How To Handle Femmes Fatales Part 3

In my final installment I will discuss methods for dealing with Clio’s last, and scariest, femme fatale.

The Amazonian Alpha (AKA Lawyer Chick)

This woman, along with the Eternal Ingenue, is the most likely of all femme fatale types to be perceived as an Iconic Woman. But whereas the Eternal Ingenue inspires dreams of perpetual love and happiness, the Amazonian Alpha inspires, in those who fall in love with her, dreams of glory, of being raised above all the ordinary people who mill around on the face of the earth. She is the Maverick Alpha’s natural mate [Editor’s note: think John and Cindy McCain], although she may choose a more ordinary Classic Alpha. Often she is unable to find a man she considers worthy of her, and may remain single.

Yes, Amazonian Alphas who don’t get married before it’s too late are the most likely to wind up frightening middle-aged women alone in mansions on hilltops with their pet german shepherds and classical music. The less prideful ones will become cougars — very VERY aggressive cougars who will stroke your chest on the slimmest pretense.

The Amazonian Alpha is usually very intelligent and generally beautiful or at least physically impressive, being statuesque of build, like Maud Gonne, the Irish nationalist who made Yeats miserable, and often athletic as well. […]

My experience with Amazonian Alphas I have dated is that many of them have striking facial bone structure and an often exotic beauty. They are never “cute” or pretty in the dull, washed-out, southern sorority sister way. They have the kind of angular looks and prominent features that a sizeable minority of men will not find attractive. They are usually taller than average and wear heels everywhere and know how to walk in them. You will never see an Amazonian wear flip-flops. She’d sooner submit to a beta male like yourself.

In social life, she can be often recognised as the lone woman talking with a large group of men, men who laugh at her jokes and who may anxiously ask her opinion about public affairs and actually listen to what she says about them. Random men sledom try to ogle or touch her, because however beautiful she may be she has a steely eye or haughty deportment that does not bode well for men who behave disrespectfully to her. Her great virtue is strength of character: she will not readily back down and is usually possessed of physical and moral courage. Her great weakness is pride, which may lead her to serious errors in judgment.

Because Amazonians are the product of the union of a successful alpha male and his beautiful wife, they often inherit their fathers’ blazing intelligence, cocksure attitude, and ambition. If they are lucky, they will inherit their mothers’ beauty, but this doesn’t always happen. More than a few alpha females look like drag queens in pantsuits.

Men are scared to tangle with the Amazonian because it feels like locking horns with a gung-ho man. They may be nice to look at, but their afeminine ballbusting personalities can be a total turn-off. Stubborn as mules, bloated egos that need constant stroking, and a keen sixth sense for smoking out suitors of bad character, the Amazonian inspires men to treat her like another man as often as a woman to be seduced. If she’s smart, she learns to temper her masculine essence to entrap men of high quality, because studies are showing that very masculine men with high testosterone are more attracted to very feminine women.

The Alpha Amazon will almost certainly be a Daddy’s Girl, but unlike the Neurotic Heartbreaker, her relationship with her father will not have been interrupted by early death or marital breakdown. Unlike the Eternal Ingenue, her father is probably also a very successful man, a dominant Alpha male who was either born to money and power or who acquired it through his own drive or gifts.

Spot on. I remember this one cunt lawyer chick I dated who rhapsodized about her father on our first date:

“He’s a professor at the University of Chicago, and he’s a classical pianist. He’s played in symphonies. He’s got patents on some of his inventions.”

I believe she used the word “redoubtable” in her high praise of him. My penis tucked itself in my ass crack.

Which reminds me… I haven’t torn a new one in lawyer chicks in a while. Where’s my thesaurus?

The Amazonian Alpha, although she may break many hearts, is perhaps alone among all the Heartbreaker types catalogued here in that she very rarely does so deliberately, nor out of subconscious neurotic compulsion. Her great problem, and the reason she finds herself breaking hearts, is the one summarized in Sheryl Crow’s lament, “Are you strong enough to be my man?”

You will endure the WORST shit tests from the Amazonian Alpha. Lesser men will retreat into belligerence or submissive shoe-gazing. Budding alphas just starting out in the game will overcompensate and allow the brinksmanship to carry on too long, thinking that sparring with her is the best way to get her in bed. David Alexander will get turned on and swap railfanning stories with her.

She will not respect a man who is not strong enough for her, and will spend at least part of her life surrounded by male admirers who are not quite equal to her in ability or dominance, who fight a bit desperately for her notice. Diana Mitford had this problem: she married a sweet-natured, rather passive man, mainly to escape from her parents’ control, and soon after humiliated him by choosing the Maverick Alpha male Oswald Mosley as a lover and publicly flaunting their relationship. Once she married Mosley, she accepted his dominance and his infidelities.

This is the interesting thing about women (yes, all women). If her man is strong enough and gets her thoroughly wet, she’ll forgive his sins despite her moral posturing. But woe be the beta who can’t get her wet; even his minor sins will forever be wielded like a cudgel, beating him mercilessly into submission, extracting the last ounce of tribute from his shattered psyche, and used as flimsy pretext to commit ten times worse sins against him. Which brings us to…

Maxim #10: It’s pussy wetness uber alles.

A woman’s shifting, squirrelly morality and conditional umbrage is also proof of another fact of evolutionary psychology — men’s infidelity is not nearly as harmful or unacceptable as women’s infidelity. I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why this is so.

Alpha Amazons tend to have more male than female friends, and to be more at ease in the company of men, partly because unlike so many women they don’t mind arguing or fighting for their point of view, behaviour that makes many women uneasy.

If an Amazonian Alpha has female friends, she will be THE MOST CHALLENGING cockblock you will ever have the displeasure to encounter. I hope you sacked up before opening her group.

If you find yourself competing with a woman’s father; if you find that you are always wondering if you are good enough for her, then it is possible that you have found an Alpha Amazon.

Trenchant.

Maxim #45: Daddy’s girls are status whores. You will never measure up to her father. Don’t even try.

Corollary: Not trying will turn her on. Be indifferent to her father’s accomplishments.

I told the lawyer chick from the above conversation that her father’s life sounded “full”, and then I quickly changed the subject. I banged her that evening.

If you are a masochist who likes women with vestigial penises, then by all means knock yourself out with the Amazonian Alpha. This is what you need to keep in mind to seduce her:

  • DON’T accept her challenges. Parry and dance blithely around her provocations. Thwart her programming. The frame of mind you want to adopt: She is inferior to you. No bitch gets uppity with you.
  • DON’T answer shit test with shit test ad infinitum. She can do that all night, and you can’t. Pass the first few shit tests she throws out (and Amazonians front load their shit tests, unlike Ingenues and Neurotics who shit test forever and ever) and then tell her “Look, you don’t have to be this way. Ssshhh. It’s time for us to talk like human beings now.” The goal is to arouse her pussy, not her pride, and not her intellect.
  • DON’T brag about your achievements, especially in response to her own gleefully recounted resume. She will see any bragging as compensation. It’s actually better for you to make light of your station in life. “Yeah, I just bought a new scooter. You’ll be the belle of the ball showing up riding in the flower basket I put over the handlebars!”.
  • DON’T be ordinary. You can coast with drinks at a trendy lounge with an artsy chick, but you’ll want to step it up for an Amazonian. Take her on an adventure. Samba dancing at midnight, bingo at a gay club, berry picking in the countryside… you get the idea.
  • DON’T be beta. This is true for any woman, but never moreso than with the Alpha chick. You’ve gotta show real dominance, and that means never asking questions, being decisive, leading her on the dance floor, and choosing her drinks for her. She will try to push you around, probing for weak spots in your underbelly, and you have to stay solid, armored, like a concrete bunker.
  • DON’T talk about her father.
  • DO stroke her ego. This is really the only type of girl you can genuinely compliment on the first date without seeming beta. Keep your compliments focused on her smarts and her life-affirming gusto. She’ll eat it up.
  • DO qualify her hard. You won’t run the risk of overqualifying yourself with this girl like you would with the other types of femmes fatales. Remember, she already thinks she is above you, so constantly screening her for compatibility will only push her closer to your level, never below it. Example: “So you can cook, but you don’t know how to cook Thai-Mongolian fusion? I would’ve thought of all the girls I’ve met you would be the one who could.”
  • DO fuck her like a silverback gorilla. Hair pulling is just the start. Practice your wind-up; you’re going to be smacking her ass so hard your dick will feel the sting in her pussy.
  • DO dump her after getting your rocks off. Why would you want to spend your life with a nutcrushing battleaxe like this?

Dating ballbusters has really hardened me. I’m a better man for it.





Comments


  1. *bows down*

    I am not worthy.

    Like


  2. solid.

    Like


  3. Clio’s last, and scariest, femme fatale…AKA DC Lawyer Chick

    Ha. No need of a Halloween costume this year, I see. I shall go as myself. 😀

    Or do I have to be a DC lawyer to qualify as scary?

    Like


  4. Ah my type. I was with one for three years, and the memory of a woman who can look you square in the eye still makes me blush.

    I would say the rarest of all female types, much to my chagrin, but unmistakable when you meet one.

    Like


  5. Woah. Seems like the most hatred was reserved for the “femme fatale” least screwed up, and most financially stable.

    Like


  6. Living in DC has really hardened me. I’m a better man for it.

    More generally, nothing will turn you into a man faster than dating really hot women, even those who are not fatales. Not even jumping into an ultracompetive environment like law school will do as much. After dating and then losing and then dating another top quality woman, you _will_ learn to control your state.

    Getting the skills to initially attract beautiful women is a good start, but it is only the beginning, young apprentice. [spoken to myself]

    Like


  7. I was once this woman. My father died prematurely, leaving me to compare suitors with a mythical legend. I melted and married a man who was not intimidated by me.

    Like


  8. “No bitch gets uppity with you.”

    Huh, watch you mean uppity?

    Hugh, whatch you mean “you people”

    “No bitch gets uppity with you.”

    Damn it’s hard out here for a pimp, bitches don’t even know

    Like


  9. If she’s smart, she learns to temper her masculine essence to entrap men of high quality, because studies are showing that very masculine men with high testosterone are more attracted to very feminine women.

    And then their uber-androgenized offspring will have to do the same, to an even greater degree, until eventually Sasquatch finally emerges and retreats to the forest as the end result of a genetic lineage constantly drifting towards more testosterone.

    Case in point:
    http://vimeo.com/1064400

    Like


  10. She is the Maverick Alpha’s natural mate [Editor’s note: think John and Cindy McCain], although she may choose a more ordinary Classic Alpha.

    Who wrote this, Clio? Anyway, it’s totally wrong. If a lawyer chick is the typical Amazonian alpha, then her natural mate is not a Maverick Alpha like McCain. The conservative men of the world like George Bush and John McCain believe in being the clear-cut leader of a relationship and in traditional gender roles and cannot stand the Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama shrill, shrew lawyer chicks of the world. Henpecked, liberal successful male feminists like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are the Amazonian Alpha’s natural mate. Or for a fictional example, Cliff Huxtable, who used to be emasculated in front of children and company by his wife Claire every chance she got. Liberal democrat men are the type that seem to be alpha on the surface but are actually a different category: high-performing betas. The high-perfoming beta is the Amazonian Alpha lawyer chick’s natural mate. Any self-respecting alpha would have no patience for a female lawyer’s ways, unless she was not actively practicing law and therefore lost much of her competitive hostility.

    Like


  11. who is that handsome beastman of the east?

    Too bad we’ll never know.

    Coincidentally, the beast-man looks and behaves a lot like my ex-boyfriend. Not to worry folks, I’ve since gone in a completely different direction.

    Like


  12. Yes, Amazonian Alphas who don’t get married before it’s too late are the most likely to wind up frightening middle-aged women alone in mansions on hilltops with their pet german shepherds and classical music.

    I’ve always wondered how far the German shepherd (or other large dog) gets with its Amazon/cougar owner. Thoughts?

    Like


  13. AA’s are by far the finest fucks of all the femme fatales. All that T.

    Like


  14. Liberal democrat men are the type that seem to be alpha on the surface but are actually a different category: high-performing betas. The high-perfoming beta is the Amazonian Alpha lawyer chick’s natural mate.

    Excellent point.

    By “high-performing” you mean career or ability-wise, etc., not synonymous with “almost Alpha,” right?

    Like


  15. @14 T. Re: Cindy McCain. Read the following:

    She is chair of Hensley & Co., one of the largest Anheuser-Busch beer distributors in the United States.

    Dixie L. Burd, who is the daughter of Marguerite Smith through a prior relationship, is her half-sister, as is Kathleen Hensely Portalski, daughter of Jim Hensley and his first wife, Mary Jeanne Parks. Cindy McCain considers herself to be an only child and does not acknowledge that she has siblings.

    John McCain pushed to end his marriage of fourteen years; Carol McCain and John McCain stopped cohabiting in January 1980, and Carol accepted a divorce in February of 1980, effective in April 1980. John and Cindy were married on May 17, 1980 at the Arizona Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix. They made a prenuptial agreement that kept most of her family’s assets under her name; they have since kept their finances apart and file separate income tax returns.

    She campaigned with her husband door-to-door during his successful first bid for U.S. Congress in 1982, and was heavily involved in campaign strategy.

    She made statements critical of the Bush administration for not deploying enough troops during the Iraq War, and was an internal critic within the McCain campaign of its profligate spending during the first part of 2007.

    She is an amateur pilot and race car driver.

    She doesn’t sound like she’s conceding John McCain as the clear-cut leader of their relationship. Separate finances, the houses under her name, etc. Actually, she sounds like she relishes power above all else, even shunning blood relations (her half sisters do after all share blood with her) for more of it.

    Very rarely do men leave their 10+ year marriages for another woman, but McCain did it, and seemingly with little hesitation. To me, the timeline suggests that Cindy demanded it to be done quickly, and the previous poor girl was just shoved out the door.

    Kind of scary, really.

    Like


  16. Liberal democrat men

    Um, ew. Nothing is less appealing than a guy who wants to talk my ear off about how the world will go to hell unless we elect him Messiah president.

    Like


  17. Having lived in DC and encountered my share of these, I have an admission. I’ve grown to enjoy being mean to these types more than anything they have to offer, physically or otherwise. Beating her to the chase with a cutting remark gives me more of a hardon than her lowcut top. The world has given me thicker skin and a well placed insult can cause her to lose control in a visible way. Getting a bitch 86’d because she’s yelling like a psycho at you is better than draining your nuts in her.

    Like


  18. Hmm. Should’ve been a strike through Messiah there…

    Ah well.

    Like


  19. Cindy McCain got pretty much all of the inheritance.

    http://www.nypost.com/seven/08212008/gossip/pagesix/cindys_sis_fumes_over_snub_125346.htm

    She is also about as tall as John McCain in heels:

    Definitively Amazonian Alpha.

    Like


  20. I LOVE draining my nuts inside a bitch.

    Bust inside, that’s for sure…

    Like


  21. on September 18, 2008 at 7:44 pm SeaFighter HSV (as VK)

    I can’t think of anything stupider than the real VK’s comment.

    Like


  22. DO fuck her like a silverback gorilla. Hair pulling is just the start. Practice your wind-up; you’re going to be smacking her ass so hard your dick will feel the sting in her pussy.

    In my experience, these lawyers women love to be choked and slapped in the face while you’re fucking them. Just slapping them in the ass was too pedestrian. I needed to leave my handprint on there for days.

    Like


  23. She doesn’t sound like she’s conceding John McCain as the clear-cut leader of their relationship. Separate finances, the houses under her name, etc. Actually, she sounds like she relishes power above all else, even shunning blood relations (her half sisters do after all share blood with her) for more of it.

    Very rarely do men leave their 10+ year marriages for another woman, but McCain did it, and seemingly with little hesitation. To me, the timeline suggests that Cindy demanded it to be done quickly, and the previous poor girl was just shoved out the door.

    Kind of scary, really.

    Yes, but she concedes the spotlight to him and is always publicly supportive. Never appears to openly contradict him or compete. She never does things like Michelle Obama did to Barack in interviews like the following from Vogue:

    In Vogue magazine she mentioned how she really hated staying home with her kids because it wasn’t “intellectually stimulating” enough (she’s a lawyer, for Pete’s sake, it’s not like she has an intellectually stimulating career to begin with!), but rather than “instead of divorcing her husband,” she decided to stick around. But she is a tough “disciplinarian” and keeps Obama “in check.”

    In Glamor magazine:

    In an interview with Glamour Magazine, Mrs. Obama details her two girls’ morning ritual, a time, she says, when her husband Barack is often “snore-y and stinky.”

    “[Our daughters] come in my bed, and Dad isn’t there — because he’s too snore-y and stinky, they don’t want to ever get into bed with him.”

    Michelle Obama often discusses more intimate details about her husband on the campaign trail — even her annoyances with the Illinois Democrat.

    “There’s the Barack Obama who lives in my house,” she said when introducing her husband earlier this year. “That guy’s not as impressive. He still has trouble … putting his socks actually in the dirty clothes, and he still doesn’t do a better job than our 5-year-old daughter Sasha at making his bed, so you’ll have to forgive me if I’m a little stunned at this whole Barack Obama thing.”

    Though some have criticized her for expressing such gripes, Mrs. Obama defended the practice to Glamour.

    “People have notions of what a wife’s role should be in this process, and it’s been a traditional one of blind adoration. My model is a little different—I think most real marriages are,” she said.

    This is the typical ballbusting of a female high-powered lawyer, and the McCains of the world would really have no tolerance for that level of public disrespected. High-powered but henpecked betas like Obama on the other hand are fine with it.

    If an Amazonian Alpha female is indeed synonymous with a female lawyer, a conservative Alpha would have no tolerance for the constant emasculation attempts.

    Like


  24. Hope 19–

    She doesn’t sound like she’s conceding John McCain as the clear-cut leader of their relationship. Separate finances, the houses under her name, etc.

    You make interesting observations and good points.

