August 2009 Beta Of The Month

The crack team of Chateau Beta of the Month researchers took a couple weeks off, so the August 2009 BOTM is tardy. Or fashionably late, if you prefer the reframe.

The winner of the July 2009 BOTM, by a wide margin, was Travis D’arby, the SWPL self-parody who can’t figure out why his wife has so many male Facebook friends, and why she won’t accept his friend invitation. She also has the gall to tell him, when he confronts her with the evidence, to keep his beta nose out of her business. They of course talk it out over dinner like the sophisticated urbane couple they are and come to some sort of closure involving “love and understanding” which, in chick language, translates as “the wife continues fucking around on her pathetic husband while he respects her privacy to fuck around on him.”

Congratulations, Travis, your balls have now been shipped to the nearest Ripley’s Believe It Or Not museum for display. Electron microscope required for viewing. And you can stop bobbing your head in the car to “It’s Raining Men”.

August 2009 BOTM Candidate #1 was submitted by reader Billy Blaze and tells the story of a high society blueblood who proves that wealth and social status aren’t enough to shield a man from collapsing into a beta black hole of his own making.

Topper was in Florida for the wedding of one of his longtime moneyed bros. Tinsley, the little trollop, was supposed to join him later at the rehearsal dinner and bring shoes for him to wear. That’s where the trouble started.

In case it isn’t clear, Topper is the man, Tinsley is his wife. You’ve gotta love the faggy and princessy names the upper class gives to their kids. Just as mockable as ghetto and hillbilly names.

Anyhow, Tinsley texted Topper (sounds like the name of a chick flic) to inform him she couldn’t make it to the rehearsal dinner. That’s because Tinsley was busy getting banged out by a European aristotrash.

Tinsley had run off to get boned by a German aristocrat/prince named Casimir Wittgenstein-Sayn, news Topper shared with some of the couple’s friends.

Topper e-mailed his friends to explain: “I know I have involved you guys in our problems and that was wrong. Tinsley is at fault of course but Casi [sic] never gave her a chance to breathe even when I asked him to give us space. He was manipulative and overbearing. I love my wife and we are going to do what we can to salvage this marriage.”

Did you get that? Topper discovers his wife’s infidelity and the guy she’s doing it with, and responds in a most manly fashion by kindly asking the good European gentleman to refrain for a time from drilling Tinsley so that he can work on his marriage, i.e. beg her to come back and give him a reason to go on living.

Topper’s plans for the future include, you guessed it, rushing to forgive his cheap whore of a wife and living out his lonely days in a self-imposed torment of soulripping introspection.

He’s become a full-time smoker. He’s lost weight. He wakes up at precisely 3:25 every morning and plays over and over the reality show his life became. Still, he hasn’t entirely abandoned the idea that she’ll come back. “I love my wife” is all he’ll tell me.

Topper, old sport, you’ve got money, status and youth. Admit that your wife is a filthy whore, stop thinking about her, go to Scores and get yourself a hot stripper for some fun. Whatever you do, don’t cry about your wife to her. Cause she ain’t coming back, although if she catches news of you boffing a stripper she might consider it.

******

August 2009 BOTM Candidate #2 was submitted by Willard Libby. It’s an article about a supremely emasculated man’s wife who started a blog not five months into their marriage to chronicle her husband’s annoying habits. Or, in words this blog’s readers could better appreciate, to utterly humiliate him in public. You can see her blog here.

For his part, [Tiffanie] Wong’s husband, WPIX-TV reporter Mark Joyella, sees the humor in his wife’s blog and has no problem with the outside world knowing of his foibles.

“To me, it’s kind of a tribute to all husbands,” said Joyella, 43, who works for the weekend show “Toni On! New York.”

“I’m sure all husbands have their own quirks.”

Some of Joyella’s most annoying habits, according to his wife’s blog, include his love of fart jokes, the fact he wears the same zip-up green sweater in every family photograph and his inability to figure out the TV remote.

“I’ll ask him to record a show for me and it ends up being Univision or something,” Wong said.

“Have you seen that remote?” Joyella countered. “It has like 50 buttons on it.”

Wong (notice she didn’t take his name) says she loves her husband, but how much longer can she go on feeling love for a man she castrates every day in front of an anonymous public audience cheering on her every revelation? Mark Joyella, for his part, seems like a happy-go-lucky goofball who’s masochistically enjoying the infamy, but he should be careful; aloofness will only buy him so much time. Eventually, a wife who doesn’t respect you enough to keep your dirty laundry private will begin loathing your betaness. Her gina tingles will roam in search of stronger cock antennae.

******

August 2009 BOTM Candidate #3 was submitted by reader West Coast Life. It’s about Sheryl Weinstein, the married woman who had a yearlong affair with Ponzi King Bernie Madoff sixteen years ago. She has just written an opportunistic book about her time as Madoff’s mistress, and in the interview linked to she describes how her husband reacted to her book.

How have your husband and son reacted to the book?
Well, my husband read most of the book. My son hasn’t read it, but he has been very loving and very, very supportive. My husband has also been supportive. It’s something that happened 16 years ago. [My marriage] was a 21-year relationship; the affair lasted about a year or a year and a half. [So] it wasn’t like, “Surprise, I’ve been having an affair for 20 years.” It was more like, “Surprise, I had an affair 15 or 16 years ago.” We’ve really worked hard on our marriage since then, and things have come around, but this really terrible thing happened to us.

Note the sleight of sophistry this cunt is attempting. Her son could despise her, but I’m sure she’s sufficiently self-deluded to believe he’s “very loving and very, very supportive”. And her husband is supportive? Either he’s prudently and cynically encouraging the success of his cheating wife’s book to restock the family’s lost finances, or he’s a beta so thoroughly beaten down in spirit that his testicularly shriveled reflex is to forgive and “support” the wrinkled, over-makeupped skank married to him. Either way, he comes off like a pathetic choad, assuming his wife isn’t lying.

That’s a big assumption. Let’s discuss that word “support”. Has any word in the English language been more misused and abused by women? It’s the go-to word whenever guilt pokes its ugly head into the hollowed crevice carved in the rotten soul of a cheating whore. The word sickens me. Almost always when you hear it spoken by someone you can be assured you are getting sprayed on by the chunky vomit of a pity pimp, an energy vampire, or a blame-shifting slut. The next time you hear someone use the word, call them out on it.

“What exactly do you mean by “support”? No one’s calling you out on your bullshit?”

And then you’ve gotta appreciate the shameless refusal to accept accountability shown by the whore:

We’ve really worked hard on our marriage since then, and things have come around, but this really terrible thing happened to us.

“You see, honey, that whole unpleasantness of Madoff’s dick in my pussy was a terrible thing that happened to us. Just some nebulous cosmic force that alighted upon our happy family for which I bear no responsiblity, and for which you are likely equally responsible anyhow. So let’s try and work through it, and with enough hard work on your part in marriage counseling I might see my way to forgiving you.”

Choice cut cunt, here, folks. Brazenly cunty. The dark side of the cunt.

Why did Weinstein write the book?

This must have been a very painful book for you to write. Why did you decide to do it?
The first part was that the investment decisions in my family were my responsibility, so I felt this tremendous guilt and responsibility about what had happened. My motivation was to try to make things better as much as I can, and that sort of meant putting myself out there.

Cha-ching! Is anyone buying her shit? Her husband? When your wife cheats, you kick her out. End of story. Any other course of action that doesn’t involve wicked vengeance will brand you with the badge of the beta for the rest of your life. Now if only the divorce laws would catch up to this eminently fair and just outlook.

******

The voting:

Who is the August 2009 Beta of the Month winner?



PS: Although it was a popular submission, I didn’t include the guy forced to stand on a DC Metro street corner by his wife and wear a placard confessing his infidelity because it was later revealed to be a local radio station prank.





Comments


  1. #3 is the most beta, in my view, but he has a long-shot way out. In rare cases, divorce courts will side with the man. He should encourage her to put as much incriminating and embarrassing material into that book (“come on honey, let it all out; it was years ago and no one will judge you now”) as he can. Then, he should use it as evidence against her in the divorce proceedings (and, of course, snag a disproportionate share of the revenues, just as victims of crimes get to collect on crime tell-alls in many states). If the children are under 18, he should easily be able to get custody if he manages to get enough “unfit mother” evidence into the book.

    Like


  2. Is anyone else kind of looking forward to the eventual fallout and divorce of Beta #2? I only hope there is a news update when it happens.

    Like


  3. X to the Z

    Is anyone else kind of looking forward to the eventual fallout and divorce of Beta #2?

    I doubt it will happen. Some men like a dominant wife, and some women enjoy being dominant over their beta husbands. Those relationships usually aren’t stable, but they can be, and it sounds like this is one of those couples. Also, it doesn’t sound like the “dirty laundry” is that bad. If she starts blogging about his penis or sexual technique, then it’s a problem. Making fun over his fart jokes and inability to use a TV remote? Lighten up; that’s not emasculation.

    My favorite style of relationship is one in which I hold more of the cards, but the woman thinks she’s the dominant one. If the woman has good character, this will bring out her best and sexiest attributes. (If she has bad character, it will show; she’ll treat you badly, and you can assert your value by dumping her.)

    Like


  4. Tough call, but I give the edge to the guy who’s wife banged Bernie Madoff….

    “The first part was that the investment decisions in my family were my responsibility”

    Take my wallet, please. The guy obviously wears the skirt in the family, and always has.

    Like


  5. The WASP richie is the worst. Game gets you pussy while allowing you to shortcut the soul-sucking and age-inducing quest for money and status. This guy already has money and status. He should be banging 9s and 10s regularly. He has no excuse – other than a pitiful, pathetic soul – for sulking over a piece of ass, and failing to understand the fungibility of pussy.

    Like


  6. on September 21, 2009 at 3:55 pm Professional Engineer

    It seems it’s over for Tinsley Mortimer and her husband, Topper, now that Tinz is in London where she’s taken up with a German prince named Casimir Wittgenstein-Sayn. Why the change of heart? For starters, “Cassie” makes more money than Topper and owns a castle in Germany. Even more importantly, marrying him would finally make the Tinz a princess. And opportunities like that don’t come along every day, naturally. [P6, DM]

    From some gossip rag in NY seems Topper is done as predicted.

    Like


  7. Just like with the Australian billionaire, I had to vote for the rich guy because he should have options. Weinstein’s husband? Probably a total loser. She might be the best he’s got and she probably promised to up their sexy time to biweekly instead of monthly.

    Like


  8. Even more importantly, marrying him would finally make the Tinz a princess. And opportunities like that don’t come along every day, naturally.

    But they do for a prince.

    I’m gazing into my crystal ball and predicting…..

    Prince dumps Tinz. She comes back to loser WASP and he welcomes her with open arms. She uses phrase ‘I loved you all along’.

    Like


  9. on September 21, 2009 at 4:02 pm It's My First Day

    #2 seems like he might be the most salvageable of the three, which also makes his case the most maddening. He seems like he just needs to sack up a bit and tell his wife to stop trying to play the role of the sassy wife in one of those “Fat Guy with a Hot Wife” sitcoms. The other two are lost far down the road of beta. For the first guy, there is hope as he is young and rich, but the last guy is probably old and a lost cause.

    Like


  10. “And you can stop bobbing your head in the car to “It’s Raining Men”.

    beta’s and their gay songs.

    heres an alpha song.(of the decade?) i love the subliminals.

    Like


  11. Get a load of Miz Wong’s jawbone. I voted for her kitchen bitch, because it will be more amusing to watch this fall apart. Rich guy is sad, but that’s pretty typical of the idle rich: they’re forever boning each other’s wives. Best way to think of them is trailer trash; at either end of the class system lies a leisure class. Go look at the Norwegian Royal Family; they are actually marrying into the trailer trash class. The douchebag who married the broad who boned Madoff is just trying to get his money back.

    Like


  12. A tough one this month.

    The dude who’s wife was getting boned by Madoff is likely nearing his 70s and is too far gone down the Beta road to save.

    While Topper Mortimer is young enough to do something about his shame. Therefore his beta crimes are far more egregious.

