Love In The Time Of Game

A lot of readers have sent me a link to this article by Kay Hymowitz, “Love in the Time of Darwinism“. I decided to take a look at it, not expecting much as is usually the case with any article written by a woman on the current state of dating, sex and game. Surprisingly, Hymowitz gets closer to the truth than any other journalist, but that’s not saying much — she’s still a million miles deep in lala land, hamstrung by her feminist biases. Her tone drips with resentment and condescension for the men who have successfully navigated the new dating landscape.

Their argument, in effect, was that the SYM [single young male] is putting off traditional markers of adulthood—one wife, two kids, three bathrooms—not because he’s immature but because he’s angry.

Or smart.

He’s angry because he thinks that young women are dishonest, self-involved, slutty, manipulative, shallow, controlling, and gold-digging.

Women have always been this way. What changed was the pill, condom, economic parity and feminist devolution. Contrary to the conventional wisdom propagandized by our ignoble Kunty Kommissars of the Kulturkampf in charge of punishing the masses for daring to pull the wool from their own eyes, women’s sexual nature, not men’s, is the wilder of the two. Women’s pussy keeps men in check, but dick doesn’t keep women in check, save for organically emergent cultural controls that put the brakes on female sexuality through the consequences of shaming, accidental pregnancy and potential out-of-wedlock destitution. If men in the trenches are reporting that women are more dishonest, shallow and sluttier than ever, then the blame rests with giving women *more* freedom, not less. It’s understandable that a feminist would shirk from this conclusion.

He’s angry because he thinks that the culture disses all things male.

Captain Obvious agrees. Has there ever been a period in human history when the men who built the tribe from the ground up into a gleaming civilization on the hill were more actively marginalized than now?

He’s angry because he thinks that marriage these days is a raw deal for men.

He thinks this because it’s true. The blessed Word of Chateau is spreading far and wide across the land. Spreading, I say.

This is from Dean in California: “Men are finally waking up to the ever-present fact that traditional marriage, or a committed relationship, with its accompanying socially imposed requirements of being wallets with legs for women, is an empty and meaningless drudgery.”

This guy sounds like he got taken to the cleaners and has lost his perspective. When you see yourself as a walking wallet, women will agree. The way out of that self-fulfilling prophecy is knowledge of women, and game as practical application of that knowledge. Women will use men with money and nothing else, but they’ll fall in love with men who are psychologically dominant. Where marriage sucks because it is a social mechanism designed to exchange sex for indentured servitude and enforced by the law, committed loving relationships are great.

You can find the same themes posted throughout websites like AmericanWomenSuck, NoMarriage, MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way), and Eternal Bachelor (“Give modern women the husband they deserve. None”).

Oh Kay, don’t be coy. You’ve been here, scared little bunny rabbit.

The reason for all this anger, I submit, is that the dating and mating scene is in chaos.

Freedom is chaos.

SYMs of the postfeminist era are moving around in a Babel of miscues, cross-purposes, and half-conscious, contradictory female expectations that are alternately proudly egalitarian and coyly traditional.

The way out of this morass is to not play by women’s rules.

And because middle-class men and women are putting off marriage well into their twenties and thirties as they pursue Ph.D.s, J.D.s, or their first $50,000 salaries, the opportunities for heartbreak and humiliation are legion.

Note: The median individual income in America is $32,000. The “elites” (and I use the term disparagingly) are completely out of touch.

PS: I use individual income and not household income because the former matters more to a man’s chances for finding a woman. If the culture were truly arranged to the benefit of beta provider males, the tax code would reflect that. It does not. In fact, just the opposite.

By the early twentieth century, things had evolved so that in the United States, at any rate, a man knew the following: he was supposed to call for a date; he was supposed to pick up his date; he was supposed to take his date out, say, to a dance, a movie, or an ice-cream joint; if the date went well, he was supposed to call for another one; and at some point, if the relationship seemed charged enough—or if the woman got pregnant—he was supposed to ask her to marry him.

This system worked when men held the economic and social upper hand.

Maxim #15: Female cultural equality = male dating inequality. Female cultural inequality = male dating equality. You cannot have both. So sayeth human nature.

For one thing, men face a situation—and I’m not exaggerating here—new to human history. Never before have men wooed women who are, at least theoretically, their equals—socially, professionally, and sexually.

Unfortunately, she does not make the connection and put two and two together. The problem lies not with men, who are merely skeleton keys that adapt to whatever lock women weld on their gates; the “problem” lies with women who have no choice but to obey their hindbrain programming and seek higher status mates in the sexual market as long as their assets allow.

But then, when an SYM walks into a bar and sees an attractive woman, it turns out to be nothing like that. The woman may be hoping for a hookup, but she may also be looking for a husband, a co-parent, a sperm donor, a relationship, a threesome, or a temporary place to live. She may want one thing in November and another by Christmas.

Women are incorrigibly capricious. This is why men must lead. Without male leadership, women spiral into a maelstrom of their emotions, buffetted to the point of ecstatic overdose until they wake up one day older and none the wiser, with no male attention off of which to ricochet helplessly addicted.

In fact, young men face a bewildering multiplicity of female expectations and desire. Some women are comfortable asking, “What’s your name again?” when they look across the pillow in the morning.

No woman has ever done this to me, but if she did I’d tell her “Fuck you, that’s my name.”

Straus describes a 26-year-old journalist named Lisa fixed up for a date with a 29-year-old social worker. When he arrives at her door, she’s delighted to see that he’s as good-looking as advertised. But when they walk to his car, he makes his first mistake: he fails to open the car door for her. Mistake Number Two comes a moment later: “So, what would you like to do?” he asks.

Chivalry cannot coexist with female empowerment and unfettered sexual choice. The days of door holding are long over. Get used to it.

The cultural muddle is at its greatest when the dinner check arrives. The question of who grabs it is a subject of endless discussion on the hundreds of Internet dating sites.

Mistake number one: Taking the chick out for dinner. Quiz for the readers: What changed in the culture that dinner dates became less than useless?

The general consensus among women is that a guy should pay on a first date: they see it as a way for him to demonstrate interest.

Mistake number two: Actively trying to demonstrate interest before attraction.

“Women seemingly have decided that they want it all (and deserve it, too),” Kevin from Ann Arbor writes. “They want to compete equally, and have the privileges of their mother’s generation. They want the executive position, AND the ability to stay home with children and come back into the workplace at or beyond the position at which they left. They want the bad boy and the metrosexual.”

As long as the government and the culture are there to pay for women’s freedom in the forms of, for example, divorce theft, child support, on-site daycare, and overregulated totalitarian nanny state intrusion, they will be able to have it all. But there is a price to pay: Men abdicating any obligation to behave according to women’s expectations. Hence, the pump and dump. The Game. The elevation of self-interest above all. Ironically, the trappings of modern society are forcing a return to a primal state of nature.

To this day, male-bashing is the lingua franca of situation comedies and advertising: take the dimwitted television dads from Homer Simpson to Ray Romano to Tim Allen, or the guy who starts a cooking fire to be put out by his multitasking wife, who is already ordering takeout.

There’s a reason I almost entirely stopped watching TV. That shit pollutes your state.

By far the most important philosopher of the Menaissance is Charles Darwin. The theory that human sexual preferences evolved from the time that hominids successfully reproduced in the primeval African grasslands can explain the mystery of women’s preference for macho—or alpha—males.

Evolutionary psychology is the most parsimonious explanation for gender differences.

At the same time, evolutionary theory gives the former wuss permission to pursue massive amounts of sex with an endless assortment of women.

Permission has got nothing to do with it. Men have always had “permission”, in the strictest sense of the word. What evolutionary theory gives men is a solid scientifically backed framework for maximizing their advantage in the mating game.

Women want alpha males, the Seduction Community agrees; with some effort at self-improvement, any man can learn the game—Game, as it is reverently known—that will turn him into a Pick Up Artist (PUA).

Not every man can become a PUA, but every man can improve his lot with women by learning game.

A highly skilled PUA can get any woman, even an HB10[…]

I don’t know any PUA who claims this. What they claim is that any man can experience more choice in women through game.

It’s impossible to know just how many wannabe PUAs there are out there, but judging from the multitude of websites like AlphaSeduction, Fast Seduction 101, Grow Your Game, SeductionTutor, and The Seduction Chronicles, as well as chat rooms, conferences, ads for seduction gurus, boot camps not just in the United States but all over Europe and parts of Asia, and books, including Neil Strauss’s 2005 best-selling The Game, their numbers are considerable.

The barn door is open and the animals are running free. Women will respond. They are genetically wired to make it as hard as possible for men to get up their skirts. It’s a sexual arms race now and forevermore.

Game is best understood as an SYM attempt to bring order to contemporary dating confusion.

Not really. It’s best understood not as an attempt to bring order, but as an attempt to cash in on the chaos.

Remember those women who want a guy who will open the car door for them? They may be lucky if they find one willing to add “please” to “Pass the ketchup.”

And they can’t help but love these men for it.

Game goes even further, actually encouraging men to “neg” their “target” women—that is, to undermine their confidence subtly by ignoring or mildly insulting them.

Why is it so hard for women to grasp the neg concept? No term has been as misconstrued as this one. A neg is not an insult, it’s a backhanded compliment.

Indeed, the Darwinists wonder, why pretend we’re interested in anything other than sex?

Darwinistic game is equally effective in the realm of love as in the steambath of sex.

Darwinian mores, or anti-mores, also explain the brutal status jockeying that pervades the contemporary dating scene and that makes the high school cafeteria look like a feminist utopia. Check out DarwinDating.com, a matchmaking website “created exclusively for beautiful, desirable people.” Members rank your picture on a scale of one to five and vote on whether to let you join their honored ranks or throw you into the slush pile of “saggy,” “hairy,” “sweaty,” “nerdy” rejects.

The ugly truths are seeping into every crevice of society, poisoning the marrow of idealistic impulse. As we learn more about how the brain works, this is inevitable. The pretty lies once served some higher, nobler purpose, but that is dead now. Embrace the known.

With good Darwinian logic, though, [men] believe that women tend to do their reckoning on the basis of wallet size rather than pulchritude.

Not exactly. Wallet size is just one of many factors. Women do their reckoning on the basis of power, status and dominance.

Seduction artists even say they prefer savvy women who understand Game as a male version of cleavage-revealing tops.

Except tougher to implement. Hey, no guts no glory.

No, the problem with the Darwinian tenor of the Menaissance is neither antipathy to women’s equality nor a misguided reading of female nature. It is an uncompromising biological determinism that makes no room for human cultivation.

And finally we get to the part where Hymowitz desperately claws for some escape out of the tar pits of Darwinistic cruelty. It is practically preordained that her gestures toward spiritually-tinged human transcendence, particularly as she expects it of men alone, will be feeble. A simple question many men ask themselves: If I play by the rules and make room for human cultivation, and the asshole down the street is getting laid like gangbusters, then what’s in it for me?

If Hymowitz answers “An ennobling of your spirit and dignity as a man”, she will lose the argument.
As well she should.

They define manhood as alpha-style toughness and unsentimental promiscuity.

Not quite. Women love to play the promiscuity card to belittle men’s choices, but alpha manhood is better defined as projecting the behaviors and attitude that make promiscuity an option. It is the ability to be promiscuous, not necessarily the promiscuity itself, that defines the man loved by women.

And in that spirit, they cultivate manipulation, calculation, and naked (in both the literal and metaphorical sense) self-interest.

Manipulation is a loaded word meant to manipulate the reader into agreement. Truth: All goal-oriented language and behavior is manipulation. We all do it, all the time, even when we engage in trite politesse to smooth social interactions. To argue that Game is manipulation is to argue that every twist and turn of courtship is as well. And in the manipulation sweepstakes of seduction, I’d give the edge to women. By a country mile.

But human beings rely on culture to tame natural selfishness.

Some cultures amplify natural selfishness, others tame it. You can’t rely on that which is actively dispossessing. If Hymowitz wants a taming culture, she had better be ready to accept that the current configuration is a failed experiment. By Chateau standards, though, it’s been a glowing success!

After all, we have prohibitions against grabbing a neighbor’s steak off the grill or kidnapping his daughter, to give just two examples of behavior about which Nature also doesn’t care.

Normally, when we refrain from stealing the neighbor’s steak, we expect our neighbor to reciprocate our restraint. As an analogy to the present state of sexual affairs, that is not what we have today.

For this reason, successful human cultures expect far more of their men than muscle and promiscuity.

Tit for tat, baby. Minus expectations from women, it makes no sense to expect anything from men.

They see that when the old dating and courting regime fell, it left a cultural vacuum with no rules for taming or shaming the boors, jerks, and assholes.

More appropriately, the whores, sluts, and serial daters.

And if the past is any guide, most of them, even the most masterly PUAs, will eventually find themselves coaching Little League on weekends.

Change is coming. Give it time. Soon the Little League fields will echo with the empty sound of wind rustling the uncut grass.

In a national survey of young, heterosexual men, the National Marriage Project, a research organization at Rutgers University, found that the majority of single subjects hoped to marry and have kids someday.

Hope is the tribute reality pays to fantasy.

Neil Strauss, the author of The Game, says that during his PUA years, he saw enough lies and infidelity to make Darwin look like an optimist. “Losing all hope is freedom,” snarls the blogger at Eternal Bachelor.

True. But would you rather get laid and lose all hope, or be a failure with women and lose all hope? The choice is clear. The pleasure of a woman’s company and the enrichment of her love more than compensates for the loss of hope.

In fact, some people would wager that the Darwinian answer to dating chaos is our future normal.

Barring any radical reorientation of our culture, yes. But I foresee the pendulum swinging back.
And I predict you will not like it, Kay, because it would mean a betrayal of your core ideology.





Comments


  1. A neg is not an insult, it’s a backhanded compliment.

    A neg is more of a back hand. Compliment it is not. Undermining someone’s confidence is no a great motive. Only people who lack true confidence indulge in this fancy type of bullshit.

    Like


  2. Game, Set, and Match. This critique of that article may be the best post I’ve read on this site.

    Like


  3. “middle-class men and women are putting off marriage as … their first $50,000 salaries, the opportunities for heartbreak and humiliation are legion.”

    Jeez. I made over $50,000 as a teen aged Ecstasy dealer.

    I always thought guys with Game didn’t get married because they didn’t have too.

    Whats not fun about swooping 3 to 5 different hot girls every week?

    – MPM

    Like


  4. “There’s a reason I almost entirely stopped watching TV. ”

    Don’t stop entirely.

    Oscar De la Hoya VS Manny Pacquiao should be good.

    – MPM

    Like


  5. on November 18, 2008 at 2:34 pm ironrailsironweights

    There’s a reason I almost entirely stopped watching TV.

    Don’t stop entirely.
    Oscar De la Hoya VS Manny Pacquiao should be good.

    Yeah … if you don’t mind paying fifty bucks. Why isn’t it on free TV? Imagine if the Superbowl or World Series were on pay-per-view, there’d be a huge outcry.

    Like


  6. So I guess by your definition Sara, that would apply to 99.9 % of all women in North America.

    Like


  7. “Yeah … if you don’t mind paying fifty bucks.”

    Way less than $14,500 ringside seats. Or dropping 100k+ at the craps tables at MGM for comped seats.

    Any night that keeps me in for $50 represents a huge savings for me.

    “Why isn’t it on free TV?”

    Because boxing has always been a sport from the gutter. The Promoters own the sport and they can make more money with Pay-per-View.

    Simple as that.

    “Imagine if the Superbowl or World Series were on pay-per-view, there’d be a huge outcry.”

    Maybe. I don’t know. I don’t watch Football or Baseball.

    Boxing and Horseracing for me.

    And Fly Girls.

    – MPM

    Like


  8. If I play by the rules and make room for human cultivation, and the asshole down the street is getting laid like gangbusters, then what’s in it for me?

    Civilization allows for a safe environment to do fun stuff like watch porn, play Xbox 360, and drive nice cars. You know, all the shit that your wife won’t let you do when you’re married and have kids. Ooops.

    A neg is not an insult, it’s a backhanded compliment.

    You keep thinking that. 🙂

    There’s a reason I almost entirely stopped watching TV. That shit pollutes your state.

    With the exception of the Simpsons, most of those idiot-dad sitcoms are just poorly written claptrap in general.

    This system worked when men held the economic and social upper hand

    I don’t see how working your ass to the bone to support a wife and several children is “working”. Oh wait, you think you’ll be Don Draper with wife and mistresses while the rest of us just get skinny versions of the 5s we get now, except they’re even more sexless due to social taboos.

    Like


  9. Another great post.

    Like


  10. on November 18, 2008 at 3:17 pm the_alpha_male

    “Yeah … if you don’t mind paying fifty bucks. ”

    You can usually find an internet stream like i have for several UFC’s.

    Like


  11. sara I
    “A neg is more of a back hand. Compliment it is not. Undermining someone’s confidence is no a great motive. Only people who lack true confidence indulge in this fancy type of bullshit.”

    Stuff it, you overweight, whining loser. That is an insult, not a neg. Now go feed the cats.

    Like


  12. Very well written commentary.

    Like


  13. on November 18, 2008 at 3:45 pm Usually Lurking

    Change is coming. Give it time. Soon the Little League fields will echo with the empty sound of wind rustling the uncut grass.

    We can already see this: Camden, Detroit, LA, …hell, San Fran, Manhattan, etc.

    Some poor examples and some rich ones, all disinterested in tradition and family formation.

    Like


  14. Good post, but this needs more explanation:

    women’s sexual nature, not men’s, is the wilder of the two. Women’s pussy keeps men in check, but dick doesn’t keep women in check

    That last part makes sense, but how does pussy keep men in check? I thought one of the prime tenets of game is to deny women that power by refusing to hold their reproductive organs as sacred or special — not putting them on a pedestal, as it’s usually described.

    Like


  15. It is impossible to undermine a person’s confidence. All one can do is offer an opportunity to reveal one’s level of confidence.

    Like


  16. “The pleasure of a woman’s company and the enrichment of her love more than compensates for the loss of hope.”

    Now who’s being naive, Kay ?

    Like


  17. There is much I disagree with here, but haven’t the time to parse.

    These words are the truest: “It is the ability to be promiscuous, not necessarily the promiscuity itself, that defines the man loved by women.” I’d replace “promiscuous” with “has options”. A women desiring commitment, wants her partner to have options, AND be confident that she is the special woman that he commits to.

    Two 4th-tier issues. Chivalry CAN coexist with female empowerment. I am a woman; I practice chivalry and it makes me feel great. I open and hold doors for less-convienienced, less-able, little kids, men and women. It is interesting to learn that most men will smile or acknowledge; women are more prone to marching on through.

    Darwinistic cruelty can’t explain altruistic behavior
    as studied by the behavioral economists who study blood donations, kidney donations, etc. We all have an apparent need to be altruistic.

    Most insulting: “”Women are incorrigibly capricious. This is why men must lead. Without male leadership, women spiral into a maelstrom of their emotions, buffetted to the point of ecstatic overdose until they wake up one day older and none the wiser, with no male attention off of which to ricochet helplessly addicted.””
    Reading this makes raises my blood pressure, but I have a suggestion for any “man” who actually believes this. Perhaps you’d naturally bond with a woman who skews toward the work world of biological sciences: nursing, genetics, medicine, pharmacy, biology research. Lots of them, and they are tethered to data- based thinking and crisp outcomes.

    Like


  18. Quiz for the readers: What changed in the culture that dinner dates became less than useless?

    Can someone give me the answer? I’m stumped.

    Like


  19. @ Affe:

    I think you isolated the key quote that causes 99.9% of the current dating problems in post-feminist America:

    “The pleasure of a woman’s company and the enrichment of her love more than compensates for the loss of hope.”

    There is an abundance of not only women, but men, who buy into the mindset that a woman does you an immeasurable favor just by being willing to be with you that no other duties are for her to be a good mate.

    Like


  20. Are the men commenting here looking for a wife/girlfriend or just a lot of one night stands?

    Like


  21. Dinner dates: during the early stage of dating they are worse than useless, they’re harmful. For three main reasons:

    1) too much risk of your appearing desparate, unimaginative, needy, or like you’re trying to buy the girl

    2) they deprive you of an opportunity to screen out a gold digger or a girl who likes free dinners.

    3) hard to gauge your chemistry with a girl that you would have otherwise gotten by getting together at at some laid back venue like Starbucks or a zoo, for example.

    Like


  22. Are the men commenting here looking for a wife/girlfriend or just a lot of one night stands?

    Many of the strategies that will help you find, attract, and keep a wife/girlfriend are the same ones that help you find one-night stands.

    The main difference is that for one-night-stands, you’re less picky about the girls’ personality.

    Like


  23. There is an abundance of not only women, but men, who buy into the mindset that a woman does you an immeasurable favor just by being willing to be with you that no other duties are for her to be a good mate

    @T- Will you list duties that make a woman a good mate.

    Like


  24. Sara I saidA neg is more of a back hand. Compliment it is not. Undermining someone’s confidence is no a great motive. Only people who lack true confidence indulge in this fancy type of bullshit

    cosign
    Iwonder how men would feel if women started handing out the same type of backhanded compliments.
    EX. My guy and I go Barney’s(tupac) for a pair of jeans. When he comes out of the fitting room I say, you don’t fill out those jeans in the crotch area but otherwise they fit you well. Can you imagine how you would feel if a woman said something like that to you?
    .

    Like


  25. “middle-class men and women are putting off marriage as … their first $50,000 salaries, the opportunities for heartbreak and humiliation are legion.”

    Jeez. I made over $50,000 as a teen aged Ecstasy dealer.
    SMDH

    @G manifesto- Folks like you will need to hide if the economy truly goes under. When the class war kicks off, I’m sending all my friends to your mansion first.

    Like


  26. Yes

    T , I remember those posts. All of you did a good job with them. I recall asking you guys to write posts on your ideal women because I was confused. Back then I was new here. I had no idea that some of you generally hate women. I just thought you were meeting the wrong women or had your hearts brooken.
    .

    Like


  27. T and Whiskey, someone has something to say about your wife’s booty
    <a http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/11/18/michelles_booty/index.html

    Like


  28. Ricky, I like your guide. It reminds me a bit of one of the chapters of Nietzsche’s _Human_All_Too_Human_.

    I find you a bit too much of a sexual democrat for my taste but I suppose there is such a thing as too much truth.

    Still, there’s just that one thing that stood out…all women’s looks go eventually.

    It would have been more realistic to say don’t let yourself go. Don’t stop grooming, exercising, and maintaining yourself just because you’re in a relationship.

    No matter how well a woman takes care of herself though, she’s going to get old. So if you don’t want to end up with an “ugly” old lady someday, you should replace your mates with younger ones regularly.

    Like


  29. awesome post. i read kay’s manchild article when it came out and i was furious. i was not really able to be so articulate in my criticism of it. you’ve done an excellent job here and i must commend you for that.

    i will read this new article by kay, but this time i am going to be laughing my ass off instead of fuming with impotent rage. thank you.

    Like


  30. when a woman wakes up to realize her emotionally controlling, draining, non-earning boyfriend is a bastard and realizes that many men have treated her this way and decides to be more cynical…she is lauded for her efforts, for she saw the truth….
    when a man wakes up and realizes only a sucker would put a ring on the finger of a girl who spent her weekends sucking random dick and having threesomes with stoners during college (snorting coke after she got her degree)….he’s a misogynist (or a fag).

    Like


  31. Benedict, I would call the guy a sucker who put a ring on the finger of a snotty, frigid bitch who spent her college years trying to find someone to pay her bills instead of studying hard, partying hard, and getting laid (like someone who actually likes sex does on occasion).

    Like


  32. You’re right, that Kay won’t like what is coming. Lucky for her she probably won’t be around to see it.

    I think it’s a possibility that emancipation from traditional sex roles involved killing off rules that only seemed arbitrary but were actually hard-won social constructs that prevented either sex from viewing (and using) each other in such a cold, mechanistic manner.

    Right now, if what I’m hearing from the young men I know and correspond with is correct, men and women in the United States view each other as commodities, with certain values, and only a fool doesn’t trade up if the opportunity presents itself. As the author put it:

    “In a review of the movie Sex and the City, the English author Toby Young remembers the five years he had lived in New York: ‘Attractive single girls not only dropped their ‘dates’ at the slightest whiff of a bigger, better deal, they routinely betrayed their girlfriends, too.'”

    Well, why shouldn’t they? We’re all adults, aren’t we? Free to make choices? Isn’t the market the most important thing? Shouldn’t we maximize our happiness and get what we want?

    The problem with this view is the same problem with liberalism, of which it is an outgrowth: it views humans as nothing more than a bundle of needs who should have maximum freedom to choose among as many goods as possible to fulfill them.

    I find that view completely insufficient–even a little bit inhuman–but, of course, I realize that this is a minority viewpoint.

    Still, it’s hard not to notice the widespread discontent on this subject (except for the beautiful, of course, as clear winners in a “free-market” race to the bottom), as those same people who believe passionately in this liberal vision still insist, for reasons they cannot quite articulate, that one’s mate should be loyal and faithful, and that people should get married.

    Like


  33. Brilliant. I learn something more every time I come to this site.

    Like


  34. “Folks like you will need to hide if the economy truly goes under. When the class war kicks off, I’m sending all my friends to your mansion first.”

    Are you kidding? I heist mansions and rob drug dealers these days. (recession proof).

    And I give to the poor.

    I have even become a patron of the Arts.

    If the class war kicks off, I will be on the front lines.

    Revolution runs in my blood.

    IRA and ETA.

    – MPM

    Like


  35. Thank you Nicole for proving Ben’s point. you could’ve not done it any better.

    Like


  36. Chic – That Salon is more proof that liberalism is indeed a mental disorder.

    Like


  37. “Mistake number one: Taking the chick out for dinner. ”

    I assume you still go out for at least drinks and stuff with women. Do you pick up the tab on the first date, or insist on going Dutch?

    Like


  38. B Smith saidwhen a man wakes up and realizes only a sucker would put a ring on the finger of a girl who spent her weekends sucking random dick and having threesomes with stoners during college (snorting coke after she got her degree)….he’s a misogynist (or a fag)

    screams

    I really have a hard time believing that a large percentage of American women live like this^^^. Even the women on Sex and the City were not this bad. Samantha is the noted exception.

    Like


  39. TChic – That Salon is more proof that liberalism is indeed a mental disorder

    No, you are confused T. To focus on labels instead of issues is a sign of mental disorder or low IQ(HS).

    Like


  40. *which*

    Chic, you had it right the first time.

    Like


  41. on November 18, 2008 at 7:40 pm ironrailsironweights

    I mentioned elsewhere the upside-down triangular shape of the GNP. That shape is the most common, but is not universal. Here is an example of one with a more diamond-like shape.

    Peter

    Like


  42. “If women wanted nice-guy husbands, they could get them, tomorrow. But they don’t. OK, she wandered a bit down that road, but then qualified it to extinction with that ridiculous paean to chivalry at the end.”

    Oh please. Women are programmed to whine that they want to see chivalry in men because only suckers believe women when they talk and women don’t want suckers.

    Easy way to tell the loser genes from the good genes that they want: see who believes the lies that women tell and acts how they’re asked.

    It’s funny, when I was younger I was always surprised that I was successful with women when I was such an asshole and believed that I had to learn to be nicer or women wouldn’t keep putting up with me. Boy was that wrong.

    Like


  43. “Boy was that wrong.”

    Fucking right. I think the game is partly innate. When I was younger I did the same, I treated them with blithe indifference, it was unconscious and successful. But then my rational brain took over, I started treating them nicely, I must stop being so mean!!!, I said, and in the process lost a valuable place in high school hierarchy, and wandered down a lonely road. Ridiculous. All those lost opportunities. Nobody told me… I blame Catholic morality too.

    Like


  44. Putting women on a pedestal is a tough demon to shake once you’ve integrated it. I still fall victim to dreams of love and happiness after getting a phone number, only to sink into an abyss on the flake. Happened just this weekend, in fact, ridiculous IOI’s received… but a flake nonetheless!! Oh women. And I was so hopeful. Pedestalization is the first thing that must go in this game. The neg helps. Cocky funny helps. Stretching the faces of beautiful women into weird oblong shapes with rainbow colours in your head helps, but not that often. Henry Miller’s “Tropic of Cancer” helps A LOT. It’s difficult to read it without subconsciously referring to most women you meet as ‘cunts’ afterwards, especially on the second reading. Too far? No, it all helps.

    Like


  45. In one of my favorite movies, “In the Line of Fire,” John Malkovich’s character tells Clint Eastwood:

    “There’s no cause left worth fighting for. All we have is the game. I’m on offense. You’re on defense.”

    It certainly applies to today’s world of romance and seduction.

    Like


  46. Raphael, suit yourself. I just believe that one of the points of being in a romantic relationship is that it be romantic, meaning in large part, sexual.

    A woman not being a virgin when you find her over the age of 25, and having done more with her brain than figure out what color of eyeshadow to wear, does not a whore make. A woman who *gives* it for *free* to people she’s *attracted* to, and makes her money with her brain instead of her hole, is not a whore.

    To put it succinctly, it’s the good women who like sex. Whores don’t like sex.

    If you marry a woman who doesn’t like sex, then you are a sucker.

    It’s easy for a whore to resist having sex. It’s not easy for a romantic woman who doesn’t need to use KY to get a good slide, to avoid having sex.

    Think about that the next time you’ve been dating someone more than a couple of months who hasn’t put out, and not specifically for religious reasons. Be a bit careful even with seemingly religious women.

    Ignore this at your own peril.

    Like


  47. Sebastian Flyte:

    Putting women on a pedestal is a tough demon to shake once you’ve integrated it. I still fall victim to dreams of love and happiness after getting a phone number, only to sink into an abyss on the flake…Oh women. And I was so hopeful. Pedestalization is the first thing that must go in this game.

    Yes of course, but one must always make exceptions for Clio.

    Like


  48. Nicole:

    Raphael, suit yourself. I just believe that one of the points of being in a romantic relationship is that it be romantic, meaning in large part, sexual.

    A woman not being a virgin when you find her over the age of 25, and having done more with her brain than figure out what color of eyeshadow to wear, does not a whore make. A woman who *gives* it for *free* to people she’s *attracted* to, and makes her money with her brain instead of her hole, is not a whore.

    To put it succinctly, it’s the good women who like sex. Whores don’t like sex.

    If you marry a woman who doesn’t like sex, then you are a sucker.

    It’s easy for a whore to resist having sex. It’s not easy for a romantic woman who doesn’t need to use KY to get a good slide, to avoid having sex.

    Think about that the next time you’ve been dating someone more than a couple of months who hasn’t put out, and not specifically for religious reasons. Be a bit careful even with seemingly religious women.

    Ignore this at your own peril.

    Well said, Nicole.

    Like


  49. Oh please. Women are programmed to whine that they want to see chivalry in men because only suckers believe women when they talk and women don’t want suckers.

    Easy way to tell the loser genes from the good genes that they want: see who believes the lies that women tell and acts how they’re asked.

    Quoted for truth.

    Like


  50. S. FLy saidHenry Miller’s “Tropic of Cancer” helps A LOT. It’s difficult to read it without subconsciously referring to most women you meet as ‘cunts’ afterwards, especially on the second reading

    Reading Tropic of Capricorn damaged me in some way. Miller was a pure pervert. I don’t know if I can bring myself to read Tropic of Cancer. How and hell can you meet a woman then 5 minutes later go sleep with her no protection. There was sheepskin back then. If I’m not mistaken he gave his wife a couple of STDs Henry acquired from his many conquests.
    Henry Miller and Anais Nin set the chairs on fire!

    Like


  51. I think that there is a good amount of self-deception going on on both sides of the dating scene.

    By definition, only a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of men can be “alpha” males.

    I have a hard time believing that all the time spent with negs, pre-thought anecdotes used to open up “sets,” and taking classes or reading books can make one more of an alpha male. I don’t doubt that it helps one pick up girls at a bar or other places though, which is what girls who dislike the game so much don’t acknowledge. Even without canned one liners and planned funny anecdotes, a guy’s chances of meeting a girl go up exponentially if he approachs her and says something. The “game” surely helps guys do that, even if it only get guys to talk to a girl they would otherwise not talk to.

    Again though, if you have to think about what would an alpha do in a situation, then you are no alpha. I would also say that if your are threatened by guys employing the “game,” then you are likely playing some sort of game yourself.

    Like


  52. Rahm Emanuel =alpha

    Like


  53. @whiskey- I know some people sleep around I just find it hard to believe that it’s as common as the men here think it is. I think if anything, most men are sharing a small group of women who are free with it.

    Like


  54. Chic — oh yes, promiscuity is rampant now. It’s worst in the urban centers but bad even in the heartland.

    Chic, it blows my mind that you live in NY and are this unaware of the rampant fun-fucking here.

    And agreed on Rahm Emanuel = Alpha.

    Like


  55. Chic, it blows my mind that you live in NY and are this unaware of the rampant fun-fucking here
    amongst a sub group yes but not the general population.

    And agreed on Rahm Emanuel = Alpha
    it’s nice to agree 🙂
    He has a strong alpha aura. When I see him on TV,I feel weird inside. Sorta like the Bill Clinton trance.
    Did you know he was once a male dancer?

    Like


  56. Putting women on a pedestal…can be difficult not to do if you had an awesome mom. It was difficult for me not to put men on a kind of pedestal because I have an awesome dad.

    If I was to look at my history, I’d call myself a “hopeless romantic” who, much like most guys I know, has clear divisions between bitches and boyfriends. In the past, also like most guys I know, I let the other person have way too much choice in what they were going to be…or to say they wanted to be anyhow.

    My “male default” was a nice but strong guy from a strong family with a freaky side, but strong core values. If a guy fit the basics, I would start thinking of how things could be, before he’d actually proven that he wanted to be there.

    I learned the hard way that as nice as some people might be as people, one has to take very special care who they allow to get close to them. Very very special care because your environment shapes your worldview. Someone being nice or basically decent isn’t good enough. People should have to earn things, and if they don’t then that puts pressure on them to be something that they might not really want to be.

    …and since I’m no model or spring chicken, I have to be really careful about that sort of thing.

    Now I’m much more selective and *voila* the quality of my prospects has improved. I have no more complaints about guys flaking out because flakey guys are below my radar.

    Amazing how clear the air is with so much less traffic.

    Like


  57. Glad she admitted wrong on her last article, ‘child-man in the promised land’, where Tucker Max was portrayed as the embodiment of modern man (ie the common female fallacy that all men pump and dump whenever they choose, when in fact only a small minority can – again, as he said in terms of median income, I think this reflects the sociological elitism of media women – a disproportionate number of men they interact with ARE genuine alphas)

    But she still didn’t fully come out and say it – women decide EVERYTHING. If women wanted nice-guy husbands, they could get them, tomorrow. But they don’t. OK, she wandered a bit down that road, but then qualified it to extinction with that ridiculous paean to chivalry at the end.

    Like


  58. Did you know he was once a male dancer?

    Not surprising at all. Not sure why, but dancing among white Western male culture is considered faggy. Dancing makes a man very comfortable with expressing himself through his body language, especially his sexual body language, and it also makes a man very comfortable with expressing dominance. Male dancers have to know how to physically lead a woman.

    It’s no coincidence that in almost all macho cultures, straight male dancing is celebrated. When the West was more macho, white men used to dance. Ballroom dancing was considered an integral part of a man’s education for example. George Washington did a mean minuet and was passionate about dancing. I believe the reason gays are the only white men who seem to celebrate dancing en masse in the West is because they are the only white men in the West totally comfortable with their physical sexuality. It blows me mind how many white Western males can’t even pull off a simple two-step.

    Like


  59. White guys still dance. It’s how breakdancing returned.
    :: shiver ::

    Like


  60. Let me just say this. You fucking darwinists used the evolution theory to explain why the white man should rule over asia. Now it will be used to explain why you should fuck as many of your women as possible, which will in the end ruin yourself.

    The fitting finale.

    Like


  61. Yeah, but that’s a small subgroup. Also, breakdancing is a step in the right direction but it’s still insular. You don’t dance with a female partner, you mostly dance by yourself. But at least it helps you gain comfort expressing yourself through your body.

    Like


  62. T.:

    It blows me mind how many white Western males can’t even pull off a simple two-step.

    “– and I really do not know what the spirit of a philosopher might wish more to be than a good dancer. For the dance is his ideal, also his art, and finally also his piety, his ‘divine service’.” — Nietzsche

    Like


  63. I’m not reading all of this. Someone provide a 3 sentence summary of this blog.

    Like


  64. Nicole

    Benedict, I would call the guy a sucker who put a ring on the finger of a snotty, frigid bitch who spent her college years trying to find someone to pay her bills instead of studying hard, partying hard, and getting laid (like someone who actually likes sex does on occasion).

    =============================

    Typical modern slut. The dumbasses on this site have failed to realize that desires are not necessarily meant to be fulfilled, and in the case of female’s this ends in their sluttiness.

    Like


  65. karma, I think that’s^^^ a bit much.

    Like


  66. It’s no coincidence that in almost all macho cultures, straight male dancing is celebrated.

    In Redneck / country music clubs dancing is very popular among men and not considered faggy.

    The thing is, when most people talk about dancing today, they’re talking about freestyle club dancing, something blacks tend to be better at than whites.

    I’ve seen straight white guys who are fantastic hip-hop/freestyle dancers, and for some reason they’re almost always blonde. And then there is John Travolta, both in Saturday Night Fever and Pulp Fiction.

    However most of us are better off learning some basic partner-dancing steps. Salsa is easy as anything, and not hard to look real good doing it.

    Like


  67. Its true what Ricky Raw says, but look at a lot of the modern black dancing, its disgusting in appearance, raw animal nature almost. At least the whites back when they had more of a dancing culture kept it relatively classy. The Hispanics probably have a better balance on it currently, but as far as pure dance goes, Asian dancing is by far superior…but NOT as a social conduit/mating strategy, more as a spiritual/religious act.

