makes you feel valuable, possessible. Somebody is paying respect to you, somebody is thinking of you as a treasure, but a treasure has no consciousness. You are becoming a thing, you are being reduced to the world of objects, you are becoming an object of possession. You are losing your subjectivity and the freedom of your subjectivity, hence the conflict.

    And you will be in misery because whatsoever you do will only fulfill half the desire and the other half will remain frustrated. If you allow yourself to be possessed, your desire to remain free remains unfulfilled, it fights; if you don’t allow yourself to be possessed you are free, but something in you goes on insisting that nobody possesses you. Does it mean nobody values you? Does it mean nobody is bothered about you, nobody takes any note, that you are worthless?

    At this level of love, misery is a natural consequence. Watch it, because through watchfulness, you can rise above it. You can start rising in love rather than falling in love. Watchfulness becomes like a ladder from the lowest to the highest.

    On the other hand, we are so free that we can choose bondage. Perhaps that’s what you’ve done. It’s not a bad choice, if it is a choice and you claim that it is. It’s just not a choice I would make.

    Like


  124. random passerby

    Only if first you are a success in your own eyes. Otherwise you’re just fooling others and that’s nothing but inflating your ego, which will eventually be deflated the next time someone does NOT think you a success. You’re talking about certain personality types of which you may be one. I’m too much a cunt to care what others think, if I might be so blunt. 🙂

    Like


  125. dave

    But it didn’t just “happen” because HE was a pathological psychopath.

    You are entirely correct. I played the victim and he played the victimizer. It was a very sick relationship and I hold no hatred for him whatsoever. What I learned finally is that I was more in control of the dynamics than he was. I was bringing out the worst in him. There is a lot going into any relationship; father issues, mother issues, and in my case and his case, rampant drug abuse, etc., etc., etc.

    Is that enough responsibility for you?

    Like


  126. Nicole

    I think Sara understands her role in the dynamic of her bad relationship, which is why she left it. She took control of her own situation, and I’m proud of her.

    Cool!

    Like


  127. David, porn can be a replacement for real life sex for some, but I believe that for most guys, it’s more of a replacement for real life sexual variety.

    Sex can be purchased relatively inexpensively, if one’s priority is simply to get laid/validated. My last husband likes to call that, “getting their card stamped”.

    Men like variety though, and it doesn’t really matter how “hot” the woman they’re currently doing is, or how hot he thinks she is, he will want something new. It’s just part of being a man.

    Something funny that you should know is that all but one of the married guys consistently trying to get into my pants is married to a slim blonde who lots of guys would love to shag. I’m not talking the simply skinny and blonde. They’re pretty symmetrical, and if they were mute, any straight male who was into the mainstream ideal would find them exactly that.

    The one who isn’t married to this particular sort of blonde, is married to a lovely looking Thai former…hostess.

    Now, I’m sure none of them are in love with me. I’m also sure that none of them is one of those hard core supermen who recognizes my strong mothering skills and/or good genes or something. If they were that strong, they wouldn’t be tolerating their wives’ abuse.

    I think it’s just that guys like variety even if they have what they think is “perfect” at home.

    It’s not her failure or his. It’s just a man thing.

    Besides, not all porn is silicone injected models faking orgasms.

    Like


  128. Chic Noir and Hello – I agree that arranged marriages are often highly successful, given the right context. What I was trying to suggest was that few people in modern societies would be willing to surrender that much of their autonomy, and in any case our societies are not constructed in such a way as to make it easy for us to do so.

    Like


  129. “People growing up today experience an ever increasing period of adolescence in their young lives. This turbulent period that used to last a forgettable 5-10 years is now a celebrated 15-20 years. Some people never reach ‘adulthood’ as compared to the adults of prior decades.

    Culturally, we glorify the youth, energy and immaturity of adolescence to the detriment of more adult values.”

    And a lot of this PUA garbage is simply an extension of that adolescence. This douchey confirmation bias and total fear of admitting error and this immature idea of alphaness is for boys, not real men.

    Like


  130. Clio and Chic Noir:

    Arranged marriages involve marrying someone very similar to you in terms of demographics and social class.

    If you are well behaved and have no serious character flaws (i.e. have a good work ethic, are frugal and responsible with money, don’t have a nasty temper), then your arranged marriage has a decent chance of working out.

    When people like my parents and grandparents entered into an arranged marriage, they also looked each other over to determine if they “liked” each other, so you could probably eliminate somebody to whom you weren’t attracted.

    Anyway, arranged marriages among the middle to upper classes seem to be pretty much okay.

    But arranged marriages among the poor can be disastrous because the people involved may not be well behaved, the men especially. So you have lots of marriages breaking up, if not going through a formal divorce, for instance because the husband refuses to work and it’s the wife who supports the family or the husband comes home drunk all the time and beats the wife and so on. (Alcoholism and gambling addiction are big problems among the poor in the area I’m from in India).

    Like


  131. on December 6, 2008 at 12:17 am ironrailsironweights

    Whatever advantages that arranged marriages might have, the fact remains that they’re nearly unthinkable in America except in some immigrant communities.

    Peter

    Like


  132. AS, thanks for the personal commentary. The articles I read were centered around middle and upper class American Indians.

    Like


  133. Thank you, looking forward to many more visits![url=http://0102lookdating.freehostia.com/?looking-for-younger-men]looking for younger men[/url]

    Like


  134. Alles Gute zum Geburtstag![url=http://0102lookdating.freehostia.com/?looking-for-single-woman]looking for older women[/url]

    Like


  135. […] some use it to win girlfriends, and some men, such as Keoni Galt/Dave in Hawaii, use it to maintain their marriages. Think of game as being like a butcher knife, which can be used to carve up meat or carve people up […]

    Like