    Like


  13. SA:”Weinstein’s husband? Probably a total loser.”

    The way I read this, their household had enough money to invest in the Madoff fund. That the guy let his wife invest their money with free reign is enough to tip the scales for me. Risk-averse indeed, those female investors.

    I think the aristocrat crowd has less social prescience than the untitled rich, though they too are generally clueless. I’m willing to excuse the high society man first for believing that his princess is such a special little snowflake. Their lifestyles have no grounding in reality. Don’t get me wrong, “Topper” is a disgrace.

    Has anyone read the ‘Dilbert’ comic strip with the minor character named “Topper”? Funny shit.

    Like


  14. Has to be Topper. #2 is run of the mill. In case #3, I think that the fact that she lost the bulk of the families savings to Bernie is worse than the cheating. Much harder to replace that than her lame ass.

    But the fact that Topper wanted to call a “time-out” so that he could work on his marriage is pathetic. She is obviously just looking for a better meal ticket and will only return to him if Cas doesn’t work-out. If she comes back and he accepts her, that is definite BOTM material. If she runs off with Cas and he is sad and lonely, also definitely BOTM material.

    Given that he is a young and rich blue-blood, that makes his situation far more pathetic than #2 and #3.

    Like


  15. “He’s become a full-time smoker. He’s lost weight.”

    Funny how they mention these like they are bad things.

    Sounds like Topper is on the road to recovery. All he needs to do is ditch the penny loafers and set up shop at the penthouse executive club.

    Or take a trip to the eastern block before winter comes.

    Other note:

    Lets give credit where credit is due. German aristocrat/prince named Casimir Wittgenstein-Sayn seems like a pretty smooth playboy.

    – MPM

    Like


  16. The way I read this, their household had enough money to invest in the Madoff fund.

    Employees usually don’t have a minimum threshold for investment or its very small. Ours is just 10k.

    Like


  17. “I saw NYC’s favorite recently divorced bachelor, Topper Mortimer, stumbling and mumbling at Dorrians on Tuesday night. He was with his social pals, Winston Lapham, Haley Bloomingdale, and even ex-sister in law Dabney Mercer was there. No sight of supposed girlfriend, Vogue’s Valerie Boster, but Mortimer sure seemed to be having enough fun on his own.”

    Banging Ex-s lil sis – could – be a technical DQ.

    My wife got screwed by Bernie, and all I got was BOTM. T-shirts in the Lobby.

    Like


  18. That Wong bitch is a bitch. But, notice that BotMC’s 2 and 3 are collaborating with their wives to further their humiliation. And to cash in on it. They should either be tied for this month’s BotM. Or, the fact that they are cashing in should leave #1 as the winner.

    What clinches it though is that Botm#1 is going through the Indecent Proposal scenario…once the count gets done with the wife, she’ll come running back. And he’ll take muffykins back.

    So, a wealthy dude gets humiliated for free? Winner.

    Like


  19. Deez fuckin betas. Voted for the rich dude.

    Like


  20. #3 gets bonus points because he let his wife invest their money with the same guy who boned her. This is rendered moot though if he didn’t find out about the affair until she sat down to write the book.

    BTW you have to love the dissection of the woman’s words too. Ladies, don’t lie to Roissy.

    Like


  21. on September 21, 2009 at 4:39 pm Ferdinand Bardamu

    I’ll go with Beta #2. Chances are his loving wife is getting her pussy pumped by some jagoff in between her blog updates on his perennial lameness.

    Like


  22. You guys have to read this post by Tiffany Wong’s husband:

    http://myhusbandisannoying.com/2009/08/30/danger-danger-robot-speaks/

    GOOD GOD I found myself grimacing as I read that shit. You can see the pain behind this guy’s words as he tries to make the “Stepford Wife” out to be a *BAD* thing, and promises that he immediately changes each behavior that his wife blogs about.

    In terms of truly soulkilling weakness, #2 is up there.

    This month’s BOTM is a really tough one.

    Like


  23. Okay. I haven’t read the comments, but this is pretty straightforward.

    The last entry is about a woman being extremely disrespectful, but there is no corresponding information on what the MAN did. For all we know from this article, he divorced her or beat her like a rented mule.

    The middle one is ambiguous. Maybe the husband thinks of the blog as some sort of flirtatious jousting, playful negging of some sort. I’m unsure what to make of it.

    But the top one is a FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL. What I don’t understand about a lot of these men is this: My problem with women was that I had overblown fears of expressing my masculinity, lest it be construed as threatening. But the masculinity was still there. I got furious with people. I got really horny when I saw a hot chick. A lot of these men are so thoroughly emasculated that you gotta wonder whether there is ANYTHING in the world that makes their blood boil. It’s like this guy doesn’t even HAVE the primal animal reaction of HOW DARE THAT MAN FUCK MY WIFE!?!?!?!?!?! It’s seems that this man’s HEARTFELT reaction was that someone piping his wife was a simple matter best left to diplomacy. If that happened to me, my instinct would be for violence. Now granted, I’d repress that end of my reaction, but I would most certainly get a divorce and burn all physical reminders of our relationship.

    I mean. Even David Alexander probably has something that makes his blood boil. For him, it is probably the destruction of the original Penn Station in NYC that does it for him. HOW DARE THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS DO THIS!?!?!?! ARGHGHGHGHGHGHG!?!?!?! Am I right David?

    The guy at the top of the list is the biggest beta by far.

    Like


  24. Mike said- “The WASP richie is the worst. Game gets you pussy while allowing you to shortcut the soul-sucking and age-inducing quest for money and status. This guy already has money and status. He should be banging 9s and 10s regularly. He has no excuse – other than a pitiful, pathetic soul – for sulking over a piece of ass, and failing to understand the fungibility of pussy.”

    This is my biggest problem with whole “game is king” philosophy.

    Sure, you can take a shortcut to getting pussy, but pussy don’t pay the bills.

    The way you phrased the first part of your comment almost makes it sound like getting laid should be your top priority in life, and that the only reason to pursue wealth is for the tail that it gets you.

    I absolutely believe in the power of game, but too many men get caught up in the idea that the guy who gets the most pussy at the end of the day is the winner. From a strictly biological standpoint I would concur. From an “enlightened male” standpoint I have a different POV.

    I think EVERY man should learn and practice the principles of game, but I also believe that every man should be working on building his kingdom. At some point down the road the kingdom building will pay off (the idea that it is a soul sucking, age-inducing quest is BS for the man who has a passion for it, as every man should) and your knowledge of “game” AND your pursuit of wealth will come together and the gods of poon will reward you with truckloads of as much grade A meat as you can handle.

    And you will never have to worry about having a roof over you or your harem’s heads. Ever.

    Like


  25. I was going to vote #1, pure and simple cheating whore, beta whiny husband. However #3 becomes the choice for me. At first I wanted to give the husband props for capitalizing on her cheating and making $$, then hopefully dumping her. Then I realized that will never happen because he already made the mistake of letting her invest money in the first place. Nothing’s more beta than letting your whore wife play investor with your cash.

    Like


  26. I cannot decide. They all are disgusting examples of manhood. How can a man live this way and be so delusional?

    Can we have a three way tie? All three of these losers deserve this award!

    Like


  27. that chicken-head who makes fun of her husband on her blog has a kind of beta of the month series too. except its called “Photo Friday.”

    http://myhusbandisannoying.com/2009/09/18/its-photo-friday/#comment-1174

    Like


  28. xsplat

    X: And O, you keep mentioning that you’ve read the good Game books, have done “the inner work”, and that you have made many substantial contributions to this forum regarding game.

    O: Yes, and that is what others have said about me as well. Your point?

    X: Off the top of my head I can’t recall a thing you’ve mentioned about game. Nothing unique, at least. Do you talk about dominance? Nope.

    O: Do I need to, X? And, by “dominance” exactly what do you mean? That’s a loaded word that can and does have differing meanings depending on who you ask.

    X: You mentioned pussy licking a bit.

    O: Quite a bit, actually. I rather enjoy it. In order to do it well, it helps.

    X: We know you like to take the seduction process slowly.
    O: Yes. Women have to court me. I ain’t no cheap thrill.

    X: Nothing other than that stands out. What did I miss? And don’t tell me to reread everything – surely you could make a few points off the top of your head.

    O: You can begin right here in this thread, one of the posts which reappears at Ferdinand Bardamu’s In Mala Fide blog and which he recently referred to with praise. I’ve talked about other important points wrt Game in this thread. Check em out.

    O

    Like


  29. As Tony Montana once said: “Fucking WASP whore.”

    “Sure, you can take a shortcut to getting pussy, but pussy don’t pay the bills.”

    Unless your pimping.

    Or run a p*rn outfit.

    – MPM

    Like


  30. i was tough to choose between #2 & #3, cause
    both are being humiliated in front of the masses.

    i’ll go with #2

    his annoying habits should be unknown to everyone.
    i laugh and shake my head at the new age idiots who feel
    umpowered that their negative actions are being broadcast to everyone they know though their wives/girlfriends because they don’t “take themselves to seriously”.

    most woman have a habit of going to their moms/girlfriends/anyone with something bad about YOU to
    talk about.

    i know a woman who would talk bad about her boyfriend to anyone who’d listen,
    almost to a point where his negative actions were the only thing she’d have to talk about.

    one day she told him that she was moving to atlanta, georgia.
    she’s just visiting a friend who lives down there but
    needed a reason to dump him since she’s wanted to for months.

    Like


  31. Topper and it’s really not even close. Whatever happened to beating your wife’s lover with a baseball bat, or as Roissy suggested, using your youth, wealth and status to score some fresh ass? I wouldn’t tolerate this shit and I fuckin’ make $14 an hour.

    Betaness %: 90 (only redemption is that he at least has a girl, you don’t end up with a cheating whore without having a girl in the first place)

    Wong is just being bitchy and whiny like all women invariably get, just through another medium. Let he who hasn’t ever been with a broad who drank too much wine and decided to air your dirty laundry at her office Christmas party cast the first stone. I’d think letting it get to you is more Beta than letting it slide like her husband is. IMO the least Beta of the three, maybe he can even channel some of his ‘fame’ into pussy? Stranger things happen everyday.

    Betaness: 65% (talk to your girl, listen to her, and if she pulls this shit, try to take advantage of it before you get too close to the woodchipper)

    The bitch who banged Madoff is just using it to leverage herself financially, her husband just hopes he’s a stop on the gravy train, these are tough times. I hope he doesn’t let her invest in some frou frou personal branding or handbags for dogs or some such shit.

    Betaness: 75% (solely on the grounds of his letting her invest the money. Investing requires three things no woman has or understands; awareness of cause and effect, objectivity and the ability to withstand pressure)

    Like


  32. #1 is ratehr disqualified because, while he is getting one-itis, apparently he played around early on. She’s tightened her grip on his genitals.

    # 2 is ongoing moderate humiliation, a henpecked husband whose wife henpecks in public for her own glory (no doubt amongst her feminist bitch frends).

    # 3 is supreme humiliation, but with a “I don’t do that anymore” thread running through it.

    # 3 is strong—I would kick her to the curb—but #2 is stronger, if onyl because its barely 6 months in, and she already has no respect for the guy.

    #2, FTW.

    P.S. after reading the blog, you see what a whiny American princess wong is. She complains “we haven’t gone on vacation in 6 months, since the wedding.”

    6 months. wow. a whole 6 months? how did you survive, o queen of the universe? your job at CNN promoting Obama’s facism is sooooo demanding.

    And note she is saying “gone” on vacation as opposed to “took.” Because its only good enough for her if she “goes” someplace exotic. A week off just relaxing doesn’t count.

    massive. cunt. do not want.

    Like


  33. Richie Rich appears to be, as G says, on the road to recovery. A few more drinks, a few blocks in either direction on 2nd Avenue, or a cab ride downtown and prognosis positive.

    Joyella. No comment. Interested in how it plays out. Wild speculation: He’s the first ever 2-time beta-of-the-month nominee.

    I voted for Madoff’s Minions. Cause I’m a family values kinda guy. It’s bad enough she shames the husband, but does she have to shame the kid? I mean, come on.