    Like


  68. Salsa is easy as anything, and not hard to look real good doing it
    PA
    Can you work those hips sweetie?

    Don’t forget about Justine Timberlake. He almost shut Beyonce down on SNL.

    Like


  69. but look at a lot of the modern black dancing, its disgusting in appearance, raw animal nature almost

    Ah, the odd animal blk folk reference. thanks

    Who are the blk dancers that you are refering to?

    Like


  70. Karma, I don’t believe that it is particularly slutty to have sex before marriage. I don’t even believe that legal marriage is a fair deal for either gender. No idea why Gay people want to do it so badly. It’s like rape but without the penetration. Someone just owns your genitals legally, and whichever of you makes the most money, loses half or more of it, when the other decides you’ve served your purpose and are no longer needed.

    So hey, if you want to legally bind yourself to a socially convenient whore, you go right ahead…but don’t knock the guys who would rather marry a slut than a whore.

    Like


  71. what is the difference between freedom and chaos…you really got me thinking here!

    Btw I have noticed more women engaging in back handed compliments and psychological warfare (cattiness) between themselves than with men. many of my female friends admitted to me that they hate to work in an all female environment…

    btw most successful seducers have learned from observing and studying woman’s behavior/reaction with men (i.e. how they behave with betas, with alphas and with other women) more than what they tend to say they want in a man. They incorporate some some of the women’s seductive tactics for seduction had always been woman’s forte.

    That was a great post! definitely in the best of!

    “women’s sexual nature, not men’s, is the wilder of the two. Women’s pussy keeps men in check, but dick doesn’t keep women in check”

    could you please elaborate on this topic, maybe in another post?

    Like


  72. However most of us are better off learning some basic partner-dancing steps. Salsa is easy as anything, and not hard to look real good doing it.

    I agree PA, basic partner-oriented stuff is great. It used to be a very integral part of a young man’s upbringing. I don’t think it has to be black dancing, just an appreciation for dance in general, especially partner-oriented.

    Like


  73. @T-Western white men= American white men because white men from places like Italy*wink* and France dance, and dance well.

    Maybe many white American men have brought into stereotypes about themselves. I may be reaching* here, but I would say that’s also why many white American men don’t do well in the NBA. On the other hand, white players from places like Spain and Argentina have no problem playing well against African-American players.

    *There was a study I read about which looked at how sterotypes affected the races during test taking but I’m not going to look it up.

    Like


  74. I agree with Karma that a lot of modern dancing is disgusting. Someone here once linked to teenage girls “shaking their booties” for Youtube, supposedly for how sexy it was. To me it looked like the girls got an epileptic seisure while squatting to shake turds loose from their ass cracks.

    Like


  75. PATo me it looked like the girls got an epileptic seisure while squatting to shake turds loose from their ass cracks

    😆
    LOLROF

    Like


  76. PA

    This is sexy dancing do right <a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mVEGfH4s5g Some how Beyonce gets it right without going over the top.

    Like


  77. Booty shaking “disgusting”?

    I won’t ask the next obvious question.

    Like


  78. “Rahm Emanuel =alpha”

    Rahm Emanuel = “DC Alpha”, which = wussy little pencilneck who’d cry at the prospect of actually getting punched, but who can act like an asshole to other wussy pencilnecks because they’re so fucking terrified of losing their lame-ass DC “status.”

    Like


  79. From what I’ve seen in clubs (early ’90s for the most part) black guys do dance well. I wondered at the time – are they following some steps, or is it all improv?

    Like


  80. Beyonce definitely gets it right.

    Like


  81. @Whiskey

    Shades of Zamyatin’s _We_, where the Tables pair you up with someone compatible for your mandatory sex session. (And yet the narrator complains that O-157 isn’t quite right for him–too simple, too plain–and goes for the hot chick, with disastrous results.)

    Also one problem Houellebecque does not explain is the absence of beta revolt in the West. True, there is his islamophobia, but that is another culture farming out its betas and their rage in an assault on us. The weird aspect of H. is his philo-Semitism, which valorizes Jewish being-in-the-world, contrasting that braininess and asceticism with “big Black dick.” (In the words of the obviously deranged Bruno in _Elementary Particles_.)

    I would submit that power is too diffuse in the West, and men too atomized for leverage, and destruction for its own sake labelled the reaction of the unstable loser: Cho, Klebold, Harris. Even Marc Lépine went as far as he did only because of exploitation of Canadian civility (no guns on campus) and the Islamic element (né Jamal al-Gharibi.) There is no nexus for revolt, and no seraglio and no master-class–instead, EVERYONE can be alpha, and how dare you question a woman’s choice, or the aggregate of women’s choices? (Which is how the modern West’s “romantic market” is different from all previous women-hoarding.)

    Game is a marginal phenomenon, so I doubt you’ll see anything approximating an “arms race”. You might see a few subcultures that look inexplicable to outsiders, but by and large even Game-saturated LA is an eye-rolling joke to most people.

    Like


  82. Chinnoir: Do you realize how typical your comments were? It’s like the vast majority of females, when confronted with evidence or arguments they can’t refute , say :

    ” I had no idea that some of you generally hate women. I just thought you were meeting the wrong women or had your hearts broken.” Except for 2 you missed, have a small dick and hate our mothers, but I’m sure you’ll get around to it sooner rather than later.

    Female Hive Mind indeed.

    Like


  83. Its true what Ricky Raw says, but look at a lot of the modern black dancing, its disgusting in appearance, raw animal nature almost.

    And your point is? Sometimes being raw and animal is called for. Sex is a raw and animal act. Not everything is about clinical, detached egghead analysis. The way you approach dance says a lot about the way you approach sex. Women use dance as a HUGE sexual screener, a big reason why the best club dancers used to get the most ass. Based on how you approach dance in your comment, any woman reading that would infer you approach sex in a similar uptight way.

    At least the whites back when they had more of a dancing culture kept it relatively classy.

    No, whites still have a dance culture. Just among the women though. It’s the white MEN specifically who are losing the dancing culture. Go to any hip-hop club with a white woman under 30 and I bet you she knows how to dance to it in that raw animal way you describe, and nowadays they know all the same moves the black girls do.

    Like


  84. Booty shaking “disgusting”?

    Yes, when when it’s vulgar.

    In any case, I like demureness. Move slowly, like a snake, not spastically like an electricuted bunny.

    Like


  85. To me it looked like the girls got an epileptic seisure while squatting to shake turds loose from their ass cracks.

    Hilarious visual, I love it. Sex is an analogue for sex, so I think that extreme type of dancing probably reflects how those teen girls approach sex too: fast, vulgar and crude.

    Like


  86. Sorry Peter

    I think Beyonce has a brazilian judging by those close-ups.

    Kevin maybe but I gerneally avoid the little d stuff unless it’s infant like tiny.

    Like


  87. Black Dance used to be the pinnacle of elegance. Not so much now. Crunk? Hip-hop? Nothing like the stuff Gregory Hines used to do. White dance is even worse though, without Astaire and Kelly there is nothing. Travolta … is widely thought be gay regardless of the truth.

    Which speaks to the larger social issue. Once something is thought to be “Gay” straight White guys abandon it like a Broadway show. Obviously there is a severe mating penalty for being even considered Gay unless you have extreme power/celebrity like Russell Brand or some Rock Idol. Which is tremendous proof of women’s desire for social dominance (celebrities and Rock gods are socially dominant).

    Which is a shame, since dancing used to be a way in which women could quickly assess a man’s overall athleticism, coordination, confidence, restraint, politeness, respect, in other words … manliness. In whatever proportions she preferred.

    Nicole — it is a sad fact that women and men have different criteria in selecting mates. Women don’t mind sharing a socially dominant man with other women, men demand exclusive access and have and do fight over that access. A woman with a lot of past partners will not be valued by her mate, and will have to suffer a lesser man as her mate if it’s known. It’s why women always undercount their partners and make excuses as to why partners don’t count.

    Like


  88. Nicole
    Booty shaking “disgusting”?

    I won’t ask the next obvious question.

    Nicole, Karma loves booty shaking more than the next man. I bet he has tricked out his entire pay in a blk strip club. 50cents’ get money is his favorite video.

    Like


  89. PA…have you ever been inside a woman during the second++++ orgasm?

    Like


  90. Whiskey, do you think 40 and 50 year old blks dance to crunk and hiphop music >nope. Older blks do linedancing, two steps, and hand dances. Crunk is played out & was for the young folk anyway.

    <a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LjgxXCsRek

    ^^^older blk folks type dance. Whiskey, you and I can do and two step to this song if we ever meet up.

    *lord forgive me for linking to a child molester.

    Like


  91. @t and whiskey-Hugh Jackman(wolverine in x-men) is another manly guy who got stereotyped as gay once it became known that he was/is a sharp dancer.

    Like


  92. on November 18, 2008 at 10:20 pm ironrailsironweights

    And agreed on Rahm Emanuel = Alpha

    His ability to project a strong Alpha aura is even more remarkable as he is very short. Emanuel has not said exactly how tall he is, but in pictures he barely comes up to the 6’1″ Obama’s chin, so he’s probably not more than 5’4″ or so.

    Maybe many white American men have brought into stereotypes about themselves. I may be reaching* here, but I would say that’s also why many white American men don’t do well in the NBA. On the other hand, white players from places like Spain and Argentina have no problem playing well against African-American players.

    Last I heard, white Americans were something like 6% of NBA rosters.

    Peter

    Like


  93. Whiskey, the fact that men marry whores and actual sluts who are really better defined as nymphomaniacs, and stay with them regardless of their evils, even slighting other more stable and actually loving women, for the sake of said monsters…I’m sorry, but your saying that men don’t value a woman who has had many past partners, doesn’t mesh with reality.

    The ugly truth is that men will put up with alot for love, and even more for love that offers them some kind of a social bonus…and a “beautiful” woman can get away, sometimes literally, with murder.

    In the business that I do, I end up with many media-beautiful female acquaintances, and most of them treat men like crap. They get away with this even with guys who claim to be above it all.

    Thanks to the hivemind, I just got 4 of my cats sterilized for free because of a hot blonde friend who all the vets and pet supply store owners want to shag.

    Beauty, be it natural or the media trendy sort, opens doors and covers a multitude of sins. That’s just how the world works.

    Moral judgements of women don’t come into play unless the guy has his pick of a group of beautiful women, and she blends in, or if the woman is well…less beautiful than he’d like.

    Many men are whores too, by proxy. It’s more important to the vast majority to have a hot woman on their arm, regardless of her past, than to have a chaste or at least relatively discreet/moderate woman. A woman’s virtue isn’t worth much in the dating market nowadays. So it’s no wonder virtuous women are more difficult to find.

    Ability to not have sex is not the same thing as virtue though. Whores are good at witholding sex without payment.

    Like


  94. One of your best.

    T: Brilliant post on The Perfect Woman.

    Like


  95. peter saidEmanuel has not said exactly how tall he is, but in pictures he barely comes up to the 6′1″ Obama’s chin, so he’s probably not more than 5′4″ or so.

    😯

    You just destroyed my material for enjoyment with your comment.

    Like


  96. PA:

    In any case, I like demureness. Move slowly, like a snake, not spastically like an electricuted bunny.

    I’m with PA.

    Snake > Bunny

    Like


  97. Michel Houellebecq observed love is not a democracy. But the losers in love (mostly the “beta provider”) do indeed vote. Constitute a market. A significant group of men. Unattached men are always dangerous and never beneficial to society.

    Contrary to here, I am pessimistic about how Game can benefit most men. At best I see a never-ending arms race in seduction techniques and essentially a status-quo of a few winners who are well-disposed to perform this way and most failing miserably, not the least of which is the requirement of unlearning a lifetime of cooperation and respect in the workplace amidst PC culture.

    Rather, I think one of two things will happen. Either socialism will apply to sex, with mandated group-marriages as in the Oneida Community and the sort of novels written by Sci-Fi author Auldus Huxley, or technology to beat the Alpha male by various means will insure it’s own race to the bottom.

    Either one is possible, both are ominous and quite dangerous.

    Turkeybaster — more choice, studies have shown, makes both genders use the most superficial criteria (looks, dominance). Since women have the market power (men in their twenties-forties pursue women in their twenties) online dating only magnifies this disparity and creates a huge pool of male losers.

    Chic — oh yes, promiscuity is rampant now. It’s worst in the urban centers but bad even in the heartland.

    Like


  98. Which speaks to the larger social issue. Once something is thought to be “Gay” straight White guys abandon it like a Broadway show.

    That’s not quite it, I think. It’s that white men in America by and large are uncomfortable with their bodies as sexual objects. They are uptight about it, with the exception of gays and metrosexuals. They’re scared of clothes even being a little tight. How many times do you go out on the town and see a sexy girl dressed to the nines with her boyfriend wearing a boxy dress shirt or a bland t-shirt along with khakis or jeans? Straight men are scared to death to physically stand out or call attention to themselves in any way, and that includes dancing. Physically presenting themselves as desirable sex objects the way women do scares the hell out of them. They’d rather present their advanced degrees, their IQ scores, their credentials, of their bank statements first. It’s this physical discomfort that they’re running away from, not the gayness. Gay men, however, don’t have the same hangups about presenting themselves sexually, hence their willingness to dress their bodies up a little sexier and dance more. As a result, those things get associated with gayness over here.

    Like


  99. Hmm, there’s something that comes up in some of these conversations that bugs me a bit …

    It’s this, I think: Some commenters seem really repelled by the idea of women being sexually adventurous. They seem to think it automatically means the woman is diseased, a whore, a user, spiritually vacuous, etc.

    I disagree. I think those are two separate phenomena, and worth separating out. Some of the sweet, tenderest moments I had (back in my single days) were with sexually adventurous women. And some of the dreariest times I spent were with women who kept ‘way too much of a lid on it.

    It isn’t automatically the case that sleeping around leads to emptiness, bitterness and hardness. Maybe it sometimes does, and maybe it especially often does today. This happily married guy wouldn’t know. But in my experience whether or not a given woman maintains some sweetness, cheeriness, radiance, etc has almost nothing to do with the number of guys she sleeps with.

    God, spare me the over-cloyingness of the virgin, and the excess drama of the girl who keeps it almost all to herself …

    Incidentally, I do recognize that sexual adventurousness isn’t for every woman. But why generalize from that fact and make a rule that it isn’t for any woman?

    Like


  100. T saidWhich speaks to the larger social issue. Once something is thought to be “Gay” straight White guys abandon it like a Broadway show.

    American men period think and act this way.

    Every man can use a good pedicure once n while. If I see one more pair of beat up feet in a pair of male sandles, I’ll scream.

    Like


  101. It’s this, I think: Some commenters seem really repelled by the idea of women being sexually adventurous. They seem to think it automatically means the woman is diseased, a whore, a user, spiritually vacuous, etc.

    Micheal, T has explained why the madonna/whore way of thinking is just wrong wrong wrong but some men just don’t get it.

    And some of the dreariest times I spent were with women who kept ‘way too much of a lid on it
    Like me

    Sorry 😦
    Incidentally, I do recognize that sexual adventurousness isn’t for every woman

    Yes

    I’m to much of a chump. STD scare the hell out of me. I just realized that in some ways I am the female version of David Alexander.

    Like


  102. Michael Blowhard:

    It isn’t automatically the case that sleeping around leads to emptiness, bitterness and hardness. Maybe it sometimes does, and maybe it especially often does today. This happily married guy wouldn’t know. But in my experience whether or not a given woman maintains some sweetness, cheeriness, radiance, etc has almost nothing to do with the number of guys she sleeps with.

    God, spare me the over-cloyingness of the virgin, and the excess drama of the girl who keeps it almost all to herself …

    Clio, is any of this getting through to you?

    Like


  103. George Bernard Shaw called dancing, the vertical expression of a horizontal desire legalized by music.

    Now, Pupu must lay flat and prepare for a dream.

    “Nite, nite, you filthy little shite.” (quote from an unknown Scotsman in one’s Pupu’s dreams.)

    Like


  104. Re white American guys and dancing — T/Ricky has it nailed.

    It’s got something to do with white guys’ difficulty with girls more generally, it seems to me. White guys can’t imagine themselves — their souls, and their soul-inhabited bodies — as being desirable in and of themselves. It seems inconceivable to them. (And, incidentally, that’s a lot of what dance is about — the spirit expressing itself through the flesh, and enjoying itself via the vehicle of the flesh.) Hence they hide under rumpled clothes and bedhead, ridicule any guy who enjoys playing with women, and flash credentials and jokes, hoping to impress.

    But dance is great training for interacting with women. You learn ease in your body, you get comfortable handling (and being handled by) a woman’s body, you get over some of your fears of looking good and feeling good …

    Klutzy white guys especially can benefit from partner-dancing classes. We klutzy white guys often can’t shine as solo improvisational stars, heaven knows, but we like being shown moves and patterns and then executing them. So why not go for it?

    Do it enough, and whether you want to or not you start to get comfy, you start to enjoy sharing movement and rhythm with a woman. And women really, really like a man who can dance, and who likes to dance. You don’t have to be great, just adequate (but genuinely enjoy it).

    That’s romance, that’s flirtation, that’s courtship, that’s sex.

    Like


  105. TC:

    Clio, is any of this getting through to you?

    Upon further reflection, I have to say there is a difference between the eager, wide-eyed and innocent zeal for life that characterizes libidinous women in their teens and early twenties versus the haggard, used up bar-skanks who never learned their lessons.

    Like


  106. Michael says, “It isn’t automatically the case that sleeping around leads to emptiness, bitterness and hardness. Maybe it sometimes does, and maybe it especially often does today. This happily married guy wouldn’t know. But in my experience whether or not a given woman maintains some sweetness, cheeriness, radiance, etc has almost nothing to do with the number of guys she sleeps with.”

    The number, I don’t know if it’s so or not…but the experiences one has how one interprets them can be damaging. It depends on how a woman views her sexuality.

    If she (like a whore) views it as a commodity to be sold for something, then having it “used” by many different guys is going to be a problem. For this type of woman, all it takes is one guy who she allowed to taste the milk without buying the cow, to make her bitter.

    This is why I don’t blame guys for being cautious. I just would set aside moral judgements for actual unethical behavior. Sex is a fair exchange for sex. Money for sex is whoring…which should be an honest business transaction, not a trap with lifelong consequences.

    If a woman’s agenda is to get into your pockets before you get into her pants, then something is not right.

    Like


  107. MB,

    White men’s discomfort with dancing isn’t a spiritual thing I think, it’s a “don’t compete in an arena where you’re out gunned” thing. Simple facts are

    1) when it comes to dancing skill it’s all about the genes and black men have been selected more strongly for the ability to dance. If you’re a typical white guy, you may enjoy dancing but you’ll stick to weddings and other (mostly) racially segregated venues.

    2) women don’t really think very systematically so if a guy simply avoids dancing, she doesn’t think to evaluate him on it but if he does dance the idea then pops into her head to compare him with every other guy there. Roosh has written about this; his success rate went up when he stopped dancing in front of women and just talked to them.

    Same thing with dressing frumpily for guys. Women won’t go out of their way to look for hot bodies on guys but if some dude is showing what he’s got and it compares unfavorably to another guy she gets second thoughts.

    Like


  108. On negs,
    The whole negs controversy reminds me of the date rape issues of the 90s and early 2000s. Young white women from middle class homes were unable to cope with the reality that behaving in certain ways exposed them to potential danger. Such a girl would get dead drunk, go to a stranger’s dorm room and be shocked, SHOCKED when he assaulted her. Or they would dress like strippers when going out and complain when men didn’t treat them as though they were Laura Bush. The really obtuse ones would do all of the above while traveling in MUSLIM COUNTRIES where they did not speak the language. Even though I grew up in the same cultural mileu as these girls I thought they were brain damaged turnips. I remember a case at Harvard where a girl drank all night with a male friend and fell asleep with him in his bed. He fucked her and she screamed rape. WHAT THE HELL WERE THESE GIRLS THINKING? That these guys were just friends who wanted to chat? Italian and Hispanic women don’t act like this. If they go to a man’s room, especially one they don’t know well, it’s because they want to fuck him not because they buy his bullshit story about wanting to show off his vacation photos. Italian and Hispanic cultures are realistic about male sexuality. Ironically, in these patriarchal cultures where fathers are (traditionally) strong presences and sexually free women are scorned Italians and Hispanics do not bleep out male sexuality. SWPL culture, with it’s emphasis on female equality, censors male sexuality and leaves it’s daughters hopelessly inadequat to deal with the freedom it emphasizes.

    Why does SWPL culture refrain from teaching it’s daughters the truth? The hunt, pursuit and capture is biologically programmed into male sexuality, and women have always had trouble facing this fact and this is one reason that women insist on courtship rituals to camouflage it. They invented “date rape” to deal with the reality that they cannot safely do what ever they want. The inability to deal with negs is similar. They want flirtation without trash talking because they’ve never learned to hold their own in a battle of wits. They want a safe, happy world where they play with matches and never get burned.

    Now I think we should pity them because they were taught from babyhood that this was not only possible, but their right. It is unreasonable to expect this level of reflection and self-awareness from so large a group as all white women under the age of 35. But some will get it, and those who don’t will rant and rave with no one to listen.

    Like


  109. on November 18, 2008 at 11:55 pm ironrailsironweights

    Back when I was in my 20’s – which wasn’t all that long ago – there wasn’t all this monomania about your partner’s sexual history. It was understood that when your relationship became serious, it was utterly irrelevant what the other person had done, with whom, and how often. Everyone started with a blank slate, so to speak. Why are things so different today?

    Peter

    Like


  110. Steve J. — But isn’t “avoidance” another way of seeing the behavior you’re describing and maybe praising? Don’t you inevitably wind up with what we seem to have today? Ie., tons of dynamic, get-outta-my-way gals surrounded by herds of sheepish wallflower guys hoping to score a little nooky sometime before they die?

    Dudes, you gotta get into the arena.

    Like


  111. Kay Hymowitz has also written critically about SYF life (see below). Now, she’s a rather schoolmarmish personality who can’t help but be more critical of guyish antics. But she’s not a man-hating feminist any more than Christina Hoff Sommers.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-hymowitz_11edi.ART1.State.Edition1.4206bbf.html

    Like


  112. Back when I was in my 20’s – which wasn’t all that long ago – there wasn’t all this monomania about your partner’s sexual history. It was understood that when your relationship became serious, it was utterly irrelevant what the other person had done, with whom, and how often. Everyone started with a blank slate, so to speak. Why are things so different today?

    This was always untenable and thus didn’t last. The number of sex partners someone has had is the best predictor of whether they will cheat on you. You would be a fool to ignore such information.

    Like


  113. Dancing,
    There are tons of dancing styles. If you’re untalented in the improvisatory hip-hop style learn another one. If you are hopelessly stiff in latin, go to yoga and do some deep breathing. That drum-tight pelvis will loosen, trust me, and you’ll be healthier in the process.

    Like


  114. “The number of sex partners someone has had is the best predictor of whether they will cheat on you. You would be a fool to ignore such information.”

    Do you have a study to back that up? It sounds reasonable to me but as the devil’s designated advocate I have to ask.

    Like


  115. Read David Buss’ Evolution of Desire.

    Like


  116. Chic,

    Regarding Obama I always thought America’s first black president would be Morgan Freeman 🙂

    Seriously if Ronald Reagan could go from acting to politics why not Freeman?

    Like


  117. Thursday — The flip side of that is that, if you move in with a girl who has had little sexual experience, you’ll have a doozy of a time getting rid of her should you ever decide to move on.

    Like


  118. Michal Blowhard:

    Thursday — The flip side of that is that, if you move in with a girl who has had little sexual experience, you’ll have a doozy of a time getting rid of her should you ever decide to move on.

    HA! Too true, too true.

    You are a wise man, Michael Bloward.

    Like


  119. Some commenters seem really repelled by the idea of women being sexually adventurous. They seem to think it automatically means the woman is diseased, a whore, a user, spiritually vacuous, etc.

    ummm, I don’t know if you noticed this Michael, but a fair fraction of the people who post here are insecure misogynists.

    Like


  120. Physically presenting themselves as desirable sex objects the way women do scares the hell out of them. They’d rather present their advanced degrees, their IQ scores, their credentials, of their bank statements first.

    It’s an attempt to weedout lower class women, and to prove their social status and cultural superiority and thus, their social worth to the women in an attempt to court them. Of course, everybody knows how well that works… 🙂

    Same thing with dressing frumpily for guys.

    I’ve tried wear a bit more stylish stuff, but every time I look in the mirror, the clothes are ill-fitting and seem to be designed for taller and bigger men than my small frame.

    Like


  121. Jackman got stereotyped as Gay because he played, a bit too enthusiastically, the lead in the “Boy from Oz” about a gay (but I repeat myself) Broadway Choreographer, Peter Allen. On his promotional tour he went on the View and shook his moneymaker for the ladies.

    Kimmel saw that, ran the clip, dubbed him “ex-Man” and it stuck. That he’s married and with a couple of kids, doesn’t matter.

    Nicole — I’m saying a woman’s ability to marry well, is directly affected by the KNOWN or PERCEIVED partners. Women often complain of the kind of guy they have to put up with in their thirties, this is part of it. “Just” Sex as you point out is another matter.

    Though even there … most men would rather have sex with a “nice” girl of fewer partners than either Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton, even if said nice girl is lower in looks as long as a certain floor is reached. This is particularly true as men get older, after a while extra looks don’t matter as much.

    As a practical matter, the effect of hormones released during sex that create lasting emotional bonds is decreased with number of partners, for both sexes, suggesting strongly that it’s best to limit them.

    A woman with many partners has two things against her for a long term relationship leading to marriage (meaning that other than meaningless sex she is a waste of time): 1. Her most intense bond is with an ex that probably wont’ reappear in her life but if he did would have a relatively easy time of it taking her away, given the intensity of the early bonds compared with the diluted effect of the late ones. 2. A woman with many partners cannot by habit and by diluted nature of bonding hormones, commit to one man and is quite likely to stray during any relationship.

    What Michael Blowhard does not get is that men do not like to share their women with other men. Period. It’s hard-wired and accounts for most of the murders observed by anthropologists reporting on hunter-gatherers. Poaching another guys’ woman.

    Duh. People are dangerous. THE most dangerous animal. Because we make tools, that make excellent weapons, and are hypercharged sexually and emotionally and intellectually.

    MQ — point to me a society that has sexually adventurous women and also values them, protects women and children and has a high degree of male cooperation, rule of law, tolerance of minorities, and such. You can’t. Humans don’t work that way. You can have female sexual adventurism, and you get West African society complete with periodic atrocities, grinding poverty amidst plenty, and treatment of women and children worse than beasts of burden.

    Women (and children) ONLY get male protection when there is male self-interest to do so, the archealogical and anthropological record is quite clear on this. I know, icky science instead of utopia, but human beings are evolved from Primates not Angels. You must take us as you find us.

    Like


  122. One last thing on the West coast here —

    I don’t think T aka Ricky Raw is correct here. Straight guys are more than comfortable in their own skin, and being athletic, and not wearing much clothes, and being stared at.

    Every weekend is filled with guys in skin-tight bike clothes, on skinny tired road bikes, each trying to beat the other guy in a peloton. You can’t drive in OC without seeing them all over the place on Saturday and Sunday AM. But it’s not thought “gay” so they do it. Just like guys will do all sorts of X-game type stuff that’s both risky and testosterone driven just to impress women — rock climbing, extreme mountain biking, skiing, snowboarding (and plethora of tricks and jumps). Motocross is a bonus — biker testosterone plus demonstrated extra income.

    ANYTHING and I do mean ANYTHING guys see as “gay” they will drop like a stone. Because there is a huge and I mean HUGE dating penalty for anyone not a celeb or rockstar to engage in that.

    Gays dance around a lot, and love the spotlight, so no straight guy will do it. Because the penalty for a girl who might be “the one” thinking he’s gay is too harsh to risk.

    Like


  123. Michael Blowhard:

    Hmm, there’s something that comes up in some of these conversations that bugs me a bit …

    It’s this, I think: Some commenters seem really repelled by the idea of women being sexually adventurous. They seem to think it automatically means the woman is diseased, a whore, a user, spiritually vacuous, etc.

    I wouldn’t use such harsh terminology, but I do consider it pretty obvious that it’s unwise to marry a formerly promiscuous girl; I wrote extensively about this in the comments to the “Wedding Ring Game” post the other day. To sum it up, my impression is that if you do it, she’ll instinctively compare you with her most intense past experiences, and you’ll likely come out unfavorably, even if you’re quite a catch by absolute standards. Thus, chances are you’ll never be able to get real love and respect from such a girl, being constantly perceived as an inferior substitute to the “real thing”. For the same reason, you’ll run a higher risk of her cheating, even if she rationally perceives you as the best option available for permanent commitment.

    Of course, the critical assumption here is that you will be convincingly outcharmed by at least one guy from her past. But I think this assumption is almost always true — even if you’re a charming alpha, a girl who’s been around a lot is likely to have had at least some flings with even more charming, higher-percentile alphas. This is one manifestation of the ugly truth that your objective, universally-agreed level of attraction matters more than some magic subjective “clicking together”, regardless of the opposite messages sent by pop culture.

    This isn’t the whole story, of course; there are also other, less rational reasons why a man who understands the basic dynamics of human sexual attraction would find it harder to fall for a formerly promiscuous woman. Even without any rational reason, I would feel somehow cheated and defeated if I granted the position of life partner to a girl who has previously made herself part of some super-alpha’s harem.

    Like


  124. Michael Blowhard:

    Thursday — The flip side of that is that, if you move in with a girl who has had little sexual experience, you’ll have a doozy of a time getting rid of her should you ever decide to move on.

    I think it’s stupid to move in with a girl in the first place unless you have a serious intention to marry her. It may simplify the logistics of sex, but it’s an invitation to potentially endless trouble.

    Peter:

    Back when I was in my 20’s – which wasn’t all that long ago – there wasn’t all this monomania about your partner’s sexual history. It was understood that when your relationship became serious, it was utterly irrelevant what the other person had done, with whom, and how often. Everyone started with a blank slate, so to speak. Why are things so different today?

    Well, the sexual history certainly mattered one generation before that (I don’t think people were indifferent to their partners’ sexual history in the 1950s and earlier). So, maybe you belong to one of the few unusual generations that experimented with the “blank slate” approach, which is now being abandoned because it has shown bad results in practice.

    Like


  125. As for the substance of his complaints, they echo my own.

    What Hymowitz deliberately misses (it would take a monumental effort to ignore the obvious) is that the balance of market power has changed. To women decisively.

    Women hold all the power because they have more suitors than themselves, in many areas outnumbered by 3-1 ratio of suitors to women … with no restraints on choices or actions due to:

    1. The Pill and Condom 2. Urban Anonymous living 3. Increased Wealth and power of Women.

    Women can sleep around with lots of guys, with no social penalty as in the past. Their future husband will never know. Women can and do share informally a few powerful men. Women don’t have to be “careful” about who they sleep with because the Pill and condom prevent unwanted pregnancies, urban anonymous living prevents shame.

    Evidence of the market power of women (and the few Alpha males) can be found in the mistresses of powerful men like John Edwards (Rielle Hunter), Bill Clinton (Gennifer Flowers, “Amanda” from Highlander, Monica Lewinsky), Gary Hart (Donna Rice), Eliot Spitzer (that NJ call girl), Gavin Newsome (his subordinate’s wife), Tony Villaraigosa (his subordinate’s Wife, Mirthala Salinas, some Korean developer hottie). Throw in Gary Condit (Chandra Levy).

    There’s a huge trend downward in looks and discretion over time, Rice, Flowers, “Amanda” certainly beat Monica Lewinsky. Guys like Hart did better than Spitzer or Newsome or Condit or Edwards. Villaraigosa did only “OK” and probably no better than say, Jimmy Swaggart with Jessica Hahn. Compare/contrast Bill Clinton and JFK, both Presidents, and whom they were dallying with. Marilyn Monroe vs. Monica Lewinsky.

    Today’s young men’s fathers did not need game because market power was roughly equal, as had roughly been for the last 100 years or so. What Hymowitz deliberately refuses to acknowledge is reality — many young men are priced out of the relationship game and with profound negative effects on society.

    Like


  126. Michael Blowhard:

    Some commenters seem really repelled by the idea of women being sexually adventurous. They seem to think it automatically means the woman is diseased, a whore, a user, spiritually vacuous, etc.

    I don’t think that’s the case at all Michael. I think that the madonna, mother, whore trope is a pretty standard ideal for most men . Or as my Dad used to say a lady in company, a friend at home and a lover in bed. In general, most men would want a sexually adventurous woman. It’s not the adventurousness that men don’t like, its the promiscuity.

    I think a female expresses her “alphaness” by the restriction in the number of sexual partners she has. That is provided she has the capacity to choose. The girl that sleeps around with as many guys as she can gives the appearance of being non-discriminatory, a bit like the beta male that takes anything that comes his way. That’s not to say that these women can’t be caring, spiritual or generally decent human beings, rather their social mating status is intrinsically diminished by their actions. Men want alpha females just as much women want alpha males. Slutting around is beta. The war pig that takes anything anyway, is the omega of the female race, not the spinster bookworm.

    The lucky guy banging away at the prom queen, is precisely that because the prom queen limits her partners. Access to her carnal pleasures are scarce. Everyone wants a piece of the action but very few get there. There is no glory in banging the town whore; everyone’s been there before.

    Oh and I don’t think that an extensive sexual past is a reliable predictor to a great sexual future. Likewise neither is virginity. Quite a few women are sexually adventurous till they get the ring on the hand, then its all over Rover. At lot of that “sexual adventure” seems to be behaviour put on to attract a mate. Quite a few of these girls go through the motions out of necessity, in order not to be thought of as frigid, rather than out of animal lust. Look my observations may be skewed and perhaps not “scientifically valid”, but I’m calling it as I see it. Yeah, there are exceptions, but they’re not the rule.

    Like


  127. “My ex, was an extremely promiscuous woman who claimed she was very picky. apart from the disappointment I felt when I found out who few of the picked selected group were”

    In many ways this blog reminds me of a feminist site. Feminists are rightly criticized here and in other conservative venues, but when you actually talk to them it’s
    plain that what really motivates their arguments isn’t dispassionate social analysis but a history of family turmoil and bad relationships. Feminists who were abused and mistreated by their fathers and ex-husbands tend to pick men who affirm their dystopic view of men (see below link). I’m not saying that there’s no truth in what’s written here, but I am reminded of Obi Wan Kenobi “Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.” Like feminists you inflate your nuggets of truth to gross generalizations and crude stereotypes and thus invalidate their veracity.

    People like stereotypes that validate their world views because over time people’s world views becomes part and parcel of their egos. But that doesn’t necesarily make stereotypes nuanced accounts of reality.

    http://www.amazon.com/Learning-Drive-Other-Life-Stories/dp/0812973542/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227101357&sr=1-1

    Like


  128. Every weekend is filled with guys in skin-tight bike clothes, on skinny tired road bikes, each trying to beat the other guy in a peloton. You can’t drive in OC without seeing them all over the place on Saturday and Sunday AM. But it’s not thought “gay” so they do it. Just like guys will do all sorts of X-game type stuff that’s both risky and testosterone driven just to impress women — rock climbing, extreme mountain biking, skiing, snowboarding (and plethora of tricks and jumps). Motocross is a bonus — biker testosterone plus demonstrated extra income.

    This is true, but there’s a difference: sports is not sexually showcasing yourself the way fashion and dance are, which is why straight American guys don’t fear it. Guys all over can try on a skimpy Speedo and swim, put on some tight pants and play football or baseball or run around a basketball court in a tank top, but in these endeavors you’re not primarily using your body in a sexually suggestive way, and you’re learning to deal with other men as a team rather than one-on-one with a woman in a way that requires you to sexually showcase your body, handle a females body in a sexually suggestive way, and know when to lead her and when to follow her lead.

    Sports teaches you how to deal with other men in a competitive team situation. Sports mentally showcase a man as leader of men and show a social intelligence about dealing with other men. Sports physically showcase that the man is healthy and strong enough to protect her. There are all attractive to a woman and push certain buttons. Fashion and dance push different buttons. They physically showcase the man as a sexual object and mentally showcase the man as a leader of women with a social intelligence about dealing with women sexually. It is these types of buttons that straight American men are afraid to push, which is why they can embrace sports but get uncomfortable with fashion and dance. This is why in America these things are only associated with gay guys.

    Straight American guys are not afraid of dance and fashion because they are associated with gay guys. Rather, gay guys are associated with dance and fashion because straight American guys are afraid of dance and fashion. PUAs picked up on half the equation by making “peacocking” a major part of the game, but even many of them seem intimidated by dancing.

    In Latin America, for example, men are more comfortable showcasing themselves as sexual objects in their dress and dance, and are more comfortable leading women in their culture, so in their culture fashion and dance is something enjoyed by both straight men AND gay men. Yet I’d argue that straight Latin men are more homophobic than straight American men are. In a lot of cultures the straight men are wildly homophobic but embrace fashion and dance because they are comfortable with their bodies as sexual objects and comfortable being leaders of women in gender interactions.

    Like


  129. Vladimir, my thanks man, you explained it all so well…

    To give an example,

    My ex, was an extremely promiscuous woman who claimed she was very picky. apart from the disappointment I felt when I found out who few of the picked selected group were,

    the problem arose when commitment occured.

    I could’ve dealt with the promiscuous past, as I am not a clean sheet either, but the point where sex was bound to me being emotionally deserving was the spilling point.

    The problem with promiscuous women arise in a relationship. the high number of sex partners who wanted her not for the brains but the demonstrated availability leaves scars in a woman even if she claims “I used them as sex toys”, because she knows she was a free ride in a world where 98% of men have to work to get laid. (even he needs to work, to get to the point where he is now).

    Taken that intro, (we slept few times lately)

    I have no problem with her sexuality if no investment, emotional, or otherwise is asked from me, I am also one of the freeriders, bein picked for an mutual sexual experience.

    but I have a problem seeing something special in a woman’s sexuality if she has spread it around like free candy to the higher ranks of men, and now wants me to cherish that as a rare artefact..