    I think though that to some extent this has to be understood within the current unprecedented uber feminist cultural and social background.

    Talk to a high powered divorce attorney and he’ll tell you (or admit, this isn’t necessarily offered up to men even by male family law specialists, it’s a female biased field) thay nearly all high earning Holliwood or corporate women demand stringent pre-nups and seperate finances to go with them these days. It’s greatly supported by feminists, while the converse as well all know is not. Even this is fit somehow into the “redress” and “evening the scales” sort of feminist mindset. It’s what independent, strong women do, don’t you know. Even if they’re Republicans.

    In contrast men insisting on pre nups that aren’t lean over backwards generous regardless of the reasons for the split, is met with widespread hostility, suspicion and a sort of social shaming of the woman who would accede to it.

    Like


  25. T 27 —

    This is the typical ballbusting of a female high-powered lawyer, and the McCains of the world would really have no tolerance for that level of public disrespected. High-powered but henpecked betas like Obama on the other hand are fine with it.

    Yes.

    Like


  26. 36 Clio

    She tests men, not because she wants them to break, but because she wants to find one who won’t.

    Yes. Women who look for weaker men to dominate don’t fit into this persona at all. I read your entire entry — quite fascinating, by the way — and I think some of the commenters are mistaking any aggressive female for a very specific type of female that you’re talking about.

    Like


  27. I didn’t see “shrill” or “unpleasant” or “emasculating” in Clio’s Alpha Amazon definition.

    You and others here seem to only see women as “shrill,” “unpleasant” or “emasculating” when their dealings are with men. The Amazonian Alpha woman behaves in much the same way, only they usually turn their sharp fangs upon other women.

    Many girls were victim at the hands of these women in school and into adulthood. I can assure you that they are terrible in their tactics and leave many scars. They are in essence catty, not “ball-busting.” I have avoided them like the plague since my school days, but I’m still fascinated by them.

    You could say that this is preferable, because men should compete with other men, and women should compete with other women. But just as there are unscrupulous, dishonorable men who employ underhanded tactics and stab other men in the back, these women have little compassion or empathy when it comes to dealing with other women.

    The female hierarchy is not just about looks, but also about a kind of power displayed through a woman’s wealth and tastes (think designer clothing, posh neighborhoods and expensive vacations). You are right that these traditional type of Amazonian Alphas would never attempt to emasculate their men in public, but it is because they see their men as a part of their overall status. So attacking him would only lower herself and her own impeccable public image. And that would never do.

    Two sides of the same coin, in the end.

    Like


  28. 31 Sara:

    The less prideful ones will become cougars — very VERY aggressive cougars who will stroke your chest on the slimmest pretense.

    The slimmest pretense? Oh, for God’s sake.

    Methinks that sand is getting harder and harder to plunge one’s head into….

    Like


  29. I lurves me a high-performing beta. I consider high-performing betas to be the men who started out naturally submissive and kind, but through life circumstance have learned to take the lead and make shit happen. I love these men because they are responsible, faithful as long as you are faithful to them, and they work their asses off. And no matter what they learn to be, they will always retain their inner vestige of kindness. They’d rather not dominate if they don’t have to, and that suites me fine. They are more centered, self-sufficient and self-confident than natural alphas. Unlike alphas they don’t need a woman to rule over. They merely need a woman to run the woman side of the relationship (male betas tend to be awful housekeepers.)

    You can teach a beta to be an alpha, but you can’t teach an alpha to be a beta, which means you’re stuck with an asshole – mayyybe he’ll lighten up once he’s geriatric but it’s no guarantee. Not for me.

    Like


  30. 41 Lisa:

    I lurves me a high-performing beta. I consider high-performing betas to be the men who started out naturally submissive and kind, but through life circumstance have learned to take the lead and make shit happen. I love these men because they are responsible, faithful as long as you are faithful to them, and they work their asses off. And no matter what they learn to be, they will always retain their inner vestige of kindness. They’d rather not dominate if they don’t have to, and that suites me fine. They are more centered, self-sufficient and self-confident than natural alphas.

    That was beautiful.

    Touching, even.

    But…

    Does he make you moist?

    Like


  31. 42 – TC: Man, you beat me to it!!

    Like


  32. Hope,

    McCain’s forgotten first wife was disfigured in a car accident and gained a lot of weight as a result of her injuries while he was a POW. This doesn’t excuse his shameful behavior, though.

    Like


  33. Tupac 13 —

    Dougjnn, *this* is why I made my comments regarding casual debauched sex with Elizabeth, as against your insistence that I “didn’t get her at all.”

    I might not have been 100% accurate in drawing a mental bead on E, but the point is this:

    What I was saying you weren’t getting was how to convince and/or seduce the redoubtable Elizabeth, not what to do once you had. However, I can’t say I really had it so right at that point either.

    At that particular time I hadn’t yet grasped, or anyway fully believed, that Elizabeth’s aversion to “being a whore in the bedroom” was so deeply rooted, or went so far as e.g. even a strong aversion (“it’s revolting”) to garden variety oral sex, in this wide open day and age in these United States (and not from some uber religious viewpoint either, it doesn’t seem). I hadn’t realized she was still a virgin at 27 for no religious reasons or that she’d only had one real crush in her life, and that was while still a teen, and no requited love affair at all ever. No sex ever to speak of.

    Instead it’s deeply grounded in a Catherine McKinnon feminist type view of sexual relations. I’m not saying she supports censorship as McKinnon does, I know she doesn’t, nor that she would say that most male/female sex is akin to rape (which may in fact be something of an exaggeration of McKinnon’s views as well). But she shares with McKinnon a deep aversion to any male dominance differential in the bedroom. She sees female in the moment surrender as an unequal female giving, rather than an ultimate thrill.

    She finds the idea that the essence of deep female sexuality is a challenging but ultimately profound temporary (bedroom) submission to male sexual dominance — to be deeply foreign, threatening and not at all intriguing. There appears to be no resonance, even a fearful or leary one, of that in her, but rather deepest suspcion and distaste. Almost like a hetero male contempating sexual surrender to another male.

    Oh, and she’s very unlikely to ever write anything that will be read by more than a smattering of people 50 years from now. Partly because that’s how writing is especially these days, and partly because it sure helps to have led a really interesting life to write really interesting stuff.

    In other words, we have an Alpha Amazon, creative writing division in ambition first and foremost, but high end lawyer chick as backup and credentials, who’s potential “great art” requires the utmost priority from her and all involved with her, who’s horrified at being a whore in the bedroom. Being with any Alpha Amazon will challenge any highly confident man’s ego, but sometimes there’s also a serious bedroom heat payoff in addition to interesting conversations. Often in private it does get very male and female. Not so much in this case, it sure doesn’t seem. That would be dangerously close to being a “whore in the bedroom” and doing such inherently degrading and submissive things as giving her man head.

    Oh, but she also says she feels deep “passion”. Male type passion, perhaps? (There was that one not long requited crush she had in her late teens.)

    Is it still possible that love for the right worthy man who is happy enough with her writerly greatness ambitions above all her other priorities, might melt her rock solid inner ice princess? Yes it is possible. One hell of an ice climb to a very uncertain peak that may turn out not to be any peak at all, but possible.

    My prediction of best match: Older high end beta or because of high earnings quasi lesser alpha, who’s highly intelligent, tall and ok looking, but rather in awe of her ambition, deeply supportive and actually somewhat submissive in a subtle way — that will grow more so over time. Their bedroom will be lackluster but that will start out being fine with her. Then she’ll cuckold him perhaps consensually if she does ever develop a big sexual appetitel. In any case she’ll dominate her husband as the real pants in the family, and have only tipid sexuality with him, greatly decreasing over time. He will be increasingly emasculated.

    To her credit she may dominate him subtly as opposed to cruelly though, esp. in front of friends, etc. She does seem like she’ll work to avoid cruelty even at the cost of some eroticism to herself.

    But hey, that’s just my divination. I claim no omnipotent knowledge, just lots of various kinds of experience.

    Like


  34. Has anyone floated out the idea that maybe Elizabeth likes women, but is very uncomfortable with that idea? I knew someone of that ilk in college, who is *still* convinced she hasn’t met the right man. Mutual friends say that the fantasy lives on.

    Like


  35. GUYS ON THIS BLOG: “We figured you all out. The worse we treat you and the other people around us, the less you can’t wait to lift your skirts”

    GIRLS ON THIS BLOG: “So not true! We hate losers, but we love guys who try hard to be assholes, but really aren’t because of their lack of testosterone. They buy us houses and help us raise children – even if they are not their own!”

    GUYS ON THIS BLOG: “Whores!”

    GIRLS ON THIS BLOG: “Okay, I admit this really turns me on. But stop spreading the word!”

    Like


  36. This is the typical ballbusting of a female high-powered lawyer, and the McCains of the world would really have no tolerance for that level of public disrespected. High-powered but henpecked betas like Obama on the other hand are fine with it.

    I’m left wondering why she would want to say such disrespectful things about her husband at this point. Is it a move calculated to accost feminist voters, many of whom may have been disappointed by the nomination of the old white man Biden as OB’s VP candidate? Or is it something she does spontaneously? Has Michelle Obama said things like that about her husband in press interviews before?

    Like


  37. to 41,42,43,

    re: but does he make you moist?

    yes, There is nothing hotter than the young father out in public adeptly shepherding his three young children.

    -or the young father who can build a sandbox, and coach a soccer team with joy and humor.

    -or the young father who educates his daughter on the difference between molasses, sugar cane, and table sugar.

    -or the young father who finishes a triathlon with his children running at his side.

    -or the high-income beta who takes his kids rafting in six rivers around the world.

    Those men take my breath away, have fueled my fantasies, and make me moist.

    Like


  38. He
    -coaches a soccer team
    -educates
    -finishes a triathlon
    -has a high-income
    -does rafting in six rivers around the world.

    Those men take my breath away, have fueled my fantasies, and make me moist.

    No wonder. You just added kids to your alpha male fantasies.

    Like


  39. “This doesn’t excuse his shameful behavior though”

    No, but if you had to walk a mile in those shoes…

    Like


  40. Marlboro Man, that part makes sense. However, most “ordinary” women do not go after married men with children, nor would they encourage their men to go into politics, nor campaign with their husbands.

    She would not be married to McCain, who was already a celebrity of sorts after the war and served as the Navy’s liaison to the U.S. Senate, if she hadn’t pursued him. She would not be nearly as famous had she not had any ambitions of her husband going into politics, and she might not have been the sole heir to her father’s fortune had she not done certain things to ensure that.

    If you take only this one incident of her life, it may seem uninteresting. But all these separate incidents put together really start to paint the portrait of a very shrewd and powerful woman who knows exactly how to get what she wants.

    Like


  41. to cz,
    Most women don’t want the manwhore bedding women. We want the durable high-performing beta who can nurture our children long-term.

    Like


  42. 46 Grace

    Has anyone floated out the idea that maybe Elizabeth likes women, but is very uncomfortable with that idea?

    I don’t know if anyone here has floated it, but I’ve had lesbian friends try to seduce me from time to time. 🙂 But no, I feel no desire for zee females. As Clio says, it’s all about the strong man. And we’re not living in a day and age that’s all that conducive to producing very strong men. Decadent ages never are. Decadent ages tend to produce soft people, both men and women.

    45 dougjnn

    I really don’t think you understand me as well as you think you do. And I don’t really want to get into it here, because it’s already been gotten into enough elsewhere, but suffice it to say: I do not want a man I can dominate.

    Oh, and she’s very unlikely to ever write anything that will be read by more than a smattering of people 50 years from now. Partly because that’s how writing is especially these days, and partly because it sure helps to have led a really interesting life to write really interesting stuff.

    Why the need to get so personal? I’m still not getting where the hostility is coming from. I’m someone you don’t even know posting my opinions on a web site. People are free to argue with me, to disagree with me, to cast judgment on my writing ability based on what they see here, and, yes, to insult me if they want, but what’s the point to the last? Who are you to say I have no interesting stories in me, or that I haven’t led an interesting life? I’ve actually had a very interesting life — heck, while I was prosecuting, it got a little too interesting at times. But that’s beside the point. The point is: you don’t know me. Basically what you know about me is that I’m not the kind of girl you would want. Which is fine. But why the need to be snide? To my knowledge, I haven’t insulted you. I haven’t cast moral judgments on people who are whores in the bedrooms, or on people who like whores in the bedrooms. All I said is: I, Elizabeth, the individual, am unlikely to be one. It doesn’t seem like it would be to my taste. To which you’re more than welcome to say: I can see why men wouldn’t want you then. That would be valid, under the circumstances of the discussion. But why the gratuitous slams? It doesn’t make much sense.

    Incidentally, it’s not all that necessary to have an interesting life to write interesting stories. Jane Austen basically spent her life visiting her relatives. She had no real significant romances, and yet she wrote six outstanding novels which had strong romantic components, novels that are still widely read today. I doubt C.S. Lewis ever visited a place called Narnia, or that Tolkien ever lived in Middle Earth, and yet people are still reading their works more than fifty years later. I’m fairly darn certain that Jules Verne never went to the moon or to the center of the earth. Experience certainly doesn’t hurt, but the key to great storytelling is imagination.

    Like


  43. @Grace: In this day and age, I find it hard to believe that someone would be ‘unconsciously gay’ post-college; especially without religious convictions. Despite relative animosity, there is enough cultural presense and anonymous support (Hello, intarwebs) that it just don’t add up. Besides, most women have some sort of secret or not-so-secret bisexualist fantasy. Which girls are all so prone to in formative years for the ‘drunken best friend makeout’.

    Besides, most ‘in-denial’ types try to ‘fit in’, and that doesn’t fit a pattern of asexuality.

    Maybe you’re the not comfortable one?

    Like


  44. clio, nothing i wrote contradicts your concept of the amazonian alpha. dc lawyer chicks, most of whom hail from upper middle to upper class families, shit test men for the same reason you mentioned — not to break men for sport (although that is part of the package deal) but ultimately to smoke out the ones who can handle her without folding like a cheap lawn chair.

    I have to disagree here, law school attracts and cultivates a hypercompetitive, win-at-all-costs mentality. Winning and competition trumps everything. Short term winning trumps the truth, the greater good, the big picture, everything. That is why the people who graduate law school but can’t maintain such an antisocial, status obsessed and myopic worldview are miserable or opt for alternative careers within law.

    Female lawyers don’t test men to see if they are alpha enough to keep. The Amazonian Alpha as described Clio to me tests men in order to screen out weakness and keep the strength. Female high-powered lawyers on the other hand test men to screen out strength and keep the weakness. Many of them are intimidated by a strong man, which is why Michelle Obama felt the need to knock Obama down a few notches in public. Even if a true alpha biologically attracts them and they succumb in the short run, psychologically they can’t handle it and always sabotage it. The Amazonian Alpha breaks a men down to find the one that will dominate and lead her by taking the man’s role. The high-powered female lawyer wants the man role for herself. Big difference.

    Like


  45. Has Michelle Obama said things like that about her husband in press interviews before?

    These were said WAY earlier in the campaign, before Biden was on board and before he was even the clear cut victor over Hillary. Many people didn’t hear about this because the media, who are carrying the water for Obama, severely downplayed it and it also seems like Obama’s handlers have severely reeled her in somewhat for fear that her harpylike ways would alienate voters.

    Like


  46. Tupac 48–

    You’re probably right. I think Elizabeth’s salvation will be as Joe T. outlined in another blog entry regarding Sara Palin:

    I disagree. She won’t do nearly as well as that in her mate’s sexual heat quotent (alphaness). Further, she values intelligence more than that.

    She won’t because she isn’t nearly sexual enough herself at this stage.

    It’s possible that once fully secure emotionally in a settled relationship, and after she’s had enough boring sex to know it’s boring sex, that she will develop strong sexual cravings. She still won’t want to give up domestic control or the support of a high earning man who keeps her comfortably upper middle class while she strives for the writerly greatness that she knows is her destiny and her particular daddy’s girl birthright.

    Like


  47. This is the interesting thing about women (yes, all women). If her man is strong enough and gets her thoroughly wet, she’ll forgive his sins despite her moral posturing.

    There is no amount of strength or wetness that will make infidelity anything other than an immediate & irrevocable deal-breaker. Sorry.

    Like


  48. T 59 —

    because the media, who are carrying the water for Obama

    You said it, and “to say the very least”.

    There’s never been anything like it in it’s pervasiveness, utter lack of more than the thinest pretense of evenhandedness, and near freedom from exception, throughout the mainstream media.

    It’s almost as bad as if we had a single BBC. It gives new meaning to the phrase “liberal media”.

    And I’m not even a Republican. (I’m an independent).

    Like


  49. they eventually lose attraction for any man who can’t dominate her psychologically.
    but maybe lawyers are a special breed and really do find happiness and wet vaginas pushing around beta husbands.

    Oh no, I must clarify, I never said they find actual happiness and attraction for the beta husbands they can push around. They don’t. They totally lose attraction for men they can dominate. It’s just that their hypercompetitiveness and extreme feminism won’t allow them to compromise and be happy in the secondary, supportive role to an alpha, no matter how much genuine attraction that alpha generates. They’d rather sacrifice attraction and hormonal excitement than sacrifice control or power to someone else.

    Like


  50. 54 – anony: Most women don’t want the manwhore bedding women. We want the durable high-performing beta who can nurture our children long-term.

    Most women want both.

    Like


  51. Elizabeth 55 —

    As Clio says, it’s all about the strong man. And we’re not living in a day and age that’s all that conducive to producing very strong men. Decadent ages never are. Decadent ages tend to produce soft people, both men and women.

    It’s not just the age but also the place. Our age in the US and to a lesser extent the rest of the Anglosphere produces hard women and soft men. Maybe even the women aren’t so hard compared to e.g. American frontier women, but that was a very specialized sub environment and attracted very few women. On the true frontier it was often only ten percent. They also weren’t so hard compared to the men of that time and place either.