    Like


  34. #1 wins hands down. GFTOW!

    Infidelity is just unforgivable.

    Like


  35. Oh wow, wait. Hmmm … torn between 1 and 3. Meh, I’ll take 1.

    Like


  36. It’s clearly number 1 and by a country mile.

    The stuff wife #2 is doing to her husband is only unusual among betas in that she put it on the internet. Beta wife’s gossip about their husband’s negative foibles and e.g. sexual performance all the time. Even alpha’s gf’s do to some extent or tend to, with very loyal exceptions- though what they have to report will have a better mix. Alphas can highten that loyalty though by being displeased and punishing about any breaches of it. (By letting her know and then cold shouldering her etc.) So anyway, yeah guy #2 is beta and shouldn’t be putting up with it but it’s pedestrian beta.

    If the story we have is true guy #3’s wife cheated 17 years ago and he’s only recently found out about it. She’s implied she’s been faithful since. It’s absurd to ascribe losing their money to Madoff as his betaness. Yeah it was imprudent investing to put some many eggs in one basket but it wasn’t beta relations with his wife, since she seemed to be working at a low risk but consistently very high returns firm. For all we know guy $3 is gonna leave her once it’s clear her book makes a lot of money.

    The standout is clearly guy #1. It’s an ongoing cuckolding of him unlike guy #3 which was eons ago. #1 is taking no steps to divorce her despite no prospect of her earning “marital property” before he does and despite the ongoing fact that he’s being publicly humiliated in the gossip rags of the country and the circles he moves in. The putze probably didn’t even get a prenup. But whatever, it doesn’t get better to wait. As the markets improve it get’s worse financially. But the main thing is the ongoing flagrant cuckolding of him with no end in sight that he’s not putting an end to. And his not getting on with his own sexual life elsewhere.

    The way he acted with his friends and acquaintances in Palm Beach when she didn’t show up because she wanted to remain with her lover was pathetic. Further her telling him that outright and other things in the article indicate that he’s known this has been going on for some time and hasn’t at the bare minimum given her an absolutely ultimatum. Or as Roissy said, simply thrown her out upon discovery and filed for divorce.

    As most American wives know and as our culture is constantly telling them, his position in getting her back on his own terms would be MUCH stronger if she had already been thrown out of their house. Of course feminist American law usually doesn’t allow throwing wives out, other than if violent to children or maybe to him. He should try though by changing the locks etc. while she’s away with her lover and after he’s filed for divorce, including in the filing a request for a court order that she remain vacated.

    Clearly #3 is BOTM.

    Like


  37. on September 21, 2009 at 5:53 pm The Fifth Horseman

    Horseman #2 : Sex Technologies :

    A big update today for sexbots, from an Instapundit link. Instapundit is actually chronicling sexbot advances…

    I still would not buy one, but I will certainly relish the drop in SMV that all women below the ranking of 8 will receive, by the year 2020.

    A sexbot cannot replace love. Yes. Hence, women will have to LEARN how to be loving towards a man, since that is all they will have to offer ahead of the robot.

    That will shape them up.

    Like


  38. I was Torn between #1 and #3. I finally voted for Topper, because like another commenter said, he *should* have options, but decided to neuter himself. #3 may not have found out about the affair until many years later, and he was probably never rich/handsome to begin with.

    So #1 seems to have committed the biggest cardinal sin.

    Like


  39. I consider #2 as the most beta, as he continues to be publicly humiliated, and does nothing about it.

    Being cheated on has a past tense. It isn’t the end of the world, nor of a healthy sex or even love life.

    Being disrespected continually and publicly, especially for a public figure, is debasing directly to the mans authority.

    I get it that some people value the purity of the pussy more than the continued authority of the man. The essence of beta is allowing your authority to be debased, without challenge.

    Like


  40. Topper FTW.

    That he sent out an email detailing his cuckoldry and his sensitive heart’s anguish to all his friends is what puts him over the, ahem, top.

    Like


  41. Mortimer is a “rainmaker” at a wealth-management firm.
    I guess NYC.
    I also guess a Jew-free bunker on 5th Avenue or by that famous tear eroded hole-in-the-ground. Serves him right. I roar with laughter at his misery.

    Joyella works for a weekend show called Toni On! New York. Didn’t I see the last funny thing Will Ferrel do – a parody of this on SNL?

    Is there any place more pussified, yet incongruously touts its “edginess than New Yawk?”
    Nope.
    We know Lilgrl is apprenticing at the foot of this Evil Sith Lord. Soon, The Circle shall be complete. Still, at least she gets her fuck on.
    Jell-0 likes fart jokes. I just cracked a fart joke to pupu. Joyboy can be saved. I weren’t laughing, I just might do it.

    If I was 5 and found out my Sainted Mother allowed Bernie Madoff even 25 feet near her cooch, I’d kick her in it. Then, hunt him down and eat his liver. Plus, I bet the cuckoldry and fuckage took place in….New Yawk.

    New Yawk has proven itself beyond resonable doubt that it, no longer is The Center of The Known Universe.

    Shanghai is.

    Like


  42. We can all learn from the cunts.

    “Babes, that orgy you found out about, wasnt that the most beautiful thing to happen to our sex lives?” In my life this works. If i know it will fail, I may try. “That Orgy was an awful thing to happen to our relationship. I love how supportive you have been in working things out.”

    Like


  43. Topper, FTW.

    On a separate note, there should be a special place in hell for cunts like Weinstein (the Madoff Mistress). Where’s a big black felon with a rape-murder conviction when you need one?

    Like


  44. The first one sounds either made up or embellished. If true, then Topper should win purely for the fact of his name, but I don’t totally buy it. “Casimir Wittgenstein-Sayn,” really?

    Nonetheless, I voted for #3. #2 is bad, but blogging about “foibles” is a minor annoyance in comparison to writing a book about having banged Madoff. Nominee #2’s reaction isn’t the greatest, but if the foibles are minor and he truly doesn’t care, then he can credibly say that he doesn’t care.

    Like


  45. The first dude mentioned in the bigger beta. And what sort of faggy name is “Topper”? What is wrong with people these days.

    Like


  46. Topper Headon from the Clash was a badass drummer.

    Like


  47. I don’t know about #2, other than letting his wife complain on a blog he’s not really doing anything that bad. It doesn’t sound like he gives in to her demands which is the important thing.

    Last week, Joyella bought his wife a calculator for her birthday and took her out to dinner at a fast-food joint.

    Rest assured, a description of the enchanting evening made its way on to the blog the following morning.

    I think he’s playing it right, he pulls this crap and she complains about it. It’s their ‘thing’. The day he is screwed is the when/if he starts habitually giving in and giving credence to her complaints and demands.

    The blog seems like a giant shiat-test that he seems to be passing so far. Guaranteed if he did all of the things she complains about she would leave him. Nothing to complain about, leaves her with no blog and a ‘boring’ relationship.

    Like


  48. Brain infarction. That should be:

    Clearly #1 is BOTM.

    Like


  49. DF waxed:

    Where’s a big black felon with a rape-murder conviction when you need one?

    he’s around here
    somewhere

    Like


  50. Clarification:that pic was not of beta#2 specifically, but of some other beta husband gay’ing it up

    Like


  51. O

    O: You can begin right here in this thread

    I was hoping for something more like an off the cuff summary, but I could read a specific post of yours, if you would be so kind as to provide the link.

    My point stands – I’m not sure what you mean with regards to your contribution. I agree that others feel that way about what you write.

    As for dominance, I can explain what that means to me and how it is crucial as the main foundation for attraction, if you are interested.

    Like


  52. Posted this at #2’s website:

    “Roissy’s right. Your disrespect for your husband in the form of nitpicking his faults is one thing; him putting up with it is another. Your hypergamous reptilian brain will grow so disgusted by his vaginatude that you will eventually leave him – the cancerous seed dooming your relationship has already been planted, and with every blog post you water the seeds of the dissolution of your relationship. And you didn’t even wait long, either – March 2009. Let me guess – he’s rich?”

    Like


  53. The only interesting thing is that youtube vid.

    Bitch you breakfast, lovely vorarephilia!

    Like


  54. It has to be #1

    #2 isn’t that beta- the wife is only blogging about minor stuff, and he is handling the blog with aloofness and humor- it’s not as good as putting his foot down, but it’s not whiny, sniveling, supplication that earns someone a BotM.

    #3 is putting up with an affair- but it was an affair that happened 15 years ago. It’s not as though he is putting up with continuing adultery. Plus, he stands to get rich off the proceeds of the book.

    #1 though is sickeningly beta. This is a guy who should have it so easy- he has looks, wealth, and status. It’d be easy for him if he were to just put a little bit of effort into game, but instead he mopes around over one girl when he could have as many as he wants.

    There are alot of aspiring PUAs in lairs all across the country who have none of thsoe advantages and who work very hard- approaching set after set after set going out night after night trying to get better… And this pathetic rich guy sits around moping.

    Clear cut BotM.

    Like


  55. Antonio: That isn’t Beta #2, that’s a reader submission on from one of the many cunts that reads her blog.

    Like


  56. I’m leaning towards agreeing that #1 is the major beta. But then I’m reminded that his main fault is oneitis and trying to salvage a ruined relashionship. Is that really so beta? Anyone heartbroken knows how difficult those obsessive thoughts can be, and how easy it is to pine for the good old days.

    But while in a relationship (as opposed to #1 who lost his before he admitted it), the man must own his wench and be able to tell her what to do.

    Tell her.

    I guess I’ll go for #1 as the winner, but #2 holds the greater life lesson.

    Like


  57. who the hell buys a book about a wrinkled whore who was banged by a crook when she was already wrinkled (though not a whore, yet) ???

    Like


  58. I give honorary beta status to any men whose wife/gf buys this book and refuses to see the implication

    Like


  59. Doug1 explains my rationale to a tee.

    Topper, and it ain’t close.

    Like


  60. I say 1.

    I don’t think 2 is really a big deal. I see where you’re coming from but…it seems kinda weak. Anyway, like someone else mentioned — he seems to be standing his ground.

    @ FP

    Do tell me about this Dark-Sith-Lord-apprenticeship.

    Like


  61. on September 21, 2009 at 8:20 pm Jesus was a leprechaun

    Genes May Explain Why Children Who Live Without Dads Have Earlier Sex

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090915100955.htm

    Like


  62. Even David Alexander probably has something that makes his blood boil.

    Things that make David Alexander boil:

    – Roissyists who deny his theories.
    – The kids messing up his stuff.
    – Bus rapid transit activists.
    – People that are against rail transit and 25kV railway electrification.

    [editor: what about women who trim their nails as short as men?]

    I should note that a recent episode of family guy discussed the issue at hand, and I referenced it on my blog a few nights ago…

    Like


  63. Firepower:
    he’s around here
    somewhere

    I thought Obsidian was only 5’8″ and into black chicks?

    I kid, I kid, O

    xsplat:
    But then I’m reminded that his main fault is oneitis and trying to salvage a ruined relashionship. Is that really so beta?

    Almost by definition.

    Like


  64. #1, without a doubt. “Tinsley is at fault of course but Casi [sic] never gave her a chance to breathe even when I asked him to give us space.”

    Chris is right. Any man who “asks” the guy who is fucking his wife to “give us space” rather than boiling over in a murderous rage is so far into beta-dom as to be past the point of no return.

    Like


  65. #1.

    Not only does he have other options afforded by his wealth and status, but at no point did he express any outrage over being wronged, or having his status as a man undermined.

    Seriously, do people have no shame these days?

    #2 – Being catty about the blog would come across as more beta than simply ignoring it, or even writing a guest-post. Being able to mock oneself requires a sure sense of self.

    #3 – Definitely beta, but he doesn’t strike me as much as Topper does.

    Like


  66. Bottomless pit of despair, thy name is Beta-man!

    These stories are a fantastic cautionary tale for recovering betas. Reminds me of being married. I never shared The Succubus with random Eurotrash, but she did pull that Facebook trick. Oh no, these are not extreme examples. This shit happens to betas everywhere. Thankfully I have been shown the path of righteousness.