    It just does not happen.

    Btw, been with many promiscuous women… the promiscuity is none of my business as long as she is clean, but when I hear “I want more”, the only thing in my head is “uh uh… aint gonna be the dude who will buy the village cycle”…

    Women need to understand

    A commodity that has been shared with a high number of people loses its value

    this in turn can be translated as a man who seems desperate. He shares his attention with many women…. for example.

    And to the men who will claim “but dude, that is special sex”, well I prefer the not special sex, in that case, which is way more abundance than the relationship sex, and easy to get.

    this whole text takes into account the integrated instinctual behavior of women that dictates them to treat sex as a trade at some point in the relationship.. It is inevitable. thus previously free, now need to be traded.

    Like


  130. Kay Hymowitz, a “feminist”? News to me. From some of her other articles I get the impression she is a very traditional home-and-hearth, marriage-and-procreation-uber-alles conservative.

    Like


  131. “Change is coming. Give it time. Soon the Little League fields will echo with the empty sound of wind rustling the uncut grass.”

    I disagree with him here.

    It’s an open question whether BETA men will not eventually give in to ANY imposition in order to have children.

    Plato wrote that every man ultimately wants to belong somewhere, in a particular place where people will miss him if he is gone.

    This is easy for Alphas – men who live lives of abundance and options. Alphas are valued, wanted, attractive. Their place in the world is assured. All such Alphas have to do is wake up in the morning.

    Betas, in contrast are largely anonymous, replaceable pieces of meat. Betas live lives of scarcity. Existence can literally become pointless without the “place in the world” denoted by female companionship, and a family that will miss them. Betas may eventually put up with ANY imposition, no matter how one sided, to get this family.

    Yet, even here, there is also a natural urge for Alphas, I believe, to pass on their genes and procreate.

    If a guy is so dominant, the ultimate legacy of his dominance is to pass on his genes. This is a natural play if you buy into the Evo Psy mantra “All life is survival and REPLICATION.”

    Such Alphas can agree with his sentiments and fight the good fight, without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Get a supertight prenup, and revolving mistresses.

    Like


  132. Hello wrote

    In many ways this blog reminds me of a feminist site. Feminists are rightly criticized here and in other conservative venues, but when you actually talk to them it’s plain that what really motivates their arguments isn’t dispassionate social analysis but a history of family turmoil and bad relationships.

    what brings many men to the world of PUa, MRA or MGTOW, or whatever else there is, is not some philosophical urge that came from nowhere.

    Almost all the men start as normal dudes and start seeing something is amiss.

    Some move towards one idea, the others towards another, and some fluctuate.

    The difference between feminists or other similar groups is that they have an extreme net of support, while men will be ridiculed insulted and even attacked when they state their displeasure at something.

    Men are supposed to live by the mantra “her past is her past” while your past, which is whatever has brought you to the social and economic state that you are, will definitely be not “your past is your past”. you will be harshly judged, and branded desperate or loser.

    Try putting a man into a crowd of sexually liberated women and state “I would not call promiscuous women sluts, but I would not call them wife material either”… you can stat the bets on how long he has got to live.

    thus yes, I am talking from personal experience, as it is the closest one that I got to talk about.

    I can also talk about the experiences of the man whose girlfriends slept with me, or the men who were chosen to be boyfriend the day after I gratiously rejected “I want more out of this”, or my friends who have been in the both sides, of thousands of men in the net.

    The one thing is that it is a crime as big as rape to talk about this in public.

    even if the starting point is personal (you are right in this), the road of learning leads you to philosophical works, to religion, to evolutionary psychology, and you start seeing the plot thicken, especially the plot against beta males, where they compete to commit to the left overs of the alpha’s… And the alpha’s disintegration into a beta once he commits to one woman without keeping backup due to his honor. (wrong belief possibly)

    but I am reminded of Obi Wan Kenobi “Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

    Yes.

    But many depend on statistics.

    False rape, DV accusations, divorce.. these are facts.

    To add to it, studies that show 20% of men are granted 80% of sexual acts (think this was in the unmarried population), and the rest 80% were fighting over the leftovers…

    Studies that show after few years of commitment, the woman’s sexual desire for the partner will plummet while her expectations stay…

    The low estimate of 10% children not by their law-fathers…

    Yea, Obi is right to some extent, but his words are as meaningless as “Not all women are like that” in this case.

    Like feminists you inflate your nuggets of truth to gross generalizations and crude stereotypes and thus invalidate their veracity.

    I just open my eyes to a different freedom of judgement.

    My life my judgement.

    You are free to do what you want, and I am free to let my judgement run my life.

    Then again, statistics back me up, in my opinion.

    If for women, a man’s promiscuity is not important, it does nto mean it should be the same for men… Just like a woman’s finances are not important to some degree to men, have men stopped working, expecting women to feel same?

    People like stereotypes that validate their world views because over time people’s world views becomes part and parcel of their egos. But that doesn’t necesarily make stereotypes nuanced accounts of reality.

    Nope..

    but somehow I cannot get it out of my head that this sounds a lot like

    “Not all women are like that”
    “You have met the wrong woman”

    Really, men can not speak about this… or many of their other problems for that matter. It is forbidden heavily.

    Thus once you find the right way to talk to a man, you start hearing stuff that women would not want to hear.

    And the worse things you’ll hear from men who have bedded many women. The others are still busy looking for a master to enslave themselves to… A master who has enjoyed free rampant sexuality with other masters.

    A woman’s promiscuity has an effect on the value of her sexuality. And that is that. Women in their infinite strength to believe the world exists only in the way they want it to exist cannot and will not grasp it. It is a choice and every choice is a trade off.

    I will be enjoying promiscuous women, as they are excellent short term, very short term partners, but I am not going to invest my emotions or my time and energy into a woman who has shown that her sexuality is on the open buffet… the quality of the eaters does not matter. What matters is the quality of the ones who got rejected… (assuming low quality is not accepted anyway)

    (of course if good quality men are rejected, and thugs are not, now we can easily call this one a slut… All the time I was talking about our strong independent and intelligent western woman)

    Like


  133. Whiskey says, “Nicole — I’m saying a woman’s ability to marry well, is directly affected by the KNOWN or PERCEIVED partners. ”

    Ah…marriage. Well, you already know my opinion on that brand of legal slavery.

    There is no way to marry well. It’s something I only did because husband #1 was in the army, and husband #2 was abroad. We promised each other freedom without penalties as soon as it was desired, and kept our promises.

    Because I was dealing with strong people who were themselves sexually adventurous, number of partners was irrelevant compared to quality of relationships. If I was in the habit of cheating or mistreating people, that would have been a problem.

    “Women often complain of the kind of guy they have to put up with in their thirties, this is part of it. ”

    Well, women complain about all sorts of things. Most of what people complain about in relationships is self inflicted. They insist on arranging their lifestyle and choices around an illusion, and then get their pipe dream shattered.

    I’m in my 30’s. I don’t have what to complain about what I have to put up with, because I don’t put up with b.s. or mistreatment from anyone. As soon as any games begin, they’re deleted from my life. In the past I even had a problem with being overly tolerant of people’s issues, and didn’t dump someone if there might be a chance they had a “legitimate” reason for not holding up their end. Now, I don’t even get that far, so I have even fewer complaints.

    “Just” Sex as you point out is another matter.

    Though even there … most men would rather have sex with a “nice” girl of fewer partners than either Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton, even if said nice girl is lower in looks as long as a certain floor is reached. This is particularly true as men get older, after a while extra looks don’t matter as much.”

    It might seem this way on the surface, but in my observation, something else is going on.

    The kind of guy who truly values good character above media trendy looks is somewhat rare…not as rare as many women make it out to be, but a bit unusual. It’s more common that a guy would value some experience that women who aren’t media trendy are capable of providing, or that media trendy women are highly unlikely to provide.

    This is a matter of sexual orientation that is set by the time a guy is in his mid teens. His social environment and personal values will determine how much room he allows himself to live his fantasies.

    …and there’s the rub. Most guys want to appear to be conforming to the surrounding “standard” as much as possible, and will go as far as to enforce it with each other. The penalty for dating outside the standard is ridicule because what’s not within that standard is considered of lower value.

    When a guy gets older, he doesn’t develop a new appreciation for character. He just becomes more realistic about how to get his needs met, and in a great many cases, becomes tired of chasing someone else’s dreams and would rather go for his own.

    As an aside, people who don’t rely too much on the herd mentality don’t fall into the trap in the first place.

    “As a practical matter, the effect of hormones released during sex that create lasting emotional bonds is decreased with number of partners, for both sexes, suggesting strongly that it’s best to limit them.”

    This may be true in extreme cases, but I don’t think that a person who truly treasures love and bonding, loses the ability to bond just from number of partners. They can however lose it if they devalue their partners, and begin having sex with people they don’t care about in the first place.

    I believe this happens to men just as well as women, which is why I counsel both to take care that their open mindedness is balanced with keeping an open heart as well. If they want to keep sex a way that they express love, then they should avoid using it for anything else.

    There are people who feel the emotion aspect of love very openly, and can meet someone and want very much to get into them, and not want to let the night pass without experiencing their sexuality. There are times when people who aren’t normally this free, may feel that way. If it’s all consensual and above board, then I don’t see a problem with this. It is a potentially bonding experience if the people involved have no exploitive intent.

    The problem is when people are exploiting each other. Both the exploiter and the exploited have a part in a dynamic that is damaging to both. Sex itself is not an exploitive act, when it’s consensual. To make it that way requires a twist of the mind. If a person is fooling around with their own or someone else’s emotions then well, there are consequences.

    I believe that men and women are equally exploitive of one another…and that it doesn’t take a sex act to exploit someone’s sexuality. A person who is continually exploited will become mistrustful, and their ability to bond will be negatively affected.

    “A woman with many partners has two things against her for a long term relationship leading to marriage (meaning that other than meaningless sex she is a waste of time):”

    There is no such thing as meaningless sex. This is an illusion. Even masturbation has some meaning.

    Sex with another person is at least an attempt to get one’s sexuality validated by another party. It is apparently extremely important to people to have this. Some even pay for it directly, or endure humiliation to get it.

    “1. Her most intense bond is with an ex that probably wont’ reappear in her life but if he did would have a relatively easy time of it taking her away, given the intensity of the early bonds compared with the diluted effect of the late ones.”

    Someone cannot be taken away unless they want to go. If they do want to go, they should be let go. It doesn’t require an ex or any other person.

    …and again, if a person does not use sex for other than an expression of love, the effect is not diluted. In fact, it may become more intense as they better learn how to relate to people with love. Experience can do bad things for a person, or good things for them. It depends on the person…though I do understand that you’re speaking in general terms.

    Generally, men are perceived as all potential exploiters, and women, the victims. So if a woman views herself as lower in value with each partner who leaves then yes, she can actually become lower in value through her behavior.

    “2. A woman with many partners cannot by habit and by diluted nature of bonding hormones, commit to one man and is quite likely to stray during any relationship.”

    A person with strong integrity will not cheat, and if they love you, would never harm you, even if they would come to harm.

    These are worries for people who make arrangements of convenience, not for people who really really love.

    “What Michael Blowhard does not get is that men do not like to share their women with other men. Period. It’s hard-wired and accounts for most of the murders observed by anthropologists reporting on hunter-gatherers. Poaching another guys’ woman.”

    I do not believe that this is the case since polyandry is and always has been quite normal. The ancient Spartans practiced it, as have many others from Tibet to the old west.

    Men can be quite happy sharing the same wife, and will often in fact, slight other women who are considered less worthy than their shared wife.

    The Chinese government is currently trying to stamp out polyandry because women in some areas are complaining that a few women are taking up all the good men. So Alpha females are as capable as Alpha males of monopolizing socially legitimate partnerships.

    In modern times, some men are discovering and embracing polyandry because they’re bisexual or because they’d rather share a good woman than have exclusive privilege to a bad one…or simply one who doesn’t love them.

    I think the claim that men are hard wired to demand monogamy from women is hogwash. It’s one of those cases where the preference has been justified by science, not proven by it. Yes, males are territorial (which is one reason even guys who want to keep their love ability sharp should defy the hype) but that doesn’t mean they are hard wired to be monogamous, when there are other options for a stable relationship.

    Sexual democracy is a nice idea, and it would be great if it was feasable for everyone, but it’s not. When a guy meets a woman who he suspects may have had many partners, but doesn’t seem negatively affected by it at all, he should wonder if perhaps the big issue is not her character being flawed, but her having something that has offered her many options.

    I’d look into the quality and circumstances of her past partners more than the number…especially if she’s in her 30’s or 40’s. If she’s been single and in the dating market for 10 years, she could do only two guys a year, and that would still be 20 guys.

    That number seems high, but it’s probably lower than yours if you’d been single and dating for 10 years.

    Like


  134. Whiskey asks, “point to me a society that has sexually adventurous women and also values them, protects women and children and has a high degree of male cooperation, rule of law, tolerance of minorities, and such.”

    France.

    Like


  135. Many of you hard-minded, logical, male-minded dudez are making a simple logical mistake. You’re conflating “sexually adventurous” with “disease-ridden slutting around.” Many cultures have evolved ways for men and women both to partake of the romance, poetry, adventure and thrill of sex without turning into slatternly club skanks. (Nothing automatically wrong with a slatternly club skank, as far as I’m concerned …) An example: the woman who’s a frisky 16 year old, who marries and raises kids, and who then, at 40, now knows her way around, kids are up and about, and gives herself a decade of extra-marital romances … I’m describing a certain kind of very common European pattern.

    Y’all also are weirdly — to my mind obsessively — fixated on some imaginary “one woman you’re going to settle down with for the rest of your life” and what you want of her. Yet you may never marry, or you may marry and break up and marry again, or you may marry and have affaris … Just because of the way life plays out these days, you may have numerous romances. She may too.

    And y’all are overlooking women who flagrantly contradict your generalizations: actresses and dancers, for instance. They’re often amazingly promiscuous, but most of them retain their sweetness, passion, responsiveness and even “innocence” of spirit through years of this kind of behavior. And they never ever have trouble finding new men who are eager to have flings (and/or even try to settle down) with them.

    Besides, why wouldn’t you want a woman who has a gleam of mischief in her eye?

    Like


  136. “I’m not reading all of this. Someone provide a 3 sentence summary of this blog.”

    It’s mostly talking about Dr. G, how great he is and such.

    Like


  137. If a guy is so dominant, the ultimate legacy of his dominance is to pass on his genes.

    This is a theme often repeated here I have some trouble with.

    Let me explain. Each one of us has exactly two genetic parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents et cetera. Similarly, our children are the children of one other person, our grandchildren the children of three other people, our great-grandchildren the children of seven other people et cetera. In the tenth generation, everyones direct descendents are also the children of 2^10-1 = 1023 other people.

    So, to leave any kind of signifigant permanent genetic mark upon the world requires Ghengis Khan level proliferation, which requires centuries of rape and pillage over half the world by oneself and one’s sons and grandsons.

    Like


  138. on November 19, 2008 at 10:44 am ironrailsironweights

    This is true, but there’s a difference: sports is not sexually showcasing yourself the way fashion and dance are, which is why straight American guys don’t fear it. Guys all over can try on a skimpy Speedo and swim, put on some tight pants and play football or baseball or run around a basketball court in a tank top, but in these endeavors you’re not primarily using your body in a sexually suggestive way, and you’re learning to deal with other men as a team rather than one-on-one with a woman in a way that requires you to sexually showcase your body, handle a females body in a sexually suggestive way, and know when to lead her and when to follow her lead.

    By that reasoning, dance should have fewer homosexual connotations than sports. Dance involves sexually suggestive interaction … with a woman.

    Peter

    Like


  139. By that reasoning, dance should have fewer homosexual connotations than sports. Dance involves sexually suggestive interaction … with a woman.

    Exactly. That’s my point. Dance SHOULD have less homosexual connotations than sports, and it would if the straight men in question weren’t both afraid of portraying themselves as sexual desirable objects and weren’t scared to death of interacting with women. Unfortunately though we live in a society where gay men understand how to advertise their sexual attractiveness and interact with a woman light years better than straight men do.

    In societies were the men aren’t afraid to exude sexuality and aren’t as intimidated by women, dance usually does have much less homosexual connotations.

    Like


  140. Blowhard: “Many cultures have evolved ways for men and women both to partake of the romance, adventure, and thrill of sex…”

    This is not one of those cultures. This is apparently one of the cultures where a few “Big Men” hoard women. Alternately–and this is also possibly the case–the overwhelming majority of American men are utter crap at detecting sexual interest, revealing it, and initiating sexual encounters.

    One of the most mind-bending things I had to deal with in Europe was the equanimity with which Europeans confronted rejection, and the fact that they expected me to share that equanimity. They couldn’t conceive that I had never experienced *anything but* rejection. Or that cultural memes about achievement and physical type WITHIN an ethnicity (American Jews) could make men of that ethnicity and physical type undesirable to that group’s women.

    And I’m a bit puzzled that you chose France, when in fact Houellebecque is quite open and honest in speaking of France’s sexual “have-nots” and the rape culture of the cités is popping up in Beurette feminist discourse.

    Like


  141. on November 19, 2008 at 11:20 am ironrailsironweights

    Or that cultural memes about achievement and physical type WITHIN an ethnicity (American Jews) could make men of that ethnicity and physical type undesirable to that group’s women.

    Are you saying that American Jewish men are undesirable to American Jewish women? Why would that be?

    Peter

    Like


  142. Peter,

    Not sure when you came up, but I’m pretty sure men – at least those with women who slept around a lot – have always cared, some more than others. Check out the movie Clerks – the main character can’t stop freaking out about how many blowjobs his girlfriend gave in her past.

    Hello,

    Respect on your observation. I do think this place can get a little too support group/circle jerk in the same way feminist sites do. That said, there tends to be a lot wider range of viewpoints and values with commenters here – rather than just “oh my god i know! great post”. I’d also say that if you’ve had to deal with enough feminist garbage in your life, it can be refreshing to see some new ideas that, while controversial, are often very true and not acknowledged in the mainstream.

    Like


  143. Slumlord says, “I think a female expresses her “alphaness” by the restriction in the number of sexual partners she has.”

    No, a woman expresses her Alphaness by doing whatever the hell she wants, and still being loved for it. She is a social strategist, not a prude. Sometimes she is even a skillful whore, though most I’ve encountered were more of the matriarch/queen bee type.

    Like


  144. T @9:15 PM

    Um, didn’t you ever see John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever?

    Like


  145. on November 19, 2008 at 11:38 am ironrailsironweights

    Not sure when you came up, but I’m pretty sure men – at least those with women who slept around a lot – have always cared, some more than others. Check out the movie Clerks – the main character can’t stop freaking out about how many blowjobs his girlfriend gave in her past.

    His concerns about his girlfriend’s history is not shown as a good thing. We’re supposed to side with the girlfriend, who considers her past to be just that, over and done, not with her uptight boyfriend.

    Clerks came out almost 15 years ago. My point is that excessive worrying about your partner’s past sexual experience was not the normal thing back then, at least not compared to today.

    Peter

    Like


  146. T @9:15 PM

    Um, didn’t you ever see John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever?

    Sestamibi – Yes, I did, but the fact that you have to go back that far is very telling and helps illustrate my point. And remember, straight WASP men across America HATED disco when it was out and it experienced a huge backlash.

    Another thing to keep in mind…Sicilian descent. It’s a culture that, like black culture, is not afraid to be macho and not afraid to treat it as a norm that men should be leaders to their women. It doesn’t have the same forced gender egalitarianism that white American WASP culture does.

    Like


  147. Dr. Grzlickson, are you by chance related to my great-grand uncle, Grzegorz Brzęczyszczykiewicz?

    Here is recently unearthed archival footage of Uncle Grześ being interrogated by a German policeman during WW2:

    Like


  148. on November 19, 2008 at 11:51 am ironrailsironweights

    Dr. Grzlickson, are you by chance related to my great-grand uncle, Grzegorz Brzęczyszczykiewicz?

    Clerk on telephone: “Excuse me, sir, could you spell that again?”

    Peter

    Like


  149. I believe the good doctor’s ancestor may have had a hand in the following slavic vocal atrocity:

    W Szczebrzeszynie chrząszcz brzmi w trzcinie

    I Szczebrzeszyn z tego słynie.

    Wół go pyta: „Panie chrząszczu,

    Po cóż pan tak brzęczy w gąszczu?

    Like


  150. Sweden?

    Can’t speak for Norway or Germany, but Swedish women I met in Stockholm said that if you get seen approaching or making out with a guy in a club, people will spread rumors that you are a whore within the week. According to her, it was a big reason why Swedish women were big on acting out while on vacation where there would be no reputation backlash, because the tendency of Swedish men to try to ruin your name as a whore based on your sexual exploits was common.

    Like


  151. Probably your best post ever!
    Also, way back when, there were a few comments on this thread on booty shaking…I keep seeing them on youtube and dailymotion but I too find them quite disgusting. Jiggly boobies, on the other hand….
    Maybe I’m a tit guy, but not that I don’t like a nice booty.

    Like


  152. @MQ

    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.”.

    Like


  153. on November 19, 2008 at 10:22 am Married But Cool

    Excellent work.

    Not really related, but Brad Pitt long ago lost all my respect, but what in the world is happening to him?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454284,00.html

    The picture of him here is simply embarrassing.

    Like


  154. Blowhard is right about one thing. Hymowitz was actually trying to describe what she had learned from angry males. She had actually progressed from her earlier naive “Manchild” piece.

    Eventually, regardless of the state of women, men need to grow up. A lot of these women lack the wherewithal to put their lives back together after men such as myself have taken them apart. I cannot put them back together either. That is a reality that should not be ignored, even by Darwinians.

    We Darwinians do not need to add conscious disorder to the world on top of all the unconscious disorder we create.

    The same applies to female Darwinians. Think of the kind of world you want to live in. Getting revenge on the males of your past through the males of your present is not rational, productive, or conducive to a livable world.

    Like


  155. y’all are overlooking women who flagrantly contradict your generalizations: actresses and dancers, for instance. They’re often amazingly promiscuous, but most of them retain their sweetness, passion, responsiveness and even “innocence” of spirit through years of this kind of behavior. And they never ever have trouble finding new men who are eager to have flings (and/or even try to settle down) with them.

    Ah, yes, Clio’s eternal ingenue:
    http://aliasclio.blogspot.com/2008/07/heartbreakers-7-eternal-ingenue-revised.html

    Beware, beware, these are not wife material.

    Like


  156. Hymowitz is one of those clueless social conservatives that F. Roger Devlin has identified as completely misunderstanding female nature and who thus misdiagnose the problems with our contemporary sexual mores. She has taken some steps to correct her deficiences, but still doesn’t seem to fully get it yet.

    It is my observation that “socially conservative” women usually have absorbed a fair amount of feminist ideology. They are against premarital sex and abortion, but otherwise aren’t that different from your average “empowered” woman.

    Like


  157. High-numbers men are also be damaged goods. Women need assurance they are special in order to give of themselves fully to a man. Women can not love a man when she feels like just a number.

    Like


  158. @Peter

    As a community that transitioned from having an ideal of “chachamim ‘iveri panim” (“pale-faced scholars”) to scrappy immigrant achievement to untold wealth, Jews in America have had circumstance re-make the ideal or concept of masculinity several times within the past hundred years. And that’s not factoring in what scholars call the Israeli “macho”. The short answer is they don’t want to marry (men like) their fathers. The fact is that fewer, later marriages yielding fewer, later children is endemic to the community, probably for reasons relating to female educational achievement, which is itself a function of cultural bias in favor of educational achievement, if not IQ.

    Like


  159. T’s right on Sweden. Northern European countries are small and don’t have any really large cities, so it’s easy to get a reputation and hard to escape one. All the feminist indoctrination and screaming against judging sexuality has just made it worse – the more PC we have, the more we spread rumours instead of confronting people.

    Picking up (non-native) Swedes in Helsinki is much easier than picking up in Stockholm and it’s just crazy in actual party destinations. Last time I was in Tallinn I ended up inviting a Danish chick from the same hotel in my room after maybe 5 minutes of talk. Slim chances of that happening with her in Denmark.

    Like


  160. High-numbers men are also be damaged goods. Women need assurance they are special in order to give of themselves fully to a man. Women can not love a man when she feels like just a number.

    This is true. Many (younger) women even find virginity in (younger) men attractive. But it is far, far, far from the whole truth. Women are both attracted to and repelled by promiscuous men, and whether the attraction or repulsion is stronger will depend on the make up of the individual woman.

    Ideally what most women want is a devastatingly attractive man who could sleep with any woman he wants, but who has only slept with her.

    Like


  161. The other factor is whether or not the bonding mechanism has been damaged. Sex is the bonding force behind romantic relationships.

    I believe this can happen, seen it. It can happen to men too.

    The thing is, romance as a “permanent magic bond” is to a degree a youthful illusion. At some point in life, you’re going to have to make a conscious, reasoned committment to stick with things and work on a relationship when you don’t feel like it at the moment. People who bond and marry young often hit this moment later in life and it can break up or ruin the marriage.

    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.”.

    For example, the problem with this girl is she’s stuck in an adolescent mindset. She expects the magic power of twue wuv to do all the work for her. But she’s so good looking, she can always get another partner, so it doesn’t matter. Probably at some level she likes it better that way. If she were a guy she could just admit to being a PUA and enjoying the scene, but since she’s a woman she has to go on about love.

    Like


  162. Married But Cool:

    Not really related, but Brad Pitt long ago lost all my respect, but what in the world is happening to him?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454284,00.html

    Stage IV Betaization.

    Like


  163. >>>you forgot to accuse me of closet homosexuality and/or impotence.

    and having a small pee pee.

    Like


  164. Markku: You question why a guy would bother wanting to pass on his genes because “to leave any kind of signifigant permanent genetic mark upon the world requires Ghengis Khan level proliferation, which requires centuries of rape and pillage over half the world.”

    Good point. Let me explain:

    1. A man’s hardwired biological impulses don’t operate according to logic. Guys don’t do an historical dissertation before they fuck. They aren’t thinking about their meaninglessness.

    2. Alphas have a VERY STRONG frame.

    Far from seeing themselves as humble pie in the grand scheme of things, Alphas generally think THE WORLD IS REVOLVING AROUND THEM.

    Take a Manhattan surgeon. Now, I know many doctors can be pretty beta. But surgeons – such as orthopods – tend towards an ex- jock “man’s man” type.

    So consider such an orthopod. In reality, probably one among a fifty or so of such men, in 2008, at a certain point in history.

    A blip on the radar screen of humanity. No Ghenghis Khan, for sure.

    But in HIS world, HIS FRAME, this surgeon thinks he is LITERALLY GOD. And he has a large body of evidence to back it up.

    He is the final authority in the medical hierarchy. He holds life and death in his hands. He barks orders, and everyone in his vicinity kowtows.

    On a daily basis, people are sedated into unconsciousness before him, at his word.

    He cuts open human flesh.

    He works “miracles.” He inserts new hips. He replaces knees. People walk again.

    If he has the right Alpha traits, he has a trophy wife, blowjobs from his nurse , generates $75,000 a week in income, is a multi- millionaire by age 35, is at the apex of the status hierarchy.

    Is a guy like this, whose life is a daily dominance display, really not going to want to spread his genes into the next generation?

    Who is going to tell this guy he is really a blip on the radar screen of world history?

    And would he ever believe it?

    Like


  165. Interesting what T. and Jaakkeli are saying about Northern Euro women. Othern than a brief stay in Helsinki, I’ve never been north of the Baltic and for some reason I had formed an impression of Scandinavia as a Sodom & Gomorrah.

    That’ll learn me to stereotype.

    Like


  166. Peter:

    Clerks came out almost 15 years ago. My point is that excessive worrying about your partner’s past sexual experience was not the normal thing back then, at least not compared to today.

    Exponentially increasing hypergamy over the last 50 or so years has created more just cause for such concern.

    Wasn’t much reason to worry about it in the 1950’s.

    Like


  167. Why wouldn’t one of the marks of a true Alpha woman be her ability to get her sexual desires/needs/whim serviced?

    And it is.

    This is where extreme male libido helps dramatically. Outdoing the alpha woman’s desire level flips the tables and brings her into servicing the male — which contrary to all online prattle, makes her happy as a pig in manure.

    Like


  168. ps: i’m a big fan of sluts. they make my job so much easier.

    But less rewarding, no?

    Like


  169. Tupac: “Brad Pitt – Stage IV Betaization.”

    What a disgrace –

    Guys like Pitt are looked on as the models for Alphas.

    I’m not sure these “actor Alphas” are really Alphas like guys in other walks of life.

    If Pitt is Alpha, but is becoming betaized by Angelina Jolie, of all women – even more red flags.

    We’re a long way from Bogie.

    Like


  170. PA:

    ps: i’m a big fan of sluts. they make my job so much easier.

    But less rewarding, no?

    Freaky girls are usually best in bed, if that’s all you’re looking for.

    As wives, perhaps not so much.

    Like


  171. Higher Power,
    You are so delusional re: orthopods. that I suspect you are one. Pods are the laughing stock in medicine because they know nothing of medicine. They are well paid mechanics, at best. ..

    Like


  172. T @ 11:45 AM

    OK then, did you ever see True Romance? 🙂

    Like


  173. y’all are overlooking women who flagrantly contradict your generalizations: actresses and dancers, for instance. They’re often amazingly promiscuous, but most of them retain their sweetness, passion, responsiveness and even “innocence” of spirit through years of this kind of behavior. And they never ever have trouble finding new men who are eager to have flings (and/or even try to settle down) with them.

    see, this is a statement by someone who truly understands, appreciates, and likes women. A lot of the people here have been deeply injured by women in the past and are looking for a place to vent their lasting grudges against the sex. Michael is atypical because he has no beef with women per se, and is more here because the place is scandalously un-PC.

    point to me a society that has sexually adventurous women and also values them, protects women and children and has a high degree of male cooperation, rule of law, tolerance of minorities, and such. You can’t.

    ummm, America? Sweden? Norway? Germany? Are you looking for some kind of utopia where there are never any conflicts between the sexes, or just a society where women get to sleep around if they want to and people still get married and have kids and society runs pretty well?

    Like


  174. Tupac: “Stage IV Betaization.”

    Pitt is a disgrace.

    Giving your daughter a male name?

    I wonder whether these actor types are legitimately Alphas to begin with. “Actors,” the good ones at least, cannot really do anything else. They pretend to be other people for a living,.

    Yet they are often held up as the models for what an Alpha Guy is supposed to be.

    If Pitt is legitimately Alpha, but Angelina Jolie has betaized him – even more red flags. You’ve got to be kidding me.

    This is a woman who was with Billie Bob Thornton, for christsakes.

    It’s hard to believe a guy like Brad Pitt could be reduced like this voluntarily. Maybe his true beta core is coming out.

    Like


  175. El Guapo:

    Why wouldn’t one of the marks of a true Alpha woman be her ability to get her sexual desires/needs/whim serviced?

    And it is.

    This is where extreme male libido helps dramatically. Outdoing the alpha woman’s desire level flips the tables and brings her into servicing the male

    This seems to assume alpha-women (as defined by their sexual market value) also possess correspondingly higher libidos.

    My experience is that there is not much relationship between beauty and libido.

    But you’re right — no woman, much less an alpha female, is going to be happy if her sexual needs are not met.

    But in my experience, the woman is a lot happier when she is the one clawing at you for sex versus you always having to make the first move. The sex is lot better too.

    Any number of beta provider husbands can tell you stories of having to cast spells and do rain dances to get their wives horny. I’m sure the husbands have higher libidos than their wives, but it doesn’t count for much…

    Perhaps I’m misreading you here.

    Like


  176. “Pods are the laughing stock in medicine”

    And jealousy put Jesus Christ on the cross..

    Like


  177. @ sest – No, I haven’t. Regardless, I never said NO straight American white guys dance at all. Of course there will be exceptions. It’s just really rare and they tend to avoid it if they can on average.

    A great show to watch is So You Think You Can Dance. Nigel Lithgoe, one of the judges, an old school hetero Brit dancer, is constantly lamenting the current state of dance in America, where homosexuals have been allowed to take it over because American straight men have relinquished the art. He gushes and is happy when he gets a male dancer who appears straight and can dance strong and masculine and lead his partner with authority. Most of the white American males that audition for the show are often flaming gay. The Russian and Latin male dancers though who do ballroom and Latin dance very provocatively and manage to still be very macho and dominating as partners and never act feminine.

    Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly were great examples of white American men who could dance wonderfully but look masculine and alpha all the way, even when partnered with other men:

    Like


  178. nicole:
    Slumlord says, “I think a female expresses her “alphaness” by the restriction in the number of sexual partners she has.”

    No, a woman expresses her Alphaness by doing whatever the hell she wants, and still being loved for it.

    slumlord is right. an alpha woman is one who is beautiful (8-10) and therefore able to leverage her beauty by securing the attention of alpha men without having to put out. an alpha female is one who has gotten commitment from one alpha male. she is likely to have slept with far fewer men than a woman of lesser beauty.

    sluts are women in the 4-7 range who use the crutch of easy sex to snag a man higher than them in value.

    once you get down to the 3 and below range, you see less sluttiness because those women are simply too ugly to get very many men at all who aren’t degenerate losers.

    MQ AKA stuart smalley:
    A lot of the people here have been deeply injured by women in the past

    you forgot to accuse me of closet homosexuality and/or impotence.
    jes trying to help you keep your script consistent.

    Like


  179. So “Game” is about nothing more than helping betas land conventionally good wives? Sorry, I’d thought the discussion was a much more interesting one than that.

    If that is indeed the topic, here’s a quick tip: Betas should leave the big cities and the coasts. Away from the “Sex in the City” world, there are tons of sweet, nice, pretty-enough girls in the various heartlands who want nothing more from life than to bear and raise kids and live a middle-class existence with someone who’s trustworthy, is decent company, and who can stir her juices once or twice a month. You’ll need a little in the way of “Game” and resourcefulness to find, woo and win such a girl, but not a lot.

    Problem solved. “Happily ever after,” I’m not so sure. But that’s just life.

    Like


  180. “Whiskey asks, “point to me a society that has sexually adventurous women and also values them, protects women and children and has a high degree of male cooperation, rule of law, tolerance of minorities, and such.”

    France.”

    I found this example incredibly amusing also. France has two cultures, the rapidly disappearing one you point at is actually an excellent example of why it doesn’t work. Why do I say that? If a society fails to reproduce it disappears. Which is exactly what is happening to the majority of European cultures – declining numbers. Ahhhh, the freedom to be as you want.

    The other culture you ask? Suprising as it may be to Blowhard it is the culture of the current migration – Islam. And the answer is no, Islam doesn’t resemble the culture of the disappearing French.

    Like


  181. thursday:
    It is my observation that “socially conservative” women usually have absorbed a fair amount of feminist ideology.

    correct.
    some have wondered why i came down so hard on a “conservative” woman. it’s because they aren’t conservative except in those issues that i oppose on grounds of hedonism. hymowitz is no different than any other feminist, 1st wave or the ridiculously attributed 4th wave variety, on those core issues that are responsible for the radical change in dating mores in the past two generations. she will not face the facts — it’s women’s equality itself which has brought us to this impasse. female economic and social equality, the fundament of feminism = longer periods of fucking around and smaller pools of men from which to choose.
    i am daring hymowitz to confront the truth. not holding breath…

    anony:
    High-numbers men are also be damaged goods.

    anony, you love to beat this drum, but there is scant evidence that your belief is true. slutty men do not take the hit to their sexual marketability that slutty women do. in fact, slutty men are more attractive to women, as their preselection by other women is an excellent indicator of their mate value. slutty women simply telegraph to men that they don’t value their sexual favors very much, and are thus poor prospects as long term mates.

    Women need assurance they are special in order to give of themselves fully to a man.

    such assurances are not mutually incompatible with past caddishness.

    Women can not love a man when she feels like just a number.

    funny how it works out that so many women love men who fuck around.

    Like


  182. Thursday — I think you’re right, a lot of what gets discussed around here is more about “what makes good wife material” than anything else. I’d add that it’s often an awfully conventional idea of what makes good wife material too …

    — I’m with Nicole on that one. She’s describing the Queen Bee (the alpha woman) pretty damned well, IMHO. Besides, I don’t understand this “without having to put out” thing, or why it even comes up. That seems to presume that women by nature don’t enjoy sex, and/or don’t want to explore the sexual dimension. Yet many of them do, even if it isn’t quite the urgent-at-every-moment matter that it often is for men. Why wouldn’t one of the marks of a true Alpha woman be her ability to get her sexual desires/needs/whim serviced?

    Like


  183. Michael Blowhard:

    Many of you hard-minded, logical, male-minded dudez are making a simple logical mistake. You’re conflating “sexually adventurous” with “disease-ridden slutting around.” Many cultures have evolved ways for men and women both to partake of the romance, poetry, adventure and thrill of sex without turning into slatternly club skanks. (Nothing automatically wrong with a slatternly club skank, as far as I’m concerned …) An example: the woman who’s a frisky 16 year old, who marries and raises kids, and who then, at 40, now knows her way around, kids are up and about, and gives herself a decade of extra-marital romances … I’m describing a certain kind of very common European pattern.

    I was talking from the perspective of a 20- or 30- something guy. I would really like to see a culture that’s managed to find a way for women to be promiscuously adventurous in their youth while still remaining worthy wife material, and where promiscuous attractive women aren’t monopolized by a small cadre of alphas. If you’re going to name such a culture, it would be nice if you presented some evidence — you probably know that reports of supposed sexual utopias à la Margaret Mead haven’t stood up to scrutiny so far.

    Y’all also are weirdly — to my mind obsessively — fixated on some imaginary “one woman you’re going to settle down with for the rest of your life” and what you want of her. Yet you may never marry, or you may marry and break up and marry again, or you may marry and have affaris … Just because of the way life plays out these days, you may have numerous romances. She may too.