    Relatively speaking contemporary American women are particularly “hard” / domance seeking in their relations with men, and the average contempo American man is particularly soft in his relations with women — when comparing historically or cross culturally.

    The reason why is obviously the American brand of feminism, combined with the relative lack of a macho substrate (blame that on Britain vs. e.g. Spain, France or Italy), the cowboy fantasy legacy notwithstanding.

    Like


  52. i still say lawyers are closer to amazonian alphas than to any of the other three femme fatales. god willing, they’ll unbreed themselves out of existence.

    Agreed. On both counts.

    Like


  53. wear heels everywhere and know how to walk in them

    In other words, she’ll never date me? 😦

    Like


  54. @14

    T AKA Ricky Raw –

    You’re making the big mistake of trying to correlate alphaness/betaness with political ideology.

    Being a conservative GOP supporter doesn’t necessarily mean a guy is an alpha. In the DC area I would always laugh to near-puking when I saw a guy driving around in a beat-up 1985 Japanese compact with a cracked windshield and a bad paint job, sporting bumper stickers from the NRA, the CATO Institute and Tom Davis. (Not one or two of the above but all three, mind you.)

    I will grant you that classic alpha males tend to lean more towards economic conservatism than to liberalism, but this is by no means a given. There are lots of liberal Democratic alphas out there… Clinton, Biden, Obama are by definition alphas. Most of the Kennedy men are alphas.

    Also, I don’t think Hillary rates as an Amazonian Alpha because of her short stature and bland features. And if she’s not an Amazonian, she also doesn’t fall into any of the other listed categories, which means she’s not a Femme Fatale at all, but just a high-achieving nerd chick.

    Like


  55. 68 dougjnn

    It’s not just the age but also the place. Our age in the US and to a lesser extent the rest of the Anglosphere produces hard women and soft men.

    Oh, I agree it’s the place as well. But when I speak of “hard,” I’m not speaking of nihilistic world-weary women with calcified hearts. I’m talking about strength of character — of people who can’t be broken, regardless of the odds. The kind of people who have what it takes to carve a civilization out of the wilderness, to build empires, and to defeat grasping maniacal tyrants like Adolf Hitler.

    I think most of these so-called “hardened, sophisticated” women of today — “Sex and the City”-style women, if you will — would break in the face of a real threat to their survival.

    Like


  56. Hope, Tupac, and the rest of you who keep going on about the various kinds of unpleasant women you know whom you think are “Alpha Amazons”: you’re mistaken. As Elizabeth said, you think that any aggressive or difficult woman is an “AA” type. But, to judge by the kind of examples you’ve offered – high school Queen Bees (Hope); or Gloria Allred, Hilary Clinton, and so forth, proposed by some of the men – you’ve completely misunderstood the concept.

    Regarding Gloria Allred and Hilary Clinton: first, neither of them is a “femme fatale”. To be an FF, you have to be sexually attractive. Furthermore, you have to be the kind of woman who is sexually attractive but whose love life is a mess, who has a trail of angry or miserable ex-suitors in her past, who probably makes a mess of her marriage. What I was trying to do is answer two questions: a) what are the characteristics of such women? and b) what makes them the kind of women they are?

    Neither Clinton nor Allred was ever an FF. But even if they had been lucky enough to be born beautiful, even if they had a trail of lovers in their pasts, they would not be Alpha Amazon FFs. Both are too anxious, needy, and difficult to be AA types. A true Alpha Amazon doesn’t need much in the way of reassurance from anyone. If Allred or Clinton had been beauties, they would likely have been Neurotic FF’s. Most high-achieving middle-class beauties are. Hope, that also goes for the Queen Bee beauties who made people like us miserable in the schoolyard: Neurotic FFs, all of them. Alpha Amazons never bully anyone. They don’t need to enlarge their self-esteem at other women’s expense.

    Diana Mitford Mosley, of whom I wrote in the original piece on the subject, was a great beauty, very feminine, never aggressive – but absolutely the center of attention wherever she went, without even trying. Her older sister adored and was jealous of her; her little sisters simply adored her, because she was so nice to them all. Her brothers’ friends began to fall in love with her from the time she was ten. She never suffered a moment’s self-doubt in her life, which was both good for her, in a way, and tragic, too; she married the leader of the British Union of Fascists and never could admit that Fascism had been a really bad idea. THAT’S an Alpha Amazon.

    Clio

    Like


  57. T 65–

    they eventually lose attraction for any man who can’t dominate her psychologically.

    Yes.

    Often I think they marry someone they see as equal overall because that’s the best they can do (given what men find most attractive).

    But then as you say elsewhere, they often can’t help themselves from continually fighting for dominance, because that’s both somewhat an instinct even among females if they’re high T, and also what uberFeminism for which they are the brightest stars, has taught them to do since girlhood.

    Men meanwhile have been taught to regard such female sparing benighly and indulgently, and as a strong woman’s natural inclination and relationship right, almost no matter how much. I’m not saying that alpha men buy this so much but that’s the messaage.

    So over time and particularly with guys that aren’t pronouncedly alpha, she’s likely to start prevailing and keep on going. All the cultural messages on TV and in the movies, just about, support this.

    So yeah, she ends up unthrilled and unhappy in her marriage, and profoundly cheats (way more than just sex) or leaves it, or often both.

    Caaa-ching, chalk another one up towards that 50% Ameircan divorce rate, overwhelming chosen by women.

    Like


  58. Being a conservative GOP supporter doesn’t necessarily mean a guy is an alpha.

    No, being a conservative GOP supporter doesn’t necessarily mean a guy is alpha. I’m just saying that a conservative alpha is the least likely alpha to put up with an Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton because unlike liberal men they don’t feel the need to subscribe to feminist ideals and are more likely to subscribe to traditional gender roles of the man as leader.

    Clinton, Biden, Obama are by definition alphas.

    You can be successful and powerful but still be beta. You can be dirt poor, unemployed and broke and be alpha. I don’t think being successful automatically translates to alpha status. Otherwise you wouldn’t see so many CEOs and high status people signing up for pickup artist bootcamps. Based on how Michelle Obama acts, and how comfortable she is publicly disrespecting him and not backing down when called on it later, it’s obvious she has zero fear of repercussions from Barack. That’s beyond private testing, that’s blatant emasculation and jocking for status. If she’s so comfortable being that way after decades of marriage its obvious he’s not an alpha, just a very ambitious and high-performing beta. You should also read her give interviews describing thier courtship process. She pretty much describes him as a desperate beta that was beneath her and wore her down into a date only through sheer persistence. (I find this hard to believe since he really seems like he could have done way better than her) Another example of public disrespect, and another very beta portrayal of him to boot .

    Like


  59. Elizabeth 72 —

    I think most of these so-called “hardened, sophisticated” women of today — “Sex and the City”-style women, if you will — would break in the face of a real threat to their survival.

    Yes I agree, but their survival is not for the moment much challenged. We could talk about push coming to shove down the road, but that’s another issue.

    Meanwhile these emotionally hardened women doing their best to take male economic support as much for granted as they can manage (wether via marriage, state coerced divorce settlements and child support =alimony for cheating and deserting wives, or tax support for unwed mothers, medical care to come, and as much else as they can vote for) often find that their success in pushing around their less than resolutely alpha husbands in marriage, with the full throated support of our feminist culture in the entertainment media and everywhere else at every turn, leads to romantic boredom soon enough. That leads to either marriage death or often divorce and divorce theft.

    It’s truly a golden age of marriage in the United States.

    Like


  60. Regarding Gloria Allred and Hilary Clinton: first, neither of them is a “femme fatale”.

    clio, if you look at my comment I brought them up specifically to say they and other female lawyers aren’t Amazonian Alphas precisely for the reason you state. But I stand corrected about which category they’re closer to. Now that I think about it, you’re right, they are closest to the neurotic category. Or maybe a mutant blend of neurotic and alpha?

    Like


  61. Clio, where do you think Queen Elizabeth I fell in terms of categories?

    Like


  62. @75

    Ricky Raw –

    I totally agree you can be successful and still a beta.

    Since we were talking politicans, let me bring up John Edwards is a prime example.

    I have had numerous interactions with the guy in the Senate and after, and he’s a very smart, talented beta who probably got the added boost from his looks, to achieve at levels we normally associate with alphas.

    Even his affair was with a not-very-attractive woman in her 40s, and he bungled it by (most likely) impregnated her, which shows he’s not very well-schooled at getting away with that kind of thing.

    Like


  63. Ricky Raw – you’re right though, I may have mispegged Obama as an alpha just because he gives good speech.

    Like


  64. on September 18, 2008 at 11:50 pm Glengarry Glenpoon

    [email protected]: Odds on Barry staying married if he loses the election? Putting her man down in public is the super klaxon after the warning klaxon.

    Like


  65. 86 Glengarry Glenpoon (lol):

    Putting her man down in public is the super klaxon after the warning klaxon.

    Word.

    Like


  66. Ricky Raw,

    The categories I proposed can only work on the assumption that the women (and men) who belong to them are compelled by purely psychological (including evo-psych.) reasons to behave as they do. But when the people in question live in political turmoil or face physical hardship, and their survival is at stake, it becomes impossible to separate their psychological needs from material necessity.

    Clio

    Like


  67. Social democratic societies like Sweden also push feminism, but not in the context of a laissez-faire capitalist society. So it’s a completely different, uncompetitive, beta-type feminism.

    Which to me is just as repugnant.

    Ditto in Finland. We have rule by feminist media pundits, women’s parliamentary/NGO/academic networks, and social workers (almost invariably female) whose word carries a lot of weight in custodial battles. During his campaign prior to the presidential election in 2000, the Center Party male candidate was put severely on the defensive during a televised debate where he was questioned about why his wife was a stay-at-home-mom (a rarity these days).

    But one thing I’m very happy to be able to say we’re lacking as opposed the USA (and perhaps Canada) is the litigation craziness. As far as I have understood, alimony does not exist (child support payments do) and the law is very straightforward when it comes to splitting assets – property accrued during marriage is split 50-50.

    Like


  68. 80 Joe T

    I don’t think the Anglosphere produces hard women and soft men.

    I think, these days, the United States (and much of the industrialized world) produces soft women and soft men.

    As I clarified above, when I talk about “hard,” I’m not talking about being callous, cynical, cool, world-weary, etc. Nor am I talking about being cut-throat or even (necessarily) competitive. I’m talking about being the kind of person who doesn’t break, regardless of what the world throws at you, the kind of person who can rise to whatever challenge you face. This is the hardness, not of cruelty and corruption, but of courage and endurance. A feminine, gentle woman can be hard in this sense. So can a quiet, unassuming man. It’s a trait that can cut all across gender and class lines, and it’s a trait a nation, and especially a nation’s leaders, need in order for the nation to survive. And it’s a trait that tends to die out the more prosperous and secure a nation becomes. When genuine threats to survival don’t exist — or when those threats aren’t obvious — people stop learning to be hard. Stoicism isn’t valued in flashy, flamboyant times. And so often, when the crisis arrives, people no longer have what it takes to stand up and fight. They’ll let themselves be conquered or annihilated.

    The disappearance of this kind of hardness was, in Edward Gibbon’s opinion, one of the primary causes for the decline and fall of Rome. Basically, when people no longer have the courage and will to rise to challenges, they lose the strength that is necessary to survive.

    I don’t like to be a pessimist, but I see a lot of parallels between America and Rome — Frank Bourne, a classics professor at Princeton, would begin every session of his Roman history class with the words de nobis fabula narratur, “Their story is our story.” He also said, “In the age of Pax Americana, there is no more important lesson we can teach American students than the rise and fall of Pax Romana,” advice that has sadly gone unheeded. I don’t think we’ve reached the point of no return by any means — I think the American people are still capable of being roused — but I do think our popular culture, with its emphasis on nothing but pleasure and instant gratification, has a corrosive effect on the soul.

    That’s what I mean when I say people today are soft. Not that they’re kind, gentle, peaceful beings, but that they’re losing their strength of character.

    Like


  69. @90 Elizabeth –

    Okay, going by your definitions of “soft” and “hard”, you are right. But that brings up a whole different area of debate.

    What I mean is actually more a superficial day-to-day “hardness”, as in “don’t fuck with me or I’ll eat you for lunch” along with a cocky, almost knee-jerk need to shit-test people, start pissing contests, and one-up everyone.

    This kind of pose, along with what was called “edginess” by 90s marketing types (and which commonly mainifests itself in things like tattoos and postmodern “sarcasm”), have become the calling cards of the modern young American woman.

    Like


  70. 91 Joe T

    What I mean is actually more a superficial day-to-day “hardness”, as in “don’t fuck with me or I’ll eat you for lunch” along with a cocky, almost knee-jerk need to shit-test people, start pissing contests, and one-up everyone.

    I agree with you that this is boorish and beneath contempt.

    This kind of pose, along with what was called “edginess” by 90s marketing types…

    I hate and despise the word “edgy” for precisely this reason.

    …have become the calling cards of the modern young American woman.

    Not so much where I live, but then, I live in a state with only one “blue” county and maybe two “purple” ones. 🙂

    Like


  71. 90 Elizabeth:

    [snip awesome screed]

    I’m starting to like you again.

    (in an asexual way, tho. not a hot buttsexx kind of way)

    Like


  72. @92 Elizabeth –

    One blue county and maybe two purple ones in a sea of red?

    Your state sounds a lot like my state…

    Like


  73. 94 Joe T

    Your state sounds a lot like my state…

    If it’s 6:40 pm in your state right now, your state has an unusual shape, and your state’s sole blue county is the sometime-home of many obnoxious blue-state politicians and celebrities, your state probably is my state. 😀

    Like


  74. 95 Eliz –

    Dunno. Your state is in the Mountain Zone (or at least partially), mine is all in the Pacific Zone.

    And it depends on what you think an “unusual” shape is. Obvisously it’s not WY or CO, right? (Unless you think a square is just unusual for a state.)

    If it’s Texas, you must live in the extreme western panhandle for you to be on Mountain time.

    The only other state in the Mountain zone with an arguably “unusual” shape is Idaho.

    Obnoxious blue state pols and celebrities sounds like a conservative’s stereotype of CA, but that’s not Mountain.

    Other than that, in your time zone, the only state which has a county which fits that description is Colorado and Boulder, right?

    Like


  75. 96 Joe T

    The only other state in the Mountain zone with an arguably “unusual” shape is Idaho.

    Here’s a 2004 red/blue map colored by county. (Fun for the whole family!) Elizabeth is in fact talking about Idaho. The blue county (Blaine) is the home of Sun Valley.

    Like


  76. 97 Joe T

    Your state is in the Mountain Zone (or at least partially), mine is all in the Pacific Zone.

    Partially is right. My portion’s in the Mountain; the Panhandle’s in the Pacific.

    Unless you think a square is just unusual for a state

    Hee. This reminds me of a story about Tom Osborne when he was coaching Nebraska. He was recruiting down in Florida, and the recruit asked him if Nebraska was “one of the square states in the middle.”

    At least I think it was Osborne. Maybe it was Bob Devaney.

    The only other state in the Mountain zone with an arguably “unusual” shape is Idaho.

    😀

    Obnoxious blue state pols and celebrities sounds like a conservative’s stereotype of CA, but that’s not Mountain.

    Other than that, in your time zone, the only state which has a county which fits that description is Colorado and Boulder, right?

    Nope. Blaine County, home of Sun Valley.

    Like


  77. OK, I know what your state is… I don’t think you have any blue counties up there.

    Your state “educated” Sarah Palin… to use that term loosely.

    Like


  78. Elizabeth; Joe T:

    Elizabeth 95 —

    If it’s 6:40 pm in your state right now, your state has an unusual shape, and your state’s sole blue county is the sometime-home of many obnoxious blue-state politicians and celebrities, your state probably is my state.

    Joe T in musing response to the above —

    The only other state in the Mountain zone with an arguably “unusual” shape is Idaho.

    Obnoxious blue state pols and celebrities sounds like a conservative’s stereotype of CA, but that’s not Mountain.

    I’m sorry Joe T, but you are not showing near enough wattage for our fair, if ohhhhhhh so frustrating, Elizabeth.

    The obnoxious politicians and celebreties in a western context clearly does refer to Cali, or is very, very likely to. But dim bulb, try for a bit more reading comprehension. She’s talking not about their home being in her state but their “sometime home”, and that’s not scatered around the state but in one particular county with a little neighboring country spillover.

    Both Idaho and Montana are odd shaped, are in the Mountain Time Zone, and are meccas for not a few, but a lot of obnoxious Calli celebrities and politicians meeting her description : specifically, Bozeman, Montana and Sun Valley Idaho, and their environs.

    Bozeman and thereabouts is more au current with the Cali celebs and politicians, e.g Ted Turner and his former wife Jane Fonda, among others, so my money’s on that state. Also I don’t think Elizabeth is Mormon, though last I heard they do allow some non Mormon’s to live in Idaho these days.

    Texas is completely out of the question as are Wyoming and Colorodo. No self respecting obnoxious Calli blue state celeb has a second home in Texas and though a lot do in Aspen Colorodo it’s tough to get a whole lot boxier shaped that that, and Wyoming and Utah (despite a few ski town blue state second home meccas) are similar. Also Co. has more than oneish blue state country, Aspen no longer stands alone, cause the Latinos been coming.

    Again, Montana or Idaho, I’d guess Montana.

    Like


  79. It’s something of a wonder how I managed that particular set of cascading blockquotes. I’m not sure I deserve all the credit. Waaa happened?

    Ah well.

    Like


  80. Elizabeth

    Yuup. Either Bozeman Mt. or Sun Valley Idaho me said — as those that can figure out what I wasn’t quoting in that cascading mess can see.

    Ok, it was my second choice, but by a whisker.

    Like


  81. ResidentCynic 101–

    A fellow cynic my say that I’m letting hotter women get away with more BS. To that I say — err, guilty as charged?

    In the immoral words of my mother:

    T’was ever thus.