    Like


  67. Howdy, evening crowd.

    I’m having second thoughts about whether Beta #2 should be classified as BotM material at all. One trait of a great relationship is the occasional right of the man to (gasp!) be beta and submissive to his lover once in a while. Being dominant is great, but submission and worship can also be fun, too. Mixing it up is ideal, IMO. This is why I don’t think a guy should necessarily be denigrated for being “beta”.

    I’m not saying one should become a doormat, or be submissive all the time– and he should always demand respect– but what fun is a relationship where she doesn’t get to lead, and be “alpha”, once in a while?

    I wouldn’t be comfortable with a wife running a blog making fun of me, but if it works for them, then it’s great. It seems to be in good jest.

    Also, I don’t think “game” applies nearly as strongly to relationships as to picking up club trash. Bar sluts are interchangeable and simple and “game” has already figured them pretty well out. Normal, healthy women are individual and complex and no one has ever successfully figured even one out.

    [editor: this is a common misunderstanding typically heard from fembots of ill will. it is wrong. most men who know and run game are not picking up “bar sluts”. they are picking up women from all walks and stations of life. the principles of game work on all women, just as the principles of beauty and effective display of beauty work on all men.]

    The PUA’s dismal and misogynistic view of women is pretty accurate– of about 30-50% of girls out there. However, they’re also the worst women, and not the kind one would want for a relationship in any case.

    [every woman is an animal under the veneer. never forget that.]

    Like


  68. Roissy: It depends on how you define “game”.

    [editor: psychosocial dominance. or, if you’re the romantic sort, seduction.]

    The problem with “game” is that (a) the concept is amorphous enough that it can be extended to include nearly anything that is successful, and (b) it suffers from the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, in that a person who attempts to apply “game” but fails (e.g. Sodini) can be said not to have understood it properly.

    [a) game refers to a specific set of immediate male behaviors that increase attraction in women through status enhancement. these behaviors can be broken down into three major parts: verbal demonstration of high status and intrigue, bodily demonstration of high status, and strategic escalation. the tactics of game are very specific and are underpinned by widely accepted theories of evolutionary psychology and natural and sexual selection in general. other factors that raise a man’s status include looks, wealth and fame, but these value enhancers do not fall under the definition of game. b) we have no idea if sodini attempted to apply game. based on what we know about him, it is likely he did nothing more than attend a seminar and read some material without ever having approached a woman. he was a virgin for 20 years after all. be that as it may, your scotsman premise is false. no one who knows the score is claiming that a man who uses game but fails at it has misunderstood game, because that would require believing that properly run game will work on every woman at every time. there are too many variables in seduction of women for such a belief to have any validity. but just because game isn’t a guarantee of sex and love doesn’t mean it won’t increase the odds of getting sex and love.]

    Game isn’t science; it’s pseudoscience (but, sometimes, shockingly effective pseudoscience).

    [hi keith. no, game isn’t science, but it’s not pseudoscience either, unless you want to argue that any practical application of established scientific theory to a problem not originally envisioned by the theorizers that results in improved outcomes for the practitioner is pseudoscience. if you do want to argue that, then you should be prepared to indict all second order uses of accepted scientific theory as pseudoscience.]

    I agree on “all walks of life”, in that there are “gameable” women at all levels of social class and education, but a woman who will have casual sex with someone because he demonstrated superficial social skill is a “bar slut”.

    [define “casual sex”.]

    Yes, she might have an Ivy League degree and an upper-class family pedigree. Still a dirty slut.

    [game is just as effective at keeping a wife happy as it is at picking up a woman to eventually become your wife.]

    Like


  69. Testify, Rosie. Would any guy stop noticing hotties once he’s married? Of course not, just as no woman ever stops trying to get the best deal for herself in the mating market.

    Like


  70. I realize this thread’s about the Beta of the Month; however, I’m greatly appreciative of any advice my fellow Roissy readers could give me:

    I do volunteer work at a public library and come in contact with all age groups – esp young people. I dress my best. New cloths, shirts ironed, shoes shined, shaved, cologne, hair buzzed REAL short because I am almost shiny on top. I am thin but work out. I was told I look good.

    At least a few young girls like me. Some of the 15-18 year olds. I was shocked! This is TRUE. They make it obvious, at 16 their hormones are in high gear. Teasing and talking to them about fun things makes them perk up.

    So far I don’t have the balls to persue anything. Until now. I will suggest pizza or to meet in a public establishment so she can feel safe. Pick her up at her house? I will come up with a plan. I know I can pull this off.

    The sex of course would be great with a beautiful, fresh young girl but I am really curious about the type of convo and things we would do. I don’t intend to use then discard her. They are beautiful young flowers.

    State law says I can go down to age 16. Not jail bait. Below 16 is.

    I want to know how you would react (if at all) seeing a clean cut older man with a very young girl in public

    Is it normal for me to date a young girl?

    Like


  71. I voted for No.2. A spineless herb utterly under his wife’s thumb. Agrees and Amplifies her negs, but not in a good way. Sleeping on that couch on her blog masthead, he looks like Ross Geller from”Friends.”

    Guy No.1… there is Byronic grandeur in being a failed patrician who smokes, fasts, and wakes up every night in cold-sweat torments. Been there. (though not in cuckoldry)

    Guy No.3… boring old people…

    Like


  72. Cless:

    Game is effective on every kind of girl, including church girls. In many ways, women are not all that different from each other. Certain variations of game, such as asshole game, may be less effective on higher quality women, but while they may reject cruder manifestations of it, all women are attracted to psychosocial dominance.

    I’d agree that the view often propounded here that all women are completely arational, amoral animals who blindly follow their gina tingles is a vast exaggeration, but what attracts the bad girl is pretty much the exact same thing that attracts the good girl.

    Like


  73. And the award for leading the reader to an interesting wikipedia lookup goes to PA, for Byronic Hero.

    The Byronic hero typically exhibits the following characteristics:[citation needed]

    * high level of intelligence and perception
    * cunning and able to adapt
    * criminal tendencies
    * sophisticated and educated
    * self-critical and introspective
    * mysterious, magnetic and charismatic
    * struggling with integrity
    * power of seduction and sexual attraction
    * social and sexual dominance
    * emotional conflicts, bipolar tendencies, or moodiness[citation needed]
    * a distaste for social institutions and norms
    * being an exile, an outcast, or an outlaw
    * “dark” attributes not normally associated with a hero[citation needed]
    * disrespect of rank and privilege
    * a troubled past
    * cynicism
    * arrogance
    * self-destructive behavior

    I know that man. I am that man.

    Like


  74. @Thursday on sexbots: those have been out for awhile.

    The German company supposedly improved on the idea, but then, so has RealDoll.

    Like


  75. OMG… I know who Tinsley is! I stopped following her when she started getting old (30+). She was in Vogue and how was sort an NYC “It” girl for a while. And then Olivia Palermo (who is now on MTV’s The City) overtook her… somthing about Social Rank.com. The 30 y.o. vs. the 20 y.o…. Tinsley=VH1, Olivia=MTV lol.

    Any way… I vote for #1 just because I am familiar with social climbing b*tches like that. She’s playing the game… and her richie rich hubby is letting her, interesting.

    #2 is just plain disrespectful, you don’t say that stuff in public about a man…in private is bad enough. wtf

    #3 sounds typical about old married couples… and how they needed to “work through issues” and all sort of too complicated emotional psycho stuff I don’t get… wtf… booooring

    Like


  76. [editor: what about women who trim their nails as short as men?]

    Eh, I have things that induce far more anger. For example, the females who call into my roadside assistance firm, and then have idea of what to do while wasting my time and asking stupid questions. I’ve had a number of those calls from the past few weeks from women of all ages who seem to run to either daddy, boyfriend, or husband, and it frustrates me to no end to see these women harass the men in their lives in that fashion…

    Stuff that also pisses me off

    – New York State Police and their revenue enhancement
    – America’s sub par low as fuck speed limits. If 80 mph is safe enough for France, it’s safe enough for America.
    – Canada’s absurd high prices
    – Athena’s black Uggs

    Like


  77. The PUA’s dismal and misogynistic view of women is pretty accurate– of about 30-50% of girls out there. However, they’re also the worst women, and not the kind one would want for a relationship in any case.

    Totally untrue. Most Game material that gets pushed is geared towards 9+s. These aren’t the ‘worst’ of women at all. They just put on airs of being a bitch and they don’t suffer from the common female malady of crippling self-esteem issues. Underneath that bitch shield most of them are just like every other woman. Why wouldn’t they be?

    Game can be tweaked for different cross sections of women though. You need to make your own observations about the kinds of women you want. The dynamics of getting an introverted, low self-esteem, girl-next-door type that you deem to be quality (or whatever you consider quality) are essentially the same; displaying value, building attraction, and comfort, et cetera. The method and results are the same even if you have to pull out a different set of tools for the job.

    (a) the concept is amorphous enough that it can be extended to include nearly anything that is successful

    Game is just the ability to attract women through a conscious effort on your part. So yes, anything that is successful in this endeavor and is purposeful is Game.

    (b) it suffers from the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, in that a person who attempts to apply “game” but fails (e.g. Sodini) can be said not to have understood it properly.

    False. There was a post here just this weekend that gave projections on what different men could accomplish. Game can improve your lot, but it can’t get you anything under the Sun. Sodini had problems outside of not being able to apply Game. He didn’t even have any friends, much less the ability to attract women. He is in no way representative of a normal human being. You want to talk about the 50% of women that are allegedly ‘gameable’, but you bring up Sodini that represents what percentage of the male population now?

    I agree on “all walks of life”, in that there are “gameable” women at all levels of social class and education, but a woman who will have casual sex with someone because he demonstrated superficial social skill is a “bar slut”.

    You obviously don’t get what is going on in interacting with a woman. What does any women find in her boyfriend besides those superficial social skills? Does she somehow gaze into his soul and know him with her mystical powers upon meeting him if she is of this allegedly ungameable tribe of females?

    Maybe after they have been together for a few years, they know each other on a very intimate social level and her attraction has a rationale behind it. She still had to be attracted to him in the first place to get there, and since she didn’t know him intimately instantaneously that attraction by definition had to be fundamentally shallow; superficial.

    Nice low blow with the misogynist label as well. By your count possibly as much as 50% of the female population of the civilized world are ‘bar sluts’, where as I see them as particularly rare. They are just regular women who are susceptible to the very human condition of being attracted to members of the opposite sex.

    Like


  78. Roissy: reasonable definition. I agree that “game” succeeds extremely well on its own terms. On the other hand, I think that women who respond most strongly to laughable dominance displays are wretched whores. If “game” works on most women, then most women are whores. I, for one, would not want to be married to a woman who might leave me upon meeting a man with superior “game”. I’d rather hold out for someone with better values. That doesn’t mean anyone should stop using “game”; do what you want to do.

    Thursday: but what is “dominance”? There are good and bad kinds of dominance. Being an intelligent and ambitious person can be cast as a sort of “dominance”, but those are good traits. Socially “dominant” people, on the other hand, are usually overbearing, narcissistic assholes. So even if the bad and good girls are both attracted by “dominance”, the type of “dominance” that attracts each can be very different. For example, the “church girl” is probably attracted by “spiritual dominance”– compassion, charity, leadership, kindness. Those are all good traits. The bar slut is attracted by socio-sexual dominance– physical aggression, mean-spiritedness, narcissism, and the threat of danger. Those are bad traits.

    K: A woman with a “bitch shield” is just that. A bitch, and a bad person. Let’s say a billionaire goes around insulting people for being poorer than he is, making unnecessary messes for other people to clean up, and generally being a rude shithead to virtually everyone. He confides in you that it’s just “an air”; it’s his “rich shield”. Does that excuse his behavior? Of course not. Is he still a despicable person? Obviously. The same holds for women with bitch shields.

    That she’s a “9+” doesn’t change the fact that a woman with a “bitch shield” is a despicable wretch, among the worst that humanity as to offer.

    I also think you severely underestimate what’s happening in the best long-term relationships if you think that they’re only about “superficial social skills”.