    You are writing as if these things will just happen to you completely out of control, like bad weather or taxes. In reality, regardless of what you want — promiscuous flings and one night stands, serial relationships, an open relationship, indefinite cohabitation, a traditional marriage… — it’s up to you to make correct steps to ensure that you’ll get it. Your chances of success in getting any of those will dramatically increase if you understand what kinds of girls are likely to be suitable for each role, where you’re likely to find them, and how to behave to win their favor.

    Of course, no such guidelines will be 100% reliable — you’ll always find examples of men who followed them and still failed, as well as those who broke them and still succeeded — but some of them are reliable enough in the large majority of cases. Furthermore, when it comes to arrangements like marriage, where investment is large and failure is costly, it’s always better for your principles to be on the cautious side. Thus, “don’t try settling down with a slutty girl” seems like a pretty damn good guideline to me, even though, as with all others, one can endlessly philosophize to the contrary.

    Like


  184. Orion — The French were getting up in the morning looking forward to a little flirtation, romance, chic food, and style 300 years ago, long before birth rates started doing whatever it is they’ve been doing recently. In fact, you could easily make the case that the French love of style and pleasure — French flair, French ego — are what led to France (a little country in the larger scheme of things) being a big deal on the international stage. Confidence, dazzle and genuine satisfaction can take a people a long way. If France’s birth rates are down, they’re down only in very recent years, and if their immigration policies need some serious tweaking, that’s really a separate issue.

    Incidentally, I’m not a big Francophile. Spent some time there years ago, didn’t like it much, came back and have only seldom returned for short visits. But an immersion in France is a very impressive and eye-opening experience.

    Like


  185. Vlad writes: “I was talking from the perspective of a 20- or 30- something guy.”

    You are indeed. And I’m writing from the p-o-v of someone in his mid-50s. So?

    Vlad: “I would really like to see a culture that’s managed to find a way for women to be promiscuously adventurous in their youth while still remaining worthy wife material, and where promiscuous attractive women aren’t monopolized by a small cadre of alphas.”

    To repeat: France. In bourgeois circles a life cycle for women often goes this way: Frisky youth spent acting-out; marriage-and-kids-and-house; sexy 40s and 50s; then being an elderly cat woman. This is actually a pretty sensible way to view (and allow for) the phases of a woman’s life. Note as well that France has never had anything like the feminist insanity we’ve had. Why? Because Frenchwomen are generally pretty satisfied with their lives. Read Debra Ollivier’s book “Entre Nous: A Woman’s Guide to Finding Her Inner French Girl”. It’s cute pop-psych on the one hand. On the other it’s dead-accurate (as well as fun, sexy, and witty).

    Vlad writes: “It’s up to you to make correct steps to ensure that you’ll get it. Your chances of success in getting any of those will dramatically increase if you understand what kinds of girls are likely to be suitable for each role, where you’re likely to find them, and how to behave to win their favor.”

    No argument from me there!

    Like


  186. Orion, the native French have higher birth rates than white Americans. They’re one of the few European peoples who look set to grow – although not as fast as ghetto Muslims, so they’re still fucked.

    Michael, small towns are *awful* places for “betas”. Even here (the country has a notable female majority, mostly because immigration used to be all about Russian and Thai brides to lonely men in the countryside) the small towns have a drastic male majority in the under 30 crowd. The vanishing stigma of divorcing has hit the market really hard: in small towns it’s common for even desired men to marry in their early twenties or earlier and those men usually dump their wives in their 30s when they can still easily compete for young women.

    Worse, when everyone literally knows everyone, “alpha” and “beta” status gets *vastly* amplified by reputation. A few guys rule the scene and women put a lot of effort into staying away from the known losers.

    Like


  187. MB:
    I think you’re right, a lot of what gets discussed around here is more about “what makes good wife material” than anything else.

    that is because there is such a thing as characteristics that make good wife material.
    if there weren’t it wouldn’t have been a subject of human reflection since the beginning of recorded history.

    I’d add that it’s often an awfully conventional idea of what makes good wife material too …

    if you want a judgement-free existence, may i suggest another planet besides earth?

    She’s describing the Queen Bee (the alpha woman) pretty damned well, IMHO.

    if a queen bee who is stunningly beautiful and a leader of her clique of female friends decides to go on a slut run of epic proportions, she will lose some of her status. remember, it’s mostly women who attempt to enforce female mores by flinging the slut slander around.
    and with good reason. they don’t need the competition.

    Besides, I don’t understand this “without having to put out” thing, or why it even comes up.

    an alpha female is one who can acquire the commitment of an alpha male without bartering her sexual access in exchange. her beauty, inner and outer, is enough to keep the man intrigued and promising more.
    this is not to say she doesn’t enjoy sex. she may very well be a demon in bed. but she has the power… the alpha power… to date and fuck on her own terms.

    Why wouldn’t one of the marks of a true Alpha woman be her ability to get her sexual desires/needs/whim serviced?

    almost any woman except the dregs can get her sexual needs serviced. that’s no feat at all for a girl. but only the very best women can get their sexual needs met on their timetables and with the men of their choosing.

    ps: i’m a big fan of sluts. they make my job so much easier.

    Like


  188. jaakkeli — You’re talking about *very* small towns! America is full of small and medium-sized urban-sprawl-ish regions (Syracuse, Indianapolis, Ft. Worth, Kansas City, Albuquerque, Spokane) where people and life are amazingly kid-centric and family-centric. Where, to be honest, there often isn’t a lot to do beyond work a boring job and raise kids.

    But how does the math you’re talking about work out? Finland has a female majority, but in small towns there’s a male majority? Because all the gals have gone to the big cities? Interesting. How did that come about?

    Like


  189. But less rewarding, no?

    yes, but sometimes freebies are fun.

    Like


  190. 1. A man’s hardwired biological impulses don’t operate according to logic. Guys don’t do an historical dissertation before they fuck. They aren’t thinking about their meaninglessness.

    I find it doubtful thant men have specific biological urges to reproduce. For sure, men have hard-wired urges TO FUCK. Contraceptives are too recent and invention to have selected very strongly for specific biological urges to reproduce.

    I was commenting on the idea that reproducing can really be anybody’s “true legacy”. Besides, even Ghengis Khan’s personal legacy is more in the empire building than in his DNA. Namely, his personal DNA was merely a recombination of the genes of his ancestors.

    Like


  191. To repeat: France.

    Houellebecq would disagree. France is just as much of a hell for betas as anywhere in the modern West.

    Frisky youth spent acting-out;

    Fucking the same three alpha French guys.

    marriage-and-kids-and-house;

    The French have a pretty high divorce rate.
    http://family.jrank.org/pages/649/France-Transformations-Family-in-France.html

    sexy 40s and 50s;

    Speaking as a 30something man, only a tiny, tiny number of women are still sexy in their 40s and sexy 50somethings are pretty much a myth. Most older men who really enjoy sex with their 50something wives are remembering how sexy they used to be. A legitimate pleasure within a relationship, but of little apparent value to those outside.

    I really can’t believe that someone who has read Houellebecq would actually hold up France as an example of sanity.

    Like


  192. Michael Blowhard:

    Away from the “Sex in the City” world, there are tons of sweet, nice, pretty-enough girls in the various heartlands who want nothing more from life than to bear and raise kids and live a middle-class existence with someone who’s trustworthy, is decent company, and who can stir her juices once or twice a month.

    Michael, the girls in the heartlands are nowhere near as hot as the ones in the big cities. And the ones that are tend to be monopolized by the Big Men in town.

    Furthermore, “once or twice a month” is how I might characterize my flossing habits, certainly not my sex life.

    Like


  193. Speaking as a 30something man, only a tiny, tiny number of women are still sexy in their 40s and sexy 50somethings are pretty much a myth.

    Have you ever had sex with a woman in her 50s? I’m sure your pride wouldn’t let you enjoy it even if you did, but I’m curious as to the source of your expertise.

    Most older men who really enjoy sex with their 50something wives are remembering how sexy they used to be.

    Poor Michael Blowhard, living off the memories…

    Like


  194. MQ:

    Have you ever had sex with a woman in her 50s? I’m sure your pride wouldn’t let you enjoy it even if you did

    Well, now *this* certainly explains a lot…

    Like


  195. The problem I hear about small towns from people who live in them is that the women are better personality-wise (less Sex and the Cityish and less likely to be J*Daters or frequent commenters on jezebel.com), but the opportunities to meet women you don’t know for a single man are few and far between, especially outside of your social circle. If you’re not from that small town and don’t have a social circle, you’re especially screwed. In a place like NY or other big cities, you can hit the ground running if you aren’t shy and meet strange women all day long.

    Like


  196. Thursday — Houllebecque is a drunk and an artist, not a careful sociologist. He’s peddling a despairing, end-of-the-world schtick, and it’s pretty effective. I enjoy it myself, and it’s not as though he isn’t onto something. But it has to do with mood. Taking him to be telling the sociological truth about French life would be like taking P.T. Anderson to be telling the sociological truth about American life. They’re showman who are good at casting and evoking a certain mood. Besides, the French have always had a taste for despairing outrageousness. They toy with it for a few minutes, then they get back to doing what they’ve always done: cafes, eating, vacation, flirtation …

    Tupac writes “Michael, the girls in the heartlands are nowhere near as hot as the ones in the big cities.”

    So the problem isn’t that there are no girls available, it’s that betas have exaggerated ideas of how pretty a girl they’re entitled to? If that’s it, then the problem isn’t with modern life, it’s with the beta’s expectations, no?

    “Furthermore, ‘once or twice a month’ is how I might characterize my flossing habits, certainly not my sex life.”

    Funny line. Sadly, the nice, trustworthy, relatively inexperienced, baby-centric, respectful girl that the betas around here seem to fantasize about marrying isn’t likely to also be a sizzlin’ pole-dancing Maxim dream in the bedroom, though she might well appreciate some lovin’ on occasion, and (if she’s wise) she may well be happy to do what she can to help you get off a few times a week. Again: doesn’t the problem have at least as much to do with the betas’ expectations as it does with the opportunities reality presents?

    Like


  197. Michael Blowhard:

    The French attitude towards sex and courtship pretty consistently translates into a much fuller and more rewarding sex life than many American women ever experience.

    Michael, I defer to your wisdom. You clearly are a man of experience, taste, and acumen. Might you care to educate this crude provincial soul as to the sexual proclivities of Canadian women? I have in mind Ottwans in particular. Franco-Slav blue-eyed blonds in their forties, specifically.

    Like


  198. Michael, small towns are male skewed everywhere, although there are likely some reasons why it’s worse in northern Europe.

    The countryside has many professions that depend on owning land or very expensive heavy machinery and these professions tend to get passed from father to son. Women don’t want the farm or the sawmill and even lesbians don’t become lumberjacks.

    Finland (and much of northern Europe) has a school system where about half leave the general school system at 15/16 to learn a trade or to go straight for a job. Most girls stay in school, most boys don’t, and higher education is overwhelmingly female. Every new level of school draws women into ever more urban areas and leaves men behind.

    And there’s little to do for single women in the countryside. The freedom is good for men as they can amuse themselves with guns, cars, booze and chasing high school girls – the main group of unmarried young women in town – but suicide is common once teenage girls start telling them that they’re creepy-old…

    The churches are the only good form of social networking open to newcomers. They’re also overwhelmingly female now – I have cousins who spent forever sitting in churches and going to weirdass born again groups hoping to meet a good Christian man, with little luck. Sometimes I think that “game” appeared only because religion died for men: there are now lots of nerdy men who’d have nice girls waiting for them in the churches they never go to.

    Like


  199. “”When you’re 12, an 18 year old girl can look gross and used-up”

    Just had to object to this. Ever since boners were invented, the 18 year old was its favorite thing in the world.

    Like


  200. It’s a much-remarked-on fact of male life that your concept of what’s sexy enlarges over time.

    True as far as I can tell. When I was getting into my late 20s, it bothered me that I was ‘out of rage’ for 15-16 year old girls. Not that I pursued dating them at that point, but the fact itself bothered me.

    Now, in my late 30s, I recognize teenage girls as nice to look at, but also something of an alien life form. Instead, nothing to me says ‘sexy!’ more than a good lookin’ 27-28 year old.

    And when I’ll pushing late 40s? No doubt 35 will be where it’s at.

    Like


  201. Michael Blowhard – there is a problem with going to the heartland areas to find a woman. Sure, they are more likely to be good wife material than urban sluts, but #1 people get married younger in those areas, which means most quality people are taken, #2 you’re less likely to find someone on your intellectual level, because the highly educated flock to the cities, and #3 jobs will be harder to find in those areas.

    The solution is for young, “beta” men, at some point, to turn more of their energy into fighting back rather than complaining. We have had our rights and benefits in society taken and taken for decades. What have we done to fight back? Nothing, besides a couple isolated school shootings. Young single men need to realize than young single women are their enemy right now and to start acting in their own interests. We need to organize and spread the word, educating young single men as to why they are so angry, and letting them know the people responsible for their situation. Once we have numbers, we can develop strategy to punish the feminists and elites, and to change the game. Our ultimate goal needs to be a situation where instead of us being scared to voice our concerns IN PUBLIC in OUR COUNTRY, for fear of upsetting PC feminists, THEY will be scared to offend US. That is the goal. Why should we have to watch what we say? Why should we have to worry about feminists shaming us? They should be worried about offending us, not the other way around. But first we need numbers and organization.

    Like


  202. Michael Blowhard:

    I’m becoming a bore, but y’all seem to see everything in awfully binary ways: a girl’s either a virgin (and thus marriageable material) or a club skank. There’s really a lot more to the world than that pair, even if all we’re talking about is marriage material (sigh). Besides, there are lots of sensible guys whose preference would fall somewhere outside those two possibilities. Real skanks may not be a wise or desirable choice for a wife, but a virgin might well be a disaster too. A girl who’s had *some* experience and adventure, though? That can be a very nice thing.

    Indeed, but for a permanent commitment, it’s better if your girl has had these experiences and adventures with you, rather than someone else. Even the most experienced and adventured girl was a virgin once, and no matter how innocent a girl is, it is possible to awaken that “gleam of mischief in her eye” that you’re talking about, assuming she really likes you and you know what you’re doing (setting aside rare pathological cases of girls completely lacking sex drive, of course). Or maybe you believe that there is some special quality in girls that can be awakened only by a series of multiple partners?

    You’re right that any girl can eventually turn out to be a disaster; you can never be 100% safe with any choice. But if you look at two options: (1) an innocent and shy girl whom you hope to skillfully turn into an excellent sex partner, and (2) an experienced girl for whom you hope that she hasn’t been damaged too much by her past experiences, I would opt for (1) as a much safer bet. This is especially true because the success in the first case depends much more on your own skill in handling the situation than hoping for external factors to turn out right.

    Like


  203. Oddly, “extension of the domain of the struggle” is the original French title, and “Whatever” is the American translator’s title of the novel.

    Like


  204. MB:
    So “Game” is about nothing more than helping betas land conventionally good wives?

    it’s about all of the above.

    If that is indeed the topic, here’s a quick tip: Betas should leave the big cities and the coasts.

    i recommended as much in my “anonymous urban living” post. maybe it’s no coincidence that a lot of engineering firms are located in industrial parks out in the middle of the burbs. it gives those beta nerds a shot at the uncorrupted dunder mifflin secretaries.

    Away from the “Sex in the City” world, there are tons of sweet, nice, pretty-enough girls in the various heartlands who want nothing more from life than to bear and raise kids and live a middle-class existence with someone who’s trustworthy, is decent company, and who can stir her juices once or twice a month.

    the main problem with the big cities, from the perspective of a beta, are the big alphas who make the girls go starry-eyed and follow the alphas’ musky aroma into the city like a horde of pepe le pews in heat. out in the sticks, there are fewer alphas stealing attention and more prying eyes to shame the girls who decide to ride the slut carousel. the first factor works in favor of elevating the beta’s relative status and the second factor discourages the girls from playing the field too long jumping from alpha cock to alpha cock. the downside is the skewed ratio — small towns are notorious for having too few women of bangable age.

    but such considerations for the beta are a logistical matter and not very relevant to finding ways to arouse a girl sexually, and keep her satisfied within a marriage or LTR. this is where game helps the home-n-hearth beta build a happy life. the game that works for the inveterate player to attract women is the same game that helps the beta hubby put a smile of gratitude on his wife’s face.

    You’ll need a little in the way of “Game” and resourcefulness to find, woo and win such a girl, but not a lot.

    much of the argument over “how much” game a man needs to get what he wants from women rests on his innate market value. the top dog in a small rural community will be as attractive to women in his scene as the big man in a bustling city. any man lower than the top dog — and that’s everyone minus 1 — will need varying degrees of game based on the disparity in mate value between himself and his target l’amour. PUA-level game is probably more useful in the cities where a guy can rack up a lot of practice rejections without suffering a hit to his rep or his ego (much), but game in the boons is no different in substance — the player just has a less dense target rich environment in which to frolic. the country girls and the city girls aren’t wired differently — they’ll all fall for the same guys who know how to push their attraction buttons.

    Problem solved. “Happily ever after,” I’m not so sure. But that’s just life.

    i’ve met guys who have told me that their marriages markedly improved (read: the wifey started wanting sex again) after they learned game. the cocky funny shit that sparks a girl’s flirty reflex in a bar will also re-ignite a wife’s dormant sex drive.

    To repeat: France. In bourgeois circles a life cycle for women often goes this way: Frisky youth spent acting-out; marriage-and-kids-and-house; sexy 40s and 50s; then being an elderly cat woman.

    there are some uncomfortable facts of human nature that i’m sure apply equally to the french as to americans. one, men do indeed prefer less promiscuous women for marriage partners and mothers of their children, for evolutionary reasons that have been expounded in great length ad infinitum for the past 20-40 years. see: the red queen, the moral animal, the selfish gene.
    french women may like being flirty and sexy and romantic (and trust me, i’m a big lover and appreciator of french chicks. my first love was french.) but their attitude to courtship doesn’t necessarily translate into more partners, more sex, or more crazy 3somes with strange men picked up in clubs. the same forces that compel a man to hone in on sluts for easy sex but to avoid them for long term commitment are as part of the frenchman’s nature as of the american man’s.
    MB, there’s a reason why the type of women who haunt sites like jezebel hate when men they are dating ask them about their sexual histories — a lot of these broads know deep down inside that men will devalue them if their slutty pasts were to become known.
    btw, very VERY few women in their 40s and 50s are “sexy”, if by sexy you mean that men with options want to have sex with them. otoh, if by sexy you mean “not fat”, then yeah, older french women have it over older american women.

    Like


  205. Also recommended: The Island.

    Like


  206. Well, now *this* certainly explains a lot…

    LOL. Haven’t had a woman that much older than me yet, but one day I certainly will be with a woman in her 50s, and I suspect I’ll enjoy it just fine.

    Like


  207. MQ
    Well, now *this* certainly explains a lot…

    LOL. Haven’t had a woman that much older than me yet, but one day I certainly will be with a woman in her 50s, and I suspect I’ll enjoy it just fine.

    Older women can teach a young dog new tricks. Moreso than a younger woman can. Learn tricks from older women and use them on younger women. It’s better than making a fool of yourself humping younger women.

    Like


  208. Michael Blowhard:

    For your pleasure. This article.

    The French–except for perhaps artistic circles–are more conservative than you think. Americans have more partners.

    The French are more likely to be monogamous, but withing that monogamy have more frequent sex. As any European will tell you, Anglo-Saxon cultural ideas with regard to sexuality are fucked. His sexually clueless American, English, Australian woman has some scientific basis.

    Like


  209. if a man’s concept of female attractiveness enlarges as he ages to encompass older women, then we have to ask ourselves if this is a function of ego-saving self-delusion or an actual change in brain wiring that occurs as the brain ages.
    if i were a betting man…

    I have to bring up Agnostic’s classic post on “girl haters”:
    http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2008/03/four-stages-of-man-in-relation-to-girls.html
    I find Agnostic’s obsession with teenagers a bit weird, they’re too annoying, immature and flakey to make good marriage material, but I can certainly attest to my own reawakened taste for 23 year olds. 😉

    Like


  210. — Nice analysis of small-town/small-city challenges and realities. And I’m not surprised to learn that a brush with Game can bring marriages back to life too.

    A few responses to your other points:

    I’m becoming a bore, but y’all seem to see everything in awfully binary ways: a girl’s either a virgin (and thus marriageable material) or a club skank. There’s really a lot more to the world than that pair, even if all we’re talking about is marriage material (sigh). Besides, there are lots of sensible guys whose preference would fall somewhere outside those two possibilities. Real skanks may not be a wise or desirable choice for a wife, but a virgin might well be a disaster too. A girl who’s had *some* experience and adventure, though? That can be a very nice thing.

    “[Frechwomen’s] attitude to courtship doesn’t necessarily translate into more partners, more sex, or more crazy 3somes with strange men picked up in clubs.”

    The French attitude towards sex and courtship pretty consistently translates into a much fuller and more rewarding sex life than many American women ever experience.

    “The red queen, the moral animal, the selfish gene …”

    I was reading this stuff before some visitors here were born, sadly.

    “btw, very VERY few women in their 40s and 50s are “sexy”…”

    Get back to me on that in 25 years. It’s a much-remarked-on fact of male life that your concept of what’s sexy enlarges over time. It’s a matter of perspective. When you’re 12, an 18 year old girl can look gross and used-up, but when you’re 30 she looks super-young and hot. When you’re 60, the hot 18 year old still looks hot, but a well-maintained 50 year old can look hot too (as well as interesting, experienced, and good company in a way that has its allure too). You’re right: keeping the weight under control is key.

    Like


  211. Thursday saidI find Agnostic’s obsession with teenagers a bit weird
    I think he has been hanging out with Gannon lately.
    *gives Thursday a pat on the back*

    Thank God there are some men like you who can wait until a woman is of legal age. Dirty old men like Gannon & Agnostic made my teenage years a living hell at times.

    Like


  212. the only way to avoid heartbreak is to avoid love

    So far so good for me:)

    Like


  213. “Whatever,” Houellebecq’s first novel, is a good primer for The Elementary Particles.

    It’s a quick read, and covers the same territory. The scene in the disco is a literary classic. As is his tragi-farcical description of a fat girl.

    And when he sings the “praises” of “the psychoanalyzed woman,” it’s about as good as his odes to she-lawyers.

    Like


  214. I will have to read Whatever from cover to cover, but here is a great quote from that book:

    Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperisation. Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It’s what’s known as ‘the law of the market’. In an economic system where unfair dismissal is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their place. In a sexual system where adultery is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their bed mate. In a totally liberal economic system, certain people accumulate considerable fortunes; others stagnate in unemployment in misery. In a totally liberal sexual system, certain people have a varied and exciting erotic life; others are reduced to masturbation and solitude. Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.

    read these books.

    Like


  215. Tupac — “You clearly are a man of experience, taste, and acumen.” Anything but. “Might you care to educate this crude provincial soul as to the sexual proclivities of Canadian women?” I’m here to learn.

    jaakkeli — Interesting, enlightening, tks.

    Rick — Maybe it’s just me, but when I was 12 18 year olds looked gross. 12 and 13 year old girls were what turned me on — fresh, just budding, etc. Of course, then I turned 13, and suddenly the wonders of 18 year olders became apparent …

    PA — And when we’re 90, in wheelchairs in the nursing home, we’ll probably be pinching the withered bottoms of 80 year olds, feeling a surge of the old heat. Men are pathetic, but there you have it.

    Jack — I’m all for youngdudez growing a pair and asserting themselves. And growing up as feminized and propagandized as many of you seem to have done can’t have been easy. But are you sure you haven’t watched “Fight Club” once too often?

    Vlad — “For a permanent commitment, it’s better if your girl has had these experiences and adventures with you, rather than someone else.” Really? Why? Maybe I’m only speaking for myself (though, false modesty aside, I know I’m also speaking for many guys I’ve known), but I’d much prefer to settle down with a girl who’s had some adventures with other dudez first. Often there’s a lot of hysteria, drama, and nonsense a girl has to go through at the initiation of her sex life. Me, I’d really rather let some other sucker deal with all that. And sure there are a lot of advantages to having had at least a few sex partners, even for girls. You pick up tricks and tips; you get over inhibitions; you get to do a little comparing and contrasting; you clear a lot of nonsense out of your system; you move on with a slightly savvier head. Experience isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Having your heart broken a few times isn’t necessarily a bad thing either, though I suppose it may be too much for some sensitive souls to cope with.

    Thursday — I’m at least a little more sober than Houllebecq is. No, I think you and he are all onto something. I don’t hang out here because I think y’all are wrong. I think y’all are onto something, and are smart and funny about it. I see what you see too, if from a slightly icy and distant — OK, oldguy’s — perspective. And I was reacting against blank-slate-ism and finding confirmation in sociobiology (as it used to be known) long, long ago. I just bridle when the dogmatism and the generalizations start to strike me as a bit too hardline.

    Like


  216. Michael: “Chicks are fascinating, sex is the funnest thing in the world, and romance and poetry are the best games of all.”

    All true. It would be perfect if music, food and mathmatics also show up somewhere in that sentence.

    Like


  217. MB:
    I’m becoming a bore, but y’all seem to see everything in awfully binary ways: a girl’s either a virgin (and thus marriageable material) or a club skank.

    if we’re gonna put numbers on it, i’d say any girl who has had 7-10 sex partners by age 25 qualifies as a slut.
    between 4 and 7 is cause for concern.
    1-4 is fine.
    0 is a little weird in the current cultural context, but not reason to write her off.
    anything over 10 by age 25 and you are getting into skank territory.

    note: flip the scale for men.

    Real skanks may not be a wise or desirable choice for a wife, but a virgin might well be a disaster too.

    i’d rather take my chances with a virgin for a wife than a skank.
    after all, a virgin can be trained. but a skank can’t be untrained.

    A girl who’s had *some* experience and adventure, though? That can be a very nice thing.

    the experience issue is overrated. very few women, if they are attracted to you, will lay in bed like dead fish. a virgin who genuinely has the hots for you will in short order overcome any potential sexual hangups she may have by following your gentle but firm leadership in the sack. really, once the vaj starts lubing up the lack of experience issue works itself out (and in and out…).
    or maybe i’m just a great motivator. heh.

    though i would be wary of any girl who used to be a skank but converted to a born again prude right at the moment i started dating her.

    That can be a very nice thing.

    virgins are highly prized the world over. i dunno, ceteris paribus, i’d choose the virgin for marriage (if i was maritally inclined) before the experienced chick. it’s pretty fucking nice to know your dick is the only one that’s been in there. call me a throwback, but hey, that’s male nature for ya.
    of course, since virgins are practically nonexistent in the state of nature circa 2008, this preference is moot.

    The French attitude towards sex and courtship pretty consistently translates into a much fuller and more rewarding sex life than many American women ever experience.

    but does a much more rewarding sex life mean more sex partners? or can it mean more sex within a committed relationship? that study posted above puts french women in the latter category.

    When you’re 12, an 18 year old girl can look gross and used-up, but when you’re 30 she looks super-young and hot. When you’re 60, the hot 18 year old still looks hot, but a well-maintained 50 year old can look hot too (as well as interesting, experienced, and good company in a way that has its allure too).

    *studies have shown alert*
    studies have shown that teen boys are more attracted to older women in their early 20s than to their own age group. scientists surmise this has to do with a woman’s increasing fertility curve. as a woman is at her most fertile around 22, that is the age that is most attractive to men, old and young. my memory is a little hazy on this matter, so maybe someone else can verify if this is correct.

    if a man’s concept of female attractiveness enlarges as he ages to encompass older women, then we have to ask ourselves if this is a function of ego-saving self-delusion or an actual change in brain wiring that occurs as the brain ages.
    if i were a betting man…

    Like


  218. PeterEveryone started with a blank slate, so to speak. Why are things so different today?

    STDs Peter STDs
    Also no one wants to be like the guy made a fool of in the bar a few posts back. BTW, many women have a problem with men who get around.

    Hello saidRegarding Obama I always thought America’s first black president would be Morgan Freeman
    Hello, Morgan Freeman is having an affair with a former friend of his wife. As women we must keep our friends away from our men(esp if your husband is wealthy).

    Like


  219. The number of sexual partners a person has/had is honestly not a conversation I’ve ever had with anyone, male or female.

    And FWIW, the most sex I ever had was during the 4 yrs I was married. I wasn’t a virgin, but I had just graduated from college and was very naive about men. I can’t speak for all females, but for me, there was actually something about getting married that made me more sexually open. Maybe like chic says, it was because I didn’t have to worry about STD’s – I don’t know.

    Also, I wonder how much a part religion plays – or played – in the likelihood of a woman remaining a virgin until marriage. I grew up in a Catholic household, and I think it was something I heard DAILY. My mother was a virgin when she married my dad, and we (my sisters and I) talked to her about it all the time.

    Like


  220. on November 19, 2008 at 8:29 pm Odette de Crecy

    MB, I’ve read Debra Olliver’s book. France may be the country with the least sexual stigmatization against adultery and women’s promiscuity, but for most of its history, adultery was the privilege of elite married women. Spinsterhood and catting around wasn’t as mainstream as you make it out to be.

    Stendhal told his sister Pauline get married to a respectable guy as soon as possible so that afterwards she could pretty much do whatever she wants in life. And by that he meant her traveling to Italy, going to Paris, attending the theater, and having an active social life without arousing suspicion. This idyllic, mainstream freewheeling sexuality you describe is mostly a post WW II development, I think. It’s nice but I don’t know how long they can keep it up.

    The conventional glamorous French cultural history that gets taught in the US is Madame Pompadour, Georges Sand, Colette, female run salons, etc… but outside of Paris there was a very traditional, Catholic culture that was about families, daughters staying virgins until they got married and the convent for hopeless cases. When Colette said of the suffragettes that they deserved the whip and the harem, she wasn’t joking around.

    Like


  221. Anony saidHigh-numbers men are also be damaged goods. Women need assurance they are special in order to give of themselves fully to a man. Women cannot love a man when she feels like just a number.
    Cosign Men don’t know or refuse to believe this^^^ but it’s true. Very few men can get away with high numbers. It’s the men who have the Clinton effect on women who can get away with high numbers and just about anything else.

    Married but cool said Not really related, but Brad Pitt long ago lost all my respect, but what in the world is happening to him? He is getting old. The man is 44(?) which means he’s no longer a spring chicken.
    The picture of him here is simply embarrassing.
    Photographer caught him in a bad photo.

    MQ AKA stuart smalley:
    A lot of the people here have been deeply injured by women in the past
    you forgot to accuse me of closet homosexuality and/or impotence.
    jes trying to help you keep your script consistent

    Well you sort of admitted to having your heart broken before.
    Rick said:
    Not sure when you came up, but I’m pretty sure men – at least those with women who slept around a lot – have always cared, some more than others. Check out the movie Clerks – the main character can’t stop freaking out about how many blowjobs his girlfriend gave in her past.

    Uh huh and notice he asked about the number of bj not intercourse. A lot of copulation is bad but a lot of bjs are just dreadful and disgusting. Some women develop stretch marks around their mouth over time from giving to much “brain” *.

    Michael Blowhard said It’s got something to do with white guys’ difficulty with girls more generally, it seems to me. White guys can’t imagine themselves — their souls, and their soul-inhabited bodies — as being desirable in and of themselves. It seems inconceivable to them
    Really ? For how long has this train of thought been in the minds of white American men?

    *j/k

    Like


  222. chiclet:
    Well you sort of admitted to having your heart broken before.

    occupational hazard.

    or: the only way to avoid heartbreak is to avoid love.

    Like


  223. So far so good for me:)

    sample size matters.

    Like


  224. if we’re gonna put numbers on it, i’d say any girl who has had 7-10 sex partners by age 25 qualifies as a slut.

    OMG, my non-date girlfriend is a slut! Whatever shall I do?

    Like


  225. So the problem isn’t that there are no girls available, it’s that betas have exaggerated ideas of how pretty a girl they’re entitled to? If that’s it, then the problem isn’t with modern life, it’s with the beta’s expectations, no?…Sadly, the nice, trustworthy, relatively inexperienced, baby-centric, respectful girl that the betas around here seem to fantasize about marrying isn’t likely to also be a sizzlin’ pole-dancing Maxim dream in the bedroom, though she might well appreciate some lovin’ on occasion, and (if she’s wise) she may well be happy to do what she can to help you get off a few times a week. Again: doesn’t the problem have at least as much to do with the betas’ expectations as it does with the opportunities reality presents?

    MB, Hero! Will anyone answer him?

    Like


  226. — So a girl who sleeps with two guys per school year has already qualified as a slut by the time she graduates? You aren’t putting me on? Man, that’s harsh. Back in the day a girl who boffed only two guys a year was considered something of a prude. Where French girls and numbers go, Whiskey’s challenge was this: “Point to me a society that has sexually adventurous women and also values them, protects women and children and has a high degree of male cooperation, rule of law, tolerance of minorities, and such.” The challenge wasn’t to come up with a culture that encouraged skanky promiscuity. French women, at least of the urban, college-educated, fairly-prosperous sort, almost all approach sex as a kind of poetic adventure. “How to conduct an affair” is a big subject over there — thousands of American girls used to go there yearly, largely to learn how to wear scarves and boots and conduct affairs. And French culture supports that approach to sex for both men and women.

    Comment_Heart_Of_Ice — Have you read anything of Hymowitz’s besides this one article? She’s anything but a Femi-Nazi. Actual Femi-Nazis *hate* Kay Hymowitz. Anyway, to the two examples you cite. 1) “For this reason, successful human cultures expect far more of their men than muscle and promiscuity.” And this strikes you as anti-Game how exactly? It’s a simple description of how successful cultures operate. If you want to catch her out factually on that, go right ahead if you can. But where’s the value judgment on Game in it? 2) “They see that when the old dating and courting regime fell, it left a cultural vacuum with no rules for taming or shaming the boors, jerks, and assholes.” Again: In what way is this anti-Game? It seems to me to be a perfectly decent description of how the collapse of the old sex-roles regime has hit a lot of young men. It doesn’t strike me as much different than a lot of the things that he and many others around here often say. Look, Hymowitz is a reporter, and this is a mostly-factual piece, not a heavily-argued think piece. 95% of it consists of her going, “Hey, look at this! Who knew!? Where’d it come from? What’s it about?” I’m puzzled why anyone would read the piece thinking that she’s dissing Game. I think she’s saying, “Hey, take a look at one of the phenomena — namely young male anger and ‘Game’ — that the collapse of traditional sex roles and gender expectations has resulted in.”

    Chic — T. has described what’s up with American white guys much better than I can. They’re scared of physical self-expression, of presenting themselves as physically desirable, of doing anything with a sense of flair and style. Weirdly, it strikes them as faggy. They’ve backed themselves into a spot where only showing-off-for-each-other activities like videogames, sports, snowboarding, and hanging out with each other aren’t found faggy. Which is incredibly weird, no? I mean, what’s faggy about pursuing women, romance, sex, culture, and pleasure? They’re eternal 12 year olds, terrified of making that big next step. I guess Game helps them bolster their courage and steel themselves for the pursuit. Which is great, but it’s weird that it should be such a challenge to them in the first place. Chicks are fascinating, sex is the funnest thing in the world, and romance and poetry are the best games of all. Why not enter the field with a little more gusto?

    Like


  227. ^^^very true. On the otherhand, male sluts don’t. They just past around disease & make unwanted children;(

    Like


  228. if we’re gonna put numbers on it, i’d say any girl who has had 7-10 sex partners by age 25 qualifies as a slut.

    Damn! That’s pretty harsh.

    I’m a little more forgiving.

    Like


  229. bang her! you know she’s good to go.

    Haw haw. 🙂

    No, sadly, I don’t think she’s a slut, but as I pointed out, I suspect that having sex with her will only tie me down to her in a twenty-one year relationship with her that will cause financial ruin…

    Like


  230. MB:
    — So a girl who sleeps with two guys per school year has already qualified as a slut by the time she graduates? You aren’t putting me on?

    “Overall, women report an average of six sex partners in their lifetimes; men, 20. But a better gauge of sexual activity for most people is the median, the midpoint between the high and low: Women report a median of three sex partners; men, a median of eight.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/PollVault/Story?id=156921&page=1

    that’s a median of 3(!) lifetime sex partners for american women. so, yes, a girl who has had 10 lovers by the age of 25 is a slut as measured against the average woman.

    this fact only sounds harsh to you because you either run in circles where huge numbers of dick are racked up by the women you know (artists, lawyers), or your standards for judging sluts have grown lax because of the general coarsening of the culture and the feminist meme that is a daily drumbeat sounding through the bullhorn of the elite controlled media.

    part of the problem someone like hymowitz, who is really an old school feminist in conservative clothing, won’t address is that men (and older women) have abdicated their duty to judge harshly women who sleep around, and this has consequences as seen in the marital rates and the divorce culture. by shifting the definition of sluttiness to well above the median number of sex partners (reminder: 3!) women can experience all the joys of soft polygamy without any of the inconvenient shaming.

    btw, readers of my blog should know i’m fully aware that what i write is often contradictory. while shaming sluts is good for society, it is not so good for me. unlike a lot of people, i’m capable of holding opposing thoughts at one time and examining them objectively. i understand that the culture shift has been a boon for my personal quest of lifelong hedonism, but a complete disaster for social cohesion. what is good for the individual is not necessarily, or even very often, good for the whole.

    Like


  231. “No, sadly, I don’t think she’s a slut, but as I pointed out, I suspect that having sex with her will only tie me down to her in a twenty-one year relationship with her that will cause financial ruin…”

    DA, don’t you only work part-time? How much money do you have to lose in a hypothetical divorce?

    Like


  232. For once I fully agree with his philosophy. My whole definition of alphaness is how much you can get away with “do as I say, not as I do”.

    Like


  233. Nicole is right; a handsome successful man will be popular with many beautiful women. Getting him to marry you out of all the 10s vying for his attention requires traits other than beauty.