    Like


  82. 98 Joe T & 99 dougjnn

    Nice deductive skills, boys, but Joe T wins: I live in close proximity to the infamous Smurf Turf. 😀

    99 dougjnn

    Also I don’t think Elizabeth is Mormon, though last I heard they do allow some non Mormon’s to live in Idaho these days.

    No, I’m not Mormon. My Mormon friends believe I am utterly debauched and sinful. I was the token heathen in my hometown, but perhaps, given my proximity to the Holy Land, I have some hope of salvation. 🙂

    Like


  83. ResCynic 101–

    Or as Spiccoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High would say:

    Well duhhh, dude.

    Like


  84. Elizabeth 104 —

    My Mormon friends believe I am utterly debauched and sinful.

    I will perhaps come as no surprise to you when I say:

    Oh. My. God. 😀

    Like


  85. 106 dougjnn

    See? I’m deserving of your compassion. I went from growing up on the outskirts of the Holy Land to college in Sodom and Gommorah. Following that mind-boggling experience, I went to law school, where the goal of the professors is to ensure that, once you graduate, your only remaining ability will be to Think Like a Lawyer. Is it any wonder I’m hopelessly confused? 😀

    Like


  86. Lawyer women are high T women, argumentative, more focused on victory, rules mastery, dominance, friends (as in allies) more than family and children. They view the world as zero-sum, since that is what the courtroom is. The only type of relationship they understand is D/s, not formally as in the subculture, but essentially as in the core of their value system and their view of human nature.

    A friend’s sister was a lawyer married to another lawyer. She and her husband decided to split, and got into a terrible battle over the custody of their two children.

    I will never forget the chill I felt when my friend told me what kind of custody battle it was. It was, I should say, not a custody battle at all. It was really an anti-custody battle.

    They were fighting over which one of them had to take the children.

    Lawyers.

    Like


  87. Clio is right: Hillary is a nerd/neurotic. In the Middle Ages, she would have been a great Saint, a nun founding hospitals. St Hillary of Rodham!

    I mean c’mon look at her early pictures. Nerd chick. Nerd. Not a femme fatale at all. Not then. Not ever.

    Gloria Allred? Christ, the only men she ever killed were the Menendez brothers’ dad and the good time guys in that Friars Club she sued.

    Like


  88. Social democratic societies like Sweden also push feminism, but not in the context of a laissez-faire capitalist society. So it’s a completely different, uncompetitive, beta-type feminism.

    I’m sorry? I’m sure you meant to say something about MAN-EATING PRO-LESBIAN HARPIES WITH POINTY CROTCH-RETOOLING CLAWS. Scandinavia is DOOMED at the hands of these all-powerful witches. Have you any idea what it’s like to even attempt to be a man over there?

    http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1474158.ece

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3054270.ece

    etc

    Like


  89. Elizabeth 107 —

    Is it any wonder I’m hopelessly confused?

    You know I was prepared to work a whole lot with you through “hopelessly confused”. That and wanting some degree of love before sex (and the challenges those things created in keeping attracted a guy you were interested in) was exactly where I THOUGHT you were at, until you started making oh so strongly and stubborly clear just how much you were NOT prepared to ever be a “whore in the bedroom” no matter how much in love, and were positively disgusted by the thought.

    See? I’m deserving of your compassion.

    Big batting of eyelashes perhaps? 😉

    I thought you were deserving of a lot more than my compassion, you brilliant sweet girl, as I think you very well know. And yes, you are pretty sweet — e.g. you certainly might have gone nuclear on me. Well, maybe you were simply cleaver enough to know there’s a better way to handle such as me. But that too has it’s virtues.

    I was more than a little smitten with you, albeit at a too old for you and otherwise engaged remove, as you know. You know perfectly well that’s why I became snide.

    Did you just dig in your heals and get all stubborn on me E? Talk of your pride not really being properly at stake was just too much? Was that really it? I was not trying to talk you into sluttery you know.

    McKinnon is so much not the answer. She’s like the devil incarnate so far as real male / female sexuality is concerned. Ever since a good part of feminism moved at least somewhat past the absolute nadir of McKinnon/Dworkin, there’s been at least some hope with those that call themselves feminists.

    Like


  90. PatrickH 109

    Yuuup. To all of it.

    Like


  91. Elizabeth 107 –

    I went from growing up on the outskirts of the Holy Land to college in Sodom and Gommorah. Following that mind-boggling experience, I went to law school, where the goal of the professors is to ensure that, once you graduate, your only remaining ability will be to Think Like a Lawyer. Is it any wonder I’m hopelessly confused?

    Actually what I think that immersion in one world view and then right afterwards another which are mutually strongly opposed, together with the perhaps somewhat above this fray view of your dad(?) helped encourage was your original and anti-dogmatic take on many things. When you get used to taking some from column a and some from column b you get used to thinking seriously on your own including about things that most in worldview b for example take as unquestionable — for example most claims about global warming and the utter necessity of doing something big time self sacrificing right now, regarldess of real efficacy.

    So what went wrong with openness to some from column b on you know what front?

    Like


  92. 110 dougjnn

    That and wanting some degree of love before sex (and the challenges those things created in keeping attracted a guy you were interested in) was exactly where I THOUGHT you were at, until you started making oh so strongly and stubborly clear just how much you were NOT prepared to ever be a “whore in the bedroom” no matter how much in love, and were positively disgusted by the thought.

    Hee hee, strong and stubborn, that’s me. But I also have utterly no idea what I’m talking about in the sexual arena, so please take this whole (metaphorical) shaker of salt and sprinkle liberally. 🙂

    Big batting of eyelashes perhaps?

    Yes, and big brown Bambi eyes.

    e.g. you certainly might have gone nuclear on me.

    Nah. “Going nuclear” isn’t really my style; it requires a degree of rage that I don’t really have.

    Did you just dig in your heals and get all stubborn on me E?

    I might dig in my heels from time to time. And overstate things a bit for colorful effect. And perhaps I have a little puckish tendency to stir the pot and fan the flames. But I mean no harm. 🙂

    If you read that Enneagram link I posted earlier, that pretty much says it. That’s actually a fairly useful personality test. That, and the Kingdomality one. The Kingdomality one is fun. Everyone seems to swear by the Myers-Briggs/Keirsey sorter, but on those I always score either ENFP or ESFP, which are supposedly diametrically opposed personalities. So they don’t tell me that much. Unless I, like Walt Whitman, contain multitudes. Or multiple personalities. I did warn you that I can switch from playful to intense in a heartbeat. 🙂

    McKinnon is so much not the answer. She’s like the devil incarnate so far as real male / female sexuality is concerned. Ever since a good part of feminism moved at least somewhat past the absolute nadir of McKinnon/Dworkin, there’s been at least some hope with those that call themselves feminists.

    I’m afraid I have no idea who these people are. I’ve never paid much attention to feminism. I prefer to think of myself as a humanist. Perhaps I’ll write a play called A Woman For All Seasons. Except I like novels, not plays.

    But I’m finally done working for the day, so now it’s off to my truckle-bed, to dream of sugarplums and fairies.

    Like


  93. Hope, that also goes for the Queen Bee beauties who made people like us miserable in the schoolyard: Neurotic FFs, all of them. Alpha Amazons never bully anyone.

    I suppose the title “Amazon” threw me off a bit, because it brings to mind the Amazonian warrior women who cut off one of their breasts to be better in combat.

    Among Classical Greeks, amazon was given a naive etymology as from a- (privative) + mazos, “without breast”, connected with an etiological tradition that Amazons had their right breast cut off or burnt out, so they would be able to use a bow more freely and throw spears without the physical limitation and obstruction.

    That level of ruthlessness and self-mastery is implied by the title you gave to the Amazonian Alpha femme fatale, so I let my imagination wander a bit.

    Also, I went to a private high school, where many of the girls I knew were from privileged backgrounds and fit many of the descriptions you gave. Beautiful, strong-featured, tall, and confident to the point of haughtiness.

    Thinking back now, the actual teasing they gave was minimal, but it was always implied in their dismissive glances and by their very exclusive social circles. When I really messed up once, they didn’t do much to me themselves, but sent the teachers after me.

    Rather unforgettable. I still have trouble forming friendship with any women aside from the really nerdy kind.

    Like


  94. on September 19, 2008 at 6:34 am Comment_Define_Hard

    80 Joe T
    ****
    As I see it, this ethos has encouraged both males and females to be hard, competitive, and cutthroat, or at least to adopt that kind of mindset as a personal philosophy.
    ****
    They aren’t hard. It’s best to describe them as savage opportunists living in the NOW. They can easily take advantage of any immediate advantage, and often quite savagely, because they are uncluttered by ‘past’, ‘culture’, ‘person philosophy’, or much of anything else. They see things as they are NOW, what is usefull NOW, and then act, immediately.

    They are also total idiots who will fall for the most stupid drivel.

    68 dougjnn
    *****
    It’s not just the age but also the place. Our age in the US and to a lesser extent the rest of the Anglosphere produces hard women and soft men. Maybe even the women aren’t so hard compared to e.g. American frontier women, but that was a very specialized sub environment and attracted very few women. On the true frontier it was often only ten percent. They also weren’t so hard compared to the men of that time and place either.
    *****
    Did you hear the story about the weak concrete bunker that collapsed after a direct 40 megaton hit, and the steely and well nigh invincible sand sculpture that endured 10 mph winds for over four hours?

    It’s easy to be hard when you are a fully armed tank facing down some stupid man waving a white flag and asking “why can’t we just get along”.

    Yes, women are the hard, hard creatures. So long as, you know, men know “never hit women”, “never be ‘mean’ to women”, “two wrongs don’t make a right”, or, as Hope would put it, “who wins if there is a fight?”

    Number One Rule of Feminism. Men Don’t Fight Back. Your mamma has probably programmed you with that when you were a kid.

    Of course now the feminists have cops and the rich, who just love the feminists inability to see anything but their own wonderfullness, to make sure that men don’t fight back.

    But on to those frighted men.

    Given the large majority of women’s absolute tolerance for violence against ‘lesser men’, it’s no surprise that beta-males are scared and damaged. Hell, a silverback can go up and beat them to the cheers of the women, and they BETTER NOT EVEN THINK about hitting back. If they do, then the Cops will take care of it.

    True story, when I was in college a long time ago, a silverback broke down the door of a college student at midnight. The silverback proceeded to beat up the college student, and then located the keg of beer some local sluts had sent him to get. At that point the beaten beta appeared with a gun. The silverback, knowing his invincibility, turn and left with the keg. He was shot dead exiting the house, keg of beer on his shoulder. The Bailey silverback, of Jena Six fame, did the exact same thing, charging a redneck with a shotgun. Obviously, the beta redneck knew better than to fire, and Bailey delivered a good beating. Earlier that week, a bad man had punched Bailey and he had run and got the cops, who charged the bad man for punching without being an alpha. So the white male silverback of Rolla wasn’t actually being stupid. Beta men aren’t ALLOWED to fight back. The reaction of local women and cops was immediate. The local college paper screamed in rage over the killing of the silverback. Notable quotes were the silverback’s father claiming ‘my son was a hero’. Yes, he said those words, they are so stupid they are burned into my memory. The terrified lesser male friends of the shooter were “understood their friend was scared, but that doesn’t excuse what he has done”.

    When the steely-eyed bitch of American can bounce back without a blink from 3-4 rapes over a period of years they will be ‘tougher than men’. Right now, they are less traumatized cause NOTHING BAD HAS HAPPENED TO THEM.
    Those relatively smaller number of women who have had bad things happen to them are every bit as damaged.

    And yes, I’m aware the number of women who have had bad things happen to them is fairly high. The number for men is MUCH, MUCH higher.

    Like


  95. Stoicism isn’t valued in flashy, flamboyant times.

    I think a bit of stoicism is pretty hot in a man.

    I actually think self mastery is both a masculine and a feminine virtue, as it enables one to succesfully dominate aswell as submit.

    Hope, you sure we did not go to the same school?

    Obama’s wife is pretty dumb to air the dirty laundry like that, does she think it does not reflect on her badly?

    Like


  96. Everyone seems to swear by the Myers-Briggs/Keirsey sorter, but on those I always score either ENFP or ESFP

    The problem is that psychologists who make up these categories don’t get math. If they’ve really identified useful independent dimensions of personality, they surely arise from a very large number of factors and elementary probability dictates that the vast majority are close to the mean values… but the classification puts people in one “type” based on which side of the mean they are, leading to mostly arbitrary typing, since people who are far from the mean on 4 independent traits are rare.

    Those (of us) who are on an obvious side of the mean on all four tend to be the Myers-Briggs enthusiasts. It’s so easy to just head off to a net forum of your type and see how many clones you have out there.

    Like


  97. Wow, you just described me (well, the effect I have on people already primed for slavish flattery, self promotion and label worship).
    I had no idea you took it so seriously.

    Like


  98. This country produces plenty of strong men and women. Many are in the military, not strolling the streets of DC playing dating games with women who have “the attititude.”

    You’ll find others in the dojo, or boxing ring, or police academies. Not everyone in these groups qualify, but many do.

    I don’t like McCain but I can respect him. Obama, OTOH isn’t even a beta. No real man would tolerate that sort of public disrespect. No smart woman would do it. After all, you married the guy and had his children, so what does that say about you, Michelle?

    Like


  99. @56 Animus:
    I never said there were no religious convictions. Those convictions, are why the rest of us say, “the fantasy lives on.”

    Like


  100. I’m a little confused though, in how the Amazonian is lumped in as only a DC lawyer.

    I’ve seen/see FAR more of the “leavin’em dead at the doorstep” variety (southern phrase for what would happen when truly enchanting women open the door to a home) from business/sales/PTA moms/banking/National Security

    And why the crazyness about them, or the crazy hate? Isn’t it kind of effortless behavior on their part to charm people into being infatuated with them? It seems to me, that’s what would be so dangerous. Is this behavior to bring a woman down, so that if she breaks your heart, you can say that you never really cared anyway?

    Like


  101. To Tupac and Czar –

    Don’t hate.

    Like


  102. 114 dougjnn

    Actually what I think that immersion in one world view and then right afterwards another which are mutually strongly opposed, together with the perhaps somewhat above this fray view of your dad(?) helped encourage was your original and anti-dogmatic take on things.

    Probably. And I come from a pretty moderate household. My mom leans liberal, and my dad leans more conservative, but neither of them are dogmatic about anything. They’re both highly educated, analytical people who tend to think things through (though my mom can get pretty fiery and emotional!). They’re both from the Midwest and were raised in that hard-working, practical culture. And they’re both well-traveled (and took us on their travels with them), so we were never raised to think that our way is the only way.

    …for example most claims about global warming and the utter necessity of doing something big time self sacrificing right now, regarldess of real efficacy.

    There were a lot of “climate change activists” at my college, but as they could never manage to answer my questions on what they intended to do about natural climate change — the world’s had at least four ice ages all on its own, without our interference — I never took them seriously. The activists would build up straw men about people who “don’t believe” in climate change and pat themselves on the back for being so well-informed and well-educated, but it was hard for them to get on their high horse once you pointed on that, regardless of what we’re doing to impact the climate, the climate will change anyway, because that’s the way of the world.

    Also, considering the kind of cars they drove, and how much money they spent on ridiculous Prada bags, it was hard for me to believe that they took their own message that seriously. Al Gore consumes more fossil fuels on one flight of his private jet than a Hummer would use in a year. He hasn’t stopped flying.

    So what went wrong with openness to some from column b on you know what front?

    Um…a severe drought of hot guys? 🙂 The Ivies aren’t really known for their lookers. And the guys’ intelligence/personalities didn’t really make up for the lack of sex appeal. Their “intelligence” was questionable, since they were more than willing to be brainwashed in order to get an A, and they were hypercompetitive. Which might have been fine, if I were a “you’re so wonderful” kind of girl, but I’m competitive, too. 🙂

    116 Hope

    Thinking back now, the actual teasing they gave was minimal, but it was always implied in their dismissive glances and by their very exclusive social circles.

    Girl bullying is a lot different than boy bullying, but oh man, does it exist. Have you ever read the book Queen Bees and Wannabes? It’s quite interesting. I had my run-ins with the mean girls in junior high, but they couldn’t really deal with my method of responding to them (direct confrontation), so after a while, they left me alone.

    What I think is interesting is that most people seem to have had their profound experiences with bullies in high school. I had mine in junior high. But I went to an exceptionally well-run (public) high school, so that might have had something to do with it.

    117 Comment_Define_Hard

    Number One Rule of Feminism. Men Don’t Fight Back.

    Evidently these feminists never grew up with brothers.

    118 Yours Truly

    I think a bit of stoicism is pretty hot in a man.

    So do I. But I don’t think you and I are in the majority, if the drooling fangirls for whiny athletes and celebrities are any indication.

    119 jaakkeli

    Those (of us) who are on an obvious side of the mean on all four tend to be Myers-Briggs enthusiasts.

    Yes, I have a lot of friends who are. One of the classes I took in college was on personality, and we took probably every personality test out there. Myers-Briggs/Keirsey was by far the most popular — most of my classmates didn’t get an X category, like I did.

    123 Grace

    I never said there were no religious convictions. Those convictions, are why the rest of us say, “the fantasy lives on.”

    Grace, I don’t think Animus was saying no one has religious convictions — he was saying I don’t have religious convictions. In other words, I have no moral opposition to homosexuality (or bisexuality, or anything that involves consenting adults), so that’s not a source of conflict for me.

    By the way, Animus — I completely agree that “in-denial” types try to fit in. They don’t tend to trade one outlier for another. 🙂 These days, really, I think people my age are more shamed for being virgins than for being gay. Even where I live, because, of course, all the 27-year-old women are married with three kids. 🙂

    Like


  103. What I think is interesting is that most people seem to have had their profound experiences with bullies in high school. I had mine in junior high.

    I was not bullied in junior high because of the intense racial separation between the different races. I was in the English as Second Language classes, and kids there were all just struggling to learn English, and didn’t really form any kind of hierarchy.