    Regarding a large number of women being disgusting bar sluts, well… it’s quite possibly true. Most people (in both genders) are of detestably low quality.

    Like


  79. One of the aspects I find particularly annoying about common “Game Theory” is the focus on seducing the standard ‘Urban Grrrl’ in western cities. I realize that the commonality of upbringing, culture and personality of these girls makes them ideal targets for PUAs who seek to gain the most ‘notches’, but some of us might want a girl who doesn’t fit this mold.

    Lately, I’ve been trying to seek resources within the “Game” community focused on priming myself for and seducing different types of women for both short-term and long-term relationships.

    I haven’t been very successful outside of the Roissysphere. [Tangent: Which is why I prefer the Roissysphere to the PUA-community. It focuses on “Game” for the man who wants to maintain a life and interests outside of just ‘Pick-Up’.]

    Would anyone have any suggestions of PUGs or other resources that concentrate on these areas? Not just foreign game, but game for different cultures, interest groups or sub-cultures.

    Like


  80. I’ve gotta go with #1. It’s one thing when a guy is so subservient that he begs his woman’s forgiveness for making her cheat on him and sticks around to let her do it some more. A lot of us were raised to put women on pedestals, so it’s easy to fall into that trap if you don’t know any better. But it’s another level of loser entirely who goes to the guy she cheated with and kisses his ass too.

    Like


  81. compassion, charity, leadership, kindness.

    Leadership, yes. The rest, no.

    P.S. I’ve told the exact same stories, done the exact same teases etc. with girls in church and girls in bars and they have responded exactly the same. My game was pretty much indistinguishable and so was the response.

    Like


  82. A woman with a “bitch shield” is just that. A bitch, and a bad person.

    No, beautiful women have to protect themselves against all the approaches they get. They can’t stop and have a nice conversation with everyone.

    Like


  83. Interesting about women with b*tch shields…

    I don’t think it’s the best way for a woman to handle unwanted attention, and it definitely screens out some great guys who don’t give an immediately good impression sometimes, but I understand why some girls do it.

    It’s VERY, VERY hard to control gratuitous male attention without being very mean and obvious. Some guys just don’t get the hint, or will overstep the comfortzone when they are trying to act Alpha (and are not internally Alpha). This might be one reason why some hot girls are b*tchy too sometimes. There are also bitter and stuck-up girls too… for the latter, being b*tchy conveys exclusivity and makes most guys think twice before approaching (a good thing perhaps).

    Personally I prefer to act a little aloof/ditzy/distracted/always on the go to screen out too many guys or unwanted guys. I’ve ignored more Facebook requests, text messages, phone calls, e-mails than I can count… and have been called out on doing that maybe once. Some guys have been trying everything under the sun for YEARS now… make up excuses to ask my opinion on something, or remember some obscure interest I must have mentioned… it’s kind of funny but sad.

    Also, if I meet a guy I can usually feel the “asking me out” coming a few minutes before it happens, so can leave the situation immediately and avoid having to blatantly reject, which always comes across as mean or disingenuine.

    Guys who are smooth wait for a lot of indicators of interest any way… it’s the dorks who go full speed ahead or are too shy to be obvious and dig up your email later and stuff.

    Like


  84. OK while I was writing my comment I can see people like Thursday get it.

    Yup, I am no “Perfect 10” (at least not yet hehe)… but it seems like if you are attractive to one man and sweet, you are attractive to a lot of them… and some socially inept guys out there will truly turn into stalkers or major PESTS unless you are super duper obvious and mean.

    Like


  85. Let’s say a billionaire goes around insulting people for being poorer than he is, making unnecessary messes for other people to clean up, and generally being a rude shithead to virtually everyone. He confides in you that it’s just “an air”; it’s his “rich shield”.

    You don’t even know what a bitch shield is, because this is an absolutely ludicrous analogy that doesn’t even touch upon the basic motive for a bitch shield.

    By your standards, if an Evangelical Christian Bible thumps up to your door and you don’t let him try to convert you for as long as he wants, you are a wretch of humanity (which is probably true of you, but theoretically there could be a decent human being that doesn’t want to be Bible thumped into submission on his porch on a regular basis).

    The bitch shield is nothing more than the courtship equivalent of telling a Jehovah’s Witness to take a hike. A social ‘No Solicitors’ sign. Just because a women is a bitch to you specifically, doesn’t mean that she is a bitch altogether, to everyone. Does she have no friends, boyfriend, family, pet that she regularly displays cordiality and affection to? Highly unlikely. That you come away with the impression that she is absolutely a bitch, and a wretch of humanity because she brushed you off really cements the fact that you so righteously deserve it in the first place.

    I also think you severely underestimate what’s happening in the best long-term relationships if you think that they’re only about “superficial social skills”.

    How do those relationships start dumbass? What deep truths does a women know about her long term boyfriend the day she decided to give him the time of day for the first time? She knew absolutely jack shit about him. He was a fucking stranger.

    I didn’t say that people in a long term relationship are superficially attracted throughout the duration of their relationship (although some are). I said that by definition initial attraction is superficial. What about that can you not grok?

    Like


  86. By the way, I guess some Alphas go full speed ahead too… but somehow with dorks it feels annoying rather than being with like… the star Quarterback

    Like


  87. on September 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm The Fifth Horseman

    The ‘First Androids’ sexbot does not appear to be very advanced. But remember each step has technological advances that carry over to the next step

    Cless Alvein and ‘Game Skeptic’ are just the latest of the mangina/Social con crowd (which is becoming more and more blurred and interchangeable) who are so afraid of doing the hard work of self-improvement that they have to mischaracterize Game due to their own insecurities.

    No matter how many times someone tells them what Game can work to strengthen monogamous marriages, to the benefit of both spouses, they will ignore those facts, as they are desperately wed to their narrative of Game being ‘bad’.

    I continue to maintain that 80% of men and 99.9% of women will never, ever grasp what Game is. They are not OTBs, and they are not high enough in Maslow’s hierarchy to be self-actualized enough to grasp Game.

    Like


  88. is there any question? I must have been gone for too long.

    BOTY imho is Beta #1.

    glad t be back to work the sides gang.
    -tunacanman

    Like


  89. Cless says, “Most people (in both genders) are of detestably low quality.”

    :: grabs a towel and some hydroponic gruel for the guy being flushed out of his pod ::

    Good morning, sunshine! 🙂

    LSB says, “It’s VERY, VERY hard to control gratuitous male attention without being very mean and obvious.”

    No, it isn’t.

    All one has to do is dress modestly, decisively state that they’re not interested, if it turns into flirting, and failing that, make it clear that one has male friends and relatives who might get stabby or bullety with someone who pushes their luck.

    …and try not walking around alone unless you have to. The male friend or relative actually being there is helpful.

    It’s a “prude shield”. No meanness necessary.

    (Thanks Mike, wherever you are.)

    Like


  90. BTW, thought I’d share my post on the annoying cunt blogger:

    tuna can man // September 21, 2009 at 11:32 pm | Reply

    … hmm seems very clear to me it is just a matter of time before you fully lose respect for your husband and go back to cheating on him like you no doubt did in your dating days.

    I ask you a serious question… why would you publicly humiliate your husband in such a way? To rationalize your inevitable (already occurring?) infidelity? If I saw you doing this about me, I’d empty the accounts, bang your best friends and/or sister, video tape you doing all kinds of the kinky S&M stuff you are no doubt into, then release it all to the internet via first a surprise (and public) family and friends surprise display first for maximum humiliation.

    ..maybe involve a radio or tv show or some such so it can land on youtube and you’ll have to change your name and move towns to avoid running into everyone knowing what a cold, calculating wench you are.

    have a nice week, insulting your husband, emasculating him, and directly undermining any rationale, respect or sanctity for marriage.

    I pity you. but worse, I pitty your husband.

    😀

    Like


  91. Cless, let me give you some advice: Roissy is right, all women are pretty much the same. The “good girls” are just bad girls who haven’t been caught yet. I predict that you will learn this the hard way.

    Like


  92. If “game” works on most women, then most women are whores. I, for one, would not want to be married to a woman who might leave me upon meeting a man with superior “game”. I’d rather hold out for someone with better values. That doesn’t mean anyone should stop using “game”; do what you want to do.

    @Cless —

    As has already been pointed out by others, this “works” on virtually all women. It does need to be tailored, a bit — as Thursday points out, your typical “asshole game” is not going to work in all contexts, but the basic principles of it work.

    I think the reason why some men don’t believe this (or don’t want to) is just another example of pedestalization — even if, in your case, you reserve the pedestal for a small portion of women whom you presume “are not like that”. That’s a false presumption.

    In addition, the fact that women *are* “like that” doesn’t make them whores any more than the fact that all men are attracted to sexy women makes them superficial assholes. Game, for men, is like looks, for women. It’s the flipside of attraction. Just as all men are attracted to pretty women (yes, everyone has their tastes and so on between women of equal attractiveness level, but at certain levels virtually *all* men will find them attractive), the same holds for women in terms of the kinds of things Game cultivates — a more complex set of behaviors designed to display status and psycho-social dominance. It’s the flipside of men being attracted to pretty women — it’s actually quite simple to understand when you look at it from that perspective.

    Like


  93. Dudes #1 was the beta from the age of 21. Any guy who wouldn’t legally change his name from Topper is Captial B beta. He wins.

    @lilgrl – I can’t say for sure but I think what Firepower means is you are learning from #2 because you post things your boyfriend says. Maybe? I haven’t read hers so I can’t tell if they’re as cute as the things you say he says.

    Like


  94. on September 21, 2009 at 11:45 pm HUNGRY HUNGRY HIPPOS YO

    1 is the biggest beta, but 3’s wife is the worst.

    Like


  95. on September 21, 2009 at 11:56 pm The Fifth Horseman

    Cless Alvein wrote :

    Also, I don’t think “game” applies nearly as strongly to relationships as to picking up club trash.

    That is because you don’t understand what Game is. This is true of many people when exposed to Game, because only an Outside the Box thinker can get it, and it takes an OTB to recognize another OTB.

    Like


  96. I liked this quote, “We’ve really worked hard on our marriage since then, and things have come around, but this really terrible thing happened to us.”

    What do you mean WE?
    Terrible thing that happened to us? It’s not a tornado that hit your house. It’s not nature.

    If I was in his position, when I would of found out about her cheating on me I would of gotten custody of the kids and divorce her unfaithful ass. (If I wasn’t cool about us sleeping with different people)

    But this takes the cake! Not only she cheated on him, she said that “we” are working things out, and she wrote a book about it, embarrassing his sorry ass in front of everybody and the icing on the cake is he read the book. Unbelievable.

    He is the biggest beta, or the most whipped person I ever heard of. I bet he only gets some pussy from her on his birthday, when he begs on his knees.

    Like


  97. even if, in your case, you reserve the pedestal for a small portion of women whom you presume “are not like that”

    After reading from this blog and others from the Roissysphere, one can walk away with the idea that all women require game. One can lead to a slightly similar conclusion as Cless, but that if you want to hold out for somebody with better values, that generally only leave’s one right hand as the only suitable partner. For somebody like myself who is lazy and finds game to be antithetical to his real-world essence and persona, I won’t use game, and I probably should give up on women. Mind you, I have no qualms about others using game, and I recommended that a railfan buddy e-mail Roissy to figure out what to do in regards to women, especially the one girl that friended him and turned to a asshole.

    One could argue that for some men, if women aren’t sugar and sweet spices, then they want nothing to do with them, and the use of game destroys the idea of the sweet girl who loves you as a hapless beta.

    Like


  98. on September 22, 2009 at 12:43 am Virginia Gentleman

    I vote for No. 1 as our BOTM. Personally, I’d like to think that if I had his resources, my response would be an immediate inquiry into what I could do to this German has-been and my soon-to-be ex-wife. Massive retaliation, if you will—the exact form would be determined later. For his tolerance of abuse, disrespect and other forms of effrontery, he earns my scorn and therefore my vote.

    No. 2 is a strange situation and since one is a media personality, I’m tempted to suspect something being concocted for economic benefit. They’re disqualified, although I’d certainly not put up with that sort of behavior if presented with it. Again, massive retaliation.