    I once did volunteer work with drug addicts and I met a truly beautiful young woman. She was movie star beautiful i.e. the kind of beauty you are stunned to see in every day life. I talked to her and pretty soon the heartbreaking stories came out. Sexually abusive stepfather, date-rapes, a string of abusive boyfriends and every chemical she could find to numb the pain. Beauty draws every type of man and makes them go to manipulative, cruel, and sometimes violent means to possess it. Fragile beauties are catnip to abusers and if beautiful women are bitchy it’s because they’ve learned how to protect themselves in the sexual jungle.

    Like


  234. DA, don’t you only work part-time? How much money do you have to lose in a hypothetical divorce?

    Actually, if ended up getting her pregnant, presuming no abortion, I’d probably end up marrying her and working full-time to take care of our family. If I luck out and end up playing with trains, it’s possible that I could eventually make six figures which means big child support and alimony payments if I divorce her. Even if she has a kid and we don’t get married, I’m responsible for child support payments, and if things become rocky between the two of us, it’s quite possible that I may end up paying checks to a child I won’t see given her tendencies to desire revenge…

    Like


  235. Vasectomy my lad..

    Like


  236. Vasectomy my lad..

    Even my beta ass craves the masculine desire of impregnating a girl while fucking her…

    Like


  237. David Alexander,
    Condom. Wrap it up and take it with you when you leave her place.

    Like


  238. hello saidDA, don’t you only work part-time? How much money do you have to lose in a hypothetical divorce?

    *slaps hello’s hand*
    naughty

    Like


  239. on November 19, 2008 at 10:42 pm Comment_Factually

    *****
    Anyway, to the two examples you cite. 1) “For this reason, successful human cultures expect far more of their men than muscle and promiscuity.” And this strikes you as anti-Game how exactly? It’s a simple description of how successful cultures operate. If you want to catch her out factually on that, go right ahead if you can. But where’s the value judgment on Game in it? 2) “They see that when the old dating and courting regime fell, it left a cultural vacuum with no rules for taming or shaming the boors, jerks, and assholes.” Again: In what way is this anti-Game? It seems to me to be a perfectly decent description of how the collapse of the old sex-roles regime has hit a lot of young men.
    *****
    Her simple description ‘forgets’ what successful cultures expect of women, and what traditional cultures do to tame and shame women. This is, of course, an accident, since Mr. Blowhard has spent this entire thread screaming about how women should have no limits put on them.

    This is really the big clue that gives it all away. Somehow Mr. Blowhard, and Miss Feminazi have missed that ‘successfull’ cultures put restrictions on women as well. That our “traditional” culture did as well.

    Back to Mr. Blowhard’s bald-faced lie. Would a ‘successful culture’, by Mr. Blowhards standards, or Miss Feminazi’s standards, have a culture to ‘tame and shame’ practioners of Game? A yes or no will do, Mr Blowhard. A yes will be considered Anti-Game. This makes her statements Anti-Game. Honest…… if we lived in a traditional culture. WHICH WE DON’T.

    And never mind that what successful cultures did demand of men has little relation to what Miss Feminazi and Mr. Blowhard want to do to men.

    Mr. Blowhard is trying to defend hs dishonest statement that her statements were NOT anti-Game with the claim that she was being honestly anti-Game. Which is still anti-Game. Of course, she was actually being sneaky. Pretending to talk about ‘traditional cultures’ when in fact all she is doing is making demands of men in THIS CULTURE. The actual culture we live in. Smooth reframing.

    ****
    It seems to me to be a perfectly decent description of how the collapse of the old sex-roles regime has hit a lot of young men.
    ****
    You meant to say YOUNG WOMEN. Young men either ‘don’t mind’ or like being able to be boors, jerks, and assholes to women, at least occassionally. This has little negative effect on the young men. It, in fact, gets them laid more, even in traditional cultures. The serial hypergamy, completely unmentioned by you or her, DOES have a negative effect on them. This Serial Hypergamy is RABIDLY defended by Mr. Blowhard.

    I know, Mr. Blowhard, you are pulling the Hard-Six and declaring all your, and her, statements must be taken completely out of context. That, in an article about Game, her ending on “what successful cultures” should do and “a cultural vaccuum” wasn’t a call to go after Game…. any more than IMBRA was an attempt to keep men in line.

    Blowhard wrote:
    *****
    Actual Femi-Nazis *hate* Kay Hymowitz.
    *****

    “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Lenin

    2+2=4

    I think Mr. Blowhard is just an idiot. A useful one. You know, the kind of idiot that helps get 40 million people killed and feels pretty good about it.

    So how do you think Mr. Blowhard will feel if following his idiotic advice destroys your life? I’ll tell you how Mr. Blowhard will feel. Pretty good about it.

    “Most people never feel sorry for the horrible things they do”-The Mentalist

    Like


  240. Condom. Wrap it up and take it with you when you leave her place.

    Obviously, one should do that, but I’m paranoid. Regardless, I will not have sex with her even if it breaks her heart, makes her cry, and makes Jesus sad.

    Like


  241. DA, I’m just trying to administer tough love. I’ve become fond of you and I’d like to see you muddle out of this despair. Friends?

    Like


  242. Condom. Wrap it up and take it with you when you leave her place.

    Obviously, one should do that, but I’m really paranoid with her. She’s a nice girl and a decent friend, but she reminds me of my older brother’s and cousin’s baby mommas. Crazy bitches who magically get pregnant regardless of whatever protection you take. The kind of women that you don’t want as the mother of your kids or your wife.

    Regardless, I will not have sex with her even if it breaks her heart, makes her cry, and makes Jesus sad.

    Like


  243. Jesus? Catholics would say that fornication is a greater sin than masturbation, so you are closer to being a good Catholic than anyone here. Except maybe Clio. Anyone else raised Catholic?

    Like


  244. Damn, now I feel guilty for badmouthing her on the Internet when she’s a nice person, and judging on how she treated my niece and nephew, somebody who loves kids and truly desires them 😦

    BTW, David is Catholic, and attended Catholic School from Kindergarten to Twelfth grade. In a past life, he was also a Eucharistic Minister at high school.

    Like


  245. Comment, people should of course have some societal restrictions. The question is whether or not there is a humane way of imposing them. So far, the only way I can think of is not so humane, but a better option than bringing back religion based laws.

    That would be for both the media and the law to start punishing people for bad behavior more by ignoring them than whipping up juicy scandals. If “bad” boys and girls were touted as boring or otherwise undesirable in a certain way, and “good” boys and girls were promoted as fun and exciting, perhaps things would change. The herd does what they’re told.

    Although I disagree that more than 10 sex partners in a lifetime automatically damages a person, I can understand why, in general, this should be a cause for concern. If a woman is mainly being approached as an object to exploit, and takes those offers, gets exploited, and feels damaged, like I said, it only takes one. If our culture hasn’t advanced beyond the point of men being cast as the predators, and women as the prey, we are not really ready for real sexual freedom, and should not play at being so. We actually don’t have sexual freedom now…just a mockery of it.

    The problem of gender roles, and really when it comes right down to it, class should be dealt with first. Throwing people into a sexual free-for-all before handling these was putting the cart before the horse.

    People are suffering because of this social experiment gone wrong.

    Like


  246. Er, “hello”, the Catholic church does not teach that fornication is a worse sin than masturbation. They are both mortal sins, the worst kind, that can lead you to hell if not properly repented; as opposed to venial sins, the less serious kind. So it’s rather hard to rank them.

    But according to Thomas Aquinas, who ranked everything, masturbation is worse, in fact the lowest of sexual sins, I think, because it’s the most unnatural – which is a word that does not mean to the Church what it means in everyday English.

    Fornication is still a grave wrong, however, because its “real world” consequences can be so damaging for either party involved.

    Clio

    Like


  247. on November 19, 2008 at 11:27 pm ironrailsironweights

    For your enjoyment, here’s today’s tasty little GNP.

    Peter

    Like


  248. OMG, my non-date girlfriend is a slut! Whatever shall I do?

    bang her! you know she’s good to go.

    (sometimes sluts perform a valuable public service.)

    Like


  249. Fair enough Clio. It’s been a long, long time since I had any religion classes and to be frank I’ve tried quite hard to forget my faith’s sexual teachings. I vividly remember confessing masturbation at 15, and the priest’s pained and guilty visage at my mention of the word convinced me that confessing that particular sin made no sense. That said, I do make it to Mass somewhat more often than C & E.

    Like


  250. “slumlord is right. an alpha woman is one who is beautiful (8-10) and therefore able to leverage her beauty by securing the attention of alpha men without having to put out.”

    In case I get accused of such again, I am not attempting to promote myself or women who look like me as beautiful to people who prefer otherwise.

    I’m just saying that looking like a model does not an Alpha female make. If it were so, models would never be dumped or cheated on with women who don’t look like models…and men would never put up with crap from women who don’t look like models.

    A woman who doesn’t look like a model would not be able to convince a wealthy man to marry her, make a baby with him, and then take half his stuff and the baby, and go live with her female lover.

    Let’s see if this time you can understand that what you prefer and what actually bears out in real life are very different things.

    If a woman looked like a model, there would be an explanation other than her talent and social skills for her mass appeal and ability to run and perhaps ruin other people’s lives, almost with impunity.

    Beauty (media or natural) may get a woman pretty far in the bedroom, but it takes more than this to maintain and regulate a large extended family or social circle.

    “an alpha female is one who has gotten commitment from one alpha male. ”

    An Alpha female is one who has the commitment and loyalty of more than one person.

    “she is likely to have slept with far fewer men than a woman of lesser beauty.”

    …and just how would you know how many men a woman had slept with?

    “sluts are women in the 4-7 range who use the crutch of easy sex to snag a man higher than them in value.”

    Silly rabbit… No woman in the 4-7 media or natural range believes that she can snag a man with easy sex more than a year into the dating market. If she does, then it’s not her looks that are the problem. It’s her moronic level IQ.

    Media 8-10’s in the U.S. might believe that, but unless they live under a rock, they quickly learn that they are not so unique. Especially if a man is able to travel, there is a whole world of thin women who are actually beautiful, and have more going for them in the looks department than a tiny waist.

    “once you get down to the 3 and below range, you see less sluttiness because those women are simply too ugly to get very many men at all who aren’t degenerate losers.”

    You should really get out more.

    Hell, get around the internet more.

    Just because you hate someone does not mean that they embody all bad traits that exist. Just because you love someone does not mean they embody all good traits that exist.

    Just because you like Barbie girls does not mean that these women have absolute power. Lots of whores living under the thumbs of pimps who beat them daily are gorgeous. Lots of women you’d think are ugly are loved and adored by their peers and people whose lives they’ve touched…or reviled as small time dictators by the people whose lives they control with an iron frying pan.

    Like


  251. MB,
    First of all, I’ve enjoyed your blog over the years. Like you I come here for the interesting and entertaining discussion not because I am a true believer. I am a woman, in case my posts and avatar didn’t give me away.

    I’ve enjoyed your posts differentiating the different attitudes toward sex and romance in France. Italian and Spanish culture also have much more flirtation and culturally natural game instead of how-to guides. Along with the French, Italians and Spaniards have comparatively little casual sex. I think the end of drugstore soda, virgin bride at 20 left Americans and other Anglo cultures at a loss because courtship culture was rather thin. Without a witty, sexy, history of flirtation Anglos must have sex to feel sexy, and once sex becomes boring they can’t use salacious wit and imagination to expand on it but must find a new partner to feel sexy again.

    I know these statements involve gross generalizations and that there are many French, Spanish and (especially) Italians don juans, as well as devilishly flirty, demure Americans and despite what some guys here think there are men for whom complimenting women and buying them meals does work. But I think that when people do not have the cultural framework to deal with open sexuality often the best they can do is get drunk and have sex. T described a similar dynamic in Sweden.

    Like


  252. Gross generalizations are a big specialty of mine. Nice to know you enjoy them too. This is certainly the right place to fling a lot of them around.

    Like


  253. Alias Magdalene:

    Er, “hello”, the Catholic church does not teach that fornication is a worse sin than masturbation. They are both mortal sins, the worst kind, that can lead you to hell if not properly repented

    Clio, I’m a bit unclear as to what your religious conviction is (I always knew you were a Believer in some sense or another), but are you, like, *seriously* Catholic per above?

    If so — God help me! — it only makes me want to smash through that icy cage you have enclosed yourself in and to do dirtynaughty things with you all the more.

    “I *VILL* break her!”

    (i am so going to hell 😦 )

    Like


  254. Do you really believe that the median for female sex partners is 3? There is NO WAY that is true nowadays, in our generation. Maybe decades ago, and that is skewing the results. And also, women lie and fudge their answers. Statistically, men and women would have the same number of mean partners, yet men is 20 and women is 6. Can’t happen. Most women seem to be at least 5 or 6 by 22 and sometimes much more. And these are college educated women.

    Do you think lawyer women are more slutty than others? I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the case.

    Like


  255. Is this the longest comments-thread ever? At least I can feel that I’ve done my part in helping it along … But what did happen to the numbering on the comments?

    Pupu – Music, yes. Food, yes. But math? Math? Really?

    — You do contradict yourself sometimes. In this case, you’re arguing on the one hand that societal foundations have been rotted irretrievably by liberal attitudes towards sex and female behavior. On the other you’re presenting evidence that most American women have only three sex partners in a lifetime. That’s not many. And it would seem to suggest — and strongly! — that the rot doesn’t go nearly as deep as you and the Game/”Fight Club” crowd claim. Care to untangle?

    Odette — Sadly, I know all too well about traditional French Catholic culture. Most of my time there was spent in a dreary corner of Brittany where the Church played an oppressive role and moods were gloomy. I’m not sure where you got the impression that I’ve characterized French attitudes and behaviors towards sex as “idyllic” and “freewheeling.” Whiskey challenged commenters to come up with a culture that tolerated “sexually adventurous” (not hyper-promiscuous) women. France is obviously one example: Women there (away from the gloomier Catholic precincts, anyway) view sex in a very different way than American women do. It’s desirable and poetic. Loving and being loved is to be explored and experienced as a central part of being alive. They have a few affairs before getting married. Those who don’t marry have affairs. Many who do marry wind up having a few affairs. I’d imagine that a French bourgeoise might reasonably expect to have had six or a dozen lovers by the time she dies. Society doesn’t crumble as a result. BTW, French life is regulated (formally and informally) in very strict ways. Love and sex there are like French food: very refined, very strict, very controlled, and very intense and voluptuous. One of the things I saw (and one of the points Ollivier makes) is that the usual French approach to erotic experience has zero to do with with American-style hanging loose and freewheelingness. The French do nearly everything (including l’amour) in very precise, almost scripted ways.

    Comment_Factually — Don’t you think the time has come for you to change your underwear?

    Like


  256. @g manifesto:

    you said
    ETA

    and you said
    Boxing and Horseracing for me.

    random question because i’m bored: what about jai alai?
    bettor … basque … it’s just too good to be true.

    Like


  257. One man explained this to me perfectly.

    He said that a woman who has lots of sex for the sake of sex, after sometime associates sex with “just for sex”. the association of sex with the context of love is blurred,

    She starts to idealize a relationship.. Makes it holy.

    and in this holy relationship there will be no place for that meaningless sex.

    now sex will be only done in the context of a holy relationship, and as the perfect man suitable for the holy relationship, this man will be demanded not to have the same urges as the other men who had sex with her just for sex…

    —————————-

    To conclude, I always find it funny that women do not seem to want to see that their most important attraction factor for a man is their availability, when it comes to ONSs. (talking about fuckable women here.)

    Like


  258. Statistically, men and women would have the same number of mean partners, yet men is 20 and women is 6.
    Can’t happen. Most women seem to be at least 5 or 6 by 22 and sometimes much more.

    When you talk about the mean, you’re absolutely correct. The mean number of sex partners of heterosexual men and women cannot differ.

    However, the median number of sex partners is a completely different story altogether. The median number of sex partners among women is bound to be higher than that of men. Promiscuous alpha males fuck a lot of women and a lot of women get fucked by them at least once. Beta males get to fuck relatively few women and their copulations take place mostly in monogamous LTRs.

    Like


  259. “High-numbers men are also be damaged goods.

    anony, you love to beat this drum, but there is scant evidence that your belief is true. slutty men do not take the hit to their sexual marketability that slutty women do. in fact, slutty men are more attractive to women, as their preselection by other women is an excellent indicator of their mate value. slutty women simply telegraph to men that they don’t value their sexual favors very much, and are thus poor prospects as long term mates.”

    What people like anony forget is that the sexuality of the sexes are different and the selection criteria are different.

    women cannot comprehend that men can have different criteria, and they expect men to have the same criteria.

    “Women need assurance they are special in order to give of themselves fully to a man.

    such assurances are not mutually incompatible with past caddishness.”

    AMEN.

    A commodity on free distribution cannot expect to be bought for any price perceived high, later on.

    As “girlfriend” is something I can easily find, and it is harder to find “free sex”, the important commodity for me is sex.

    for a woman searching a man, this commodity would be love and attention. If her was spreading it around, he cannot expect her to respect it as some alpha’s love who was fucking around but not loving. this is because for men, giving love is the harder thing than giving sex.

    Once again, the uncomprehensible difference between sexes.

    “Women can not love a man when she feels like just a number.

    funny how it works out that so many women love men who fuck around.”

    It is like money. The more money you have, the more money you make.

    the more women you have, the more women you get.

    And these women will easily rationalize this by “he makes me get butterfly’s in my stomach”…

    Like


  260. “if we’re gonna put numbers on it, i’d say any girl who has had 7-10 sex partners by age 25 qualifies as a slut.
    between 4 and 7 is cause for concern.
    1-4 is fine.
    0 is a little weird in the current cultural context, but not reason to write her off.
    anything over 10 by age 25 and you are getting into skank territory.”

    to clarify, I am talking about way higher numbers…

    nowadays i see it almost normal for a woman of 25 have
    Above 50 : Problem for concern, what I call highly promiscuous
    25 : average (~2 per year)

    And what is more important than pure number is the number of one night stands and no strings attached sex. The serial daters may be a different issue when it comes to their view of sexuality in a relationship.. but then with them, the concept of relationship is skewed anyway.

    Chicnoir:

    “Cosign Men don’t know or refuse to believe this^^^ but it’s true. Very few men can get away with high numbers. It’s the men who have the Clinton effect on women who can get away with high numbers and just about anything else.”

    if many men with high numbers would get away with high numbers, how did the other men with high numbers end up with high numbers?

    the problem is: a man with high numbers is automatically attractive due to preselection.

    “Michael Blowhard said It’s got something to do with white guys’ difficulty with girls more generally, it seems to me. White guys can’t imagine themselves — their souls, and their soul-inhabited bodies — as being desirable in and of themselves. It seems inconceivable to them”

    Michael, maybe it is due to the fact that 95% of men are slaves to masturbation while they watch their peer females service the 5% top. When these ladies need to get abbies, now they turn to the 95%..

    Maybe that’ll have an effect ha? (and to prevent certain issues, I am not in the 95%)

    Like


  261. Slumlord says, “A persons sexual status is determined by the opposite sex. ”

    No, sexual status for both males and females in any species is determined by females. Period.

    This is why I hate it when the mainstream co-opts a scientific principle, and starts marketing it. It gets twisted all out of proportion until it is totally unrecognizeable from its original.

    Women determine the aesthetic standard. Women determine sexual status/value. If women as a group decided that only stable, responsible men were sexy, then men would become stable and responsible with few exceptions. If men decided that only stable, responsible women were sexy, the only guys who’d get laid were ones who didn’t require it, with few exceptions.

    This is why guys who aren’t picky about looks get laid more than guys who are. It’s simple supply and demand. The demand for sex with women is higher than the demand for sex from women.

    “Women may consider another woman empowered and alpha if she screws around as she pleases, but a majority of men won’t consider her alpha, fuckable yes, but not alpha. ”

    Slumlord, the majority of guys wouldn’t know how many men a woman had slept with before she landed in front of him. If she is discreet, stable, and responsible, she could have had four or five partners per year, and you’d be none the wiser…more if she participated in swinger or other freak/hippy gatherings.

    Aside of actual sexual intercourse, she could be in the habit of regular hand jobs to her good submissives who suck her toes well, or having two of them at a time play tug of war with their testicles.

    You guys seem to have no idea of the level of perversion a creature whose sexuality is 99% mentally driven, is capable of without technically adding to her intercourse statistics.

    While you’re worried about how many guys a girl has banged, somewhere in a friend’s yard out in the boonies, she’s sitting nude in a jacuzzi with three or four other Dommes, talking about how not to wrap while whipping with a single-tail…or on the flipside, shining the boots of a male Dom who makes a point of not ever letting her touch his cock ever, because he wants to teach her that her vagina holds no magical value for him (as opposed to you, who think it’s some holy hole that gets corrupted by being penetrated).

    Get that woman off that pedestal. A hole is a hole is a hole.

    What you need to be worried about is the rest.

    Like


  262. Michael Blowhard:

    You’re conflating “sexually adventurous” with “disease-ridden slutting around.” Many cultures have evolved ways for men and women both to partake of the romance, poetry, adventure and thrill of sex without turning into slatternly club skanks.

    No offence, but I think you’re doing the conflating. I don’t exactly understand what you mean by “sexually adventurous”. Does it mean wanting to try new sexual experiences? Or does it mean having sexual experiences with others? Or Both? The last I presume is the case.

    I don’t know if anyone here has problems with women who are at ease with their sexuality, or who are sexually rapacious, in fact most of the males here would probably find this type of woman the ideal; something to be prized.
    However, for a given aesthetic rating, the desirability of this woman decreases in proportion to the number of partners that she has had, because it appears that she is undiscriminating with regard to the choice of her partners. A girl that enjoys her sex and has had multiple partners, is great to have an adventure with, but not to commit to.

    I’ve got quite a few male patients who would probably put him and his crew to shame with regard to their number of partners, yet when asked would they like a woman who behaved like themselves, the answer has always been emphatically no. It’s hypocritical but it’s a fact of life. Sexual jealousy is a powerful normal emotion. We are happy to share what we use, not so happy to share what we love. How many girlfriends would be happy with their boyfriends if they went out for a coffee with a former girlfriend? Thursday was right, when looking for a marriage partner the sexual jealousy dynamic comes in, when looking for a one night stand or short term fling, sluttiness does not matter. Fuckable does not mean lovable or worth committing to.

    A persons sexual status is determined by the opposite sex. Women may consider another woman empowered and alpha if she screws around as she pleases, but a majority of men won’t consider her alpha, fuckable yes, but not alpha. Likewise a man maybe able to knock a brother out, be worth seven figures and have the looks of the younger Brad Pitt, but if women are giving his fat friend Guido all the action, he is not alpha.

    And what’s with the Catholic bashing? Where are women more sophisticatedly sexual? France or England? Spain or Sweden? Italy or Scotland? It seems that the Latin countries can produce family stability and sexual sophistication. Also they seemed to have been able to keep the link between romance and sex,unlike the countries up North, which seem to have developed a link between drunkenness and passionless sex. Oh, and as a side issue, the most sexually satisfied women in the U.S are married Christian women, they’re also the ones getting the most sex. Check out the Sex in America survey, by the University of Chicago.

    Finally, I think your view of France must have been affected by circles in which you moved. Here is the latest scientific survey of French sexual habits. Now remember the median no of sexual partners the average American woman had was 3, in France it’s 1.8! There must be a small group of Frenchwomen that are busy getting around. French girls on average are not sluts. Oh la la!

    Like


  263. Get that woman off that pedestal. A hole is a hole is a hole.

    Nicole, that’s really fucking vulgar. There is a huge middle ground between putting women on pedestals and mounting an indifferent hole like livestock in a barn.

    Like


  264. Michael Blowhard:

    Maybe I’m only speaking for myself (though, false modesty aside, I know I’m also speaking for many guys I’ve known), but I’d much prefer to settle down with a girl who’s had some adventures with other dudez first. Often there’s a lot of hysteria, drama, and nonsense a girl has to go through at the initiation of her sex life. Me, I’d really rather let some other sucker deal with all that.

    Well, in any long-term relationship, there are going to be episodes of hysteria, drama, and nonsense — and unless you’re doing something horribly wrong, those that will happen due to the issues of her sexual inexperience will be the least of your worries. With an innocent girl, you invest effort and skill and reap the rewards. With an experienced one, you can hear the echoes of guys who pumped and dumped her in the past laughing while thinking, “Let some sucker deal with her now.”

    And sure there are a lot of advantages to having had at least a few sex partners, even for girls. You pick up tricks and tips; you get over inhibitions; you get to do a little comparing and contrasting; you clear a lot of nonsense out of your system; you move on with a slightly savvier head.

    But as I pointed out earlier, this “comparing and contrasting” is likely to be very bad for her image of you. You will most likely be compared and contrasted with someone from the past who outcharms you. Even if you’re a great catch, super-alphas who completely eclipse you might be extremely rare, but each of them goes through at least hundreds of girls, so an experienced girl is likely to have crossed paths with some of them. Also, I’d say that the nonsense in her system may well accumulate with time rather than being cleared, and she is more likely to be moving on with emotional baggage than with a savvier head.

    Like


  265. Slumlord — Nice comment! But: Was I doing some Catholic-bashing? Where? You mean in my reference to the gloomy part of France where I spent some time? But Catholicism there was a gray, chilly and oppressive thing — anything but the sexy/warm/juicy thing it often seems to be once you get closer to the Mediterranean.

    I don’t quarrel at all with the Darwinian basics, I’m just trying to break the hard-‘n’-fast connection some are making here between “sexually adventurous” and raw numbers (let alone skankin’ around) where female behavior is concerned.

    Sexually adventurous for a guy probably will mean raw numbers. Sexually adventurous for a woman will probably imply some numbers, but as women tend to be more relationship and emotion-centric far smaller ones. Still: probaby more than one.

    The raw Darwinian view has a lot going for it, and French women are, god knows, as prone as any other to use what they’ve got to get where they want to go. But there’s a lot else to life. We don’t just eat in order to survive, for instance — for people lucky enough to live in the richer countries, we eat for fun, for pleasure, for sociability, for aesthetic excitement … Likewise, we don’t fuck only in order to make babies. We fuck for fun, to relieve boredom, to bond, for companionship, to discharge excess — but also for aesthetic and spiritual reasons.

    Frenchwomen are more prone than American women are to view the erotic and romantic dimension as something not just to exploit for advancement but as something to be explored purely for the sake of the experience. It’s all part of living life as “une femme.”

    And, as I said in an earlier comment, this isn’t a matter of being vague and loose and free in a purely-impulsive, no-structure way. There are life-patterns deeply inscribed in French culture. They can seem rigid to us but living them out seems to deliver great hunks of satisfaction to the French, who have never had to endure the kind of insane feminism that we’ve been subjected to. Their women experience satisfaction as women in ways most of ours will never know. Nonetheless, they aren’t kept under lock and key. They’re out there in the world, they’re living out sex and life as an adventure in terms that suit them. My conclusion: It’s possible to have a life that pays off both in some modern “liberal” ways *and* that recognizes diffs between women and men and delivers loads in the way of traditional satisfaction.

    Incidentally, if the French are screwing/have screwed themselves over with a lot of bad policies where immigration is concerned, that’s too bad. But it strikes me as a mega-stretch to blame that on the fact that the French are more tolerant of affairs than we are.

    As for the sex study: 1) studies of sexual behavior are best viewed a little skeptically. 2) As I keep trying to point out, where women are concerned “sexually adventurous” and “raw numbers” aren’t as tightly connected as they are for guys. The adventure might be one vacation affair in Madagascar, or seducing daddy’s best friend at 16, or it might be having many affairs throughout the still-desirable-but-now-calmer 40s. 3) There’s a big part of France that’s deeply conservative in ways that are hard for Americans to conceive of, as well as a still-existing peasant class. That would skew the numbers big time. I’m talking about the kinds of French people who are comparable to the people who visit this blog — college-educated types who wind up spending some time in the city.

    Like


  266. PA said, ” ‘Get that woman off that pedestal. A hole is a hole is a hole.’

    Nicole, that’s really fucking vulgar. There is a huge middle ground between putting women on pedestals and mounting an indifferent hole like livestock in a barn.”

    This is why I added to that, what a man needs to be worried about is everything else, as in not just her hole.

    A woman’s vagina is not what makes her a better or worse person, and the number of partners alone, says nothing about her character.

    The situation that led her to it, and how she handles herself says something about her character. One of the first things men should do to get women off a pedestal is stop viewing the vagina as some magical vortex into ecstatic validation of their manhood, and start looking at women as whole people who can be as great or as screwed up as a man.

    …and men and women who run around shagging stupidly make cattle of themselves. They don’t need me to label them.

    Men and women who aren’t stupid, but enjoy sex, and don’t use it as currency, have as many partners in a lifetime as they have opportunities to connect with people who are up to their standard. You can moralize as much as you like, and decide that any woman who has had more than a certain number of partners is below your standards, but that’s your standards based on your illusions of what quality means. You have no idea whatsoever though, if you would meet her standards, so it is silly to believe that just because she’s had many partners, she’d be “easy” in any way.

    In a few cases I know personally, the women’s “many partners” are in the top 20% of income, recognized talent, and/or intelligence. The small percentage of Alpha males may dominate most females, but they absolutely monopolize the Alpha females.

    …and I understand those who look at these “uppity bitches” and try to bring them down a notch saying they’re not all that, and they’re sluts or whatever, but that’s just sour grapes.

    Like I alluded to before, somewhere out there is a club of people who trust one another, have lots of great sex and related activities with one another, and laugh amongst themselves about the silly ignorants with sticks up their arses who marry women who don’t want to have sex with them, and men who try to restrain their sexuality instead of enjoying it.

    More power = more opportunities = more action.

    Like


  267. Vlad — You’re making perfectly good points, I just think you’re reaching hard-and-fast general conclusions based on your personal tastes. If you like breaking in virgins, and see some advantages to that way of going about life ‘n’ love, more power to you. There are plenty of guys who prefer the pleasures and charms of a more experienced woman. (Incidentally, women are always a lot of trouble, but I’d still maintain that the dramas of a virgin are something special, whether good or bad. There’s only one first time, after all.)

    BTW, when did it become common for guys to routinely see the “more experienced woman” as necessarily “a skank to be avoided”? And when did the assumption start up that a girl who’s had a few sexual partners has necessarily been damaged by a lot of pumping and dumping? It’s perfectly possible that a girl who has had some boyfriends and affairs (and who has maybe even had some — gadzooks — flings) has had her life enriched by these adventures.

    Like


  268. Hello,
    While I can respect your righteous indignation, I’ve learned a long time ago that you don’t get any extra credit, to say nothing of Poon, for being a stand up guy. Moral victories are just that, nothing more or less.

    I say all that to say, that whether he or any other man in our time now is principled or a cad, is largely irrelevant. Moreover, one has to make a strong distinction between one’s own view of morality and reality. Whether you, me or anyone else likes it or is responsible about it or not, the reality is that the world has been forever changed along the lines that comprise this thread.

    Glad to see we agree on Tiger and Mansfield. Men after my own heart.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  269. But Catholicism there was a gray, chilly and oppressive thing — anything but the sexy/warm/juicy thing it often seems to be once you get closer to the Mediterranean.

    Michael, if you’re talking abut what I think you’re talking about… I like this gray, chilly and oppressive thing. That’s my temperament, anyway.

    Clio on her blog once noted that the Italian-bred Camille Paglia’s mega-blindspot is her lack of appreciation for the northern Euro sensibilities. Spot on.

    I’m the same way. I attend an ethnic Catholic parish where the sermons and the atmosphere is serious and elevated. In contrast, I recently went to an Episcopalian mass for a friend’s religious ceremony, and there I encountered lots of clapping, singing, and an upbeat smiling minister who cracked jokes. It was an upper-middle class white church, BTW.

    No, the palms, the flamingoes, the hot days, the dancing, the eternal sunshine — that’s nice a couple of days out of the year. A necessity, in fact. But that’s it.

    For me: give me the chill wind whistling through the fields, the bare birch trees, and a distant sound of migrating birds under a late autumn sky.

    Like


  270. This is why I added to that, what a man needs to be worried about is everything else, as in not just her hole.

    Gotcha Nicole, sorry, I missed that part.

    Like


  271. MB:

    BTW, when did it become common for guys to routinely see the “more experienced woman” as necessarily “a skank to be avoided”? And when did the assumption start up that a girl who’s had a few sexual partners has necessarily been damaged by a lot of pumping and dumping? It’s perfectly possible that a girl who has had some boyfriends and affairs (and who has maybe even had some — gadzooks — flings) has had her life enriched by these adventures.

    I think a distinction Vlad would make (correct me if I’m wrong Vlad) is between

    – the story of the small town girl who explores her nascent sexuality with a number of local boys, all of whom more or less match her in sexual and sociocultural market value. These affairs are short lived and my vary wildly in “flavor” but are at least in the context of some romantic feeling.

    – the story of a similar girl leaving home to see the big city: a city full of charming cads, international playboys and sundry alphas who live a life lightyears apart from what she is used to and will likely ever be a part of. Here, she gets her experience by being pumped and dumped for a time (although she may see it differently) before eventually fluttering back down to her more appropriate social milieu (assuming she doesn’t snare that brass ring of marriage with an alpha).

    The former scenario is a heart warming tale commonly depicted in popular music and film (I have in mind Bob Seger’s “Night Moves”). The latter tale is what is occurring with increasing frequency, both in the city and now in the smaller locales.

    It is the latter scenario which has the potential to burn a girl out for her future suitors,as Vlad has outlined.

    “I’ve eaten the sun, so now my tongue has been burned of the taste.”

    Like


  272. “While I can respect your righteous indignation, I’ve learned a long time ago that you don’t get any extra credit, to say nothing of Poon, for being a stand up guy. Moral victories are just that, nothing more or less.”

    For once I’m not being righteous, merely rhetorical. I just think that saying “I don’t really want to be a man-whore but society gives me no choice.” is patently ridiculous. Many people are vegetarians despite society’s trend toward meat-eating to name just one example. A person who says “I don’t really want to eat meat but I simply cannot fight a fried chicken and hamburger society” is talking out of their ass. Vegetarianism is far easier today than it was in 60s, for example, but people still did it because that was what they wanted to do. There are fewer rewards for being monogamous now than there were fifty years ago and it may not be as easy but some men still choose to do it and are happy.

    I’m not telling him or any of the guys here to give up pickup or to guiltily affix scarlet letters to their chests. If that happened I’d lose a very entertaining blog. But adults don’t lay the responsibility of their choices on others. You can play the cards you are dealt in a variety of ways. History is full of men who bucked trends and made their destinies the way they wanted to do. Now if you prefer the libertine life simply state that of all the options to you in a free society this is your choice. To say that despite your socially conservative beliefs you are forced by trends to tomcat around is passing the buck and unworthy of a man. A man builds the life he wants regardless of society.

    Like


  273. Tupac — That makes sense, tks.

    Like


  274. @Nicole:

    The logic is “If the kitten didn’t want me, I don’t want the cat.” I am not going to expend material resources in a permanent relationship with someone who got to play (when I didn’t) who decides that I am now good enough for some second-string action in return for commitment and those resources. (As, on the flip side, many Israeli men apparently do to you, with ethnic difference being their “barrier.” But as one, I get to say “Israeli men are idiots.”) Also, I suggest you look at Tyler Durden’s “Secret Society” post–people with lots of natural options have always been the same, even or especially in France. Like some men who come to Pick-Up, I needed game to get 5s, 6s, and 7s, who always had more and better options than their male peers. A lot of the hatred and resentment stems from that, and from the fact that Game-learning males (as a result) do not experience their lived sexuality as “natural” but rather something they had to learn to “do” “with” women, if not “to” them.

    Like


  275. Eurosabra — But haven’t a lot of guys always had to learn how to treat women? Why should there be any shame in that? It’s part of the craft of being a man. And as with most crafts, there are a few dudez who seem born with the ability while the rest of us have to apply ourselves and learn our lessons. But so what? I dunno, it seems to me like wasting energy getting angry about the fact that a tiny percentage of people get to have the fun of being born rich while the rest of us have to earn a living. It’s a little annoying, but why let it get in the way?

    Like


  276. It’s not a question of shame (though some schools of feminism try to shame one for it) as resentment that one needs to learn a code, a language, a whole means of being-in-the-world with its associate arcana in order to experience the fulfillment of an innate, natural desire. It’s the feeling that the “other side” is so wigged-out in their processing of reality (the extreme is the guys on Pandagon who argue that “you know, women don’t experience lust” because “women can get sex for the asking, and yet they don’t”) that their perspective has no legitimacy and value and represents nothing more than a grotesque imposition.

    I have PTSD and social phobia from hell, so I have to do A LOT more mental work than most just to stand there and spit game. So it’s a combination of entitlement, laziness, and resentment. Even casting that aside, there’s a feeling that Josephine Average has leverage way above her station. Bear in mind that unlike most men, all I have to worry about is “Yes” or “No”–and I get “No” from 49 out of 50 women even within my ethnicity, socio-economic class and sociolect.

    Like


  277. Clio on her blog once noted that the Italian-bred Camille Paglia’s mega-blindspot is her lack of appreciation for the northern Euro sensibilities.

    in the name of diversity, i agree. *shit eating grin*

    For me: give me the chill wind whistling through the fields, the bare birch trees, and a distant sound of migrating birds under a late autumn sky.

    well said, PA. i too have a fondness for the heavy anvil sky of a late autumn afternoon, and the killing frosts of winter warm my mind. as someone who has both the southern and northern euro in him, i feel the pull of both, and i can see more clearly when one or the other is belittled.

    Like


  278. Eurosabra says, “The logic is “If the kitten didn’t want me, I don’t want the cat.” I am not going to expend material resources in a permanent relationship with someone who got to play (when I didn’t) who decides that I am now good enough for some second-string action in return for commitment and those resources.”

    Well, this is the point when a woman with her head up her arse, and a realist part ways…at the phase of life when play time is over, which is in my opinion, after high school. Maybe it’s after the first degree for some, or after the half year in India after the army for others.