    The white kids tended to stick together, and I was put in their classes the second year because I was “smarter.” They accepted me as one of their own, and the girls didn’t see me as a threat whatsoever because I was a total ugly duckling. One girl befriended me and used me as a homework sponge, but I didn’t realize that was happening and thought I was her friend.

    High school was much more brutal. I more or less escaped by getting a boyfriend in the sophomore class in the middle of my freshman year, which lasted a year. Then I got entangled in a two year long relationship with a druggie/weirdo kind of guy in my own class who relentlessly pursued me.

    So I even though I was near bottom in the female hierarchy, I avoided the popular girls altogether and started hanging out with guys (online and offline) almost exclusively. My regret is that I didn’t form any tight bonds with the nerdy girl crowd in my class.

    Um…a severe drought of hot guys? And the guys’ intelligence/personalities didn’t really make up for the lack of sex appeal.

    Odd that you who seem so virginal would want a high level of sex appeal from a guy. 😛 Personally, if I thought a guy really started liking me, I just automatically started liking him in return. Then he seemed cuter than all the other guys in comparison. That became problematic in so many ways, but I never had a lack of appreciation for “non-hot” guys. My husband’s coworkers joke that I’m blind, because I think he looks like Matt Damon.

    Like


  104. Check out this overcontrolling lawyer chick (she admits to being a lawyer and lying to everyone later on): http://ask.metafilter.com/102033/Is-he-a-cheater

    Over reacting to her bf because he went out to party.

    Of course the mefite beta-males and feminists had a field day of BURN THE MALE. Turns out it was more her fault.

    Like


  105. 125 – Lisa: Aaaaawwww – you like me! 🙂
    Come here and cuddle with me a little. I like you, too.

    Like


  106. John McCain called his wife a c*** and a trollop on the campaign trail because his wife said he was balding.

    “Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain’s intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain’s hair and said, “You’re getting a little thin up there.” McCain’s face reddened, and he responded, “At least I don’t plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt.” McCain’s excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.”

    http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html

    Like


  107. 39 Tupac

    Methinks that sand is getting harder and harder to plunge one’s head into….

    My main focus in life right now is getting paid, not getting laid. I have a friend who IS quite the aggressive cougar. She is shameless in her pursuit of young men, and seems to have a good time in the process. Just not my style, though the 28 year old was fun, in the end too much drama.

    Elizabeth: Eights are not the daddy’s girls as meant in the enneagram. You could call me a daddy’s girl, as I’m closer to my father emotionally than my mother, but it’s quite different than a type two. There’s no hint of incestuousness to it.

    Like


  108. 132 Sara I

    There’s no hint of incestuousness to it.

    Um, ew. Okay. I am not a daddy’s girl in that sense. 🙂

    Like


  109. 131 Sara I

    Oh no, you’re an eight too. Being a woman and an eight is no walk in the park. Aggressive women are not exactly celebrated, though we are as feminine as can be on the inside.

    Yes, tell me about it. And we would be so celebrated if we were men. 🙂

    Do have a seven or nine wing?

    I don’t know — I don’t remember the test I took telling me that. How do I find out?

    Like


  110. Elizabeth, what number do you think I am?

    Like


  111. 135 Yours Truly

    Elizabeth, what number do you think I am?

    On the Enneagram?

    Like


  112. Indeed.

    Like


  113. Comment_Define_Hard 117–

    Yes, women are the hard, hard creatures. So long as, you know, men know “never hit women”, “never be ‘mean’ to women”, “two wrongs don’t make a right”, or, as Hope would put it, “who wins if there is a fight?”

    Number One Rule of Feminism. Men Don’t Fight Back. Your mamma has probably programmed you with that when you were a kid.

    Yes, absolutely right. I do hope you never read anything to the contrary into anything I’ve written, because I guarantee you, thoughts along these lines have ALWAYS been at the back of my mind.

    Female physical immunity is the core bedrock, but then building from there they go way beyond it. Any kind of criticism by women of men is progressive. Any kind of criticism by men of women is misogyny. Quite literally. The charge is constantly deployed as a shield. All the fricking time.

    American women are hard for entirely artifical reasons in a hyper-protected environment, yes absolutely. Men have been letting them get away with it. Oh yeaah.

    Feminism is particularly bad in America in part because we have a very legalistic social environment. But beyond that it’s particularly bad in the Anglosphere generally because it builds upon the early “English Gentleman” concept of exaggerated and often entirely one way chivalry, where any woman is a lady worthy of the treatment (dramatically contra to the origins of the ethic). Macho cultures have much, much more attenuated versions of feminism, and that’s no accident. Consider Spain, Italy and even France, which is somewhat blended in it’s machoness/chivalry ethic.

    I’m tempted to say I agree with your entire post. Reading through it quickly, I do. It’s a long post and I’d have to re-read it a few times though to prudently say that; else someone may find some snippet somewhere that I don’t agree with, or that sounds really over the top, etc. But I do agree entirely with the basic gravamen of your post. I’m not quite as bitter about it, perhaps, but I think it’s gone way past unbalanced and unhealthy as well.

    One word that I think we men should focus on taking back by ridicule is “misogyny”. Actually, I’ve been taking that word back for more than a decade in all my personal interactions. Women including feminists NEVER have a good rejoinder.

    It’s simple. Feminists and their acolytes use the word to equate deviating from feminist dogma or pronounced truths with hating or in more advanced use “denigrating” women. It’s utter rubbish. It’s more than possible to love women and detest feminism and all true believing feminists, to the extent that they are.

    The most basic area of conflict is essential sex differences, and any different sex roles whatsoever that one might feel consequentially USUALLY flow from that.

    Of course like most ideas of wide currency, there is sometimes a core of truth somewhere, sometimes, to misogyny claims. Men who insist on rigid old time sex roles in a manner that’s oblivious to the real life qualities, abilites and strengths of two real people, man and woman, is being at the least a bit unperceptive and unfeeling about the true nature of the woman in front of him.

    So that or anything like is to be avoided. I’ve seen nothing that suggests to me though that you in particular need to be told that.

    Again, great post.

    Like


  114. 137 Yours Truly

    Well, from what I’ve seen here, you’re clearly intelligent. You have your own mind and aren’t afraid to express it, but you can do it diplomatically and without being strident. (Oh, for that ability!) Your comments about people having the responsibility to take care of their own lives suggest that you believe in self-reliance and willpower. You seem thoughtful — not only in an intellectual way, but in a personal way (like when you asked Hope about how her pregnancy was going). You seem to have high standards about the people you want to associate yourself with — not in a snobby way, but I don’t get the feeling that you suffer fools easily. 🙂 You seem practical. And your discussion with Hope and dougjnn in one of the other threads about flirting and what attracts men suggests you might be image-conscious, but not in an insecure, needy way.

    So my guess is a Three.

    How’d I do?

    Like


  115. Yours Truly 135–

    Elizabeth, what number do you think I am?

    On the Enneagram

    I’d be quite surprised if you didn’t score pretty high on 5.

    Yuup, I took a look at that test that E. linked. I put only limited stock in those things for several reasons, but I don’t think it’s meaningless.

    But there are too few questions and they cover too narrow a range of things and life. Also, it’s too easy to present the persona you’d prefer to be rather than the one you are — it’s pretty easy to ‘psych out’ a lot of these questions. The more Q’s there are in diverse and surprising areas, the harder that becomes. Not that everyone or most will try to present themselves differently from reality or otherwise game the test. It’s just there as possible for the intelligent.

    So what my curious, eager and feminine Yours Truly do you suppose were my three highest scores on that mini Enneagram test? (And nope, I didn’t try to game it. I restrained myself from doing that in fact.)

    Like


  116. @126 Elizabeth:
    Correct, I was talking about you specifically. Ingrained moral objections are the only reason I think anyone is closeted these days.

    As the virginal comment goes, I think you are right. There’s more women like that out there than we might think specifically because they keep it on the ‘downlow’. Saying “I’m a virgin” has a reflection on beauty (because it’s a sexually charged culture) and desirability (“What must be wrong with her?”); and that is too brutal to the ego for most people to air openly.

    Like


  117. 140 dougjnn

    But there are too few questions and they cover too narrow a range of things and life. Also, it’s too easy to present the persona you’d prefer to be rather than the one you are — it’s pretty easy to ‘psych out’ a lot of these questions.

    Yeah. That’s a problem with the mini-tests. But I actually took the huge 240-question one for a class in college. Those are a bit tougher to fake out, though I suppose someone with tremendous mental discipline (or patience) could do it.

    I like Enneagram, but my favorite personality test of all time is Kingdomality. The personality types are delightful. 😀

    Like


  118. Elizabeth 126–

    Um…a severe drought of hot guys? 🙂 The Ivies aren’t really known for their lookers. And the guys’ intelligence/personalities didn’t really make up for the lack of sex appeal. Their “intelligence” was questionable, since they were more than willing to be brainwashed in order to get an A, and they were hypercompetitive.

    This is too blanket for me to really buy it E. I can easily buy that these factors reduced the field lots, such that what was left was rare — and not inclined to go after a girl who was very hard to get into the sack, and while very pretty, not the absolute most stunning on campus, and certainly not prepared to dress and otherwise put out sexual hotness /wildness signals to bolster her looks. And so on.

    Like


  119. 138 dougjnn: I grew up in non-anglosaxon Europe, and things are actually not that much different over there. The idea that guys are the ones supposed to pay for dinner, gifts etc. has spread all over the world.

    Maybe I am too young to know, but my hunch is that this is not due to a feminist conspiracy, the democrats or the sixties or whatever.

    Instead, it’s all about compliance and value (oh oh – now somebody is giving away female game for real).

    The recipe is simple:
    1) Pretend the other person needs something that you both want (a good fuck) more than you.

    2) Let the other person work for it (by spending money on you, writing you poems, complimenting on your actually not that great figure etc.).

    3) Reap the benefits: Free dinners, free entertainment, no more caring about your waistline – and on top of that the sex you wanted in the first place!
    As a bonus, you now have someone committed to you – even if you put on your worst behavior, because all that heavy investment would cause cognitive dissonance otherwise.

    Females have employed this strategy throughout the millennia. History is full of classic examples.

    It works. Not because women want or enjoy sex less than men. Au contraire (if you haven’t come to that conclusion yet, you are doing something very, very wrong after the pants went down). No, it’s because women prefer no sex to bad sex, while men don’t. That alone causes the illusion of scarcity – and thereby increased value of sex to the other gender (another reason is that women are actually turned off by the effort somebody puts in to bed them, but we discussed that one to death already).

    Lisa, there is no hate here. No bitterness. No, no. Because for guys like us, once you get aware how much she wants you, the above recipe becomes all yours.

    And that’s what’s great about this status of of our society! Women love to buy you dinner, write you poems and compliment on the parts of your part that define you as a man.

    The fact that 80-90% of men fall for what women say they want by chivalrously chasing their chastity, makes it oh so more exciting if they finally get to be the pursuer themselves.

    Praise feminism if that is what lead to the current state of the dating scene!

    And it is a great filter for you ladies, too. Any smart guy will realize sooner or later that being the high achieving beta nice guy you ask for will make him go alone night after night out, while dropping all good manners will let him chose between three- and foursomes.

    Like


  120. Elizabeth 126 —

    Part of why I don’t entirely buy it is I went to any Ivy as well. OK, the west coast Ivy. So I’m very well familiar with the lay of that land. Ok, it was many moons before you went, but still …

    Like


  121. Hmm. I had a comment swallowed. Is there some kind of rule about linking?

    Anyway —

    140 dougjnn

    I put only limited stock in those things for several reasons, but I don’t think it’s meaningless.

    But there are too few questions and they cover too narrow a range of things and life. Also, it’s too easy to present the persona you’d prefer to be rather than the one you are — it’s pretty easy to ‘psych out’ a lot of these questions.

    Yeah, the mini-tests are pretty worthless, especially if you’re consciously trying to get a certain type. But the version of the test I took for my class (it had 240 questions, I think) was much harder to pull that kind of trick on, and obviously much more detailed.

    I like Enneagram. But my all-time favorite personality test remains Kingdomality. The personality types are delightful. 😀

    Like


  122. Thank you for your analysis, Hope.

    Actually, I’m not so sure what my enneagram is, hence I asked 🙂

    So what my curious, eager and feminine Yours Truly do you suppose were my three highest scores on that mini Enneagram test?

    I would say 5, 1 and 8, you flatterer! You are pretty intellectual, like to help other and have strong opinions.

    Like


  123. But my all-time favorite personality test remains Kingdomality.

    What’s that?

    Like


  124. 142 dougjnn

    This is too blanket for me to really buy it E.

    Well, I was also rather infamous after the fraternity party where I floored a guy for making what were, in my opinion, very inappropriate advances. 🙂

    Like


  125. 147 Yours Truly

    What’s that

    Hmm. I just had another comment swallowed. This site really doesn’t like the link to the Kingdomality test! So here, I’ll write it out:

    http://www.cmi-lmi.com/kingdomality.html

    Basically, it’s a personality test that tells you what you would have been during the Middle Ages. I’m a Black Knight. 🙂 Unfortunately, the online descriptions aren’t as detailed as the ones in the book, but they’re still a lot of fun.

    Like


  126. 147 Yours Truly

    What’s that?

    Basically, it’s a personality test that tells you what you would’ve been in the Middle Ages. I’m a Black Knight. 🙂 The personality descriptions online aren’t as detailed as the ones in the Kingdomality book, but they’re still pretty fun.

    I’ve tried posting the link, but the comment keeps getting swallowed. If you google “Kingdomality,” it’s an easy site to find.

    Like


  127. Your distinct personality, The Dreamer-Minstrel might be found in most of the thriving kingdoms of the time. You can always see the “Silver Lining” to every dark and dreary cloud. Look at the bright side is your motto and understanding why everything happens for the best is your goal. You are the positive optimist of the world who provides the hope for all humankind. There is nothing so terrible that you can not find some good within it. On the positive side, you are spontaneous, charismatic, idealistic and empathic. On the negative side, you may be a sentimental dreamer who is emotionally impractical. Interestingly, your preference is just as applicable in today’s corporate kingdoms.

    This is what I tested as.

    Like


  128. Yours Truly —

    I would say 5, 1 and 8, you flatterer! You are pretty intellectual, like to help other and have strong opinions.

    Fairly close. Actually, it’s 3, then 5 and 8 in equal measure.

    you flatterer!

    Only for a few babe, and only when they deserve it. I wasn’t wrong about what I said, was I? 😉

    Like


  129. Yours Truly —

    This is what I tested as.

    Oh yes, I can easily see Dreamer-Minstrel for you on that test. Goes together with the curious, optimistic, idealistic on the other.

    Quite delicious really. And very feminine. Ummm.

    You can also be very hurt. I really don’t want too much of that for you; it would scar and scab over your heart, or very much tend to. You need to choose your men very carefully, because you are liable to fall very deeply in love. Very sexy men, who will also cherish your heart, are hard to find. But not impossible, if you become clear what you’re looking for, and what to avoid.

    Oh wait, you’re gonna accuse me of more flattery.

    Only for a few.

    Like


  130. So you are a Black Knight, Elizabeth?

    Oow, I’m kinda scared now, you dark one!


    Fairly close. Actually, it’s 3, then 5 and 8 in equal measure.

    I can see 3 too, I think 1 and three both motivate a need to improve things, just for different reasons.


    Only for a few babe, and only when they deserve it. I wasn’t wrong about what I said, was I? 😉

    🙂 Being able to find good qualities is what a master of flattery can do and a mere apprentice can’t.

    Like


  131. Oh yes, I can easily see Dreamer-Minstrel for you on that test. Goes together with the curious, optimistic, idealistic on the other.

    Quite delicious really. And very feminine. Ummm.

    You can also be very hurt. I really don’t want too much of that for you; it would scar and scab over your heart, or very much tend to. You need to choose your men very carefully, because you are liable to fall very deeply in love. Very sexy men, who will also cherish your heart, are hard to find. But not impossible, if you become clear what you’re looking for, and what to avoid.

    Thanks for the advice and the compliments!

    It is also encouraging to know that you consider my type of men a possibility at least. My mother says I’m looking for a demi god, LOL!

    Would you also get back to me on yesterday’s post at the first of the femme fatale series?

    Like


  132. 155 Yours Truly

    So you are a Black Knight, Elizabeth?

    Oow, I’m kinda scared now, you dark one!

    Yes, yes, be afraid. 🙂 The description’s even scarier in the book!

    A Dreamer-Minstrel. If I recall correctly, that would make you a Helper. Black Knights are Challengers, which means you and I are basically exact opposites. But not quite. White Knights are my exact opposites. 🙂

    Like


  133. Elizabeth 151 —

    I like Enneagram, but my favorite personality test of all time is Kingdomality.

    Black Knight. Hmmmm. Don’t go by the phrase you all, read the description via google. Well, yeah. Utter Machiavellian dedicated to her own greatness beyond all else by far, who’s also capable of being mondo charming. Yuuup. Some of that is attractive to me but unmitigated helpings, as is probably the case, are less so.

    So there we are.

    The number of men who will be genuinely deeply attracted in a way that isn’t self deception ending in utter heartache to a true female black knight type, in this case artist convinced of a greatness calling, is I think vastly smaller than women to men of that type. I think that’s for inborn sex difference reasons.

    Lord knows that if gender differences can be overwritten by cultural messages this is the time and place where it has been furthest attempted. They can be to some extent, but only some extent.

    I’m tempted to say that a “black knight” is a fundamentally un or anti feminine personality type. It’s less inherantly that way in an artist manififestation, but that’s a matter of degree. As well, artists tend to be given the most license to be utterly selfish by social consensus in our society, and have since 19th century romanticism.

    What you do though Elizabeth is overlay an Ingenue veneer. As well, your anti-dogmatism and other things help you to not generally be head to head combatitive on stuff that’s not critical to you. When your direct career or artistic success is at stake, then I imagine it’s rapiers.