    Part of me wants to believe, like others, that No. 3 is carrying out a scenario similar to what I outlined above. “Yes honey, tell them everything. I support you 1000%.” Meanwhile, statements are made to the SEC and/or law enforcement and divorce papers are being drawn up. It would be premature to denounce No. 3 until the whole situation is seen.

    Like


  99. A picture says a 1000 words? Well this one says 1,000,000

    Like


  100. Mr. Mortimer, on his wife’s notoriety: “It’s not necessarily the type of goal that anybody should strive for, going out every night for the sake of self-promotion and getting their pictures taken. And I mean, these are girls who went to good colleges. You would think they’d have something better to do.”

    Later, a miffed Ms. Mortimer explained, “Sometimes he forgets, when he’s on this subject, like: ‘I know one of them. That’s my wife.’”

    However, the couple seemed determined to overcome their differences:

    “I adore her,” he said, affecting reluctance.

    She made a pouting face and said, “Adore me, Topper.”

    “I don’t care what anyone else thinks,” he said. “If you want to live a certain way, I love you the same. I’ll still be here.”

    More cringe worthy stuff here:

    http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/mortimer-divorce

    Like


  101. In Response to Aoefe:

    That body language… That fashion… That slack-jawed smirk…

    The poor fucker never had a chance.

    Like


  102. @ruby:

    No he never had a chance. Her new guy is much more alpha in appearance.

    I bet Roissy could do a whole post on the body language in both pics. Topper and Prince Casiopia (something like that).

    Like


  103. Oh and she even look less bitchy with the new guy.

    Like


  104. Maybe it’s my idiocy, but she looks like you Aoefe…

    Like


  105. DA – nope she’s tinier, blonder and icier

    Like


  106. If Topper ever went to prison wanna guess what he’d be …

    Like


  107. DA – nope she’s tinier, blonder and icier

    So I’d do her first, then you, right? 🙂

    Like


  108. I know I know – A Bottom!!!

    Like


  109. Wow DA that sounded almost manly and sexy. But don’t add the right? it ruined it. 😦

    Like


  110. Cless — As a practical matter, almost all women will leave ANY guy if a more Alpha guy comes along, and shows interest. Obviously, older women that are not sexually attractive don’t play, but that’s about it. ALL women who are attractive are like that. In fact, infidelity and trading-up to the new Alpha guy are celebrated in our culture, it is part and parcel of what makes women, well women.

    A woman will stay with a man, married, in love, only so long as there is no guy more Alpha who can and will show the least bit of interest in her. This is to be expected — women’s improved earnings, cheap and easy contraception, anonymous urban living, loss of social censure, religious feelings, and approval of female and Alpha Male infidelity (women LOVE Edwards more now that he’s moving his bimbo and bastard kid into his house and told his dying wife to stuff it) make this inevitable.

    You either take women as they are, or go David Alexander. No woman loves anyone unconditionally and forever except herself. Period. Church girls are bar sluts who make it to Church on Sunday. Religious women (save Mormons) are well known for being among the sluttiest. Women do not really care much about compassion, charity, and kindness in men they are attracted to. Those attributes have a name: gay. Women want, physical, aggressive, threatening domination, appropriate for the setting. Dalrymple’s nurses liked thugs who beat them, Carrie like Big, most professional women like Jerks and A-holes. Being “nice, kind, decent, charitable” is just another way of being … gay.

    Like


  111. Wow DA that sounded almost manly and sexy. But don’t add the right? it ruined it.

    Poor Aoefe thinks I was trying to game her. Ooops. 🙂

    Like


  112. Okay must be bored but was looking around at Prince New Guy and found out he’d been married before to a woman who was nine years older than he was, but she looks a great deal like the new model.

    I dug and found the first wife wedding announcement in some snooty high class announcement place. But this announcement which is not about them takes the cake. I sometimes would like to be super rich and then I read this and think I’d fail miserably as a royal – I’d be laughing my head off at the pretentiousness. I love the last line – she was born around 1966…heh heh…ya 56 more like it.

    Gert-Rudolf [Muck] Flick (son of Ernst-Otto Flick and of Barbara Raabe and former husband of Princess Johanna of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Hohenstein and of Donatella Missikoff) married thirdly Corinne Mueller-Vivil at the Church of the Immaculate Conception in Mayfair, London in April 2000.
    [She was born around 1966.]

    Like


  113. No DA – I was trying to teach you how to game silly boy. Back on your knees.

    Like


  114. No DA – I was trying to teach you how to game silly boy. Back on your knees.

    Is this some covert thirty-something woman plan to seduce a younger man? I don’t think it’s working…

    Like


  115. I vote none of them… here’s why….

    . lets forget about gender for a second and just take 2 – average genderless salespeople

    Salesperson A – makes 100 sales calls per week, selling a highly desirable product with broad mass market appeal and a 1 year life span—– how much is sales call 101 going to mean to her? how hard is she going to try? how high are her stress levels? ?? how likely is she to discount her product? or go the extra mile with customer service….??

    but Conversely how many opportunities has she had to experiment and work out the best techniques and the best pitches???? how good are her skills going to be at closing the deal? – I’d say very good.

    Sales person B – makes 4 sales calls per year. selling a specialised product (say satellites with a 15 year life) within a specialised field how much is sales call 5 going to mean to him? how hard is he going to try? how high are his stress levels.

    but how comparitively rusty are his skills goign to be at closing the deal? – I’d say comparitively poor.

    So which one are you ? Salesperson A or B.

    Like


  116. OH DA are you trying to pretend for all the big boys at Roissy? That’s cute.

    Like


  117. In Addition.

    And Sales person A started her job at 14 and was trained by her mother, sisters, friends, magazines and mass media 24/7/365 using the full immersion training method

    while

    Sales person B started his job part time at 18 while still pursuing hobbies, video games, and education… He had no training from his father, or peers

    how good is he going to be?

    Like


  118. on September 22, 2009 at 2:25 am msexceptiontotherule

    Topper looks like he could be Tinsley’s really weirdo step brother or first cousin, who has an inappropriate level of interest in getting to see her naked (even as her wife..I mean husband…they probably don’t have sex all that often, likely because doing it more than once every three months is more than she can stand.)

    That Prince New Guy/European Aristo-trash looks like he decided to trade up for Tinsley…god that’s a retarded name. If only it were legally required for people to get approval for what they want to name their kid to limit the number of stupid names that no one wants to say out loud much less read.

    Like


  119. Tough call this time, but I voted for #1, because of what several people have already noted: anyone who asks the other guy to “give us space” is a fucking beta loser, regardless of how much money he has. Topper-boy says that Casi-boy “never gave her a chance to breathe”. Yeah, it probably was hard for Tinsie-girl to breathe with Casi-boy’s cock shoved down her throat. And aoefe is right – Tinsie-girl looks like an entitled ice queen. Even without the background information, one can see that Tinsie-girl should be avoided at all costs – that hard look in her eyes could shatter diamonds, or at least cut them into attractive and easily stashed pieces to be placed in settings later.

    Like


  120. Roissy – incredible blog, just discovered a week or two ago and so glad I did. Not sure why I’m first posting on this relatively more boring entry, but why not…

    Rich wasp is def the tool.

    Madoff guy should dump the bitch after the royalty stream worked out. He’s a tool, but pales compared to the wasp

    But I think you’re being way too harsh on that middle guy- he sounds like a fool, his wife is a troll- but I went to the blog and it’s just cheesy, but doesn’t make fun of any aspects of manliness- actually it reads like she’s trying hard to be assertive- isn’t it possible that he dominates her behind scenes, so she comes out with this silly way to retake control?

    Like


  121. on September 22, 2009 at 5:35 am I don't want Whiskey to kill me.

    I’m going to go off topic for a second.

    Should we be concerned about the commenter Whiskey?

    He’s been making some very ominous and creepy comments lately and might be showing signs of being a Sodini.

    Comments like this are disturbing:

    http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/how-much-can-game-do/#comment-131518

    http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/how-much-can-game-do/#comment-131622

    And on this forum run by some who comments here, there was this post:

    http://www.rationalmale.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=c81343cc72263ff8a0cb80080c959c10&topic=16.msg108#msg108

    Note the similarity between the last two comments — “KontrollerX” is Whiskey/testing99.

    If Whiskey sympathizes so much with Cho and Sodini — and Whiskey, like them, is an Omega male — isn’t possible that Whiskey contemplates/gets off on thoughts of violence against strangers?

    I’m serious here.

    Like


  122. Thursday

    “A woman with a “bitch shield” is just that. A bitch, and a bad person.”

    No, beautiful women have to protect themselves against all the approaches they get. They can’t stop and have a nice conversation with everyone.

    That is very true and most of the time they don’t even notice their so called “bitch shield”.

    Then there are also women who have what looks like a “bitch shield” but what it really is is their irritation that you are NOT approaching them if they find you attractive.

    Like


  123. Whiskey, I think you’re wrong about women, and underestimating the value of being alpha in the home rather than alpha on a local/national scale.

    There may be no “good girls”, but the opposite of a good woman is not a whore. The opposite of a good woman is a bad woman. A good woman may be a wife type or a whore type, but whichever type she is, she’s honest and fields her options accordingly. A bad woman screws guys over regardless of which type she is.

    The problem isn’t most women being whores. The problem is most women, along with most men being shallow and simple. I don’t know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but that’s humanity: primate vermin.

    None of us should be deluded about that. As advanced as we think we are, without the ability to empathize with each other, we eat each other alive. So whoever can fix your “otherness” in their mind, will be rid of you by any excuse necessary.

    Humans in romantic relationships have two failsafes that have kept us from becoming extinct: bonding and territorialism. Men should never ever EVER forget that part of what makes them male is territorialism. The main thing that gets both hoes and wifeys looking out the front door is men losing the willingness to be territorial. If you’re not possessive enough, you stop being man enough in her mind. Non possessive means the same thing to us as not interested and therefore not dependable: bad investment of emotion.

    If you are not enough of a controlling, judgmental bastard (which has to be balanced because you don’t really want to get into psychoville), you will lose the attention of a woman because then you become an “other”…just some guy.

    It’s not about moral or amoral. It’s about wanted or unwanted, and regulated or unregulated. If you fail to regulate a woman’s behavior, her subconscious is telling her that you are either not invested, or you’re a wuss lacking crucial features of manliness. It means you’re looking for a new mommy, not a girlfriend or wife…or even a capable hoe. So you become an object just as surely as a woman who gives up sex to any and everybody who gives a little attention.

    Women need to belong to someone. In what way is this amoral? Why would a guy even want to be let off the hook in what ought to be a basic primal need that he himself needs to fulfil in order to feel like a man himself. What man with testicles *doesn’t* feel protective or reasonably possessive and territorial over his woman?

    So…even with church girls, a church guy has to go turn over some tables in the temple yard so she knows you love her like Christ loved the church. Get a stick and find some pharisees, and quit complaining that women need men.

    Like


  124. whiskey

    Cless — As a practical matter, almost all women will leave ANY guy if a more Alpha guy comes along, and shows interest.

    You know whiskey you are such a pathetic, wormy dork that you make David Alexander seem like a cross between Hugh Hefner and Clint Eastwood.

    I have noticed that you have some ability to quote Wikipedia like knowledge on certain subjects and then add your own views that are almost always 100% wrong, psychotic and motivated by White male betadorkitude and deep seated fear of women.

    You either take women as they are, or go David Alexander. No woman loves anyone unconditionally and forever except herself.

    Jesus Christ, does this all get back around to Mom with you.

    Like


  125. Nutshell version: a spineless man with good credit is the male equivalent of a slut.

    You will get used and abused because you put yourself out there to get exploited. You have something that other people want, but nothing they can’t get just as easily from someone else.

    Have something someone can’t just as easily get from someone else. Start with having yourself…your dignity, your desires, your values, and your standards.

    Like


  126. As a practical matter, almost all women will leave ANY guy if a more Alpha guy comes along, and shows interest.

    I tip my hat to Whiskey’s expertise on women and his “extrapolate an iron law based on a grain of truth.” Nevertheless, this is incorrect. Properly gamed women bond with their men, and if he has a requisite minimum level of LTR Game, his woman is amlost certain to NOT leave him for a stronger alpha.