    Exploration is something that’s good for almost everyone. That stage of life well, I can’t really find any fault in anyone doing what they do in a non exploitive context, especially those who are trying out stuff like communal love. I don’t think much cures the risk of infidelity like experimenting with polyamory.

    If you didn’t get to play this well, it definitely wasn’t because of being beta. It was because of being a moralist who chose to surround himself with insipid, whining sexual morons who would rather wank to porn than to go to the after-Rocky parties (read orgies) with the artsy intellectuals.

    I used to get on my friends’ cases about this until they woke up. I think the defining moment was my asking, “So *paying* to look at a drug addicted broad with full body makeup to cover her black eye sockets down to her varicose ankles, dance around a pole is not perverse…and watching a movie with a fresh young 19 year old who doesn’t need any makeup to look hot, then going to drink and maybe smoke some grass and have sex with three of the same, is perverse? Even when at least one of those three might actually be worth having breakfast with the next morning?”

    What you believe is worth investing in, is your business, but in life there are no guarantees. People die all the time, and women who have been near angels all their lives fall from grace every day.

    I, personally, would rather bank on someone who knows what they want and what they don’t, regardless of their raw stats.

    “(As, on the flip side, many Israeli men apparently do to you, with ethnic difference being their “barrier.” But as one, I get to say “Israeli men are idiots.”)”

    Some are idiots, and some are not. Since my filters got better, I’m meeting more guys who are incompatible for other reasons, and it’s easier to keep them at bay because being a racist is something people here actively try to hide, but preferring more mainstreamed women isn’t.

    …but you’re right that I am not into leftovers. If they want to marry Barbie, and shag Oprah on the side, I ain’t the one.

    I’m not resentful though. In one case, I actually referred a guy to someone who would meet his needs.

    ” Also, I suggest you look at Tyler Durden’s “Secret Society” post–people with lots of natural options have always been the same, even or especially in France. Like some men who come to Pick-Up, I needed game to get 5s, 6s, and 7s, who always had more and better options than their male peers. A lot of the hatred and resentment stems from that, and from the fact that Game-learning males (as a result) do not experience their lived sexuality as “natural” but rather something they had to learn to “do” “with” women, if not “to” them.”

    I understand the resentment because I’ve been there…or rather, I am in a hostile dating situation. What I’m saying is that being angry is good for a time, but when you’re enraged, you’re not thinking clearly or looking at the situation in a way that is actually going to help you.

    The initial reaction is of course to do some childish, magical thinking and extremist swearing off of love, and deciding that none of it is worth it.

    This doesn’t really solve the problem though.

    What did it for me was first acceptance of the situation as-is, and then making my peace with that.

    Now, I still don’t have a consistent sexual/romantic partner, but I do have many good things in my life that I focus on. One that sure takes the edge off is a not so consistent but at least non exploitive prodigy/lover. I’m like his big auntie with perks.

    Some might call that dysfunctional (hello) but hey, seeing the looks after getting some tongue from a cute Russian 18 year old, despite my lack of herd dependency, makes me feel somewhat vindicated.

    …much like the looks when my second ex, his sub/girlfriend, and I are all out together, and we’re both leaning on him and giggling to one another.

    You can’t run with the wolves and eat grass with the sheep. At some point a guy has to decide whether he’s going to keep banging his head on an impenetrable wall, or start thinking and acting outside the box to get his needs met.

    Like


  279. Actually, I have always been an extrovert. What prevented me from getting play was neglecting to “take” women whose major game move was going limp on the couch of the dorm room or the back seat of the taxi, misreading other signals on the rare occasions on which a woman asked me out, and then compounding these early difficulties at high school by being too eager to push for connection at University. So while most of my problems ARE mine, I have ACTUALLY been hard-done-by, and since learning Game I haven’t had stellar success–more like one partner a year, and since I don’t like giving them up, I tend to be poly, settling into a stable dyad. And this with constant effort at approaching and networking.

    Part of the problem is that I’m psychologically dinged enough that I have to feel my way INTO the whole “sex drive” thing, then run Game out of whole cloth. I spend a tremendous amount of time and resources in order to wind up with women who, intellectually, socially, and sexually, match me. And few-to-none-of-them are “hot.”

    Oh, and a man in your position would be dropping some serious Shkalim for an “18-year-old Russian”, gay or straight, unless the racial fetishist card is played. So I think with all that you are still in a seriously privileged position compared to a comparable man. Dunno, because so few people are in your insider/outsider position. Your experience seems sui generis.

    Like


  280. Nicole,
    I wouldn’t call you dysfunctional. Statistically rare, perhaps, but you seem decisive and content. Your life is definitely not what I’d choose but you are living by your rules and making your own happiness.

    Like


  281. Eurosabra, non Jewish, western Black men around my age group here are usually basketball players who decided to stick around, or working in high tech. So they usually have a great advantage aside of the racial fetish, but strangely don’t seem to have to spend much money to get very media pretty girls hanging on them.

    The thing is, ethnic/religious designation is passed through the mother here. So Jewish women are pretty much allowed to date out, except in really conservative families, so long as the guy has money. There’s even a considerable amount of teens and early twenties dallying with Arabs because of this.

    It’s also easier for an Arab man to move to a predominantly Jewish town, especially one like Haifa, and basically assimilate, than it is for a non Arab woman to live in an Arab town.

    So a man who isn’t the “right” respective ethnicity, will have an easier time than a woman, since his ethnicity is legally irrelevant.

    So I do not have crowds of 18 year old guys wanting to do more with me than shag, and this is only because I look young for my age. Rather, I should say that I just look less tore-up than many women 15+ years younger than me.

    Usually, when they meet me, they hope that I’m Jewish. It’s when I tell them I’m not that the games begin.

    These games don’t get played with my male counterparts, and they are given alot of free sex from young women who want to be seen with them. Western Black men here are chick magnets. Ethiopians are another story, though that seems to be changing in the second and third generations.

    Like


  282. You are pretty high-up in the socio-economic spectrum which operates in Israel, as are the techies or Basketball players of whom you speak. So the “dimes for the dimes” may be indirect, or prestige-based, but they’re there. I may just be prejudiced and stereotyping 18-year-old Russians as gold-diggers, but they ain’t getting with no broke droozhi. (“dudes.”)

    Women trying to assimilate in Arab towns are generally the married partners of an Arab man.

    For the rest, I have actually seen pretty diverse behavior among the Russians, so I shouldn’t be stereotyping. But it seems I’m seeing guest-workers dating guest-worker Russians a lot more than most Israelis do.

    Like


  283. Michael:

    You mean in my reference to the gloomy part of France where I spent some time? But Catholicism there was a gray, chilly and oppressive thing — anything but the sexy/warm/juicy thing it often seems to be once you get closer to the Mediterranean.

    Point conceded; the more Northwest you go, the more ascetic it becomes. I come from a Central/South European background, the people from that region seem far more sensual that the Northern type of Catholics, though not as sensual as the Latins.

    We don’t just eat in order to survive, for instance — for people lucky enough to live in the richer countries, we eat for fun, for pleasure, for sociability, for aesthetic excitement … Likewise, we don’t fuck only in order to make babies. We fuck for fun, to relieve boredom, to bond, for companionship, to discharge excess — but also for aesthetic and spiritual reasons.

    True, sensuality is important, but it seems to have been lost in the current sexual climate, especially in the Anglo influenced West. Pornification of our society has driven out the restraint that usually was a pre-requisite for a more sensualised sexual experience. To use a crude analogy, instead of using a knife and fork and contributing polite conversation while having a meal, we grab the food with both hands and shove it in our mouths. It satisfies the hunger, but it doesn’t satisfy the soul. And frankly, it’s vulgar. I’m all for the embracing of sensuality, within limits.

    As for sexual surveys, most are crap. But the ones with a fair amount of scientific validity, seem to confirm that the happiest and most frequently sexually active people are married couples. And perhaps it so because all of those “extras’ that make sex so enjoyable and sensual are there; the commitment, ease with the partner and knowledge of them and love. Sure being married to a sexually frigid woman or coarse man would be hell, and I can understand people who go looking in other pastures, but variety gives variety, not necessarily happiness. I’m all for shaming women who let themselves go once married, as I’m for shaming course and uncultivated men. I think there is an imperative for both parties to make sensualism a part of their lives, and not to be repulsive to the other. Interestingly, the French that I know are very harsh when it comes to fatties. They expect you to look good.

    As for sleeping around, I don’t really care how many partners a woman has, but she’s gonna have to accept the fact that men are in general going to find her less desirable. I’m not putting this forward as judgment, it’s just the way it is. It seems to be a way we men are hard wired, especially when it comes to long term commitment material. Bitching about human nature and trying to change it has never worked, adapting to it, is the smart survival strategy.

    Like


  284. Nicole saidEthiopians are another story, though that seems to be changing in the second and third generations

    Nicole please explain

    Like


  285. Nicole,
    I dpn’t really know your story, but it seems that you’re an non-Jewish American and you live in Israel. How did you come to go there?

    Like


  286. I mentor some women like this, and seriously, though they have a high number of partners, every last one of them is a guy with some kind of status or plausible potential. They’re usually the kinds of guys who have already succeeded in something great, or will be the ones about whom future publications will say, “…from humble beginnings…”

    women make up a lot of nonsense about mediocre men in order to give themselves permission to sleep with them and finally have some sex. Learning to cooperate in this process is basically the key to game for the mediocre (as most people are, when it comes right down to it).

    Also, Nicole, you don’t exactly strike me as an “alpha female”…just a middle-aged kinky bisexual who is perhaps not attractive enough to get a marriage partner…such women are the queens of a geeky BDSM scene.

    Like


  287. Eurosabra, well, Russian women aren’t usually feminists, and the ones who are, aren’t the same sort that Americans are. Neither are Russian men.

    So within Russian culture is a spectrum of fairly common behaviors most Americans would find weird or dysfunctional, or borderline perverse, but it works for Russians. They’re people who generally deal with real life very well, and appreciate things many others take for granted.

    …like a man who is stable, responsible, and has a job, but knows how to have fun sometimes. I don’t know if women who appreciate a stand up guy are necessarily gold diggers. Some are, but they’re going for a different set of guys than upper middle class…well, unless they’re old whores looking to retire. Black guys are usually pretty good at avoiding these though. Most Israeli guys however, are not, and two of my friends so far have fallen into the trap. One, the baby trap, and the other, the pseudo-bisexual trap.

    On the male end, Russian guys who were raised by “very Russian” parents are men at the age they reach physical adulthood, and some before. So it’s not so unusual for a younger man to be with an older woman and still be “the man” in the relationship.

    Then you have this strong contingent of Russian guys who never grow up, and are overly coddled, and totally disrespect their parents. These are the ones who get girlfriends to be replacement martyr-moms.

    The man-on-time type though, tends to resent much intervention in his life. The idea of a woman paying for anything for him is embarassing…which may be why many Russian women appear to be materialistically demanding when what they’re really doing is letting the guy have the opportunity to be “the man”, and if a (silly feminist western) guy doesn’t do it automatically, she’ll think him less a man and start berating him for it.

    But for their independence in the early stages of dating, and then providership (true or symbolic) at the point of cohabitation, the guy expects what basically comes down to obedience. My young man respects my age and experience, but if there’s a problem, he has to have the solution, or else I get the authority voice. This is something I learned from my dad, so I have a kind of automatic reaction to it, which is to shut the f*ck up.

    I’m not sure if the way the matches happen is really socioeconomic or more social. The more ghetto type Black men, and overly suburbanized White men, regardless of how much they make, don’t seem to stay here long because they don’t relate to people. For a non Arab non Jew to get along here, one has to be able to get along with Russians because despite the recent hype, they’re the most tolerant of ethnic differences.

    So I think maybe it’s more than “dimes for dimes”. It’s more that like goes to like, but with the added wow factor of dark skin, smooth talking, and fun. As they get to know each other, then things like being cultured despite “humble beginnings” comes into play.

    Stereotypes get a bad rap because they’re basically just misinterpreted generalizations. That doesn’t make them totally untrue, just perhaps in need of some context.

    Generally, the kind of Russian women who aren’t into being replacement martyr-moms do indeed expect a man to pay for things…but a Russian man who pays for things expects to be the boss. So with Russian women, pay for stuff and be the boss.

    Like


  288. Macho Russian men, mmmm

    Like


  289. Slumlord says, “As for sleeping around, I don’t really care how many partners a woman has, but she’s gonna have to accept the fact that men are in general going to find her less desirable. I’m not putting this forward as judgment, it’s just the way it is. It seems to be a way we men are hard wired, especially when it comes to long term commitment material. Bitching about human nature and trying to change it has never worked, adapting to it, is the smart survival strategy.”

    An air of “damaged goods” is as devastating for a woman as an air of desperation is for a man. This is because both are devaluing themselves, and others simply respond to their self perception by agreeing.

    The damaged woman and the desperate man both consistently end up in situations with exploitive people (which by the way is one reason I stopped basically dating like an American while I’m in Israel…didn’t want to become damaged due to stupidity and failure to adapt). They don’t want to, but they do because of the mentality that leads a woman to feel damaged by her first not being her last, or a man’s feeling desperate due to an inability or lack of will to self validate instead of seeking that from women (or men if he’s Gay).

    Predators go for the weak and the sick.

    So if you’re handed some points of data (including but not limited to something like more than 2 or 3 intercourse partners per year) that add up to a woman being “damaged goods” of course you’ll say to yourself that you do not want that…but in the field, you don’t know how many partners a woman as had when you meet her. What you know is how she’s behaving, and if it’s screwed up then it doesn’t matter if the only man she’s slept with is her ex husband.

    Same with a desperate man. You don’t know what got him to that point, but you know he’s acting like someone you don’t want to be with then and there.

    Men in general find damaged women less desirable. In cultures wherein women are supposed to function only as breeders, chastity matters alot. A woman who is not chaste will be considered damaged because her honor is restricted to just that. She doesn’t really need to be honorable or mature in any other way.

    …and this is why women get away with so much childishness and stupidity now…because their level of “honor” is only as deep as the hole between their legs.

    So the general perception is definitely not something an advanced woman who is truly honorable, truly loyal, or truly loving, should be worried about unless her romantic goal is to find a mediocre man.

    …and hey, there’s nothing particularly wrong with mediocrity…just that many women who have chosen the path of chastity, and gotten with mediocre men, have learned all too well, just like many nice guys, that it is not a guarantee that one will get a good or faithful partner. Many chaste women end up with guys with madonna/whore complexes, and find themselves with men who don’t want to further “damage” them.

    Like


  290. Clio, here, Ethiopians are generally perceived to be poor, primitive, and infested with HIV.

    So most women sexually avoid Ethiopian men here, even if they themselves are Ethiopian. Ethiopian women have similar issues, but if a woman is cute enough, a guy will often take the chance, if she’s legally Jewish.

    There is another ethnic group of Black people here that doesn’t get much attention though, and they are the descendents of Christian and Muslim laborers who were left behind by the Turkish. They blend somewhat with the Arab population…somewhat.

    Yet another up and coming group are descendents of Kingdom of Yahweh members, who’ve broken away from them. They were born and raised in Israel, so they’re Israeli, but they’re also American. They often convert officially to Judaism to avoid having the issues that I do. For them it’s not selling out though. They grew up believing that they are actually Jews.

    Like


  291. Nicole, Whitney Houston’s cousin is a member of the Kingdom of Yahweh. I recall seeing pics of bobby and Whitney in Israel from about 5 years ago. Can you tell me more about the blks who were left behind by the Turkish. I want to read about them. What are they called?

    @T- this chic is for you <a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOvqF4ZPDNM&eurl=http://failblog.org/page/4/

    Like


  292. Chic,
    Why are you posting that klutz?

    Like


  293. on November 20, 2008 at 11:39 pm Comment_Two_Faces_Of_Feminism

    SUMMING IT UP:
    Of COURSE Little Miss Feminazi is a “conservative”. If she wasn’t, then how could she demand that men behave in a traditional way? How could she maintain the female PRIVILEGES of a traditional culture?

    Little Liberal Miss Feminazi would look silly demanding that men behave traditionally after her deranged ranting on femine empowerment.

    So we need a Conservative Miss Feminazi to make sure women keep all their PRIVILEGES(with help from Mr. Blowhard) while Liberal Miss Feminazi makes sure women lose all their RESPONSIBILITIES(with help from Mr. Blowhard).

    This simple fact makes Conservative Miss Feminazi necessary and obvious for Feminism. Along with Feminism other face…. Liberal Miss Feminazi.

    Mr. Blowhard wrote:
    ****
    Comment_Factually — Don’t you think the time has come for you to change your underwear?
    ****
    Why Mr. Blowhard, aren’t you the crude little animal? But your kind always is, once one scratches the surface. If you think being a stink animal will phase me… I mean really. It’s funny.

    Like


  294. Tupac Chopra:

    I think a distinction Vlad would make (correct me if I’m wrong Vlad) […]

    Yes, that’s pretty much what I have in mind. Obviously, I don’t have conclusive proof, but it seems to me that nowadays, “experience” for attractive women usually means the latter, potentially self-destructive sort. I’ve certainly seen some nasty examples of that.

    I’d say that among the main causes of this are not only the urban environment, but also bad upbringing. Instead of realistic warnings about the dangers of messing with charming cads and against unrealistic expectations, many girls today are growing up with the Sex & the City message that being a 35-year-old uber-slut is the right path towards finding a super-alpha who will be begging you for commitment.

    Also, unrealistic expectations and an overblown sense of entitlement are dangerous even when it comes to “regular” heartbreaks. They can prevent a girl from drawing the appropriate lessons and readjusting her goals and priorities realistically (which, I assume, is more or less what Michael meant by “clearing nonsense out of her system” and “moving on with a savvier head”).

    Michael Blowhard:

    Vlad — You’re making perfectly good points, I just think you’re reaching hard-and-fast general conclusions based on your personal tastes. If you like breaking in virgins, and see some advantages to that way of going about life ‘n’ love, more power to you. There are plenty of guys who prefer the pleasures and charms of a more experienced woman. (Incidentally, women are always a lot of trouble, but I’d still maintain that the dramas of a virgin are something special, whether good or bad. There’s only one first time, after all.)

    Maybe you misunderstood me a bit — I definitely have no fetish for serial defloration, and I agree that somewhat experienced girls are more fun for flings and non-serious relationships. I just think that when you’re choosing a girl for permanent commitment and starting a family, then, probabilistically speaking, the expected value of what you’re going to get is significantly higher with a more innocent girl, if you only have the necessary skill to guide her into opening up and becoming a good, passionate, unrestrained lover. This is true even though, strictly speaking, any particular case might conceivably go either way. You can call it rational statistical discrimination on my part.

    Like


  295. Of COURSE Little Miss Feminazi is a “conservative”…

    This simple fact makes Conservative Miss Feminazi necessary and obvious for Feminism. Along with Feminism other face…. Liberal Miss Feminazi.

    Interesting…

    Like


  296. Vlad says, “I just think that when you’re choosing a girl for permanent commitment and starting a family, then, probabilistically speaking, the expected value of what you’re going to get is significantly higher with a more innocent girl, if you only have the necessary skill to guide her into opening up and becoming a good, passionate, unrestrained lover.”

    Vlad, first I have to ask how you define innocence. I know some very very low quality virgins who are just a psychobitch waiting to happen. I know even more women who, by their fourties, had only had sex with 1 or 2 men in their lives, who were well established harpies or whores holding out for a retirement man.

    I, personally, would think that there was something wrong with a non or less than fully religious, unmarried woman over 30 who had not had at least 5 partners in her life. Something would tell me that there was a reason for that other than “innocence”.

    I have no argument with those who choose to gauge women’s worth as long term partners by the number of men they’ve had sex with. It’s their preference and they will pay the price for their wisdom or foolishness. All I’m saying is that from my perspective, it looks like very shaky ground to stand on.

    There is one thing I can say with full confidence, ain’t gonna happen.

    You don’t get an unrestrained lover by selecting a restrained lover. You can’t train a person who doesn’t have something in them, to have that something.

    In the days when almost all women, if they had a choice, were chaste before marriage/serious cohabitation, it was luck of the draw, and every once in awhile a guy got lucky, because there were plenty of passionate women with their legs closed the same as the less than passionate.

    Now, passionate women are generally sexually active outside of strict religious environments. So selecting for chastity or near chastity means basically that you don’t mind a marriage of convenience. If her sex drive is low, or she thinks your penis is ugly or a tool of violation, it’s all good because you’ll get the “unrestrained passion” you really want from unrestrained women outside of your marriage.

    This kind of thing makes me laugh because I get offers from guys in this very situation ALOT. If I was a whore, I’d be a very wealthy one.

    There’s a physical Barbie fantasy, and an emotional one too…the perfectly chaste 10 who is saving herself for someone who really really loves her, and will unleash the wild, wanton minx just waiting behind her quivering hymen to be freed by this special guy.

    Keep dreaming. It’s good to have dreams.

    Like


  297. “There’s a physical Barbie fantasy, and an emotional one too…the perfectly chaste 10 who is saving herself for someone who really really loves her, and will unleash the wild, wanton minx just waiting behind her quivering hymen to be freed by this special guy.

    Keep dreaming. It’s good to have dreams.”

    Vlad, I once read a dating book which specifically advises women to never admit to more than 5 partners and to keep mum in bed without suggesting anything kinky or offbeat. Then, when he suggests such things, pretend like you’ve never done them and that he’s bringing out the animal in you. The guys here are right, men do need game to compete in the modern dating world, but for all that you still have no reliable way of telling how experienced your girlfriend is.

    Like


  298. Women also have a version of this fantasy: a charming, handsome rogue who’s had scores of women over the years but meets you, has an epiphany and decides that he only wants to be with you and despite his many options never cheats on you throughout the years. That’s as unrealistic as Nicole’s emotional 10. Game for women is being realistic about this and not falling into the trap of chasing these guys with pipe dreams of monogamy.

    Like


  299. I, personally, would think that there was something wrong with a non or less than fully religious, unmarried woman over 30 who had not had at least 5 partners in her life. Something would tell me that there was a reason for that other than “innocence”.

    I agree with this, provided that the woman had spent a lot of time single (she might have a smaller number of partners if she had been in a good LTR that ended for some reason). I want a partner who is compatible with me emotionally and physically, and I doubt a woman who was so closed off or so indifferent to sex that she had very little of it during her 20s would be compatible with me.

    I do, however, watch out for a history of cheating on past boyfriends — that’s trouble.

    Women also have a version of this fantasy: a charming, handsome rogue who’s had scores of women over the years but meets you, has an epiphany and decides that he only wants to be with you and despite his many options never cheats on you throughout the years. That’s as unrealistic as Nicole’s emotional 10.

    Actually, I don’t think that’s unrealistic. Men get tired of catting around eventually and do want to settle down. I’m average looking and probably not a rogue, whatever that is. However, I have had scores of women over the years. And I’d be quite happy to settle down now if I met the right person.

    Like


  300. Nicole- No Jewish girl with any self-respect is fucking blacks or especially Arabs. If this is common over there, the Israeli guy are not doing their job (especially brothers and fathers). Unbelievable, women even fuck men who want to eradicate their race now.

    Like


  301. Nicole- No Jewish girl with any self-respect is fucking blacks or especially Arabs.

    I’ve banged several Israeli chicks in my day, both tourists and transplants. And these were not low-status or low class women either. Yet they all had black fetishes to differing degrees (slight curiosity to extreme fixation). One I met even went so far to tell me when she walks into any venue, she will always get fascinated by and attracted to any black man in the room, even if he’s ugly. Her I didn’t hook up with because that just creeped me out. (Which is something else I noticed about Israeli women I met, this weird bluntness. They seemed to blurt out whatever came into their heads regardless of if it came off rude. Refreshing in some instances, but annoying in the big picture)

    But these were all attractive, classy women with good jobs. I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “self-respect.” Do you mean their level of class? Promiscuity?

    Like


  302. Yet they all had black fetishes to differing degrees

    I’ve noticed that women for the most part stick with one race of male partners. Usually their own, obviously, but not always.

    I’ve known two black women, and more than one Asian/Indian, who went exclusively with white guys. And a few white girls who go with black guys only. Similar one-race patterns with E. Asian women too.

    Exceptions are sexually omnivorous women, who will shag anything, but they’re outliers.

    I wonder it this is a pheremonal thing — women are born with, or develop — a chemical preference for a specific type of/race of man. This is assuming that these things or “subconscious smells” are different by race (which seems to me that they are.)

    Like


  303. Jack,

    The problem with Israel is that even the police are Jewish. Try “having a little talk” with the Arab guy who keeps honking his horn at your daughter as she walks home from middle school, and you’ll be the one jailed.

    I’m an extraordinarily physically weak man whose profession involves the saving of lives, and yet I’ve been in situations there where I’ve had to draw on people. Israeli laws on self-defense are about as restrictive as a blue state. You really will be judged by 3 (military courts) if you decide not to be carried by 8.

    And the women? Are a mess. Some sport-fucking thrill seekers who will call their own taxi rather than sleep over. But the flip side of 50 times “Get the fuck away” is a chick who will tell you “I want you inside me” right there in the club. Or True Believers from any religious tradition you like. Anything you want, anything at all, for sale if not for free. Anything. “Will trade BDSM for room” ads are not uncommon.
    And the sex trade is utterly horrifying.

    The West has no answer to the sexual freedom of the modern age except perhaps to sleep only with partners who share your values.

    Like


  304. T., those women were attractive and had good jobs – but that doesn’t make them classy. It only makes them more pathetic.

    Eurosabra – it sounds like Israel is doing a very poor job of teaching its women the proper way to act, as poor as the USA. Considering Israel is fighting for its survival literally every day, this surprises me. Cops should be encouraging Israeli guys who protect their women from Arabs or blacks – or the cops should be putting the smack down themselves.

    It seems like every western nation is hellbent on self-destruction.

    Like


  305. T., those women were attractive and had good jobs – but that doesn’t make them classy. It only makes them more pathetic.

    But why exactly? Just because they’d fuck a black guy?

    I just want to make sure I follow your logic. What if an Israeli girl with a good background and a well-paying job and attractive fucked a Barack Obama and another one working blue collar and fucked a Kid Rock wannabe, would the former automatically have less class than the latter because the person she fucked is black?

    Like


  306. Israel is a country where cultures in which women are owned conflict with cultures where women are individuals on a daily basis. There is always a little Western-culture sleeping around to flip the bird at Mom and Dad while the traditional cultures’ women are guarded at home. One learns not to take anything personally.

    Like


  307. T – no, but in general, black men have lower IQ’s and much higher rates of AIDS than white men. Barack Obama is of course nothing like the average black man. Now of course you are not the typical black man either, but any white woman with a black “fetish” is automatically a low-class white woman, because she is attracted to those most likely to be stupid, diseased and violent. Not exactly befitting of educated, “classy” women. Again, these are generalities, but I doubt these Israeli sluts are all fucking only blacks with Harvard Law degrees. Just a hunch.

    Of course, it is even more surprising for Jewish girls to be screwing Arab guys. I am guessing that the Arab girls are kept under control much better than the Jewish ones are.

    Western nations have the most attractive women in the world, and they have allowed these women to become shallow, masculine whores in the last 50 years.

    Like


  308. And T – in addition – you “banged” these women. It doesn’t seem like you had relationships with them. A respectable, classy girl does not fuck men she is not seriously dating. That is the definition of a classy girl. Girls who fuck guys without commitment are sluts. That is the point of this blog – young, urban women nowadays are all sluts, they are not worthy of marriage or long-term relationships, and men need tips to succeed in the meat market, because the marriage market is dying.

    Like


  309. but any white woman with a black “fetish” is automatically a low-class white woman, because she is attracted to those most likely to be stupid, diseased and violent.

    Leap of Intellectual Faith: If you think these women are low class, does it really matter if they marry outside of the race, especially if you’re not willing to date low class women? If you’re going to play white nationalist, you might as well pawn off the lower class whites onto the other races, and keep the high class ones for yourself. Quality is better than quantity, right?

    Like


  310. Jack –

    One of the girls, the one I never hooked up with, would date ANY type of black guy, regardless of class. She turned me off because she was very indiscriminate. She’d fit into your low-class profile.

    The other ones were from good schools but only dated highly educated, middle-class and up black guys. They just found black men more physically attractive. Some people are just like that. In big cities like New York a woman can actually date exclusively black without venturing into the thug, AIDS or low IQ zone at all. There are social circles of the black elite, very snobby and highly pedigreed, and are more averse to mingling with lower-class blacks than even most white people. Circles which, frankly, even though I’m smart and educated I’m considered beneath and am out of the loop with. For some of the Ivy-educated white girls I hooked up that were dating exclusively black, I was actually considered slumming compared to the black guys they normally dated.

    Like


  311. A respectable, classy girl does not fuck men she is not seriously dating

    No, they just don’t ever tell you they ever did. When a woman wants to marry a guy and make a beta provider out of him, they will sell you whatever image he wants to see and tell you whatever sexual history they want him to hear. There are plenty of women out there who slut it up on vacations or in college, meet a guy like you who has something of a Madonna/Whore fetish and will put on a whole “pure as a driven snow” act. With the money, connections and pedigrees those girls I hooked up with had, do you think when they are tired of fun-fucking and meet a beta guy willing to marry them, that beta guy will doubt whatever high-class, virginal image she sells them?

    Unless she’s particularly frigid, this mythical high class woman who’s never done her share of dirt is a reassuring fiction insecure men buy into to help their self-esteem.

    Like


  312. Arab women in Israel are kept under rigid control, because every family has a loser cousin who can be detailed to kill them, and he can sit for 5 to 7 or 7 to 10 with no great loss to the family as a whole. One ironic side-effect of greater integration with the larger society and greater prosperity is that a family/clan/tribe may no longer be able to kill “straying” women–as doctors/lawyers/politicians they have too much to lose–and they cease to be “men of respect.”

    Levels of violence against women in Israeli society are high in all social strata, among the worst in the world.

    Like


  313. DA,

    Not really. If you’d read _The Turner Diaries_ you’d know that the 14/88 crowd is obligated to kill “race-mixing fornicators.”

    Like


  314. hello:

    Vlad, I once read a dating book which specifically advises women to never admit to more than 5 partners and to keep mum in bed without suggesting anything kinky or offbeat. Then, when he suggests such things, pretend like you’ve never done them and that he’s bringing out the animal in you. The guys here are right, men do need game to compete in the modern dating world, but for all that you still have no reliable way of telling how experienced your girlfriend is.

    In the conditions of social atomization, where you meet a girl and have no other clues about her past except what she’s told you, I agree that it’s possible for her to successfully lie and pretend (although even then, it won’t be easy for her unless you’re naive — admittedly, most men are — or you drop your guard and get carried away too early). But if you’ve both known the same people for a long time, and you have an insight into her family and circle of close friends so you can draw an accurate picture of what her lifestyle’s been like, it’s next to impossible. Fama volat.

    And anyway, it’s not like I have an irrational fixation on some abstract “innocence” disconnected from any worldly matters. I’ve explained at length why I believe that my guidelines are motivated by very realistic concerns. If you’re really sure that a girl honestly adores you, rather than viewing you as an inferior substitute for more charming men who dumped her in the past, then I agree, her past doesn’t really matter unless it bothers you in a subjective way. However, if you really like the girl, it’s easy to fool yourself into believing so, especially if she’s putting on a good act — and you might awake to the ugly truth only much later, when you’re already deeply committed to her, and she’s tired of the act or sees no further need for it. And if you’re such a good reader of women’s minds that you’re sure you’re not being lied and gamed (hah!), then you’re probably a pretty high-ranking alpha who runs little risk of any problems in the first place.

    Like


  315. MQ says, “I’m average looking and probably not a rogue, whatever that is. However, I have had scores of women over the years. And I’d be quite happy to settle down now if I met the right person.”

    …but the way a guy who’s “had” scores of women over the years gauges “right” is far, far different from a guy who’s “slept with” or “been with” scores of women over the years.

    Though I’m not trying to nitpick about language, the way a guy describes his experiences does say something about his overall attitude towards sex. Men absolutely must stop viewing themselves as exploiters and predators in consensual sexual relations.

    That you are usually initiators, and physically “topping”, and viewed as a stabilizer, doesn’t make you an aggressor. A woman is not on a pedestal that by shagging her, you take her down from. She’s right “down” there with you.

    Jack says, “Nicole- No Jewish girl with any self-respect is fucking blacks or especially Arabs. If this is common over there, the Israeli guy are not doing their job (especially brothers and fathers). Unbelievable, women even fuck men who want to eradicate their race now.”

    Good morning, Jack. I don’t think color matters, but culture most certainly does. Jews lost the majority in Israel years ago, though the secular and Christian non Arab non Jews were a strong buffer for a time.

    …but not enough of either are being born to sustain the demographic balance because well, a bunch of people with a high sense of entitlement but low motivation can pass in a large country, but it can implode a smaller one. Arabs are outbreeding all but lifestyle orthodox Jews. In 50 years or less, the impact of this is due to hit, and hit hard.

    I wish I could say I had some sympathy, but I’ve had a taste of what passes for “self respect” here. They feel free to shag whoever they like, but just tend to marry for social convenience, and at all costs. Who cares if it requires malignant narcissism to accomplish it?

    …and by the way, Jack, Eurosabra, there is no police left.

    No such thing as a beat cop anymore, and most of the actual policing is done by civil guard. Each local station may have one or two actual police officers managing the civil guards, even in areas that are big and relatively high in crime.

    I’ve been in some of these shacks with one prima dona and 10 guys who barely know CPR.

    Sad.

    I’ll second Eurosabra. Something has drastically changed about Israeli women over the past 20 years. I got here 12 years ago, while there was still some of the stunning wonder left. Israeli women were some of the most beautiful in the world, and in Haifa in particular, you’d find a grand variety of shapes, sizes and colors, but all doing their level best to look very classy, yet making it look easy.

    I kind of stood out a bit, being fat, but I wasn’t the only one, and had no trouble dressing for my figure when I was 20 kg. heavier, because the Russian seamstresses took care of me. When you wanted to update your wardrobe, you went to a tailor or boutique that had a style you liked, and got your clothes sewn to fit. IMO, not being forced to wear mumus made me more conscious of how I carried myself.

    …but all that changed. The kids got wilder, and the women got uglier, and yet snobbier. If I wasn’t afraid of getting in trouble, I would take a camera down the street here in what’s supposed to be an upscale neighborhood, so you could see the horror that assaults my eyes each day.

    Have you ever seen a size 26 woman in a pair of hip level capri length tight *satin* stretch pants, and an even tighter shirt that doesn’t quite touch the “waistline” of her pants?

    I mean, not as a joke on the internet.

    This is normal here.

    Again, most of this comes from a high sense of entitlement, but low motivation. Even my mom, also a fairly big but active woman, noted that here the men are prettier than the women, but not by much.

    Like


  316. for all that you still have no reliable way of telling how experienced your girlfriend is

    It all comes out eventually. You can fool some people some time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

    Like


  317. It all comes out eventually. You can fool some people some time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

    Maybe, but oftentimes its too late. As in, “she’s entitled to 50% of everything you own” too late.

    Like


  318. Maybe, but oftentimes its too late. As in, “she’s entitled to 50% of everything you own” too late.

    Very true.

    Like


  319. Epic comment ‘Pac.

    Like


  320. “Vlad, I once read a dating book which specifically advises women to never admit to more than 5 partners and to keep mum in bed without suggesting anything kinky or offbeat. Then, when he suggests such things, pretend like you’ve never done them and that he’s bringing out the animal in you. The guys here are right, men do need game to compete in the modern dating world, but for all that you still have no reliable way of telling how experienced your girlfriend is.”

    Just to clarify, I woudn’t do that although I haven’t been with a lot of guys anyway, just because I couldn’t keep up that kind of lie my whole life. But believe me there are women who reinvent themselves more often than Madonna.

    I’m reminded of a quote from “The Red Queen” regarding the male desire for a prim, virginal wife and a raunchy sex life with bimbos: “The goals are only contradictory because women are not prepared to neatly divide themselves into wives and whores. “

    Like


  321. *runs over to Keith, kisses him on the cheek*

    Amen!

    Like


  322. “In such a case, she does not truly respect you as a man on a fundamental level, as you have not established your dominance in her limbic brain. Her frontal-cortex may be giving her plenty of warm fuzzy reasons for “loving” you, but we all know how fickle *those* types of feelings are.”

    Most relationships start out with great sex, but the sexual infatuation part fades and the relationship stands or fails based on the warm fuzzy reasons. No sex, however hot, doesn’t cool so if your plan is to keep a woman in a constant state of horniness you shouldn’t be thinking long term.

    Like


  323. hello:

    Women also have a version of this fantasy: a charming, handsome rogue who’s had scores of women over the years but meets you, has an epiphany and decides that he only wants to be with you and despite his many options never cheats on you throughout the years.

    *rushes over to dresser drawer, pulls out two large manilla envelopes, hurries back to computer, dumps out contents onto desk*

    Clio…this huge messy pile you see before you is a collection of *every* single form of contact information I have for all the women who have breezed through my life…every lipstick smudged cocktail napkin, every phone-number inscribed matchbook, every food-stained receipt, every dog-eared business card…it’s all here…a silent testament to my former life of debauchery…yes, I said former….because, you see, I am about to set it all alight…to burn away the inglorious past…sending those demons to waft away in smoke…because since I’ve met you, none of it matters anymore…NONE of it…you mean EVERYTHING to me…I gladly give it all up just for the chance to hold you delicately in the circle of my arms…planting butterfly kisses all over your flaxen hair…as you regale me with comparisons and contrasts of Greco-Turkish papal authority during the Ottoman Empire…or whatever it is you talk about…no matter, we’ll have each other…please Clio…it’s our last chance…

    *delicately reaches into pile and removes a single slip of paper*

    Well, all except THIS one…that girl did this…THING…with her tongue

    Like


  324. Nicole:

    Vlad, first I have to ask how you define innocence.