    Does that leave room for real love and for some compromise for love? Or would any love have to be totally in orbit around your greatness aspirations?

    *****

    What type did i come in as on that very mini Kingdomality 8 quuestion test? Took it twice, once yesterday and once today. Could only have changed things very slightly, without trying to. Came in as Discoverer one time and Prime Minister the other.

    Like


  134. Yours Truely —

    Would you also get back to me on yesterday’s post at the first of the femme fatale series?

    Since you ask so winsomely, I will, if you link me up to the comment post of yours you have in mind.

    Like


  135. Apparently I’m the Shepherd.

    Your distinct personality, The Shepherd is to tend to your human flock. You understand the needs of those for whom you are responsible. Shepherds are vigilant and reliable. You realize your obligation and commitment to the well being of those entrusted to your care. Shepherds are very dependable. You engender a feeling of comfort and stability to those within your charge. On the positive side, Shepherds can be empathic, caring, understanding, practical and realistic. On the negative side, you may be manipulative, close-minded and sentimentally rigid. Interestingly, your preference is just as applicable in today’s corporate kingdoms.

    I’ve usually not seen a personality test description that combines “empathic” and “caring” with “practical” and “realistic.” Interesting. I like it, even if the title is kind of bleh.

    Like


  136. Aw, Hope,

    You are a mommy type!

    Like


  137. 158 dougjnn

    Some of this is attractive to me but unmitigated helpings, as is probably the case, less so.

    Which is why I think it’s easy for me to have superficial relationships, both friendly and romantic, but not that easy to have intimate ones. Not many people can take me in large doses. 🙂 If I were into casual flirtations and flings, this wouldn’t really be a problem. Alas….

    The number of men who will be genuinely attracted in a way that isn’t self deception ending in utter heartache to a true female black knight type…is I think vastly smaller than women to men of that type.

    I think this is true. Most men are attracted to feminine/very feminine women, and the Black Knight isn’t a feminine type. In fact, I have a history of attracting closeted gay men who are looking for a beard, and I’m guessing they’re drawn by the fact that I have a feminine appearance but an often masculine personality.

    Of course, I think women who are attracted to male Black Knights are also inviting heartache, but that’s another subject entirely.

    What you do though Elizabeth is overlay an Ingenue veneer.

    Which is largely natural. I was very shy and sensitive as a child, but somehow also managed to be aggressive and competitive as well. People have the tendency to misjudge me on sight because I have a soft, high voice and a delicate appearance. (I’m not tall and statuesque, and I have soft features, not sharp ones.) In competition, I’m pretty cold, but in non-competitive situations, I’m emotional and easily moved to tears. Around little kids, I’m a total creampuff. And — again, away from competition — I’m playful and whimsical. So it’s like I’m a Black Knight wrapped up in an Ingenue shell. But it’s not a consciously constructed veneer. I’m not immune to playing it to my advantage, but the veneer isn’t based on false characteristics.

    I think God was playing a joke on the world when I was born. Or maybe karma’s punishing me. I’ve said on numerous occasions that my life would be a lot easier if I were a man. Maybe, in some past life, I was a total heartbreaker, and my punishment this time around is that I have to be a freak of a girl. 🙂

    When your direct career or artistic success is at stake, then I imagine it’s rapiers.

    I’m pretty relentless about what I want, I’ll just say that. 😀

    Does that leave room for real love and for some compromise for love? Or would any love have to be totally in orbit around your greatness aspirations?

    I’d like to think it leaves room for real love, but I’m not holding my breath. I see two possibilities: a rather unconventional relationship with a man who’s as ambitious as I am — ambitious in a different arena, so that we’re not direct competitors — or a relationship with a man who doesn’t resent my ambition. I’ve kept my eyes out for the former, but I haven’t met him yet. And I’m not sure the latter exists. In couples in which one partner is highly ambitious, and the other is supportive of the ambition, the ambitious one is almost always male, the supportive one almost always female. And those relationships are rarely that happy. I can’t imagine many men would want to play that supportive role, and I’m not sure I’d be attracted to one who did. I have the tendency to stomp all over more emotional people without meaning to — which is probably why I have more male friends than female.

    So who knows.

    Came in as Discoverer one time and Prime Minister the other.

    The Kingdomality system has four basic “guilds” as well as the twelve personality types. The four guilds are, I believe, Helpers, Challengers, Explorers and Maintainers. If you’re a Discoverer, you’re an Explorer. If you’re a Prime Minister, you’re a Challenger like me. 🙂

    Like


  138. 163 Sara I

    I might have to pick up the book…it looks pretty interesting. But just glancing at the descriptions on the web site, I’m guessing I have a seven wing.

    Like


  139. 161 Hope

    Apparently I’m the Shepherd.

    Then, like Yours Truly, you’re a Helper. And I found the description for Helpers online:

    Helpers

    Dreamer-Minstrels, White Knights, and Shepherds
    Driven to Help, Support, Nurture, and Make Connections

    Helpers are harmonizers. They dislike discord and feel compelled to make sure that everyone is happy. Helpers are the glue that holds a team together. They serve as cheerleaders for the organization and they provide a sense of humanity and belonging to the group.

    Helpers take stands based on their feelings. Feelings, theirs and others’, are true facts to Helpers. Sometimes being guided by emotions can lead Helpers to make choices that may not turn out to be the best choices, even though the choice feels like the right one at the time. Commitment and connection to a group or cause give life purpose. Helpers can become very passionate about righting what they perceive as a wrong, offtimes going to lengths and costs others think excessive but which to Helpers are perfectly reasonable.

    Helpers will listen intently when the Challengers grouse about the constricting influence of the Maintainers. They encourage Explorers when they are frustrated by the mundane and routine tasks they must perform. They commisserate with Maintainers, who want more structure in the group.

    Like


  140. Helpers take stands based on their feelings. Feelings, theirs and others’, are true facts to Helpers. Sometimes being guided by emotions can lead Helpers to make choices that may not turn out to be the best choices, even though the choice feels like the right one at the time.

    Wow, dead on! Yours Truly, no wonder I get you.

    Like


  141. me = Benevolent Ruler

    That’s nice, I like it.

    Like


  142. Ha ha, I love Amazon.com’s “Search Inside” feature. (Can you tell it’s a slow day at work for me?)

    Here’s the description for Challengers, the opposite of those sweet, loving Helpers:

    Challengers

    Prime Ministers, Black Knights, and Merchants
    Driven to Win and Be Efficient
    Motivated by Logical Thinking

    Challengers are strategists who pursue the most efficient and logical path toward the realization of their plans. Logical thinking is their strength. Challengers are the competitors of the world. They constantly challenge themselves and the people around them. Challengers have a great need to know what the score is, and they will rarely play a game for the fun of it. Challengers are motivated to make constant improvements; that is how they define growth, even life itself. Better, faster, cheaper is more than a slogan for them; it is a way of life.

    Challengers are results oriented. Their competitive impulses may cause them to emphasize competition over teamwork. This can result in short-term success, but sometimes the cause of short-term success can be long-term discord and infighting.

    Challengers don’t easily accept goals others set for them. If an organization’s policies stand in the way of a Challenger, the policies will be circumvented or ignored. Challengers can keep prodigious amounts of data that will help support their goal.

    Challengers focus Explorers, spur Maintainers to action, and keep Helpers from becoming so emotional that they become ineffective.

    Which can basically be summed up as: Ruthless, rebellious, and scary. Stay out of their way. 😀

    Like


  143. Which can basically be summed up as: Ruthless, rebellious, and scary. Stay out of their way.

    Hah, I am not nearly the sweet and loving helper the description would have you believe. At least, not all the time.

    Everybody consists of multitudes. I have a bit of the logical thinker in me, too (you have to be in order to troubleshoot lines of code that’s boring to most people), and I can get a real competitive streak going.

    My husband is a Dreamer-Minstrel, and I see a lot of Discoverer and Benevolent Ruler in him, too.

    Like


  144. This whole comments section has turned really, really ghey. My testosterone dropped just reading the last 20 comments

    Like


  145. Have people gotten softer?

    I’m not sure whether people are softer today. It does seem that people exercise their moral backbones less than they did 70 years ago. But do we know that internal softening is the change that causes that effect?

    I nominate another change, the change in what standards people take seriously. Here I am only interested in standards that predictably call on people to demonstrate them by actually doing something, or by giving something up. Honesty is the one I’ll try to illustrate with a story below, but it’s only one of many that show up with various weights in various cultures. Others include loyalty, or enduring hardship, or being generous, or facing danger.

    Several years ago I was with a group of half a dozen low-level urban professional types that I had known for a few hours. One of them told a story on himself, about getting out of Home Depot with a barbecue grill that he wasn’t charged for. It was a mixture of “what should I have done” and sharing feelings about how it was OK what he had done: realizing the error, shrugging, and moving on, never trying to reimburse them or anything. He seemed to be telling the story to build rapport. Maybe it mostly worked; no one else seemed to think it there was anything wrong with it. But I think in 1940, in an analogous group, the general reaction would have been different.

    The expressions that I can think of to describe the old norm that he was flouting successfully are old expressions, like “he’s a straight shooter” or “he’s a stand-up guy.” My impression is that in 1900 or 1940 many people thought it was normal to say those things. Now fewer people would, except if they intended either a narrow meaning (like being trustworthy not necessarily in general, but in one particular context), or some irony about the broader meaning.

    As an example for another virtue, I’d guess that Biden’s income tax charitable giving figures might have caused more friction in 1940. Now the reaction seems to be “whatever.”

    It seems to me that we’ve dropped our weighting for various demonstrable virtues like that. And as far as I can see, we haven’t raised up other demonstrable virtues to make up for it. So the number of things that people are deeply motivated to do, because dammit they believe they’re important, has gone down. And then isn’t it natural that people would demonstrate sterner stuff less often?

    However, even as the sphere of our culture’s demonstrable virtues shrinks, there remain things that people do give a damn about. E.g., consider a parent defending children (an example chosen in order to dodge how conflicted we have become about ordinary self-defense). Is it safe today for two or three dead drunk adults to attack two or three small children while a parent is standing by, unarmed but able to pick up kitchen or garden tools?

    Maybe it *is* safer to attack children in front of a parent today, because maybe people really are softer even about the things they still care about. But I can’t think of anything that demonstrates that very clearly, as opposed to possibly remaining roughly as hard about a much-diminished set of things that matter deeply to them.

    Like


  146. For most non-experts, probably better to not even go after this type. Just like it’s probably better, other things equal, to approach a shorter girl than one who is taller than you.

    Like


  147. Wow, dead on! Yours Truly, no wonder I get you.

    I also see a lot of myself in you. I notice that when I am put in charge of something, I behave a lot like the Shepherd description. What is the difference between the three helpers?

    Challengers don’t easily accept goals others set for them. If an organization’s policies stand in the way of a Challenger, the policies will be circumvented or ignored. Challengers can keep prodigious amounts of data that will help support their goal.

    This does sound like a personality fit for a lawyer.

    Like


  148. on September 20, 2008 at 8:02 am Comment_Not_So_Much

    Elizabeth said:
    *********
    117 Comment_Define_Hard

    Number One Rule of Feminism. Men Don’t Fight Back.

    Evidently these feminists never grew up with brothers.
    *********
    I say:
    Could we stop with the exceptions? Your family was raised like that because that is what your mother wanted your family to be like.

    And it made you different, just like your mother wanted.
    Elizabeth wrote:
    *****
    It’s quite interesting. I had my run-ins with the mean girls in junior high, but they couldn’t really deal with my method of responding to them (direct confrontation), so after a while, they left me alone.
    *****
    Your mother had a plan, she implemented, it worked. Good for her. I’m perfectly serious here. Most American parents are lousy parents. Perhaps ‘plan’ is a bit of a strong word, or not.

    Of course, your mother wasn’t one of the feminists I’m talking about, so I don’t see what that has to do with the experience of most Americans.

    This link may improve your understanding of what I’m talking about:
    http://yahmdallah.blogspot.com/2004/01/time-i-was-on-sitcom-date-or-very.html

    “I said I wasn’t interested in a relationship anymore. The exact words I used elude me. I know I didn’t curse, at least. ”

    I’m quite sure skip could bring out the big nasty bad words were he talking to a man. But women, you know, don’t you?

    This is an excellent, pure, example of what I’m talking about. No hiding behind “pick your battles” or “men are stronger”.

    Oh, and one last thought. Why did old Gore, like the Stageshow Magician, wave Global Warming at Peak Oil?

    Absolutely worst case, Global Warming will become a major problem for America in a few decades. Peak Oil is Right Here, Right Now.

    And that’s you lesson in real propoganda, as it is played by the Big Boys. 101.

    Like


  149. on September 20, 2008 at 8:35 am Comment_Not_So_Much

    126 Elizabeth wrote:
    *****
    117 Comment_Define_Hard

    Number One Rule of Feminism. Men Don’t Fight Back.

    Evidently these feminists never grew up with brothers.
    *****
    I reply:
    Could we please stop with the exceptions? Your home was that way, because your mother wanted it that way. And it had the result your mother wanted.

    Elizabeth wrote:
    ****
    Girl bullying is a lot different than boy bullying, but oh man, does it exist. Have you ever read the book Queen Bees and Wannabes? It’s quite interesting. I had my run-ins with the mean girls in junior high, but they couldn’t really deal with my method of responding to them (direct confrontation), so after a while, they left me alone.
    ****
    I continue:
    Your mother had a plan. She implemented it. It worked. Good for her. I’m serious here. Most American parents are lousy. Perhaps ‘plan’ is to strong a word. Or not.

    Your mother wasn’t a feminist though, so I don’t know what your home experience has to do with most American’s experiences.

    Here is a very good example of what I’m talking about:
    http://yahmdallah.blogspot.com/2004/01/time-i-was-on-sitcom-date-or-very.html

    ‘I said I wasn’t interested in a relationship anymore. The exact words I used elude me. I know I didn’t curse, at least. ‘

    I’m quite sure had the man been dealing with another man, he would have used big bad mean words.

    This ‘pure’ example isn’t excusable by things like “didn’t want to make a scene”,or “pick your battles” or “Men don’t hit women”.

    On an entirely different topic, I’d say Al Gore, a skilled stage-magician, was very successful with Global Warming. After all, Global Warming won’t be a real problem to America for decades, at least. While Peak Oil is right here, right now. The distracting flourish was well-done. And that’s the end of Lesson #1 on how propaganda is played by the Big Boys.

    Finally, and on an upsetting topic, Elizabeth, have you actually found a project you wish to dedicate yourself to?
    I’m sure till then, ‘writing’ will be a nice placeholder, but do you actually think it will ever be more?

    Like


  150. 117 Comment_Not_So_Much

    Finally, and on an upsetting topic, Elizabeth, have you actually found a project you wish to dedicate yourself to?
    I’m sure till then, ‘writing’ will be a nice placeholder, but do you actually think it will ever be more?

    I finished a 151,000-word novel (479 pages) a few weeks ago and sent off a query letter to an agent. It was the first in a planned series of six novels, and I’m currently working on the second. In the meantime, I’m waiting to hear back from the agents, who have an average response time of about 5-6 weeks, though they can take as long as 8 weeks. And that’s only the first step. The road to publication is very long indeed.

    Not counting the total garbage I wrote in high school and college, I’ve finished two books before this, but I never sent out query letters for those. On one, I simply wasn’t satisfied with the quality. The other was a novella, and novellas usually aren’t published except by established authors, and usually as part of a collection of stories. So that one’s on hold for the time being.

    As for other projects, I have two other series planned. One is a coming-of-age story of seven novels, the other is a historical fiction story of six novels. The former will probably be my next big project, because it doesn’t require research. The latter requires a lot of research. I’ve done most of it, but not at all.

    Then I have a lot of stand-alone novels planned — ten, last I counted. I prefer writing series, because they permit a depth of plot and characterization that most stand-alone novels don’t have, but it’s hard for someone like me, who has no real history of publication, to sell a series right off the bat. I’m trying anyway, because the series I’m currently working on is the project I’m by far the most excited about, but if I’m not able to sell the first novel, I’ll put that project on hold for a while, and focus on one of the stand-alone novels, which is based on my experiences prosecuting. Legal stories, if written competently, are not that difficult (comparatively) to sell, whereas a publisher would be taking a pretty big risk on the novel I’ve submitted, both because it’s a series from an unknown author and because the subject matter is controversial. So my submitted novel is an even longer shot for sale than most first novels, but like I said, it’s the one I’m most excited about.

    I write rough drafts in about twenty days, then take about two months to edit. And that’s with me working at a professional job full-time. It doesn’t take me long to write, which is good, because most authors who actually make a living publish about 4-6 books a year. I’d love to be like J.K. Rowling and become a billionaire based on seven novels written over the course of 17 years, but my books aren’t as charming as hers. 😀

    So yes, I’ve actually found several projects I want to dedicate myself to — this isn’t a placeholder that I plan to do “someday.” And there is not “till then,” it’s something I’m working on now. I’d absolutely love it if I got a call tomorrow from an agent saying they’ll represent me, and that they’ve already found a publisher, and that the book will be published four months from now, but that’s not the way publishing works. If my novel’s picked up in the next few months, I’d probably be looking at a publication date of early 2010. These things take time, and I doubt agents and publishers are going to change their timetables for me. Right now, I’m just hoping they’ll take a chance on me.

    I have a quota of 5,000 words that I have to write per day, and I usually write more than 10,000. I spend about five hours per day writing. That’s time I spend actually writing, not planning out stories or researching (which I do on my lunch break). I wouldn’t be putting in all this work if I didn’t think it would go somewhere, and I wouldn’t have changed jobs from something that was very interesting to something that’s very normal (and not quite as well-paying) if I weren’t planning to make certain sacrifices. I might be insane, but I do know what I’m doing, and I do know there’s a long road ahead. And I’m used to skepticism, and I know it’s a long shot — in case you haven’t noticed before, I do have a law license, and I have no intention of starving in the gutter or begging on Mommy and Daddy’s doorstep — so while I understand your condescension, it’s not merited here.