    Not only that, but properly LTR-gamed women (above a certain level of quality of character) will not entertain other men as sexual beings and if they get too pushy, will respond with disgust at his advances.

    Also, a guy doing things right will not let his wife/girlfriend be exposed to too many situations where she can be gamed by “more Alpha” guys. And “competition” will know better than to try anything.

    No, beautiful women have to protect themselves against all the approaches they get.

    I think of the bitch shield as a bum-shield. Say you’r ewalking through a city and a bum, with a barely concealed “I wanna con you” look on his face comes up to you and says “excuse me sir, do you have a minute…” and starts into some elaborate bullshit story of how he needs your spare change (blah blah blah).

    Well, any guy over 25 will know to no tfall for this crap. He’ll harden his face at the approach, or alternately, will smile and say “nope, sorry” as he walks on.

    That’s a kind of a bitch shield that is necessary to go about your day sanely. And in the above example, the bum just wanted your quarter and a nickle. But for women, the approaching party wants to undress her, mount her, and shoot his load inside her. Now you see the necessity for a bitch shield?

    Like


  127. PA, but if you’re walking around flashing cash and jingling your pockets on purpose as you pass by bums, could you really blame them for asking?

    Why not just behave like a woman who’s not…public?

    Like


  128. Interestingly Nicole, I started writing somethign about how girls who dress provocatively invite unwanted approaches and in their case I am less sympathetic about the need for bitch shields, but it started getting too verbose so I erased that paragraph.

    Like


  129. You either take women as they are, or go David Alexander. No woman loves anyone unconditionally and forever except herself.

    So true. Only your mother but it is a different kind of love.

    The love of a woman is very shallow and follows self-interest. Stop being useful to a woman (for her goals: marriage, kids, money) and see her love for you disappear quickly. See her move on and don’t give a damn for you the rest of her life.

    Never be take a woman’s love for granted. You are always a couple of months away from being dumped. Game your woman and don’t believe her exaggerated claims of love. Men love women and women love kids. Such is life. Such says ev psych.

    Like


  130. Final colon

    Men love women and women love kids. Such is life. Such says ev psych.

    Spoken as a true book-worm. Someone who understands love from what he reads and thinks about it.

    Or spoken as an inexperienced male with little hands on talent for invoking overwhelming infatuation and deep bonds.

    Like


  131. Definetly #1 or #3.

    If you read the blog that got #2 nominated it makes more fun of other men than it does of the guy himself.

    Nevermind that – the guy bought his wife a calculator and took her to a burger joint for her birthday and she rationalized why that was ok for her.
    IMO that puts the guy in solid greater beta territory at the very least – no standard chump beta would ever get away with that.

    Like


  132. ””””””’Congratulations, Travis, your balls have now been shipped to the nearest Ripley’s Believe It Or Not museum for display. Electron microscope required for viewing. And you can stop bobbing your head in the car to “It’s Raining Men”.””””””’

    lol

    Like


  133. Not the worst (most BETA) BOTM’s that I’ve read on this blog. August’s list is a bit of a let down. Sorry.

    Like


  134. Roissy’s BOTM surveys demonstrate the “primacy effect.” The initial option presented will generate more salience or importance to the reader.

    Like


  135. Both #2 and #3 have at least some possible financial interest in embracing and promoting their betahood. #1 has no excuse.

    Like


  136. The reason these BOTM choices are so difficult is that usually all candidates commit non-negotiably beta things, usually tolerating their wives’ infidelity or extreme disrespect in some way.

    In my voting, I generally select the most dull and herbish guy as my choice — one who is most pussy beta in gestalt, even when his specific act of betatude might not be as eggregious as the other guys’.

    So I picked No. 2, since he seems like a hopeless herb, while No. 1, who did a more beta act, seems to have seedlings of potential alpha in him. The G Manifesto can mentor No.1 into shape. No. 2 is an empty well.

    Like


  137. #2 is in need of a good beating.

    Both of ’em.

    Like


  138. DF

    Firepower:
    he’s around here
    somewhere

    I thought Obsidian was only 5′8″ and into black chicks?

    YOU are not the messiah – you’re a very naughty boy

    Like


  139. On the Two Types of “Alpha”:

    First, a definition of ‘Alpha’:

    “One who is first in desirability and deference to the consent and satisfaction of others.”

    There seems to be two types of Alpha, then — Alpha by Men’s Standards (AbM) and Alpha by Women’s Standards (AbW).

    Example of AbM: United States Special Operations Command Generals

    These men are in absolute control and command the respect of thousands of the most hardened, focused, skilled, dedicated warriors in the history of mankind. Many of them could order their subordinates to enter an obvious suicide mission for the obtainment of a greater strategic goal and receive nothing less than a pledge of fulfillment from them.

    And yet, no one would argue that these men could seduce young, attractive women to build a harem with.

    In fact, a former Delta Force, Special Forces and Ranger operator, Stan Goff, has written about the noted lack of “Game” of various Special Operations Officers [as well as the Natural Alpha “Game” of ground operators. Many Delta Force Members apparently racked up multiple-notches on deployed missions even while in relationships at home.]

    One who stands out is Lieutenant General William G. Boykin [ret.] who despite being a Delta Force Officer of the highest standing and commanding the CIA’s Special Activities Division, eventually drove off his wife for being too religious and has not found a replacement for her, yet.

    Example of AbW: Orlando Bloom or Johnny Depp

    Women worldwide feel spontaneous ‘gina tingles’ upon catching even a digitized glimpse of these dudes, but I suspect many men wouldn’t trust them in any leadership capacity outside of the pursuit of women.

    Also, there is the fact that sense “Alphas” are ‘Alpha’ only in relation to their peer group, they can lose their Alpha Status if displaced from that group.

    Example: Upper middle class AbW’s who were drafted into the Vietnam War and fell completely apart or Crime-Lord AbM’s who get caught and are sent to prisons where the incarcerated population isn’t friendly to them.

    Like


  140. Properly gamed women bond with their men, and if he has a requisite minimum level of LTR Game, his woman is amlost certain to NOT leave him for a stronger alpha.

    I’m tempted to argue that such a sentiment is really something that lower alphas and users of game tell themselves to prevent pessimism. One could argue that it’s the male version of the snowflake theory.

    Like


  141. lovelysexybeauty
    @ September 21, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    Interesting about women with b*tch shields…

    My little chapatti cake – this entire post of yours actually makes me truly sad. Sad for a loss of what i tresure. You’ve actually gottento The Mighty Firepower. an entire post of such deep insight regarding the dark side of the female moon suggests, that in reality, you cannot be as Hot as you claim.

    Like


  142. Nicole you’re overselling the power and effectiveness of the prude shield/modest dressing. Run around BYU, and you’ll notice there are still bitchshields and that the prettier girls/cooler guys get more attention than others, even if they’re mostly all of similar character/modesty. And BYU is probably about the best example you’ll get of modesty in a modern US.

    Having loads of brothers and cousins and male friends who, miraculous, will never actually hit on you is nice and all but it’s not reasonable for the majority of women in the US, especially those who would like to live somewhere other than their hometown.

    While I agree with you that women should be more discriminating and certain behaviors discouraged, dreaming of a modest paradise that existing a few generations ago where women and men rewarded character only is not helpful.
    a. that paradise never existed
    b. it certainly doesn’t currently exists and advocating it as a solution is not helpful.

    Like


  143. How much of the Topper story might be pure fag fiction? It is written for the gossip mags of exclusive gay and female patronage. There is not a single journalistic quote in the three-page article… I’m not apt to take the author’s word.

    Like


  144. I can’t even read these, it hurts me too much.

    Like


  145. Also, I don’t think “game” applies nearly as strongly to relationships as to picking up club trash.

    I’d say it’s just the opposite. You can pull a certain amount of “club trash” by just being in the right place at the right time, or getting them drunk. I think that’s how most betas get laid by attractive women on those rare occasions when it happens: a woman decides to give it up—maybe she just had a fight or breakup with her man, maybe she’s feeling unlovable because the cute guy at work keeps ignoring her or she just gained 5 pounds. For whatever reason, she decides she wants sex, and the beta happens to be standing right there because he just bought her a drink or dinner or followed her to a party. Next thing he knows, he’s getting laid, and he thinks it’s because he seduced her—when the truth is she would have nailed any non-grotesque guy who happened along at that moment, and she’s probably thinking about someone else.

    On the other hand, in a LTR, at some point she’s going to sober up and see you for who you really are, and that’s when having internalized Game and made it a part of you will pay off. In a LTR, it’s not enough to just know a few good lines and be able to lean against the bar like James Bond; you have to really BE a masculine man day after day.

    Like


  146. Rumor has it that BOTM #3 is either into big boys or little boys, which would make his betatude a cover.

    Like


  147. I’m tempted to argue that such a sentiment is really something that lower alphas and users of game tell themselves to prevent pessimism. One could argue that it’s the male version of the snowflake theory.

    Yo David, betas are the ones who believe in sweet unconditional mother-milk-teat love of their girlfriends. Like Wall-E and Eva.

    Alphas act on the knowledge that nothing in this world is unconditional and so they always sleep with one eye open.

    An alpha knows that underneath all the fun and feasting, life is a struggle from birth to death.

    I am beginning to sound like Nicole.

    Or Xsplat.

    Like


  148. PA

    An alpha knows that underneath all the fun and feasting, life is a struggle from birth to death.

    Yes, but I’ve found an NLP or hypnotic suggestion catchphrase that turns this on it’s head.

    “Life is easy. Don’t make it difficult.”

    I say this often, and it increases our mutual ease, enjoyment, and satisfaction. Which is the whole point of all endeavors.

    And no, O, one never tires of life’s best pleasures. And the best pleasure in life is the best sex. And while sex can be animalist, for the full and integrated human, it is all encompassing. A prayer and a feast.

    Life is easy. Don’t make it complicated.

    Like


  149. Yo David, betas are the ones who believe in sweet unconditional mother-milk-teat love of their girlfriends. Like Wall-E and Eva.

    I guess it’s safe to presume that you have no desire for that type of love. 🙂

    Of course, given that anybody can secure their own orgasm, the only reason to deal with the opposite sex for romantic reasons is for that sweet unconditional love. Otherwise, why bother when one can just go for pump and dumps and far less intrusive and responsibility reduced platonic friendships?

    My concern is that men your like yourself will magically presume that your game is so good that no other man can run game successfully on her. As I stated, it’s no different from the snowflake theory that women use to delude themselves into thinking that they’re the special girl with special talent that will keep an alpha loyal. For a portion of both groups, there will always be somebody with far better game and other attractive qualities that will intervene in your relationship.

    Alphas act on the knowledge that nothing in this world is unconditional and so they always sleep with one eye open.

    Wow, even the alphas must be miserable even with their orgasms on demand with hot girls…

    Like


  150. I should mention that I utter that catchphrase in times when the life’s machinations click together harmoniously. Such as the first date with my Kiki girl. We fucked the first night and fell immediately into a happy and fun sensual relationship. She moved in on the first date.

    Like


  151. I guess it’s safe to presume that you have no desire for that type of love.

    Having a good woman’s sincere and honest love is the best thing in the world. Which is why LTR game ensures a lifetime supply of it.

    Wow, even the alphas must be miserable even with their orgasms on demand with hot girls…

    Are you miserable during roadgeeking because you have to watch out for other cars and keep an eye out for speed traps and on the fuel gage? No — you are having a blast. Same thing with women.

    Like


  152. Life is easy. Don’t make it complicated.

    Or KISS — keep it simple, stupid.

    Like


  153. “Or KISS — keep it simple, stupid.”

    Ya, philisophically similar, but my phrase is a deliberate harnessing of the power of embodied thought to transform tension and struggle into happy ease.

    Like


  154. I learned game through my lifes greatest mentor, a gay man.

    He made people around him feel happy. People walking down the street would smile at him and say hello. A master seducer, of gay and straight men alike. The essence of charm.