    In a nutshell, no history of casual sex and/or participation — of both the conscious and the deluded sort — in alpha men’s harems.

    I, personally, would think that there was something wrong with a non or less than fully religious, unmarried woman over 30 who had not had at least 5 partners in her life. Something would tell me that there was a reason for that other than “innocence”.

    Well, the flipside of that coin is that in the opposite case, something would tell me that there was a reason for why things obviously went wrong with these previous 5+ guys. In any case, it is true that after mid-20s, the number of quality girls who are still not taken (either married or in very serious relationships) is very small.

    Now, passionate women are generally sexually active outside of strict religious environments. So selecting for chastity or near chastity means basically that you don’t mind a marriage of convenience.

    Notice the keyword “generally” — even you admit that there are exceptions to the rule that a girl is either a slut or pathologically asexual. You’re not saying it in as many words only because you’re trying to counter the claim that slutiness is a very negative indicator of future long-term quality.

    And anyway, your division of women into biologically predetermined major categories of “passionate” and asexual ones is a fantasy. Except for a very small number of women who have low sex drives for real medical reasons, any woman is constantly tempted to jump into bed with handsome and charming guys around her. It’s a matter of social conditioning that not all of them do it all the time regardless of the circumstances, but only when they feel it’s respectable to do so. Slutiness is merely a consequence of a lack of such conditioning. (This is the basic reason why slutiness is a predictor of future cheating.)

    (And I don’t think “social conditioning” is anything negative by itself. People can’t be other than dirty savages without social conditioning to the contrary.)

    Like


  325. T. AKA Ricky Raw:

    Unless she’s particularly frigid, this mythical high class woman who’s never done her share of dirt is a reassuring fiction insecure men buy into to help their self-esteem.

    I agree that many, perhaps most girls trying to sell such an image are lying, but you’re still overgeneralizing. Like many other people on this blog, you’re forgetting that in modern society, there are still significant segments of the population that are living in more traditionalist ways, who won’t cross your path much in a way that you would recognize them as such.

    Consequently, there are still non-frigid girls who don’t do dirt, and are virtually impossible to get just by using game if you’re not established in certain social circles to which they restrict their attention. Of course, you do need game to attract them — but with them, it’s a necessary, not a sufficient condition.

    Like


  326. “Actually, I don’t think that’s unrealistic. Men get tired of catting around eventually and do want to settle down. I’m average looking and probably not a rogue, whatever that is. However, I have had scores of women over the years. And I’d be quite happy to settle down now if I met the right person.”

    MQ,
    You don’t sound like the type I mean. I’m referring to a Rhett Butler character, or the hot and sexy Daniel Craig. Men like that may marry, but even if they want to be faithful most end up cheating. A man with a history of successful promiscuity with beautiful women is very unlikely to give it up cold turkey no matter how beautiful his wife is. Trying to turn a studly asshound into a faithful provider is like trying to turn a 25 year old virgin into pole dancing queen. Not impossible but improbable enough to largely make it a waste of time.

    Like


  327. Vladimir,

    I’ve gotta admit, being born and raised in the big city my whole life probably has a lot to do with my overcynical worldview. There probably are large segments of more traditional living people I’m not giving enough credit to.

    Like


  328. Israel certainly has insular sub-cultures, perhaps it has insular sexual cultures as well. Certainly films like “Yossi and Jagger”, “The Bubble”, “Walk on Water”, and “Antarctica” show a gamut of both badly-behaved and very sentimental gay men, from the 7 men each sleeping with 7 other men in “Antarctica” to the couple who are certain that twoo wuv will save them in “Yossi and Jagger” and “The Bubble.” I imagine that heterosexual sub-cultures are the same, what I observed among students was that the breaking point was the “serious relationship”–which often involved sleeping over instead of a taxi as a serious measure of intent–but 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 partners over the course of 4 years was considered normal, even healthy, since everyone had done the “fuck everyone” thing in high school, or continued it in the army 18-21, so 21-25 or 21-29 was the same kind of zoo 15-18 had been. Or not. Depending. It seemed to depend how much they valorized adulthood and “settling down”, and my feeling was that stable educational and professional situations meant more likelihood of valuing the current partner as “the one” or “long-term.”

    I have never really gotten to play like that and my current situation precludes it, so even the state of a “normal” NYC woman (40 partners from age 18-30 not being uncommon) gives me vertigo.

    Like


  329. You can respect a man’s cock and hate him. Trust me.

    Like


  330. hello:

    Just to clarify, I woudn’t do that although I haven’t been with a lot of guys anyway, just because I couldn’t keep up that kind of lie my whole life. But believe me there are women who reinvent themselves more often than Madonna.

    I know — and there are many suckers who buy into their act. But as I said above, you don’t have to be one of them if you know what you’re doing.

    I’m reminded of a quote from “The Red Queen” regarding the male desire for a prim, virginal wife and a raunchy sex life with bimbos: “The goals are only contradictory because women are not prepared to neatly divide themselves into wives and whores.“

    The funny thing is that for a guy who has game and knows where to look for each sort, these days they actually do.

    Like


  331. I’ve gotta admit, being born and raised in the big city my whole life probably has a lot to do with my overcynical worldview. There probably are large segments of more traditional living people I’m not giving enough credit to.

    Also, being raised a big city Catholic can make one cynical about how well religion and a religious culture can restrain people sexually. The Toronto Catholic schools are renowned for their bad kids. One very devout Catholic girl I dated in Toronto said she would never in a million years let her kids go to a Catholic school in the city. Furthermore, even in more conservative areas, a lot of the teachers in the Catholic school system openly mock the church’s teachings on sexuality. There are pockets of traditional Catholicism that try to keep the church’s standards, but they are in the minority.

    Like


  332. Vlad:

    If you’re really sure that a girl honestly adores you, rather than viewing you as an inferior substitute for more charming men who dumped her in the past, then I agree, her past doesn’t really matter unless it bothers you in a subjective way. However, if you really like the girl, it’s easy to fool yourself into believing so, especially if she’s putting on a good act — and you might awake to the ugly truth only much later, when you’re already deeply committed to her, and she’s tired of the act or sees no further need for it.

    For many many years, the online chatter regarding male/female relationships centered on the NiceGuys/Jerks dichotomy. It was a two tiered categorization with the “Nice Guys” living celibate lives and hearing “Lets Just Be Friends”. The “Jerks” were those who lived lives of sexual abundance without needing to follow conventional wisdom or even offer commitment.

    I propose that it is high time this model be expanded to include a third tier in the middle: those who manage to get laid, who erroneously think they’ve made it to the top, but who are seen by their women as merely being “good enough” to fulfill the role of beta provider.

    I such distinctions are made on this blog in general, but I think the community would benefit greatly from a more focused analysis of the dynamics in such situations, since women can be quite sly in hiding their true feelings about you, as you note above.

    To disagree slightly with something he wrote recently, the true test of a woman’s attraction for you is NOT getting your dick in her pussy. Many women will simply *tolerate* the sex until they get that ring on their finger. In such a case, she does not truly respect you as a man on a fundamental level, as you have not established your dominance in her limbic brain. Her frontal-cortex may be giving her plenty of warm fuzzy reasons for “loving” you, but we all know how fickle *those* types of feelings are.

    In my view, a woman does not truly *love* you unless she Respects The Cock. That type of feeling is biological, it flips primordial attraction switches, it is an ancient feeling of ownership that stretches back eons. It is, in a word, real.

    To be loved because you have the resources to care for your family only means she “loves” you up until the point you lose your job.

    There is nothing so stable and powerful as the bond that occurs when you “OWN the bitch” as some men put it.

    Otherwise, one is at risk for enduring a creeping disprespect from one’s woman when she starts to feel too comfortable and free. It may start with just the sex, but it can end up poisoning every interaction in the relationship.

    Pimps up, hoes down.

    Like


  333. hello
    Chic,
    Why are you posting that klutz?

    To make you lol. She was doing so well until she slipped on the floor.

    Like


  334. Eurosabrais a chick who will tell you “I want you inside me” right there in the club
    Some women are so bold. Some small part of me admires them for being that way. The day I try something like that will be the day I write my own death warrant.

    I’ve had male friends tell me about women doing/saying stuff like that. For a long time I didn’t believe them.

    Like


  335. jack saidBarack Obama is of course nothing like the average black man

    REALLY??? I would add Obama is of course nothing like the average white man as well.

    Like


  336. In my view, a woman does not truly *love* you unless she Respects The Cock.

    There is nothing so stable and powerful as the bond that occurs when you “OWN the bitch” as some men put it.

    Does one mind going a little bit more in depth to explain that to those of us who are a bit naive in the ways of the world?

    please Clio…it’s our last chance…

    Your beta groveling is whack.

    In a nutshell, no history of casual sex and/or participation — of both the conscious and the deluded sort — in alpha men’s harems.

    What about girls who have multiple medium-term relationships with beta males?

    The funny thing is that for a guy who has game and knows where to look for each sort, these days they actually do.

    Of course, the downside is that requires work, quite a bit of filtering, some training, and hoping that she doesn’t freak out. Plus, in some men, it may require a strong mental remapping to realize that the girl that he’s using as an orifice for his cock is the same girl who cuddles with him and hugs his kids in the morning.

    Then there’s DA-esque men who can’t orgasm to anything less than a supermodel or porn star…

    The Toronto Catholic schools are renowned for their bad kids.

    IIRC, Ontario’s Catholic Schools are essentially public schools with religion classes, so it doesn’t make a difference. In turn, the stereotypes of Catholic Schools solving the discipline problems of bad children fails when the schools are essentially turned into dumping grounds for bad suburban kids.

    Like


  337. keith saidShe doesn’t view an apology as a sign of weakness and doesn’t then demand more apologies for the sake of some bullshit status. She recognizes that the ability to apologize when one has really done wrong is itself a form of strength.

    My name is chic noir, keith.

    & I cosign the quote above.

    Like


  338. Tupac Chopra:

    To disagree slightly with something he wrote recently, the true test of a woman’s attraction for you is NOT getting your dick in her pussy. Many women will simply *tolerate* the sex until they get that ring on their finger. In such a case, she does not truly respect you as a man on a fundamental level, as you have not established your dominance in her limbic brain. Her frontal-cortex may be giving her plenty of warm fuzzy reasons for “loving” you, but we all know how fickle *those* types of feelings are.

    In my view, a woman does not truly *love* you unless she Respects The Cock. That type of feeling is biological, it flips primordial attraction switches, it is an ancient feeling of ownership that stretches back eons. It is, in a word, real.

    Excellent comment; I couldn’t have said it better myself. (Well, except for my usual caveats about the scientific terminology.)

    To be loved because you have the resources to care for your family only means she “loves” you up until the point you lose your job.

    There is nothing so stable and powerful as the bond that occurs when you “OWN the bitch” as some men put it.

    Otherwise, one is at risk for enduring a creeping disprespect from one’s woman when she starts to feel too comfortable and free. It may start with just the sex, but it can end up poisoning every interaction in the relationship.

    I would add that once she stops with the act, it will make the whole relationsip far less pleasant even if it doesn’t result in any major disasters, and even if you’re still getting sex. At some point, you may find yourself unhappy and wondering why she’s no longer that sweet person you thought she was and why you no longer feel loved and respected, even though you can’t pinpoint what exactly went wrong, let alone why.

    Like


  339. “Notice the keyword “generally” — even you admit that there are exceptions to the rule that a girl is either a slut or pathologically asexual. You’re not saying it in as many words only because you’re trying to counter the claim that slutiness is a very negative indicator of future long-term quality. ”

    Oh no, I am not trying to counter the claim that sluttiness is a negative indicator. I’m countering the claim that a higher number than the median (reported) partners, is the same as sluttiness.

    Some women who have only slept with one or two men in their lifetime are sluts or whores. Women don’t actually have to have intercourse to be sluts or whores.

    See, in defining who is what, this is where you have to step into the hivemind. Both feminists (as Comment said irresponsible) and traditional (privileged) women bank on keeping men oblivious to how these things really work.

    Good women/wife types like sex.
    Whores don’t like sex.
    Sluts are just attention whores, and don’t really like sex.

    Tattoo that on whichever hand you wank with, for training purposes.

    There’s a way that a woman who can love deeply touches a man, just as there’s a way that a man who can love deeply touches a woman. A good woman recognizes this, and her numbers are going to be lower than a slut’s, even if she’s very open minded because a guy touching her unlovingly feels way too much like paranecrophilia.

    Her numbers however, will still be higher than the median because her opportunities will be greater, especially if she looks “hot” in either the media or natural sense.

    For guys who may not know the difference, a woman is naturally hot if people walk up to her on the street just to tell her she’s beautiful, and kids stare at her with weird smiles on their faces and such. They’re burning that memory in their minds.

    Sure, if she’s worried about the general population of males, then yes she should keep her legs closed regardless, because Mr. Mediocre believes what he’s taught to believe by the hivemind, that unless his mom was a crack hoe, she’s a saint who’s only slept with their dad.

    There is indeed a middle ground, but for some reason, even in this debate, guys seem to be ignoring it.

    I’m saying that women in that middle ground, or who are outside of the normal dynamic aren’t keeping their legs closed because the guy who would disqualify them based on the numbers is either outside of their awareness or easily fooled because he believes the hype.

    If no man that these women have ever been in an ltr with, has disqualified them on those grounds before, why should they be worried about some hypothetical individual who might not meet their own standards anyway?

    Like


  340. “Then there’s DA-esque men who can’t orgasm to anything less than a supermodel or porn star…”

    The Domme in me wants so much to chain this man to a chair behind a two way mirror observing a women-only haftla.

    Seriously man…the cure, and a good way to meet hot women is to learn to play the darbuka.

    Like


  341. @chic noir

    It took me a long time of pondering why that was so rare, why most women can’t initiate touch–it’s because of safety issues. A woman willing to be that direct risks taking home a killer, someone dangerous who will get off on ending her life or harming her. For a woman to say that, or initiate kissing or touching, requires a situation where her boundaries for safety and intimacy will be respected–if she wants kissing, but no more, or mutual touch, but no more, or safe sex of a specific kind or tempo, or kink without penetration, etc. etc. Or, more likely in the Israeli context, where she is taking the risk and just does not give a damn.

    I missed out on a lot, and frustrated a lot of North American English-speaking Jewish women who thought they were giving me a total green light, because they were relying on passive signaling, feeling that touching first would make them look desperate, or that it was “the man’s job.” Or fearing that consent to one act meant consent to anything, and that their boundaries would not be respected. Or fishing for alphas, someone who would initiate and touch and push the boundaries, the “I’m holding out for an @$$ho7e who won’t respect my ‘No'” phenomenon, which is another way of testing for alphas.

    Like


  342. I’m pretty sure most of the people posting here are sociopaths.

    Like


  343. I’m pretty sure that a sociopath wouldn’t feel much motivation to post here.

    Like


  344. Nicole,
    Considering how our friend DA refers to his former girlfriends as queens and says stuff like “pain is pleasure” it occurs to me that he might like a dominatrix.

    As for sociopathy, or antisocial personality disorder, let’s examine the below link and be the judge of that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

    Like


  345. BTW, the above is a joke. The tongue in cheek amorality of this blog is it’s greatest draw.

    Like


  346. David Alexander:

    What about girls who have multiple medium-term relationships with beta males?

    Well, think about it in the context of what I’ve been writing. The key is that she doesn’t show lack of restraint and emotional baggage. Several past relationships with guys that never made too much of an impression on her are compatible with that. See also the above comment by Tupac Chopra on Nov 20 at 11:55am.

    Of course, the downside is that requires work, quite a bit of filtering, some training, and hoping that she doesn’t freak out.

    The downside of life is that you have to constantly tire your muscles to breathe, chew food, and the like. And hoping that you don’t kill or cripple yourself accidentally at any moment. Have you considered that it might be more consistent with your basic philosophy to just lay down and croak off?

    Plus, in some men, it may require a strong mental remapping to realize that the girl that he’s using as an orifice for his cock is the same girl who cuddles with him and hugs his kids in the morning.

    Passages like this make me think that you must be either seriously mentally disturbed or bizarrely eager to cling to even the most surreally absurd excuses for doing nothing with your life. Fortunately, you’ve already demonstrated the latter.

    Then there’s DA-esque men who can’t orgasm to anything less than a supermodel or porn star…

    From what you write, I gather that you regularly orgasm to your own hand, so you’re obviously contradicting yourself here.

    Like


  347. From what you write, I gather that you regularly orgasm to your own hand, so you’re obviously contradicting yourself here.

    Actually, per a recent experiment, without the porn, my right hand is utterly useless in creating an orgasm. I’m hooked on porn. 🙂

    The key is that she doesn’t show lack of restraint

    You know, dating beta males in long-term relationships can be deemed as a lack of restraint, but that’s if one believes that it’s better to hold out for an alpha than to slum around with (lowly) beta males.

    Have you considered that it might be more consistent with your basic philosophy to just lay down and croak off?

    No, I’m just too lazy to deal with the mess of having to poke and hunt for signs of sexuality. One could argue that dating is the equivalent of hunting, game is just a better gun for hunting, and that lazy asses like myself who use porn just go to the supermarket to buy frozen food versions to cook in our dinky ass 900 watt microwaves.

    Besides, smart girls with class don’t do acrylic nails. 🙂

    Like


  348. Considering how our friend DA refers to his former girlfriends as queens

    There’s only two girls who can honestly hold the position of Queen. Jewish Queen because I was madly in love with her, and Wellesley Queen because she was (and probably is still) “better” than me.

    and says stuff like “pain is pleasure” it occurs to me that he might like a dominatrix.

    David tends to run his mouth off and say stupid shit.

    Mind you, David reads mind control stories that are both male dominant and female dominant, so both sides are appealing to him. The girl may seduce, but David ends up whispering in her ear how he loves his precious slut.

    Like


  349. Vlad:

    The downside of life is that you have to constantly tire your muscles to breathe, chew food, and the like. And hoping that you don’t kill or cripple yourself accidentally at any moment. Have you considered that it might be more consistent with your basic philosophy to just lay down and croak off?

    LMAO. You just *nailed* the ultimate end-game of DA’s philosophy if carried to its extremes.

    Vlad’s on *fire* today!

    Passages like this make me think that you must be either seriously mentally disturbed or bizarrely eager to cling to even the most surreally absurd excuses for doing nothing with your life. Fortunately, you’ve already demonstrated the latter.

    ZING

    From what you write, I gather that you regularly orgasm to your own hand, so you’re obviously contradicting yourself here.

    Hey-yooooooooooo!

    Like


  350. hello:

    The tongue in cheek amorality of this blog

    “tongue in cheek”?

    Like


  351. hello:

    You can respect a man’s cock and hate him. Trust me.

    Hello, I really didn’t mean to turn you on…

    My bad.

    Like


  352. hello:

    *runs over to Keith, kisses him on the cheek*

    Amen!

    Yes, Dudley Do Rights like Keith get lots of female attention in the form of kisses on their cheeks.

    I on the other hand get my dick sucked, but hey that’s just me. *shrug*

    Like


  353. David Alexander:

    Does one mind going a little bit more in depth to explain that to those of us who are a bit naive in the ways of the world?

    What, like you all of a sudden are going to start implementing our advice and you’re going to go straight from omega-status, right through PUA-status to full blown Pimp Game??

    Nigga please.

    Like


  354. “I on the other hand get my dick sucked, but hey that’s just me. *shrug*”

    What happened to giving it all up for Clio?

    Like


  355. hello:

    What happened to giving it all up for Clio?

    The demon rouses when the angel hesitates.

    Like


  356. “The demon rouses when the angel hesitates.”

    I think I hear her crying somewhere….

    Like


  357. I think I hear her crying somewhere….

    Then I shall have to give her a little

    ~~kiss~~

    Like


  358. One of Pupu’s all time favorite songs to cheer everyone up:

    Like


  359. The guitar in this recording is lovely.

    Like


  360. “Yes, Dudley Do Rights like Keith get lots of female attention in the form of kisses on their cheeks.”

    Yes, being a real man who can stand strong when right and admit error when confronted with evidence is so Dudley Do Right, and it totally arouses no deep and abiding wild animal passion in women, comp. You keep telling yourself that, Sparky.

    Like


  361. Vlad:

    Excellent comment; I couldn’t have said it better myself. (Well, except for my usual caveats about the scientific terminology.)

    Not to belabor this point, but I think you would have to agree that *sexual attraction* in the female is largely handled by the primitive brain centers as opposed to the more recent neocortex which regulates the feeling of “love” in the service of pair-bonding, no?

    I would add that once she stops with the act, it will make the whole relationsip far less pleasant even if it doesn’t result in any major disasters, and even if you’re still getting sex. At some point, you may find yourself unhappy and wondering why she’s no longer that sweet person you thought she was and why you no longer feel loved and respected, even though you can’t pinpoint what exactly went wrong, let alone why.

    Yes, precisely. My wording wasn’t clear — when I said “it may start with just the sex”, what I was referring to was the *quality* of the sex and therefore what that implies about the rest of the relationship.

    Only men with experience understand that what happens in the bedroom is a reflection of, a proxy for, a microcosm of, what happens outside of it.

    As above, so below.

    What do I mean by this.

    Sex, despite all of its modern incarnations and perversions, is fundamentally an interplay of Will vs. Surrender. The man acts, instigates, demonstrates and the woman yields, surrenders, follows.

    This does not mean the woman cannot be sexually aggressive — quite the opposite in fact. Ideally, sex for the woman is an act of admiration (and in its highest form, worship) for her man. As such her behavior can equally take the form of “desire to please” as eager surrender. I want to make clear that “surrender” does not imply the woman lays there like a dead fish.

    It means she recognizes the value and power of her man and she expresses this appreciation by acting as his willing “slave”, either figuratively or literally (as in BDSM).

    So, to bring this back to the topic at hand: the way a woman sexes you tells you a lot about how she views you as a man and the role that you play in her mind.

    Let’s compare and contrast.

    Does your woman look to you for direction as you go about your day together? Does she ask you “would it be alright if…?”

    Does she flirt sexually with you in public places, perhaps groping you under the dinner table, making clear in no uncertain terms that she is “good to go”?

    Does she eagerly remove your clothes in anticipation of the sex act?

    Does she insist the lights stay on?

    Does she lovingly look in your eyes as she gives head?

    Is she down for all sorts of sexual positions?

    Does she liked to be fucked hard? Does she grab you as she screams, “Fuck me! Fuck me!”?

    Does she orgasm? Repeatedly?

    OR…….

    Does your woman follow her *own* lead, running her own schedule as you hustle to play catch-up, constantly having to have “discussions” about what the plans for the evening will be?

    Are you always the one having to show sexual interest outside of the bedroom? Does she feel that sexual advances in public places are “inappropriate” and should wait until the bedroom?

    Do you have to stage elaborate “romantic” setups at home, like candles and roses, in order to get her “in the mood”?

    Does she passively wait for you to make all the moves like removing her clothes?

    Does she prefer to have the lights off during sex?

    Do she require extended foreplay before she is ready for sex?

    Do you go down on her more often than she goes down on you?

    Does she mechanically give you head like a chore to be gotten through before she “gets hers”? Does she give you head at all?

    Are certain sexual positions off-limits because she finds them “degrading” or “not intimate”?

    Does she need to be touched tenderly and “lovingly” as she keeps her eyes closed in intimation of “romance”? Does she balk when you try to get aggressive?

    Does she orgasm with any frequency, or at all? Or does she tell you, “It’s ok honey, it’s the experience and feelings that count.”?

    I realize these are generalizations (and extreme ones at that), but to the extent you find yourself in the first category, you know you’ve got a winner.

    To the extent you are in the second category, you are seen by her as merely a chump beta-provider whom she “loves” because you’re kind and smart and have a good job and her parents love you like one of their own and you fulfill her white-picket fence dreams.

    But…she doesn’t respect you as a MAN.

    Take heed.

    Like


  362. Vlad, Keith, Pac,
    I don’t think there’s a huge disagreement here. Being manly with your woman is important, and I’d much rather have the first relationship (re Pac’s post) than the second. However, where I part ways with you (and I suspect Keith does as well) is the idea that all a man has to do is stimulate a woman sexually to keep her happy. Everyone here has been in the situation of having great sex with someone to have the relationship founder because the other person was stupid, disrespectful, self-absorbed.

    This sort of thing doesn’t matter in casual hook-ups, where the stuff detailed here is effective, but over time no matter how great the sex is your partner will see you for who you are. If you can’t provide the character Keith describes she’ll hang on longer than she would otherwise, but unless she’s weak or utterly without options she’ll leave.

    And as a woman when you realize that a guy who’s fantastic in bed is a pathetic with his pants on your former admiration turns to contempt far greater than any mild dislike of a random unsexy man. And when you finally do leave, after hanging on for the sex, juxtaposing his flaws next to his potency merely makes the former even more glaring.

    *winking at Keith*

    Like


  363. Vlad, so looking at your questions, I’m in the first section way more than the second. And yet here I am, this nice, sweet guy. Weird!

    Tupac’s gonna slit his wrists!

    Like


  364. Correction, those were actually Tupac’s questions.

    Like


  365. Hello, I agree that finding out someone you’ve been shagging is a dumbass (for good women who don’t dig jerks) is traumatic for two reasons. First, it makes you feel like an idiot. Second, it’s a cruel reminder that we as women are just as vulnerable when we’re horny as men.

    It is a very good argument for non intercourse “play” or making out until one is absolutely certain that this is a person worth doing.

    People these days seem to have forgotten about making out. It’s a necessary buffer that needs to be brought back into fashion.

    Like


  366. Actually, a lot of this game stuff looks like the sort of things I thought everybody does in a relationship. Who doesn’t tease their mate and gently mock them? What man in a relationship doesn’t play fun little “status dominance” games with his woman? Hell, what man in a LTR hasn’t played “stop hitting yourself” with his woman?

    So maybe this is all just some sort of decline in modesty. Women go to clubs dressed in near-lingerie, and men talk to them like they’ve already been lovers.

    Somebody a few threads ago had some good comments about this. Basically game is just the male equivalent of plunging necklines and bare midriffs.

    Like


  367. “Do she require extended foreplay before she is ready for sex?”

    You don’t need to give her foreplay; you criticized her shoes!

    Like


  368. T., I don’t deny that educated white women can be whorish, and then act like respectable girls to snag a “beta provider”. I don’t. As a matter of fact, that’s the basic premise of this blog – how women have deteriorated in pretty much all ways that make them suitable for marriage or long-term relationships. But men have to start taking responsibility too – and stop dating and marrying these women. Men should not marry the over-30, former alpha-fucking, used-up “educated” woman. Unfortunately, many do. THAT is the problem. If these women were incapable of slutting around for 10 years then snagging a husband, they’d change their behavior accordingly.

    The women you describe may have good jobs, but they are not suitable for anything more than casual sex, period. And this is true whether they mainly fuck whites or blacks.

    Like


  369. David Alexander:

    You know, dating beta males in long-term relationships can be deemed as a lack of restraint, but that’s if one believes that it’s better to hold out for an alpha than to slum around with (lowly) beta males.

    “Holding out for an alpha” is a deluded strategy. If a girl is attractive enough to elicit alpha guys’ interest, they’ll be hitting on her from day one. If she’s also good wife material, she’ll be getting serious interest from high quality men from an early age. (Notice I emphasized “quality men” as opposed to “alphas” in the previous sentence, since it takes much more than alphaness for a man to be a good husband and father — in fact, marrying a major alpha is usually a very stupid move for any girl who won’t be OK with his constant cheating).

    Of course, it’s smart for a girl to delay serious commitment until the other conditions in her life are ready, as long as she’s not in denial about her clock ticking. But holding out for a guy much more handsome and charming than the ones that are actually showing interest in her is extremely stupid. It’s a recipe for being pumped and dumped by alpha cads and eventual spinsterhood or settling down for a man of much lower quality that she could have gotten in her prime years.

    One could argue that dating is the equivalent of hunting, game is just a better gun for hunting, and that lazy asses like myself who use porn just go to the supermarket to buy frozen food versions to cook in our dinky ass 900 watt microwaves.

    You forgot the part about writing elaborate pity-party posts on blogs about hunting under a thin pretense of extolling the advantages of your microwave experience.

    Besides, smart girls with class don’t do acrylic nails.

    And if you bothered to find a girl you’re happy with in real life, you wouldn’t develop such bizarre preferences. Come to think of it, if I were in your place, I’d be very worried about the further possible directions in which your porn obsession might cause your preferences to develop in the future.

    Like


  370. Tupac Chopra:

    Not to belabor this point, but I think you would have to agree that *sexual attraction* in the female is largely handled by the primitive brain centers as opposed to the more recent neocortex which regulates the feeling of “love” in the service of pair-bonding, no?

    Not necessarily. Observe the great differences in the mating patterns of humans and other closely related primate species (see e.g. here for some details), and then also compare them to the sexual behavior of various “lower” species. Obviously, evolution doesn’t necessarily lead towards more stable and seemingly rational patterns of sexual (or any other) behavior; it is possible for a species to pass through stages in its evolution in which, so to say, raw, irrational, and erratic sexual passions gain a more prominent role, even though it’s simultaneously evolving towards greater intelligence and more complex patterns of social organization.

    So, it seems to me that the most recently evolved parts of the human brain might regulate not only advanced cognitive functions such as language and abstract thinking, but also additional layers of irrational emotions and passions, sexual as well as others. Maybe human intelligence happened to come prepackaged with major changes in patterns of sexual attraction compared to the most recent ancestors of modern humans, and maybe these changes are due to the same recently evolved circuits that are responsible for the more noble ways in which humans are different from their ancestors. Maybe even the legacy brain centers for raw sexual attraction have been largely overridden by these newer ones? Who knows?

    Of course, this is just my amateurish speculation, meant only to show that things are probably more complicated than they might seem. If the actual brain science has determined the role of different brain centers in various aspects of human mating behavior, I would be very interested to see the relevant literature.

    Otherwise, another very good post.

    Like


  371. hello:

    Vlad, Keith, Pac,
    I don’t think there’s a huge disagreement here. Being manly with your woman is important, and I’d much rather have the first relationship (re Pac’s post) than the second. However, where I part ways with you (and I suspect Keith does as well) is the idea that all a man has to do is stimulate a woman sexually to keep her happy. […] If you can’t provide the character Keith describes she’ll hang on longer than she would otherwise, but unless she’s weak or utterly without options she’ll leave.

    As far as I’m concerned, you’re attacking a total strawman here. I never wrote a single word about what the sufficient conditions for an enjoyable permanent relationship might be — I merely elaborated on what some of the necessary ones are, and why it’s unlikely for them to be satisfied with a girl who has a slutty history.

    Now as for Keith’s remarks above, yes, of course that in order to keep a woman happy and faithful in a long-term relationship, especially once serious problems and issues in life emerge, being an asshole who relies purely on his alpha charm and sexual prowess is a very poor strategy (although it is a good strategy for getting casual sex from sluts, and sometimes even to maintain the upper hand in non-serious relationships with not-so-slutty ones). However, it’s dangerously wrong to believe that if a woman wants to settle down with you, this automatically means that she has a deep respect for you as a man and permanent willingness to make you happy, even if she sticks around permanently. The situation where she settles down with you even though she sees you as an inferior substitute rather than the fulfillment of her dreams may well be more stable in the long run than a situation where she’s whipped by your charms even though you’re treating her badly — but it’s usually a recipe for long-term unhappiness.

    Like


  372. Keith:

    A woman likes a nice man who cares about her welfare and she likes a man who knows when it’s time to take charge. It really is damned easy to appeal to a quality woman at both levels, if you’re a tyrue man. […] a quality woman understands true manhood and real strength. […] a quality man is neither wimp nor douchebag, neither master nor slave in daily interactions. […] I’m in the first section [of TC’s questions about how your woman treats you] way more than the second. And yet here I am, this nice, sweet guy. Weird!

    I don’t see what’s supposed to be weird or contradicting my claims here. Of course that the ideal setup is a quality girl who will deeply respect you and to whom you’ll be appealing at every level while being nice to her and behaving like a gentleman. Nobody except clueless losers and savages equates being a gentleman with being a wimp and pushover.

    However, notice that you felt it necessary to specify that you’re talking abouy quality women. But low-quality ones will also usually want to settle down once they realize that the clock is ticking dangerously, and it’s not good to end up with them. I drew controversy when I claimed (and tried to justify) that slutty history is usually a reliable predictor of low quality, but I haven’t seen you challenge that, so I suppose we don’t really disagree about anything.

    Like


  373. Jack:

    T., I don’t deny that educated white women can be whorish, and then act like respectable girls to snag a “beta provider”. I don’t. As a matter of fact, that’s the basic premise of this blog – how women have deteriorated in pretty much all ways that make them suitable for marriage or long-term relationships. But men have to start taking responsibility too – and stop dating and marrying these women. Men should not marry the over-30, former alpha-fucking, used-up “educated” woman. Unfortunately, many do. THAT is the problem. If these women were incapable of slutting around for 10 years then snagging a husband, they’d change their behavior accordingly.

    Exactly so. That’s why feminists are thrown into fits of seething rage whenever anyone suggests that a history of slutting around lowers a woman’s expected quality as a life partner (from what I’ve seen in feminist writings, their technical term for it is “slut shaming”, and apparently it’s near the top of the list of the Great Iniquities of the Patriarchy). They’re afraid that men might actually start seeing through some common modern delusions.

    Sadly, many men fall into one of two traps. First, many of them have fallen for the feminist claims that all this talk about sluts vs. good girls is just another relic of all that superstitious old rubbish that has been overcome by our enlightened modern civilization. (It wasn’t just feminists who have made this claim, but they are the main ideological group that has consistently and loudly insisted on it to the present day.) Second, at a certain age, many beta men eventually run into formerly slutty girls who have started to show interest in them because the clock is ticking — and instead of prudently asking themselves why exactly they’re suddenly getting interest from much prettier girls than before, they get all excited about it and fall for the bait.

    Like


  374. Vlad,
    This argument seems to be winding down, but let me make two points:

    A. The circumstances you describe – an ambitious hot chick seeking an alpha sluts around with as many as possible to maximize her chances but ends up settling for a nice guy – don’t describe every instance of a woman having many partners. Some just date a lot without an eye for a rich man to see what kind of man is right for them. A woman like the former will probably make a poor wife, but a lot of that is probably due more to the materialism and shallowness that set her on that path than the number of partners.

    B. High testosterone women have both higher sex drives than normal women and are more irritable. That may be why slutty women can be so bitchy.

    Like


  375. Nic,
    Can you tell me more about your experiences with Russian men? My former job brought me into contact with many Russians and I was stunned by how masculine they were. Even translators and policy wonks just seemed to have this intensity that’s non-existent in their American counterparts. Sadly, all of these men were married and what I’ve read about Russia states that men in their late twenties who’ve never been married are rare.

    My interactions with Russian women conform to everything written here; very pretty, and fabulously put together even when not pretty. Oddly enough the most beautiful Russian women I met were much nicer than the plainer ones, and it was from the latter that I saw the iciness. I once had the bizarre experience of talking to a very bright teenage girl who’d moved from Russia at seven. She had an American accent but icy Russian demeanor.

    Like


  376. Despite spending the day out with the non-date girlfriend, I’ve managed to crawl back to this computer to bait the fish…

    Yes, Dudley Do Rights like Keith get lots of female attention in the form of kisses on their cheeks.

    I on the other hand get my dick sucked, but hey that’s just me.

    That presumes most girls know how to suck dick properly. At that point, maybe the hug and kiss are a better bet. 🙂

    What, like you all of a sudden are going to start implementing our advice and you’re going to go straight from omega-status, right through PUA-status to full blown Pimp Game??

    While I may not be the type of guy who uses game, relationship topics have generally been of interest to me. It’s always fun to question how the rest of you normal people work. 🙂

    What happened to giving it all up for Clio?

    His whack game chased her away. 😛

    Does your woman

    Oddly, that sounds like the Canadian Mistress back in the day. Since “non-date” and I don’t fuck, only the first question only applies, and she asks me about our choice of activity which sucks since I’m a recluse.

    you are seen by her as merely a chump beta-provider whom she “loves”

    The bonus of being a beta provider is that you feel useful, but it’s obvious that a divorce and a bitter marriage will destroy that feeling and creates bitterness. There’s a difference between being useful and being used.

    Like


  377. She had an American accent but icy Russian demeanor.

    Russians aren’t white. There, I bloody said it.

    Like


  378. “It’s always fun to question how the rest of you normal people work”

    There are normal people on this blog?

    Like


  379. she’s also good wife material, she’ll be getting serious interest from high quality men

    Fun Question: How man women are good wife material and how many men are high quality men? Does high quality infer no betas?

    in fact, marrying a major alpha is usually a very stupid move for any girl who won’t be OK with his constant cheating

    IIRC, some have noted that women prefer a little bit on an alpha than a whole beta.

    It’s a recipe for being pumped and dumped by alpha cads and eventual spinsterhood

    If you’re an average ranking woman, is it better to hold out for an alpha and stay single, or should this female date her male equivalents? Per your theory, she’ll be content with such men, but per my hypothesis, these women will not be happy because society isn’t a magical vacuum where she’ll have no access to alpha males. The main problem is that she’ll always have latent feelings that she could do better, and there will be a day where she may throw it all away for chance to chase an alpha. Mind you, this only if one believes that no woman can truly be happy with an alpha.

    And if you bothered to find a girl you’re happy with in real life, you wouldn’t develop such bizarre preferences.

    I think I’ve mentioned that I’ve had the nail fetish before porn. I’ve been watching nails since I was in my mid-teens, and I started watching porn because the girls had nails in it. Porn where the girls don’t have nails is generally deleted within 24 hours of first viewing.

    Come to think of it, if I were in your place, I’d be very worried about the further possible directions in which your porn obsession might cause your preferences to develop in the future.

    What other directions? White girls with big asses and large tits? I may be technically addicted to porn, but I really don’t see the harm in only finding porn stars sexually attractive and alluring.

    she sees you as an inferior substitute

    What’s the incentive to be an inferior substitute?

    instead of prudently asking themselves why exactly they’re suddenly getting interest from much prettier girls than before, they get all excited about it and fall for the bait.