    Like


  151. As for other projects, I have two other series planned. One is a coming-of-age story of seven novels, the other is a historical fiction story of six novels. The former will probably be my next big project, because it doesn’t require research. The latter requires a lot of research. I’ve done most of it, but not at all.

    I could actually see an easily digestable series about a teen coming of age in Ancient Rome sell pretty well. Something that is a bit like most fastasy series, or if you know Christian Jacq, something like his series.

    Lots of people are into Rome and the people who read books like these buy them more often then borrow them from the library. Books like that are also great for teens to learn about history.

    Like


  152. Sigh. I wish these posts had an edit function. Or that I read a bit more carefully before I posted. Ah well. Apologies for the errors.

    173 William Newman

    Your comment is well-taken, and I agree there are still certain things that people are hard about. But those things — like protecting one’s children — are things that people are always hard about, whether in civilized times or barbaric times. I’m sure people in late imperial Rome still cared enough about their own families to protect them from harm. But civilizations are not built, and they do not survive, on such narrow, individual interests. For a society to survive, it depends on a sense of civic virtue. I.e., the civilization must have people who are willing to live and die, not for themselves alone, not for their families and friends alone, but for the well-being of their society. And while I don’t think people in the West have completely lost their sense of civic virtue, I do think it’s being progressively socialized and entertained out of us. Our politicians have pretty much adopted panem et circenses as their motto, and there’s no easier way of sapping people of their hardness than of infantilizing them and making sure they’re sucking on the government teat from cradle to grave, all the while using pretty entertainment to distract them from what’s really important.

    177 Comment_Not_So_Much

    Your mother wasn’t a feminist though….

    That would be news to her. She considers herself very much a feminist. She just doesn’t see that as meaning that women and men are the same, or that men must be degraded to advance women. My mom doesn’t believe that equality means sameness.

    ….so I don’t know what your home experience has to do with most Americans’ experiences.

    I don’t see why my home experience is any less valid and representative than anyone else’s. If you really want to get into how people’s home lives are different, I could say that about everyone, and so there could be no general rules derived from any one example.

    Like


  153. 179 Yours Truly

    Yes, something that does give me a lot of hope for my peculiar brand of stories is that people have renewed interest these days in both fantasy and the classical world. My historical fiction series is indeed about the ancient world, as are two of my stand-alone novels (one is about Rome, one is about Athens). The book I’m currently trying to sell takes place in present-day America, but it’s a fantasy adventure story that is very much influenced by classical mythology. So there are definitely encouraging signs. I just don’t have any illusions that it’ll be easy to make it as a writer. 🙂

    Like


  154. 182 Elizabeth:

    I have a lot of friends who think artistic, dreamy troubadour types are sexy.

    Funny (sort of) anecdote:

    Way back in my college days, I was in a Music History class covering the Middle Ages. The prof was discussing the rise of the troubadors and jongleurs and had just finished reading to the class some particularly maudlin canso of courtly love. He then asked the ladies, “How about that? Imagine if some young boy were to write something so beautiful foryou?”

    The girls looked at each other, each searching the other’s face for “permission” to express how they felt. Quickly, a sort of collective moan of restrained disdain bubbled to the surface, accompanied by heads nodding “no.”

    The prof, being quite a wise fellow, then rephrased the question:

    “What if it was the right boy?”, said as he raised his eyebrows and winked knowingly.

    The girls exploded in a loud chattering mass of agreement, heads vigorously assenting “yes!”

    Tupac just sat in the back of the class, chuckling to himself.

    (Upon reflection, that prof was a rather earthy, salty, Hemingway-esque figure. I would very much like to have a beer with him today.)

    Like


  155. Oh, wow! That is pretty interesting, thanks for posting that!
    I do have a creative, adventurous streak.

    So the Black Knight is the opponent of the White Knight, right?

    Are some types more compatible with eachother for friendship, work and romance?

    Like


  156. 183 Tupac Chopra

    Ha, that’s funny, and that professor sounds like a fun guy. Your story in turn reminds me of the scene in Pride and Prejudice where Lizzy and Mr. Darcy are arguing about poetry. Lizzy says that “one good sonnet” is enough to kill any love, and Mr. Darcy responds that he had often thought poetry was the “food of love.” Lizzy replies that poetry only helps a love that’s already strong, because anything will nurture what’s already strong.

    184 Yours Truly

    Are some types more compatible with each other for friendship, work and romance?

    The Kingdomality system was designed specifically with the workplace in mind, so it doesn’t talk about friendship or romance, unfortunately. And the emphasis on working relationships is more on how each type influences the other types than on who works best together. The major emphasis is basically on how to motivate a person of each type — for example, Helpers do best when they’re emotionally engaged in their work, Challengers do best when there’s some kind of competitive element, etc.

    It would be fun if the system were expanded to deal with romance and friendship, though. 🙂

    So the Black Knight is the opponent of the White Knight, right?

    Not necessarily opponent, but opposite, yes. 🙂 Black Knights are “the warriors of the realm.” So like the White Knights, they’re brave; unlike the White Knights, they’re motivated a lot more by competitive drive than by principle. Black Knights love winning, hate losing, and, unlike White Knights, will not fight for the principle of the thing — Black Knights won’t fight if the cause is already lost. Where White Knights are earnest, inspiring, and sincere, Black Knights are charming, charismatic, persuasive, and logical. White Knights will fight if they really need to but prefer not to; Black Knights have no qualms about using their weapons, so to speak. 🙂 And while both White Knights and Black Knights like to be rewarded, their concept of reward is a lot different. White Knights like praise, appreciation, and admiration; Black Knights don’t really care about acclaim, and can even get impatient with it. Black Knights like material gain. And while White Knights prefer to work with others, as members of a team (as Helpers, they like emotional connections to others), Black Knights are fanatically independent and insist on being the masters of their own fates.

    Like


  157. 185 Elizabeth:

    Black Knights have no qualms about using their weapons, so to speak. And while both White Knights and Black Knights like to be rewarded, their concept of reward is a lot different. White Knights like praise, appreciation, and admiration; Black Knights don’t really care about acclaim, and can even get impatient with it. Black Knights like material gain. And while White Knights prefer to work with others, as members of a team (as Helpers, they like emotional connections to others), Black Knights are fanatically independent and insist on being the masters of their own fates.

    It’s really a shame that Elizabeth is (apparently) so, SO my type, physically, yet so, so, SO not my type otherwise.

    It’s almost like God decided to play some cruel joke on me, to test my integrity.

    I really don’t think I could handle being in her presence. I think the conflict between my cock and mind that would rage inside me would cause my head to explode, Scanners-like.

    Perhaps in the future, genetic engineering will allow us to place Clio’s mind in Elizabeth’s body.

    We can only hope.

    Like


  158. Elizabeth 185 —

    White knights and black knights are both warriors and like to receive acclaim and status as warriors.

    White knights fight as champions for a group, and often value self sacrifice and altruism. Actually that’s a core part of their being. It can involve a great deal of self righteousness and self delusion.

    Black knights only sometimes pretend to fight for group interests but instead always fight for their own advancement and status. They may perhaps if male fight for their love as well, so long as she remains worth it, but not if she doesn’t. No self sacrifice for the princple of the thing. If female the whole idea of fighting for a male lover is differernt and perhaps non existent. He should be able to take care of himself. Actually I’m not sure I really have that rare sliver of the female psyche figured out, and Elizabeth is far to inexperienced in sexual love to be relied upon to say anything true ont he subject, but it still might be interesting to hear her / or your / speculations.

    In essence black knights can sometimes be useful to others, but they are ALWAYS dangerous and can NEVER be trust at all, whatsoever. On the other hand they rather inherantly think outside the box, so if you’ve got some really challenging dragons that need slaying, black knights might be worth their price.

    And they just might write a pretty interesting novel or two as well.

    Like


  159. Tupac 195–

    (We can also comfort outselves with the knowledge and belief that on the appearance front when females self describe, if we get beyond obviously coy self denigration, there’s just about always some signifcant grade inflation going on. Well, we can certainly comfort ourselves with that thought, now can’t we?)

    Like


  160. If female the whole idea of fighting for a male lover is differernt and perhaps non existent. He should be able to take care of himself.

    I think tender, protective love of a masculine woman for her man is pretty rare. You see most tenderness among the tradional role couples, 50/50 couples tend to have less but reversed have the same as 50/50. I think because even if the woman is more dominant, her physical strength, even if she is strong for a woman, is probably not more than that of her man if he is reasonably fit. Perhaps she may shield him in different ways though, maybe from stress or defend him verbally. After all, her tongue may very well be superior to his.
    I could also see her seducing her husbands enemies and then destroying them if she is loyal to her husband.

    Like


  161. 189 dougjnn:

    (We can also comfort outselves with the knowledge and belief that on the appearance front when females self describe, if we get beyond obviously coy self denigration, there’s just about always some signifcant grade inflation going on. Well, we can certainly comfort ourselves with that thought, now can’t we?)

    Nah, I’m more a “glass half-full” kind of guy. 😉

    Like


  162. 186 Tupac Chopra

    It’s almost like God decided to play some cruel joke on me, to test my integrity.

    Hee. Try going through your whole life with utterly contradictory impulses.

    I really don’t think I could handle being in her presence.

    I can contain myself in polite society, really. I don’t bite, and unless people are talking about something that really interests me, I can maintain an appropriately wholesome and charming facade. 🙂

    187 dougjnn

    Black knights only sometimes pretend to fight for group interests but instead always fight for their own advancement and status.

    This isn’t necessarily true. While Black Knights will rarely fight for some lofty, vague “cause,” they will fight cunningly and ruthlessly when something they value is threatened. That can be their place in society, but it could also be for family, friends, or country — anything that the Black Knight cares about and connects to himself. You’re right that it all comes down to the Black Knight, but that doesn’t mean it won’t also be for the benefit of others. I don’t think I’d have any qualms about fighting someone who attacked someone I care about, even if that would be at tremendous risk to myself. Black Knights are as capable as White Knights of being self-sacrificing, but while the White Knight will often fight for something intangible, “principle,” or something that wholly benefits other people, not himself, the Black Knight will not.

    Also, something that the White Knight and the Black Knight have in common is that they can almost never be bought off. It’s contrary to the White Knight’s principles and contrary to the Black Knight’s need for independence.

    If female the whole idea of fighting for a male lover is different and perhaps non existent.

    I’d fight tooth and nail for someone I cared about, be it lover, family, or friend. But I think this circumstance is rare, because female Black Knights are rare.

    Come to that, I have a deep-seated hatred of bullying, and I’ve often stood up for people I don’t like and who don’t like me. But, Black Knight that I am, the reason I was willing to stand up to the bullies had more to do with my dislike than my concern for the people being bullied.

    In essence black knights can sometimes be useful to others, but they are ALWAYS dangerous and can NEVER be trust at all, whatsoever.

    It depends. All the personality types have dangers inherent in them, especially the “pure” types. White Knights, for example, are quite susceptible to emotional manipulation and a crusader/Inquisition mentality — you wouldn’t find a Black Knight participating in a crusade or an Inquisition. Black Knights rarely seek power over others — that would inhibit their independence, after all — and they’re not, by nature, hostile; picking fights for the heck of it, or betraying people for the heck of it, goes against their Challenger’s logical nature. And Black Knights are charismatic, social, and charming — they like the company of other people. Their “lone wolf” nature kicks in when they want something. So Black Knights can be very, very dangerous when someone stands in their way, but they’re not dangerous in general. They’ll employ any weapon they need to when they have to; otherwise, their inclination is to get along or leave other people alone. Picking fights or being cruel for no reason would be illogical.

    Compare that to, say, the Bishop, who can be an exceptional, inspiring leader, but who, being rather power-hungry by inclination, can also be very manipulative and rigid. Bishops have the tendency to demand absolute loyalty from those around them and will test the loyalty of friends, family, and followers all the time; that’s something a Black Knight, who relies on himself, wouldn’t do. Bishops are also champion grudge-holders and will seek revenge for the sake of revenge; Black Knights shrug off negative emotions. Black Knights are probably the most dangerous personality type when you’re standing in their way, but are otherwise content to let others be. Bishops and Scientists both have a high need to control the people around them, and are both very dogmatic, which can make them a broader danger than Black Knights if that need to control takes a negative turn.

    As for trust — unless a Black Knight, like any Challenger, has a logical reason to break a trust, they won’t do it. It’s important to remember that Challengers, like Vulcans, are driven by logical thinking. Helpers, driven by their emotions, are actually more likely to break a trust if they feel hurt, misused, or betrayed (and Helpers, because they’re so sensitive — the White Knight being the most sensitive of all types — have a tendency to feel hurt where others wouldn’t), but none of the types are more trustworthy than any of the others. Some might be more trustworthy under certain circumstances, but not all.

    On the other hand they rather inherantly think outside the box, so if you’ve got some really challenging dragons that need slaying, black knights might be worth their price.

    The creators of the Kingdomality system make a point of saying that Black Knights, with their fighters’ natures and their independence, are most useful in risk-driven situations that require action, daring and original thought.

    And they just might write a pretty interesting novel or two as well.

    Danke. 🙂

    Like


  163. Is there a picture of this circle somewhere online?

    So how would I be influencing a Black Knight?

    Like


  164. 193 Elizabeth:

    But, Black Knight that I am, the reason I was willing to stand up to the bullies had more to do with my dislike than my concern for the people being bullied.

    I do love your capacity for ruthless self-awareness, Elizabeth.

    Perhaps all is not lost between us. I’m beginning to think we could marshall our forces in the manner of a king and queen. You, my queen, would rule with me by my side as an equal when public appearances are required. You would have your own private chambers to retire to, and I, as an equal, would have my own sex-dungeon visited by nubile young chambermaids to satisfy my decadent cravings.

    Sounds workable. What’s your take?

    Like


  165. 194 Yours Truly:

    So how would I be influencing a Black Knight?

    1. Be hot.

    2. Be as intelligent and engaging as possible *without* being more so than your Knight. You never want him to feel like you might be unpredictable, even if you really are smarter than him.

    3. Be compliant without being a doormat.

    hth

    Like


  166. Tupac Chopra 191 —

    My head hurt reading that. I never had to go to such mental lengths.I just sense these things off the bat.

    Oh I do too. I’m very skeptical of anything that doesn’t start out as somethng I just sense. Thinking about it a bit can refine the impression though.

    My head hurt reading that. I never had to go to such mental lengths.

    Oh no head straining involved at all, I can assure you. It’s more like I can’t stop myself. Or some of that and some of playing with a crossword puzzle. It’s fun to the extent it isn’t just something that happens involuntarily.

    Like


  167. Yours Truly 190 —

    Perhaps she may shield him in different ways though, maybe from stress or defend him verbally. After all, her tongue may very well be superior to his.
    I could also see her seducing her husbands enemies and then destroying them if she is loyal to her husband.

    I think you’re edging over here into intuiting the motivations of wmen more like yourself Yours Truly.

    Your pretty delicious feminine but/and feisty self, from the glimpses that I’ve gotten.

    Like


  168. 194 Yours Truly

    Is there a picture of this circle somewhere online?

    I can’t find one, but let’s see if I can describe it for you, now that I have my book out.

    Imagine a circular clock. Here are the positions of each personality type on the clock:

    1:00 — Merchant
    2:00 — Engineer-Builder
    3:00 — Scientist
    4:00 — Doctor
    5:00 — Shepherd
    6:00 — White Knight
    7:00 — Dreamer-Minstrel
    8:00 — Benevolent Ruler
    9:00 — Bishop
    10:00 — Discoverer
    11:00 — Prime Minister
    12:00 — Black Knight

    So the top of the clock — 11:00, 12:00, 1:00 — belongs to Challengers. The right side of the clock — 2:00, 3:00, 4:00 — belongs to Maintainers. The bottom of the clock — 5:00, 6:00, 7:00 — belongs to Helpers. And the left side of the clock — 8:00, 9:00, 10:00 — belongs to Explorers.

    So you’re a Dreamer-Minstrel. That means, on the clock, your position is between the White Knight and the Benevolent Ruler, who is an Explorer. So you have a core identity in common with the White Knight (you’re both Helpers), but you’re also influenced by your proximity to the Benevolent Ruler, an Explorer. dougjnn mentioned that he tested once as a Discoverer and once as a Prime Minister, which makes sense, since they’re right beside each other on the clock. He’s probably somewhere on the border between an Explorer and a Challenger.

    So how would I be influencing a Black Knight?

    Er, basically? By reminding us that we’re human. 🙂 Helpers help Challengers keep in touch with their feelings, while Challengers focus Helpers by preventing them from becoming too emotional.

    195 Tupac Chupra

    I do love your capacity for ruthless self-awareness, Elizabeth.

    Ha ha, thanks.

    Perhaps all is not lost between us….Sounds workable. What’s your take?

    I’m game, so long as I get to lead soldiers into battle. 🙂

    Like


  169. Elizabeth 200-

    I’m game, so long as I get to lead soldiers into battle.

    You know you need mondo brains in a mate E. You also need someone whose drive and ambition you can somehow respect, yet isn’t in gut wrenching competition with your own. You’ll take that leter however you can find it and are open to the guise in which it might possibly appear — in part because you know how hard it’s going to be to find in someone sufficiently attracted to you.

    You would certainly have a major challenge in attracting someone you are sufficiently attracted to regardless. But your show stopping blockage so far is I think due to the deep ice containment (or the small extent, not sure which) of your sexual heat. You would need to be signaling one hell of a sexual furnace to attract a man you found worthy given the steepness of your slope, but you aren’t doing anything remotely like.

    Hence you’re a virgin at 27 and consider oral sex disgusting.

    Are you actually deeply afaid that a man in capturing your heart will contain and limit your black knighthood?