    He taught me that in relationship, the duty is to project into the room ease and joy and excitement and peace, and to play. Play a lot.

    If there is any secret to relationship, it can be transmitted wordlessly as embodied contentment and playfullness.

    Like


  155. Are you miserable during roadgeeking because you have to watch out for other cars and keep an eye out for speed traps and on the fuel gage? No — you are having a blast. Same thing with women.

    Actually, those things are what make roadgeeking rather annoying. You have to watch out for a cokeheaded guy who may hit you, and you’re freaking out every five minutes hoping that you’ll stop fast enough as you do 80 mph in a 65 before the cop sees you, and there are times where you just want to go as fast as possible, yet you know there’s a frigging cop around the bend. The last thing that I want to do is to tell my mom that I lied to her to go roadgeeking and that I either crashed the car or have a $250 speeding ticket with four to six points on my license and increased insurance for the next three years.

    So yes, those potential liabilities may create higher opportunity costs which influence a decision to go on a roadgeeking trip, and they have prevented me from going on a trip. Hell, I nearly backed out of my last roadgeeking trip at the last minute. Even railfanning has its risks too with overzealous police forces, NAMs, and the small potential for a crash…

    Having a good woman’s sincere and honest love is the best thing in the world. Which is why LTR game ensures a lifetime supply of it.

    That is not love, but merely long-term induced lust and worship on her part for alphaness. To me, it’s not love.

    Like


  156. Even railfanning has its risks too with overzealous police forces, NAMs, and the small potential for a crash…

    Now you are overplaying the David Alexander character.

    Nobody rides Amtrak and worries about a crash.

    Like


  157. THE CASE FOR #2:

    Clearly #1 stands out, but #2 is the more notable beta.

    Most guys will never be in a #1 situation. Most wives won’t actually have OPEN affairs. Instead they will lose interest and leave, as will likely happen in #2.

    Furthermore, we still live in a society that claims to disaprove of the actions in #1. The actions in #2 on the otherhand are celebretated.

    The attitudes displayed in #2 are all too prevelant and are bringing down American society.

    Like


  158. ””””””’I think EVERY man should learn and practice the principles of game, but I also believe that every man should be working on building his kingdom. At some point down the road the kingdom building will pay off (the idea that it is a soul sucking, age-inducing quest is BS for the man who has a passion for it, as every man should) and your knowledge of “game” AND your pursuit of wealth will come together and the gods of poon will reward you with truckloads of as much grade A meat as you can handle.

    And you will never have to worry about having a roof over you or your harem’s heads. Ever.
    ””””””””””””””””

    Yea that was some straight up.

    ”””””””””””””The G Manifesto
    As Tony Montana once said: “Fucking WASP whore.”

    “Sure, you can take a shortcut to getting pussy, but pussy don’t pay the bills.”

    Unless your pimping.

    Or run a p*rn outfit.

    – MPM
    ”””””””””””””””””””””””’

    So was this though to an extent. That I believe is key have your harem pay there own bills plus yours but yea to initiate it you got to have loot to get the doors opened for em and get that bonding going. So your the one who handed em the keys to their new life of ease.

    Like


  159. PA

    Nobody rides Amtrak and worries about a crash.

    unless you’re in Boston
    or DC.

    Instead of a fire alarm, they should have a bag of Funyuns behind a piece of glass stating

    “Break Only in Case of Driver Sleepin”

    Like


  160. Nobody rides Amtrak and worries about a crash.

    There’s always that lingering .01% chance that one has to worry about whenever they ride any train, whether streetcar, Stadtbahn, metro, regional rail, or intercity rail. The more likely risk comes from overzealous cops who presume that you’re a terrorist, a trespasser, or suburban cops who think you’re only there looking for new targets for one’s criminal exploits, or NAMs who think that your an excellent target for a mugging. I’ve nearly been mugged twice while railfanning, and I’ve received dirty looks from cops and locals in suburban areas. And I’ve heard stories of railfans who were arrested or had their cameras or memory cards seized.

    Like


  161. @I don’t want Whiskey to kill me.- I’ve noticed the psychotic nature of Whiskey’s comments as of late also but I don’t think the commenter you linked to is whiskey.

    Sad shame too because Whiskey has some very good qualities.

    Like


  162. on September 22, 2009 at 6:02 pm Back When I Was Young & Foolish

    It’s too late to get him on this poll, but Lamar Odom of the Los Angeles Lakers is the true beta of the month.

    He’s marrying D-list celeb Khloe Kardashian this weekend.

    http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2009/09/lamar-odom-the-latest-laker-who-wants-to-be-a-k-brother.html

    What’s wrong with this picture?

    1) He’s a tall, good-looking man. She’s the ugly one of the Kardashian litter and about 40 lbs overweight.

    2) They’ve been dating for less than a month.

    3) He just signed a $32.8 million four-year contract in August.

    All this guy has to do is show up and he’ll get high quality women. He settles for some cow… I just don’t get it.

    Like


  163. Al says, “Nicole you’re overselling the power and effectiveness of the prude shield/modest dressing. Run around BYU, and you’ll notice there are still bitchshields and that the prettier girls/cooler guys get more attention than others, even if they’re mostly all of similar character/modesty. And BYU is probably about the best example you’ll get of modesty in a modern US.”

    I think you meant the prettier girls. Of course prettier girls will get more attention. It’s the *type* of attention they get that matters.

    No single woman wants to block out potential compatible mates. They want to block out the cads and whatever’s their personal or family’s definition of losers.

    Modesty filters out at least the low effort cads and guys looking for an “empowered” hoe.

    “Having loads of brothers and cousins and male friends who, miraculous, will never actually hit on you is nice and all but it’s not reasonable for the majority of women in the US, especially those who would like to live somewhere other than their hometown.”

    Relatives are one thing, and male friends are another. Male friends (esp. of the family) within one’s age range are usually family approved potential mates. If something should “accidentally” happen, these guys have enough accountability factor and honor to do the right thing.

    When I moved away from my family, I found myself only considering guys who were my friends or had that kind of familiarity. So you can take the girl out of the church, but you can’t take the church out of the girl. Even when we stray, it’s usually not too far.

    “While I agree with you that women should be more discriminating and certain behaviors discouraged, dreaming of a modest paradise that existing a few generations ago where women and men rewarded character only is not helpful.
    a. that paradise never existed
    b. it certainly doesn’t currently exists and advocating it as a solution is not helpful.”

    Though the social results would be nice, what’s more important in this is individual women deciding how they want to be perceived, and behaving accordingly. If one doesn’t want to be viewed as an available slut, one shouldn’t dress like one. Simple as that.

    Like


  164. on September 22, 2009 at 9:38 pm I don't want Whiskey to kill me.

    Chic Noir, the first two comments were by Whiskey. The last one sounds exactly like him.

    Whiskey is threatening to go out Sodini style.

    When it happens, we’ll say “oh, it was so obvious all along” and feel bad about not attempting to stop him.

    Like


  165. ^^^Chic Noir, the first two comments were by Whiskey.
    yes, i know.

    The last one sounds exactly like him

    I don’t think so or at least the writing style is different. Whiskey writes in a “slow rumble building to a big crash “style.

    When it happens, we’ll say “oh, it was so obvious all along” and feel bad about not attempting to stop him

    I have but he doesn’t listen to me. If anyone can help him it will be one of the ladies here since the men seem to do a lot of alpha posturing.

    Like


  166. Overdramatic much, IDWKTKM?

    The person you linked sounds nothing like Whiskey. He takes the whole alpha/beta thing way too far, but it’s not the same writing style.

    And in those posts he said he thought more attacks like what Sodini did was likely. He didn’t say he was going to do that or that he thought it was right to do that.

    Hey, I think that is likely that Islamists will do more terror attacks. Does that make me a terrorist?

    Logic escapes you.

    You’re either a woman and an extreme drama queen, or you are a beta who has white knighting tendencies so deep that it has become the essence of who you are.

    Either way, you are pathetic.

    Like


  167. on September 22, 2009 at 10:33 pm I don't want Whiskey to kill me.

    If Whiskey was being impersonated, why didn’t he air any complaints?

    So I guess every time Whiskey says something creepy/chilling, it isn’t him?

    Whiskey has repeatedly shown sympathy for Sodini and Cho, and all you guys can say is “oh, it’s someone else impersonating Whiskey.”

    Get out of here with that bullshit.

    The man is implicitly threatening to kill himself or to kill strangers as revenge for his loneliness, as revenge for being an Omega male.

    We must unite to help him.

    Like


  168. Get out of here with that bullshit
    LOLROF

    We must unite to help him.
    I’m here to help in any way that I can.

    celtic The person you linked sounds nothing like Whiskey. He takes the whole alpha/beta thing way too far, but it’s not the same writing style.

    agreed whiskey has a very distinctive writing style.

    celtic or you are a beta who has white knighting tendencies
    Nothing wrong with this^^^. white knighting gives chic noir gina tingles.

    Like


  169. “Men love women and women love kids. Such is life. Such says ev psych.”

    Spoken as a true book-worm. Someone who understands love from what he reads and thinks about it.

    Or spoken as an inexperienced male with little hands on talent for invoking overwhelming infatuation and deep bonds.

    Are you always that way? Do you answer arguments with ad-hominem attacks and shaming language? What matters who I am to evaluate my arguments?

    You missed the shot. Spoken as a man in his early forties who has had a few long term relationships and has discovered that deep bonds follow self-interest. There is no unconditional love from women, except for kids.

    About infatuation, it was never my thing. I looked for true love but now I am older and wiser and value companionship and not fairy tales.

    When you are older, you will know. And you will know not to so pedantic to deduce the personality of a man out of two lines quickly written. Pedantry is healed by age.

    Like


  170. I don’t feel comfortable talking about Whiskey as if he isn’t a regular of this blog, and therefore part of this conversation.

    Whiskey, if you’re reading, you know you’re not alone…rare, but not alone. I don’t know what kind of help you need, if you need any at all, but if I can then feel free to email me.

    Like


  171. on September 23, 2009 at 12:30 am I don't want Whiskey to kill me.

    You’re right Nicole. We shouldn’t discuss this where Whiskey can read it. I’ll email you.

    Like


  172. Actually, that invitation was *for* Whiskey, not to talk about him.

    Like


  173. Final Colon, we are about the same age.

    I guess we both missassumed.

    I still disagree with you, and still think our differences are based on differences in the quantity and quality of dating experiences.

    Like


  174. That is, I agree about unconditional love, but disagree that real love needs to be unconditional, or should be. Women can love their mates deeply and profoundly. For a while – sometimes a long while.

    Like


  175. Totally agree with xsplat here. Human love is conditional because we are not a monogamous animal, although we have monogamous tendencies (much stronger in some people than others). That does not make it any less ‘real’

    We are not prairie voles (one of the only true monogamists in the animal kingdom).

    “All this guy has to do is show up and he’ll get high quality women. He settles for some cow… I just don’t get it.”

    Hmm.. it’s almost enough to make you think that people vary wildly when it comes to what they’re attracted to, and the rules of ‘game’ don’t apply to plenty of people.

    Like


  176. Back When I Was Young & Foolish

    It’s too late to get him on this poll, but Lamar Odom of the Los Angeles Lakers is the true beta of the month.

    He’s marrying D-list celeb Khloe Kardashian this weekend.

    http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2009/09/lamar-odom-the-latest-laker-who-wants-to-be-a-k-brother.html

    What’s wrong with this picture?

    Lamar Odom just got tired of fucking every white groupie on the planet; he just wants to settle down
    with one
    who’s been
    on TV

    Like


  177. Dear Topper,

    How are things in the Hamptons, old chap? I’m sorry to say you are currently being the strong frontrunner for August Beta of the Month Award on some frightfully vulgar “blog” thing. A word of advice in this regard: do consider that your real problem was not that continental fellow Casimir, but getting hitched to some old girl named Tingler.

    Yrs, etc.

    GG

    Like


  178. […] two things. He either is completely under your thumb (complicated by the possibility of harbouring homoerotic desires of his own) or he truly does not care about you. In either case, it is a lost investment and he is […]

    Like