    These men presume that the girls have wised up and they have finally learned that beta men are “good men” while in some cases, the men are desperate for any attention. It’s the opposite of the DA theory where any girl who shows interest is presumed to be broken and defective and effectively undesirable.

    Like


  380. There are normal people on this blog?

    Compared to me, most of the commenters are normal and somewhat mainstream.

    Like


  381. hello pussy:

    “It’s always fun to question how the rest of you normal people work”

    There are normal people on this blog?

    We’re ahead of the curve.

    Anyway, to digress for a moment, I have a question re: my ongoing seduction of Fair Clio…

    Up until this point I had always assumed my thrusts and parries against my Immortal Beloved’s taciturn pensiveness was best represented as

    (that would be my darling Clio on the left, btw)

    But…truth be told, I suspect — nay, rather fear — that my schnookum sees our current standoff as:

    What does your feminine intuition say to you regarding this matter?

    Like


  382. I think this is more representative of how Clio sees you:

    Like


  383. Ah, so all is well then. Sweet.

    Game on.

    Like


  384. You just *nailed* the ultimate end-game of DA’s philosophy if carried to its extremes.

    It may be the theoretical ultimate end game, but it’s highly unlikely that one would carry it such an extreme. I may choose not to go chase women due to the low return on investment, but that doesn’t mean that I’m going to stop eating or breathing. It just means that I chase investments where the yields are better.

    Like


  385. hello says, “Nic, Can you tell me more about your experiences with Russian men? My former job brought me into contact with many Russians and I was stunned by how masculine they were. Even translators and policy wonks just seemed to have this intensity that’s non-existent in their American counterparts.”

    There are a few reasons for this.

    Russian men have obligatory army service, and no real control over where they are stationed, and what job they will get. In addition, for most people there, life in Russia is difficult in a way that even inner city Americans can barely imagine. There aren’t enough Russian men to go around partly because so many don’t survive, and many end up in prison. Many also leave Russia when they have the opportunity.

    This is one reason I smiled when David said that Russians aren’t White. Their culture and experiences in Russia are quite different. They’re more Eurasian than European. Also, “White” is a social construct, not a nationality, or really a race. It only somewhat accurately describes people of such widely mixed European descent that they have no definite national heritage save American…in which case, American is a more accurate label that White.

    …but then that would put them on the same level as Americans who are brown, so White had to be invented in order to create an artificial division that seemed more legitimate than class.

    In Russia, and other former Soviet countries, despite many years of communism, ethnicity is much more complicated than color, and class is king. Russian thugs could easily compete in mentality with Columbians, who out-thug Black American and even Mexican thugs. Russia’s upper class is classier than than any in the western world. In between those extremes, you have a people who are very much tougher than most Americans, and yet more cultured.

    The bad are very good at being bad, or they don’t survive. The good are very decisive about it, or they’re ridiculed.

    So wherever Russians go outside of Russia, they’re loved by some, hated by others…but one remarkable thing that happens is that they tend to dominate their social landscape. This is a culture that values strength, so strong women don’t have to sacrifice their femininity, and classy men don’t have to sacrifice their masculinity.

    The downside is that some are raised with a high sense of entitlement, but low motivation. These are usually the third or fourth generation of Russians raised outside of Russia, or those who come from the privileged classes. It takes longer for Russians outside of Russia to lose their Russianness, than it takes other Europeans.

    “Sadly, all of these men were married and what I’ve read about Russia states that men in their late twenties who’ve never been married are rare. ”

    It is rare because Russians (as most Eastern Europeans) are socialized to be men by the time they are so physically. Women are expected to be adults on time as well. Families are also supportive without smothering. Save for a few extremely religious people, a Russian and most Eastern European moms expect help preparing breakfast from whoever their son or other male relatives living with them, brought home the previous night, if he actually let you sleep there.

    …and if she sees you sleeping in her house enough, she expects help paying for groceries and the like as well, or will expect the guy to pay more. They’ll never ask you to do so, and if you ask them, they’ll tell you not to. Pulling one’s weight is just something an adult is expected to do.

    It is not uncommon for people to be married while attending university, so the college flings phase just doesn’t happen. From Russian friends, I’m told that this kind of wildness by that age is immature. If a Russian guy or girl isn’t married by then, they have one partner (or at least one at a time) they see during that time who they expect to marry once their lives are more settled.

    Some will sleep around alot, but they’re considered low class (male or female). Even a guy who sleeps around though, will usually treat it more like a harem of girlfriends, and there’s usually something going on like it’s a harem of privileged or wealthy women who are unattached or having affairs, and reward his attention with gifts and connections. The affairs thing is rare though, because of the tendency of Russian guys to freak out and do something drastic, or turn it in on themselves and die somehow.

    “My interactions with Russian women conform to everything written here; very pretty, and fabulously put together even when not pretty.”

    Well, there’s a relative deprivation factor there. Most of the western world is full of ugliness because we allow it to be so. Strength and intelligence, especially when it means resourcefulness, is highly prized in Russian culture. So the way most Americans look at beauty is not the way most Russians look at beauty. If you’re Black or know many Black people, it’s similar to the difference between how an African American sees beauty, and how say, an Ethiopian sees beauty.

    An African American’s eye is going to be more drawn to lighter skin, straight hair, and a slimmer figure because of how he’s been raised, and what he tends to need from a woman. An Ethiopian in Ethiopia is looking at clarity of skin, quality of hair, and a more “breeder” type figure. Consequently, without trying to, Ethiopian women tend to be more beautiful than African American women. Their life is tougher indeed, and the society has many problems, but Ethiopian women are still better looking.

    In a culture where people don’t hate their womanhood or manhood, and strength is prized in both, people look better. A girl who isn’t a “10” doesn’t let herself go, but at the same time, doesn’t do crazy things to try to conform to a standard that isn’t really relevant to her. She’s competing with her peers, not with vague images, and can even enjoy fashion for what it is: an art.

    Unlike American and now Israeli men, Russian men aren’t going to stop having sex with human women because they’re human with flaws. He’s also not going to not get married or not be romantic because of a shortage of 10’s…which there isn’t, for Russians.

    If every day, day in day out, you see women who look just like your mom and your sisters (and aunts and cousins and…), and they’re all or mostly blonde, blue eyed and slim, you’re not going to think this is very special.

    “Oddly enough the most beautiful Russian women I met were much nicer than the plainer ones, and it was from the latter that I saw the iciness.”

    Well, there’s where we get into things like class, ethnicity, and such. The plainer ones might be from villages or have had a harder life, or may have other things going on that make them “plain” in comparison to others. I have seen very few plain Russian women (under 45-50)…many who were not of the media template, and some with actual defects, that may get them a lower looks rating from some guys, but actually plain? not many. The few I have seen are almost invariably doing something self destructive, hate men, have some kind of issues, or something other than raw looks going against them.

    The iciness could have to do with their being outside of Russia. I’ve noticed the same thing among some here in Israel. When they find themselves in a social situation where beauty is viewed as a marital asset rather than just a screwing asset, and less beautiful women (especially the ethnically inconvenient) are viewed as more easy or more disposable, they attempt to defy that. It’s a natural reaction to being in a somewhat more hostile dating environment than one is used to.

    The gender war moves from trying to select a guy who won’t beat and mistreat you, to trying to find a man at all. Russian women are culturally, experts in this, so watch them and learn. Doing so has improved my prospects dramatically, and cleared my life of much unnecessary drama.

    “I once had the bizarre experience of talking to a very bright teenage girl who’d moved from Russia at seven. She had an American accent but icy Russian demeanor.”

    Well, in Russia, Jesus and Andrea Dworkin aren’t holding hands and telling little boys and girls that everybody should play nice and disregard reality in favor of not-so-ideal ideals.

    The police will not protect you, and are very likely to be working with the criminals, or at least in their pockets. If you surround yourself with treacherous people, you’ll get more than your feelings hurt. You must protect your children because if you don’t, nobody else will.

    Many 10’s are seduced, kidnapped or blackmailed into prostitution. So your looking more physically like a model is ultimately meaningless to your quality or your happiness. What matters looks wise, is your actual beauty-beauty…and if you show any insecurity about that, people will mark you as an easy target. If you don’t go for what you want, and decisively, someone will take it from you.

    You’d be kinda icy too.

    Like


  386. Nic,

    “Also, “White” is a social construct, not a nationality, or really a race. It only somewhat accurately describes people of such widely mixed European descent that they have no definite national heritage save American…in which case, American is a more accurate label that White.”

    White as Americans use the term is indeed a social construct. To say that an FOB Romanian immigrant has more in common with a native born white American than a black American is ludicrous.

    “Russian men have obligatory army service, and no real control over where they are stationed, and what job they will get. In addition, for most people there, life in Russia is difficult in a way that even inner city Americans can barely imagine. There aren’t enough Russian men to go around partly because so many don’t survive, and many end up in prison. Many also leave Russia when they have the opportunity.”
    I’ve read that Russia’s divorce rate (the highest in the world) is driven by the man shortage. After a few years of marriage, kids and the cooling of passion a man can very easily find an affair and pretty new bride.

    “This is a culture that values strength, so strong women don’t have to sacrifice their femininity, and classy men don’t have to sacrifice their masculinity.”

    Ah yes, the cultured yet deeply masculine man. I’ve met muscians and dancers who were utterly devoted to their crafts yet deeply masculine.

    “Unlike American and now Israeli men, Russian men aren’t going to stop having sex with human women because they’re human with flaws. He’s also not going to not get married or not be romantic because of a shortage of 10’s…which there isn’t, for Russians.”

    In all fairness, many American women refuse to marry anyone who isn’t both good looking and successful and thus become spinsters. Americans of both sexes are picky, critical and unrealistic every day.

    “If every day, day in day out, you see women who look just like your mom and your sisters (and aunts and cousins and…), and they’re all or mostly blonde, blue eyed and slim, you’re not going to think this is very special.”

    Do Russian men prefer a different look than the willowy blonde?

    “I’ve noticed the same thing among some here in Israel. When they find themselves in a social situation where beauty is viewed as a marital asset rather than just a screwing asset, and less beautiful women (especially the ethnically inconvenient) are viewed as more easy or more disposable, they attempt to defy that.”

    Beauty isn’t a marital asset in Russia?

    “The gender war moves from trying to select a guy who won’t beat and mistreat you, to trying to find a man at all.”

    For all our complaining white American college educated women have it pretty good.

    “Russian women are culturally, experts in this, so watch them and learn. Doing so has improved my prospects dramatically, and cleared my life of much unnecessary drama.”

    What specifically did you learn?

    “What matters looks wise, is your actual beauty-beauty…”

    How do you differentiate media beauty and beauty-beauty?

    There aren’t a lot of single Russian/EE men in DC. For all that they fascinate me I am also somewhat frightened of them. Last year at night I got onto a metro car that was empty except for a group of EE men. I could tell straightaway that they were thugs, yet I could not look away. They noticed me checking them out and laughed. Luckily the train arrived at my stop soon after.

    You’ve written that Russian men expect to be the boss in their relationships. I honestly wouldn’t mind that if I was with a good, principled man who didn’t use the position to run roughshod all over me. But my darling we haven’t even gotten into the alcohol yet!

    Like


  387. Hello said, “White as Americans use the term is indeed a social construct. To say that an FOB Romanian immigrant has more in common with a native born white American than a black American is ludicrous.”

    The Romanians I’ve met remind me so much of Black people that I can pick them out of a crowd with pretty good accuracy, from posture, style, and smell, if they’re still culturally close to home. By the way, if you happen to get hold of a good Romanian, he’ll make you forget all about Russians.

    Russians have a good balance of machismo and style, but Romanians make it look easy.

    “I’ve read that Russia’s divorce rate (the highest in the world) is driven by the man shortage. After a few years of marriage, kids and the cooling of passion a man can very easily find an affair and pretty new bride.”

    Yes, and in their wake, they leave behind single mothers who don’t get financially buffered as well as other western countries where either the husband or the state will make sure the woman and kids don’t starve. Though, for this reason, it’s also fairly common for the woman to leave the kids with their dad if they’re school aged.

    “Ah yes, the cultured yet deeply masculine man. I’ve met muscians and dancers who were utterly devoted to their crafts yet deeply masculine.”

    Well, before you get too happy about that, bear in mind that despite the secularism, homosexuality is still generally considered a perversion in Russia. Even if a guy is as Gay as spring wildflowers, he is not going to admit it in polite company. He’ll marry, make children, etc. and then do what he does on the side, or he’ll be one of those tragic eternal bachelors, like back in the day.

    So where straight is the default, regardless of profession, for every straight male ballet dancer, is a Gay or bisexual one admiring him from afar.

    “In all fairness, many American women refuse to marry anyone who isn’t both good looking and successful and thus become spinsters. Americans of both sexes are picky, critical and unrealistic every day.”

    Yes, Americans of both sexes are well known for this.

    “Do Russian men prefer a different look than the willowy blonde?”

    It depends on the guy, but if there’s a rule, then it’s that they tend to like variety. Most I know don’t have a single template for sexy. They have many, and “willowy blondes” are but one. Also, many associate dark skin and dark hair with being more passionate, or smarter…more personality.

    Some are the opposite, and are very much into the whole racial purity thing, but most that I’ve met or heard from on the subject prefer darker, or like variety.

    …and no, this is not because they’re trying to get into my pants. Most of my friends here are Russian, to the point that I am learning it because I have to in order to function.

    “Beauty isn’t a marital asset in Russia?”

    It is, and it isn’t. It can get you alot of male attention, and can easily get you laid. It might even get you married if a guy is that stupid, but it won’t keep him monogamous or keep him with you for long when there are scores of women around him who look just like you.

    When physical beauty is so plentiful, the only real selling point you have is between your ears and maybe in your pockets. It’s what makes you more or less desirable than the woman standing next to you.

    It’s not just that it’s common. Time with it is somewhat easily purchased, since the economic situation is so bad there. Russian men don’t generally have the same inhibitions against prostitutes as the average American. It’s partly because of a kind of strange romanticism. They would rather go to a prostitute than to waste the time lying and going through the motions with a regular woman.

    But then, in Russia, prostitutes are trained to be extremely pleasant and fun…party girls.

    So a Russian guy has in his mind, a line between what he wants in a hoe, and what he wants in a wife. Hoe is about looks, and wife is about overall suitability with whatever beauty she has being viewed as a bonus.

    “For all our complaining white American college educated women have it pretty good.”

    Yes, much better than a college educated Russian woman living in Israel, for certain.

    “What specifically did you learn?”

    Where to begin?

    I can summarize it somewhat as dress well, be positive but not flaky, and decisive, but not overly harsh…but when it doubt, err on the side of harsh.

    A man who really wants you will not be put off by needing to earn his place with you, but you will have to earn your place with him too.

    Another thing that was difficult for me to get because of some leftover feminism from mom was that obedience to your man is not the same thing as obedience to the herd…and if you don’t trust a guy enough to believe that if you take his direction on things that have to do with the relationship, then you should probably not be dating him.

    So now, when I meet or talk to a guy, if I get the sense that he’s not trustworthy, I’m just not going there. Russian women have taught me to be very gutt friendly. It’s how I learned the “not ready for a serious relationship” game. Before, that was a good enough reason for me not to get involved with someone already, but since having Russian friends, I’ve learned that this is a game.

    Attitude affects tone and delivery in a way that can get you into or keep you out of trouble. “Fear is the mindkiller…”

    There’s so much more than this, but my posts are already extremely long.

    “How do you differentiate media beauty and beauty-beauty?”

    Media beauty is supermodels. The closer to that look a woman is, the more beautiful she is considered by the masses.

    Cultural beauty is a culture/ethnicity specific template. This varies from area to area, but is usually the look of the ideal beauty of the dominant class. Increasingly though, this is being replaced with an ethnically flavored version of the western supermodel. Koreans are currently contending with this.

    Natural beauty is the golden ratio, symmetry, good hip to waist ratio, etc. It sometimes overlaps with the other two, but it trumps them. It defies upbringing, social status or convenience. It just is, and it will elicit some kind of positive response, whether or not the beholder is made uncomfortable by it.

    It is the evidence of health, strength, or some other type of relative superiority. Where the first two are an opinion, natural beauty is a fact.

    “There aren’t a lot of single Russian/EE men in DC.
    For all that they fascinate me I am also somewhat frightened of them.”

    This is probably intelligent, but one must face their fears. There are good and bad in all ethnicities. They seem more frightening because they are generally more comfortable with their manhood, and well…men are scary, but you know, they’re supposed to be.

    Nature built men, as a gender, to be frightening. It’s part of their job as hunters and protectors. Their foreheads wrinkle before ours do, and they get chunkier as they get older. They’ve got big hands and they’re stronger than us, even if they look relatively soft. That’s just men.

    “Last year at night I got onto a metro car that was empty except for a group of EE men. I could tell straightaway that they were thugs, yet I could not look away. They noticed me checking them out and laughed. Luckily the train arrived at my stop soon after.”

    How did you know they were thugs? Did they have tattoos?

    Sometimes a group of EE accountants can look like thugs to the untrained eye. They’re just tough like that.

    “You’ve written that Russian men expect to be the boss in their relationships. I honestly wouldn’t mind that if I was with a good, principled man who didn’t use the position to run roughshod all over me. But my darling we haven’t even gotten into the alcohol yet!”

    Well, that’s why it’s important to get well into a culture before dating in it. If you learn the culture, you’ll learn how to pick a good man from it.

    Like


  388. hello:

    For all that they fascinate me I am also somewhat frightened of them. Last year at night I got onto a metro car that was empty except for a group of EE men. I could tell straightaway that they were thugs, yet I could not look away. They noticed me checking them out and laughed. Luckily the train arrived at my stop soon after.

    Oh for God’s sake Hello, please try and show some sensitivity.

    “Thugs”? Listen: I know that PA and his family, with their shifty-eyed cunning, shady underworld connections and knives stashed in their boots, may look “different” to us but that’s no reason to disparage them with such hurtful language.

    On behalf of open minded Americans everywhere, I apologize for any discomfort Hello and her hateful prejudices may have caused you, PA.

    Like


  389. Pac,
    Jealous? Sorry but there are so many sexy men in the world.

    Like


  390. Nic,
    Make your posts as long or as short as you want, love. Faced with your entertaining and informative commentary and men who conveniently fail to post their photos and net worth blaming society because they can’t attract virginal 20 y/o 10s I will read you any time of the day. You should have your own blog.

    “By the way, if you happen to get hold of a good Romanian, he’ll make you forget all about Russians.”

    *fanning face* How are they different?

    ” Even if a guy is as Gay as spring wildflowers, he is not going to admit it in polite company. He’ll marry, make children, etc. and then do what he does on the side, or he’ll be one of those tragic eternal bachelors, like back in the day.”

    I once had a male Russian ballet teacher whom I mistook for straight because his Russianness seemed so masculine. *sigh* Yes I’m sure that for every Barishnikov there’s a Nuryurev. I’ve read about Russia’s extreme homophobia. It reminds me a bit of black culture in that regard.

    “Some are the opposite, and are very much into the whole racial purity thing, but most that I’ve met or heard from on the subject prefer darker, or like variety.”

    I now think that blond fetishism, to the degree that we see it is an American phenomenon. Now blonds seem to be preferred in most white dominated societies but in my travels I’ve noticed that it is not so overwhelming a preference outside the US.

    …and no, this is not because they’re trying to get into my pants. Most of my friends here are Russian, to the point that I am learning it because I have to in order to function.

    “When physical beauty is so plentiful, the only real selling point you have is between your ears and maybe in your pockets. It’s what makes you more or less desirable than the woman standing next to you.”

    The EE women and married men have liked for my knowledge of Russian history and my interest in the arts, so

    “Russian men don’t generally have the same inhibitions against prostitutes as the average American. It’s partly because of a kind of strange romanticism. They would rather go to a prostitute than to waste the time lying and going through the motions with a regular woman.”

    This makes perfect sense to me. When the whole Spitzer debacle went down women I knew said that in his wife’s shoes they’d be more upset about the fact that he’d been with a prostitute than his cheating. I am monogamous and expect fidelity from my partner but if my man strays I prefer, assuming STIs and police don’t make an appearance, that he go with a whore than have an affair. I’m sure there have been one or two men who’ve left their wives and girlfriends for prostitutes but almost every man who goes to a whore does his business and never gives her another thought.

    Still I’d want a faithful man. Are EE men more romantic than Americans or more prosaic. The ones I’ve met have seemed both tougher and more emotionally sensitive. A very alluring combination.

    “So a Russian guy has in his mind, a line between what he wants in a hoe, and what he wants in a wife. Hoe is about looks, and wife is about overall suitability with whatever beauty she has being viewed as a bonus.”

    I think most men do, and that only the most extreme status-whores go for looks alone. Of course the man shortage in Russia puts them in an enviable position to choose.

    “What specifically did you learn?”

    Where to begin?

    I’d like to hear a little more, if you feel like passing on advice. Around here Russian women wrap men around their little fingers though I’m sure that impressions is biased since many of the local Russian lasses are successful gold diggers. What do Russians do right that American women mess up?.

    “Koreans are currently contending with this.”

    Which must be why they have such high rates of plastic surgery.

    I’ve met enough educated professionals to know what they’re like and these guys were different. They may have just been bouncers or other manual workers. I once saw a group of Russian construction workers (!) at a building near my office. One was a dead ringer for Daniel Craig, and yes I managed to get out of their sight before I fainted.

    “Well, that’s why it’s important to get well into a culture before dating in it. If you learn the culture, you’ll learn how to pick a good man from it.”

    How interested, in your experience, are Russian/EE men in Western women? Are they too spoiled by the man shortage to pay much mind to outsiders?

    Like


  391. “By the way, if you happen to get hold of a good Romanian, he’ll make you forget all about Russians.”

    *fanning face* How are they different?

    *eagerly awaits nicole’s reply*

    Like


  392. hello said I’ve read about Russia’s extreme homophobia. It reminds me a bit of black culture in that regard

    This ^^^aspect of African-American culture is greatly misunderstood by non African-Americans.

    Like


  393. how so, darling?

    Like


  394. They may have just been bouncers or other manual workers. I once saw a group of Russian construction workers (!) at a building near my office. One was a dead ringer for Daniel Craig, and yes I managed to get out of their sight before I fainted

    LOL, hello you sound like me. He must of had that Clinton effect.

    Like


  395. “LOL, hello you sound like me. He must of had that Clinton effect.”

    We shouldn’t go dancing without a third. If we both faint on the dance floor we’ll need at least one person to get us to safety before we get trampled to death. And if any of the guys that post here happen to be at the club trampling will be the least of our worries.

    Like


  396. I now think that blond fetishism, to the degree that we see it is an American phenomenon.

    No, VERY blonde obsessed people exist everywhere. And there’s a big big problem being very very blonde-obsessed in Finland. You got amazing power to lay any chic noir since they don’t impress you as much as they should but it’s very rare to actually meet any who don’t dress in a sack.

    Like


  397. *an exception would be Senegal(trad)

    Like


  398. jaakkeli said
    No, VERY blonde obsessed people exist everywhere. And there’s a big big problem being very very blonde-obsessed in Finland. You got amazing power to lay any chic noir since they don’t impress you as much as they should but it’s very rare to actually meet any who don’t dress in a sack.

    Pardon me???

    Like


  399. hello:

    Ah yes, the cultured yet deeply masculine man. I’ve met muscians and dancers who were utterly devoted to their crafts yet deeply masculine.

    It’s not limited to just music and arts. Unlike in North America, in Eastern Europe there is no strong correlation of intellectual and technical interests with dorkiness, and the corresponding stereotypes are much weaker. You’ll find a surprising number of EE men whose professions, erudition, and intellectual interests would suggest extreme nerdiness here, but who are actually manly, handsome, stylish, and know how to deal with women. It would be an interesting topic for a long essay why this is so.

    Like


  400. “No, VERY blonde obsessed people exist everywhere”

    I know that, but in my travels in Italy, Ireland, and France there were a lot of blondes on TV and in magazines, but they were not the dominant sex symbol. The black haired Andrea Corr is considered “the most beautiful woman in Ireland”. Many, if not most run of the mill blond Hollywood starlets are pretty ordinary when you look at their bone structure. This is not to say there are no great beauties; Charlize Theron is one and even among “The Girls Next Door” Holly Madison is quite fetching. But in my observation bone structure is more important outside of the Hollywood sphere as is general carriage and persona.

    I have no experience in Scandinavia where I’m sure things are different. And I agree that in most white countries there is a preference for blondes, but that outside of America (and Scandinavia) the preference is less universal.

    Like


  401. “You got amazing power to lay any chic noir since they don’t impress you as much as they should but it’s very rare to actually meet any who don’t dress in a sack.”

    Yeah, that threw me for a loop since you were replying to my post.

    Like


  402. Oh chic never mind if I’m not making sense, it’s 6 am and I haven’t slept at all cause my tooth hurts like absolute hell. If you get health care like ours remember to thank Obama.

    I used to get totally obsessed with blonde chicks and NEVER succeed and also make everyone totally envious with the darker chicks I could get (the others got totally obsessed and the chicks got obsessed with me since I sent attention to less popular blondes). I got over that though. I even got obsessed with a brown girl from India once (deep brown + blue eyes = never seen before, not seen since, COMPLETE OBSESSION).

    Like


  403. OK now I’m being creepier than Gannon.

    That’s it, no posting today.

    Like


  404. “Unlike in North America, in Eastern Europe there is no strong correlation of intellectual and technical interests with dorkiness, and the corresponding stereotypes are much weaker. You’ll find a surprising number of EE men whose professions, erudition, and intellectual interests would suggest extreme nerdiness here, but who are actually manly, handsome, stylish, and know how to deal with women. It would be an interesting topic for a long essay why this is so.”

    Are you based in U.S. or Eastern Europe? You must have a theory or two on this subject. I’ll do my utmost to refrain from fainting.

    Like


  405. “I used to get totally obsessed with blonde chicks and NEVER succeed and also make everyone totally envious with the darker chicks I could get (the others got totally obsessed and the chicks got obsessed with me since I sent attention to less popular blondes). I got over that though. I even got obsessed with a brown girl from India once (deep brown + blue eyes = never seen before, not seen since, COMPLETE OBSESSION)”

    Didn’t you once say you weren’t attracted to dark skinned women? *shrug* I hope your tooth feels better.

    Like


  406. Well I vastly prefer pale but it’s not like I’m blind to boobies of any colour, if you know what I mean.

    And actually I like brown of a certain shade and the really pale (other colours seem strange or unhealthy). And when I say dark chick I easily mean some who may well be blonde by not Finnish standards.

    Plus for some reason rare combinations like brown + blue eyes get me. Then it’s all overthinking “I have to impress her with something unique, I have to impress her with something unique…”

    I hope your tooth feels better.

    What the fuck, it’s not getting off that easy! Once I have the dentist hand it over, I’m going to beat the crap out of the snotty bastard!

    Like


  407. hello:

    Jealous?

    Humorless?

    Like


  408. hello:

    I’m sure there have been one or two men who’ve left their wives and girlfriends for prostitutes but almost every man who goes to a whore does his business and never gives her another thought.

    Part of the reason why men’s affairs are not as destructive to the family (and hence society) as women’s.

    Like


  409. hello:

    And if any of the guys that post here happen to be at the club trampling will be the least of our worries.

    You would never even suspect it was me if I was there, I assure you.

    Like


  410. Keith:

    For most women beyond a certain educational/cognitive/social cutoff, women just won’t settle for a husband who isn’t good in bed.

    You’ve got it backwards, methinks. It’s those women who marry up in status who will gladly forego the deep dicking for the deep pockets.

    He can be nice and “beta” or dickish and “alpha,” but either way, he’s going to have to perform well.

    It won’t matter how well a man “performs” if his woman doesn’t surrender herself to his masculine leadership.

    Typically, at least in my history, the frontal cortex and the limbic section relate and entertwine for quality women.

    If by “quality women” you mean “hot enough to secure commitment from a man who has it all” then sure.

    All the other women are forced to make a choice of compromise however.

    That’s because a quality woman understands true manhood and real strength. She doesn’t view an apology as a sign of weakness and doesn’t then demand more apologies for the sake of some bullshit status. She recognizes that the ability to apologize when one has really done wrong is itself a form of strength. And she appreciates a refusal to apologize when the man hasn’t done wrong. That’s because, unlike he and his rim jickeys ™, she’s mentally beyond Middle School. She respects honesty, even when it’s not what she wants at that moment.

    That was beautiful. I would like very much to meet such women.

    On my unicorn.

    In return, a quality man is neither wimp nor douchebag, neither master nor slave in daily interactions.

    Any more such vague, fluffy platitudes and I’m going to smack you.

    The douchebag route, if there’s any relationship at all, just ends in resentment and catastrophe. Yeah, at first she likes Mr. Douchebag, but enough douchiness over the years, and she stops showing up at the church of Le Coq. More often, it’s the “alphas” who get taken to the cleaners.

    What do you think happens with more frequency in either real life or literature/film:

    – a woman leaving a charming stud and his exiting life for morally pure accountant

    – a woman leaving her morally pure accountant for the charming stud

    Reaction time is a factor so please answer quickly.

    And yet here I am, this nice, sweet guy.

    Hilarous.

    *cue yet another hissing, spittle-flecked invective from Keith in 3…..2…..1…..

    Like


  411. anon:

    And, for the record, I am not: a former fattie, fat now, or ugly. I am 25, very good looking, in great shape and confident. You are sad.

    He didn’t pull it out of your mouth like he said he would, eh?

    Like


  412. hello:

    “Unlike in North America, in Eastern Europe there is no strong correlation of intellectual and technical interests with dorkiness, and the corresponding stereotypes are much weaker. You’ll find a surprising number of EE men whose professions, erudition, and intellectual interests would suggest extreme nerdiness here, but who are actually manly, handsome, stylish, and know how to deal with women. It would be an interesting topic for a long essay why this is so.”

    Are you based in U.S. or Eastern Europe? You must have a theory or two on this subject. I’ll do my utmost to refrain from fainting.

    I’m originally from EE (former Yugoslavia) and currently based in Canada, which is extremely similar to the U.S. in this regard. As I said, there are many cultural and economic reasons for these differences, and I could easily write a whole essay on the topic. But I’d say that it could be boiled down to three very general factors.

    First, and most important, the general cultural attitude towards erudition for its own sake is much more favorable in EE than in North America. General erudition is something that will get you lots of respect and make people think you’re classy. Of course, it’s not like girls will swoon at your knowledge of history, science, philosophy, etc., but it won’t be a red flag marking you as an undesirable “nerd” either, as long as you’re not pushing it on them or being a smartass.

    In fact, Slavic languages don’t even have words like “nerd” or “geek” that automatically equate pleasure in intellectual pursuits with social ineptitude and lack of manliness (although of course we have plenty of words for only the latter). Also, our usual words for people with extraordinary intellectual interests don’t imply an autistic obsession with a certain narrow area, but rather evoke the picture of an all-around cultured, classy, well-mannered intellectual.

    Second, the relative status of engineering and scientific professions is much higher. Unlike in NA, in EE they’re not considered much (if at all) inferior in status and earning power to law, medicine, or finance. Thus, there’s no assumption that among smart men, the really ambitious, successful, leadership-oriented ones pursue the latter professions, and more dorky ones the former. In fact, due to the legacy of socialism, engineers and scientists are even seen as ambitious people who chose a meritocratic path to success, as opposed to comfortable sinecures where the only way up is through nepotism and political favoritism. (I’m caricaturing things a bit here, but you get the point.)

    Third, the pre-university education system is very different, and also the teenager culture that goes along with it. This is an extremely complex topic in its own right, but the main point is that before university, the segregation between “regular” students and those who take more advanced programs is not done in a way that marks the latter as “unpopular” nerds. Also, thanks to the early legal drinking and smoking age and practical non-enforcement of age verification even before that, teenage hard partying is not considered as some status marker of cool, daring people — it’s something everyone just does normally.

    I could say much more about this topic, but this should give you a rough idea. I have many personal anecdotes to illustrate these points, but I’d rather not share them on a public forum. If you’re really curious about this topic, I can tell you more over email.

    Like


  413. “Part of the reason why men’s affairs are not as destructive to the family (and hence society) as women’s.”

    I was referring to prostitutes, not affairs. Men do leave their wives for mistresses – not as often as the mistresses would like – but it does happen. Also, when a man pays a whore for time he gives her no more money. A mistress sucks money out of a man in gifts dinners etc. not including the money he spends on women who end up not putting out. And men’s affairs are only harmless when their wives accept them. A woman leaving her husband over infidelity is little different than a woman leaving her husband for another man; either way a marriage is broken.

    Like


  414. “If you’re really curious about this topic, I can tell you more over email.”

    I’m interested, let’s do email.

    Like


  415. on November 26, 2008 at 9:06 pm Carlos From Anaheim

    a little late to this party but I found this newscientist.com article ” http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026841.700-the-dizzying-diversity-of-human-sexual-strategies.html?page=1

    page three, paragraph three echoes everything you have touched upon in this blog.

    Like


  416. Chicnoir, the difference is mostly cultural, but partly due to the Romanian tendency to explore other cultures more deeply than Russians. This is a generalization, but a fairly solid one.

    Russians do mix romantically, but usually with European or somewhat westernized people. Romanians more often marry Asians, go live in someplace far from home, and just generally get around more. Russians socialize with Russians, and it’s kind of difficult to get into the circle, but Romanians are freakin’ everywhere. “The Romanian guy” in a social group outside the U.S. sounds like,”the Black guy” in a social group in the U.S.

    Some Romanians/Moldovans of Russian ethnicity have even absorbed enough Romanity to kind of represent in that way. The Romanian guy is always the most macho, the most stylish dresser, takes the least amount of crap from others, holds his liquor the best, and has a severe addiction to extremely stiff hair gel.

    He *always* smells GREAT, in stark contrast to his Russian peers. Russians tend to be a bit relaxed about the smell thing, believing that a human shouldn’t smell like flowers.

    Romanians on the other hand, will take great pains to find the right scent, and will often have some Voodoo-Jadoo-Whateverdoo shaman mix them something as well tailored to their personal body chemistry as their pants are tailored to their characteristically tight buns.

    That is by the way, one way to tell the Romanian guy in a crowd. You could bounce a silver dollar on it.

    Now, I’m told that the women are stunning in Romania, and that the men are kind of hideous…and this is kind of true, if you’re looking at it with an Americanized eye. I don’t know many Romanian guys I’d describe as pretty. Mind you, I haven’t been there yet, but I’ve met many of them because I seem to have a strange RoDar and beacon attached to my forehead or something.

    Meatloaf would probably be considered extremely handsome there, if he was well dressed.

    So I think half of the attraction for me is the voice. Some say Romanians don’t really have an accent when speaking other languages, but they do. It sounds like…singing. When speaking, their voices lilt in a way that is kind of hypnotic.

    Guy: It’s ^such a ^beeaauuuT-iful niiiiight.

    Girl: Why yes I will lick your :: muffled sound ::

    Thing about Romanian guys one has to be watchful for though, is that they tend to go for the purse. So I’m flattered by the attention, but I admire them from afar now.

    Once bitten…

    Like


  417. once you get down to the 3 and below range, you see less sluttiness because those women are simply too ugly to get very many men at all who aren’t degenerate losers.

    I actually still see 3’s getting banged by horny ass black males.
    its funny how most ghetto black guys will brag on how many women they got going in their harem when one actually see’s what they are banging.its like fuckin halloween attack of the blobs !
    Thank god for horny black guys,now I know ugly, fat white women can still get fucked and be happy these days.

    Like


  418. Thank god for horny black guys,now I know ugly, fat white women can still get fucked and be happy these days.

    This is not a black thing, it’s about being poor and the options being broke gets you. Broke men of all races are lenient on fat chicks. Watch Jerry Springer or Maury and you’ll see white trash guys with fatties too. It’s a “prole” thing. It’s just that there is a disproportionate amount of poor people in the black community than any other community.

    But ask yourself, how many rich and successful black people do you see with fat women? Even ghetto rappers, once they get rich and get options, dump the ghetto fattie they used to have for a slimmer hottie. It’s an options thing. There are just a higher proportion of black guys without options than any other race.

    Like


  419. Hello there

    This is my first post on this forum so i just want to say hello to everybody. My name Is Josef i am from LA in USA and i am 16y old :).
    i want to make some online friends…

    cya

    Like


  420. I really like this post, but what is appalling to me is the hatred between men and women going forth.

    Especially most people commenting here have to express their hatred towards women and the idea that they would have to work to support them and kids.

    It’s like this blog is just a place of escape for self- and women-haters out there, but I know its not.

    Guys, with everything that evolution is, you are responsible for the actions you take from knowing this stuff, so its your own self to blame, not women.

    Keep it up.

    Interested if people get my point 🙂

    Like


  421. Thursday-

    I fail to see why contraception, widespread prosperity and female economic equality should have such radically different effects in France than in North America.

    Maybe neither you nor much of anyone else will see this, but i was backreading this thread based on a recommendation from Vladamir, and wanted to pipe up.

    I don’t think there IS as much female economic equality in France as the US or the rest of the Anglosphere. I’m not absolutely sure about that but it’s my strong impression. There’s no affirmative action for anyone in France. And I think there remains a certain amount of favoring men from networks etc. in high corporate, and legal, etc. positions.

    Like


  422. on September 18, 2009 at 5:27 pm SAW: south asian woman

    Someone: Its true what Ricky Raw says, but look at a lot of the modern black dancing, its disgusting in appearance, raw animal nature almost.

    Ricky Raw Dude: And your point is? Sometimes being raw and animal is called for.

    ………………

    In public???

    They even teach their toddlers to do it! Check out youtube.

    Disgusting mleccha Amrika culture.

    Like


  423. by the way, two years later, i realize that i forgot to give you props for the gabriel garcía márquez reference.

    nicely done my friend.

    Like