    Like


  170. 201 dougjnn

    Are you actually deeply afaid that a man in capturing your heart will contain and limit your black knighthood?

    Well, I think girls like me have a choice. We can either force down our true natures, develop a pleasant guise to attract “love,” and go through life as a mere shell, or we can be true to our natures and never have romantic love, because men aren’t attracted (long-term) to girls like us.

    Pretty brutal, but that’s the way things are. And it’s nothing that can be fixed through “feminism” or anything else, because people can’t help what they’re attracted to.

    Like


  171. Elizabeth 178 & 180
    ****
    I have a quota of 5,000 words that I have to write per day, and I usually write more than 10,000. I spend about five hours per day writing. That’s time I spend actually writing, not planning out stories or researching (which I do on my lunch break). I wouldn’t be putting in all this work if I didn’t think it would go somewhere, and I wouldn’t have changed jobs from something that was very interesting to something that’s very normal (and not quite as well-paying) if I weren’t planning to make certain sacrifices. I might be insane, but I do know what I’m doing, and I do know there’s a long road ahead. And I’m used to skepticism, and I know it’s a long shot — in case you haven’t noticed before, I do have a law license, and I have no intention of starving in the gutter or begging on Mommy and Daddy’s doorstep — so while I understand your condescension, it’s not merited here.
    ****
    I had no condescension. I misinterpreted your reasons for being here. I am, for the most part, killing time. My current project has been stalled for over two years since a series of mistakes caused serious financial problems. I care nothing for dig a hole and fill it up America’s ‘work ethic’. I’ve done sixty-hour work weeks as an engineer and have little to prove.

    I do seem to have projected my reasons for being here on to your reasons for being here. You are conducting research for your books? Since you “are a virgin”, very likely to be true, you would need to conduct research, and this would be a good place.

    Another Elizabeth comment:
    *****
    177 Comment_Not_So_Much

    Your mother wasn’t a feminist though….

    That would be news to her. She considers herself very much a feminist. She just doesn’t see that as meaning that women and men are the same, or that men must be degraded to advance women. My mom doesn’t believe that equality means sameness.
    *****
    Your mothers position would not be tolerated by real feminists unless they were using it as a tactical dodge.

    Your mothers opinions are against the dogma of American Feminism, and while they may be tolerated at local levels, they are certainly not encouraged in any way. And that tolerance extends far less than you may think.

    For example, Lawrence Summers, ex-President of Harvard, was crucified for stating a fairly reasonable position that inate differences between men and women may be responsible for the fact that few women choose engineering and math. If one is actually going to take “men and women are different but equal” seriously, then certainly there is tremendous evidence for this. And his questioning was done in a very closed enviroment:
    “The conference, on women and minorities in the science and engineering workforce, was a private, invitation-only event, with about 50 attendees.”
    Didn’t matter, off with his head.

    But on to why your mother’s position doesn’t make good dogma. You mother’s position has serious flaws. It is true that her position is much more grounded in reality, but what does that have to do with anything? It suffers from three fatal flaws.
    1.For creating Banned Topics, it is a hydra of complexity. It’s easy to say “women have the same intelligence as men in ALL WAYS” but what if one started applying endless qualifiers like your mother wants to do? Like, except in visio-spatial where men are better and various verbal where women are better, and what about physical performance? Stress tolerance? On and on go the qualifiers. Some truths are banned, some are not, but there are hundreds of truths, how is a (relatively stupid) party hack to keep track of banned and unbanned? Better by far, “women have the same intelligence as men in ALL WAYS”.
    2.Each ban may now be INDEPENDENTLY attacked, and the “Equal” groupies may very well ignore attacks on the banning of a truth when they feel it won’t effect them. It becomes easy to get the treacherous conspirators to sell-each other out. A universal ban keeps them united.
    3.How exactly DOES one defend the ban at any given point?
    See Jack Construct A Yes-Set. Go Jack, Go.
    A.We all know women are better at (blank) than men, right?
    B.And we all know that women are better at (blank) than men to, right?
    C.So should anyone feel suprised that men are better at (blank) than women? They have to be good at something, right?

    Now I’m quite sure that isn’t the best way to go at it, but I put that together pretty easy, and I’m sure that others here could do much better.

    Like


  172. ****
    She just doesn’t see that as meaning that women and men are the same, or that men must be degraded to advance women.
    ****
    Also, since her position says “men don’t have to be degraded” she is removing one of the BENEFITS that many women get out of feminism.

    Again, taking away ‘positives’ doesn’t make one popular.

    Like


  173. What’s this I hear? Elizabeth finds oral sex revolting? Is this true Elizabeth? If so, I find it hard to imagine that you’re an enneagram type eight, being that lust is their assigned deadly sin. Lust meaning excesses of all kinds. I was quite the little whore before my first marriage and cleaned up after that as far as promiscuity, but the intense sex drivel; NO. “Eights find great joy in sexuality.” What’s up?

    Like


  174. 205 Sara I

    ….but the intense sex DRIVEL…

    Oh, that was cute.

    Like


  175. Sara, you realise that the talk of being the little whore does not speak in your defence on the unwanted intimacies thread?

    Like


  176. Sara 205 —

    If so, I find it hard to imagine that you’re an enneagram type eight, being that lust is their assigned deadly sin.

    Yeah I know. I wasn’t taking that on face value either, though not exactly because of my deep immersion in things enneagram. Rather my experience that women who are highly driven in an aggressive, self centric, warrior sort of way, are generally highly sexual as well. Often they have male like sexuality that lusts after variety as well as a main squeeze, but lust there generally is in spades — at least once awoken. Which last may be the secret to the enigma.

    Like


  177. Yours Truly 207–

    Sara, you realise that the talk of being the little whore does not speak in your defence on the unwanted intimacies thread?

    She did say she reformed herself following her first marriage (and during it?)

    Sara 205-

    What lead you to clean up your earlier promiscuity when you re-entered the mate market following your first marriage? I promise there is no baiting intent in these questions.

    Were you a sex slut earlier on to “buy” attention/affection/love only?

    Was the just sex fun when you were younger but less fun as you got a bit older?

    Did you reform because although the just sex sluttery could be fun, it wasn’t worth the cost to your reputation and hence your ability to attract better men for a committed relationship?

    Or finally were the male hot enough to f*ck just for fun pickings slimer in the time and place you found yourself following your first marriage, past your teenage and young twenties years and with the large volume of tasty men mostly then taken?

    Like


  178. Well, my best friend’s baby sister is very masculine and competitive. From the corner of your eye she looks a bit like a guy, very thin and angular in a button down shirt, trousers and flats. Her fiancé cooks on most days as she works a lot of overtime, he is a very gentle guy, quite feminine too. She reminds me of Elizabeth. She has very pretty long curly hair and if she learned to walk in heels she would dress up nicely, but she is simply neither that sexual nor feminine so not motivated to do so. I do think she is less sexual than the average women, but a bit more than Elizabeth. She has a boyfriend before this one and she is younger than her. But I think she is more so a type 5 that happens to be masculine.

    Like


  179. Elizabeth:

    “Um…a severe drought of hot guys? The Ivies aren’t really known for their lookers. And the guys’ intelligence/personalities didn’t really make up for the lack of sex appeal. Their “intelligence” was questionable, since they were more than willing to be brainwashed in order to get an A, and they were hypercompetitive. Which might have been fine, if I were a “you’re so wonderful” kind of girl, but I’m competitive, too.”

    I’m not totally sure what this was in reference to, but there are some issues here. First, you described intelligence as the main thing you look for in a guy. That contradicts your first sentence in the above paragraph, which looks like it was written by a shallow 14-year-old who idolizes Paris Hilton. Ivy League schools have the most intelligent young people in the country, on average. What were you looking for?

    Second, if the point is that Ivy League schools don’t have attractive people, that is much more true for women than men. I went to an Ivy. Women want to date Ivy guys. The guys complain about the women much more than vice versa. I doubt many Princeton girls want to date Michigan State guys.

    Then, you complain about the guys being competitive. Would you rather date someone without ambition? Elizabeth, you seem to be blaming your lack of interest in sex on not being able to find a suitable guy in college, where you were with intelligent, ambitious men – those most compatible with yourself. You, like me, have quirks that make it hard to find similar mates, but that statement makes it look as if you have no idea what you want at all. Please explain.

    Like


  180. 203 Comment_Oops

    Since you “are a virgin”, very likely to be true, you would need to conduct research, and this would be a very good place.

    Er. That would presume I’m writing about sex. Which I’m not. Bodice-rippers aren’t really my thing.

    205 Sara I

    What’s this I hear? Elizabeth finds oral sex revolting?

    I think it sounds revolting. I have no personal experience to base the opinion on.

    If so, I find it hard to imagine that you’re an enneagram type eight, being that lust is their assigned deadly sin.

    *shrug* That’s what I scored on, overwhelmingly, in the long test I took. And reading the description sounds pretty much exactly like me, especially with the basic fear being a loss of independence. And if this isn’t me:

    The result is that Eights become blocked in their ability to connect with people or to love since love gives the other power over them, reawakening their Basic Fear…

    I don’t know what is.

    Although my personal deadly sin, like Lucifer’s, is pride. 🙂

    What’s up?

    Er. I kind of think that subject has been beaten to death. 🙂

    208 dougjnn

    Rather my experience that women who are highly driven in an aggressive, self centric, warrior sort of way, are generally highly sexual as well. </i.

    Um, yeah. For such women to be highly sexual, that would kind of require that men be attracted to us, which in my experience, they aren’t.

    211 Jack

    Elizabeth, you seem to be blaming your lack of interest in sex on not being able to find a suitable guy in college…

    Um, no. dougjnn asked why I hadn’t been more open to blue state culture when I went to college back there, and I gave him a rather facetious reply. And I don’t have a lack of interest in sex. I have a lack of interest in casual sex, because I don’t like to be touched by people I don’t know well. And I haven’t been blaming anyone for anything. I’ve said on multiple occasions that people like what they like, and that’s that, and they simply don’t like me. I don’t know how much clearer I can make that. Men. Don’t. Like. Me. They are looking for something that I do not have. Like, I don’t know, a heart. Or maybe a soul. (Sorry. Already sold that to Satan. It’s a requirement to get a law license.) Whatever it is, I don’t have it. That’s fine. I don’t expect other people to change for me. I expect them to go after what they want. But I’m really having a hard time understanding what it is about me that everyone here finds so objectionable. Worst case scenario, I die an old maid. So what? I’m the only one who’s hurt by that, right? It has absolutely, utterly no impact on the rest of the world. I assure you, I will remain perfectly sane and content without a mate. Nuns manage it all the time.

    Then you complain about the guys being competitive. Would you rather date someone without ambition?

    No. But I’d rather not be in direct competition with my mate, and the guys I dated in college felt the same way. Hypercompetitive people do not tend to get along with each other. That’s just the way it is.

    What were you looking for?…Please explain.

    I am looking for what everyone else on the planet is looking for — someone I like, who likes me in return. Most guys I’ve dated have determined, after a few dates, that they don’t like me romantically. So that’s it. Period, end of story. It’s really not that complicated.

    Like


  181. on September 22, 2008 at 3:14 pm Usually Lurking

    Men. Don’t. Like. Me.

    Elizabeth, I have not read all of the comments, but I have a hard time believing this. I am going to assume that you are neither fat nor unattractive, which means that many men will be attracted to you.

    Now, being in the field that you are, you have probably hurt your prospects some, but not terribly so.

    Most guys I’ve dated have determined, after a few dates, that they don’t like me romantically.

    This is a serious question: are you dating pussys?

    I am going to make a few more assumptions, most men melt for any girl that can pour on the sweetness. It is something that we can only get from girls. And most of us fall for it every time. That is why girls call us “suckers”.

    How many of these “guys” that were not into you went hunting and fishing on Saturdays and watched Football on Sundays? These are obviously the most basic ways of determining someones masculinity, but, it is a way.

    I am not “hating” on you, I just have to know who these guys are.

    Like


  182. 213 Usually Lurking

    I am going to assume that you are neither fat nor unattractive, which means that many men will be attracted to you.

    Initially attracted. I don’t have any trouble getting asked out on dates. But the guys can’t be anything more than superficially attracted, because when they find out I’m not into hooking up, they generally lose interest.

    This is a serious question: are you dating pussys?

    I’ll go out at least once with any guy who asks me, unless I have a good reason not to. (That is, I already know him and dislike him.) So I’ve gone out with a lot of different kinds of guys — jocks, nerds, frat boys in college, and pretty much everything in between. I don’t have a certain “type” that I date exclusively.

    I am going to make a few more assumptions, most men melt for any girl that can pour on the sweetness. It is something that we can only get from girls. And most of us fall for it every time.

    Um, yeah. And this is totally something I don’t do. It’s not really in my makeup. Elizabeth = obnoxious hard ass. Well, except with little kids. Little kids are adorable and make me melt.

    How many of these “guys” that were not into you went hunting and fishing on Saturdays and watched Football on Sundays?

    Considering where I live? Most of them.

    However, I tend to know more about football than the guys I meet, thanks to growing up in a family of ardent Husker fans. I’ve even coached football. And if anything, I’ve found that guys don’t particularly like girls who know a lot about sports.

    Basically, I think it all comes down to the fact that guys feel like they’re with another guy when they’re with me. So I’m great at making male friends. Great at finding boyfriends? Not so much.

    Like


  183. on September 22, 2008 at 3:50 pm Usually Lurking

    But the guys can’t be anything more than superficially attracted, because when they find out I’m not into hooking up, they generally lose interest.

    Are these “city” guys or “country” boys? You know what I mean.

    Elizabeth = obnoxious hard ass.

    Well, now I can see why the guys are not into you. There is nothing wrong with being interested in intellectually stimulating subjects, or having lots of opinions on lots of things, but being an obnoxious hard ass is going to be a turn off to almost anyone, and I would be suspect of anyone who was turned on by it.

    And if anything, I’ve found that guys don’t particularly like girls who know a lot about sports.

    Yeah, I agree with them. It is actually kind of weird when a girl takes an interest in, say, football in the same way that a guy does.

    Basically, I think it all comes down to the fact that guys feel like they’re with another guy when they’re with me.

    I can see that.

    So I’m great at making male friends. Great at finding boyfriends? Not so much.

    I am assuming that when you do meet someone that you are going to want him to act like a man, no? You might want to consider whether you are interested in acting like a woman.

    Personally, I don’t care…you should live your life the way you want to, but, there is a reason why most of us are attracted to what we are attracted to.

    I have dated a few girls who were nice, kind, sweet and caring but lacked femininity. Guys are “drawn” to girls. Guys “hang” with other guys.

    Like


  184. 216 Usually Lurking

    I am assuming that when you do meet someone that you are going to want him to act like a man, no? You might want to consider whether you are interested in acting like a woman.

    Yes, I like men to act like men. But if acting like a woman means becoming something I’m not, I have no interest in it. Even if that means I don’t get married.

    Personally, I don’t care…you should live your life the way you want to, but, there is a reason why most of us are attracted to what we are attracted to.

    Which I don’t have a problem with. As I’ve said repeatedly. But I am what I am. Guys really wouldn’t like me if I changed to please them. They’d like fake Elizabeth, not real Elizabeth. So that’s that. Really quite simple. No deep mystery involved.

    Like


  185. Elizabeth, you really are a virgin, right?

    Like


  186. 217 Czar

    Elizabeth, you really are a virgin, right?

    Er, yes….

    Like


  187. 218 – I am amazed that none of the other girls has picked up on that. It explains everything.

    There are a couple of girls in their mid-twenties in my social circle whose sexual experience level matches yours. I didn’t know, of course. But at some point, the others girls started pointing out certain things. They complained they weren’t able to talk about love and relationship with these girls of chastity, because – according to these girls! – it needs sexual experience to understand these things.

    Losing your virginity is like flipping a switch. It will open a whole new world to you.

    That’s why I posted days ago that you need to find somebody to open up to. Which is hard, because your instincts are still dormant. And guys will be confused by sensing this masculine, logical approach of yours to dating. But once you get the ball rolling, you will be able to understand what the other girls are talking about.

    And probably you really are an eight. I hope for you you will soon find out yourself.

    Like


  188. on September 22, 2008 at 5:23 pm Usually Lurking

    Yes, I like men to act like men. But if acting like a woman means becoming something I’m not, I have no interest in it. Even if that means I don’t get married.

    Fair enough, but you must admit that it is pretty interesting that what you want from them is also what they want from you, and you are not offering that.

    Guys really wouldn’t like me if I changed to please them.

    There is a huge difference between understanding what people want and doing things that are absolutely inauthentic.

    For instance, think of how many parents stay up all night with a sick and crying baby. I don’t know how many of them actually WANT to be up all night, but, they would also never trade that (raising and nurturing a family) for anything else.

    Another example would be a woman who feared that she would never get married and have children. Then, she finds that husband and gets pregnant. She is not looking forward to going through labor, but she is not complaining either. It is simply part and parcel to having a family.

    Again, your life is yours to live, but I would caution you from buying too much into this idea of “always being yourself”. Understanding what others want and being a fake are two very different things.

    Like


  189. 219 Czar

    That’s why I posted days ago that you need to find somebody to open up to.

    I think you’re right that it’s quite possible I could be different (without being false) with someone I really wanted, but I’ve only felt that kind of heady passion once. I think I’m one of those people who don’t fall much, but fall hard when they do.

    And probably you really are an eight.

    And now my vanity is wounded. I insist on at least a nine. 😉

    220 Usually Lurking

    Fair enough, but you must admit that it is pretty interesting that what you want from them is also what they want from you, and you are not offering that.

    It is interesting, which is why I don’t blame them for it. 🙂

    There is a huge difference between understanding what people want and doing things that are absolutely inauthentic.

    I agree, but there are certain things considered “feminine” behavior that would be absolutely inauthentic for me, and I couldn’t pretend to be those things.

    Like


  190. on September 22, 2008 at 5:46 pm Usually Lurking

    …but there are certain things considered “feminine” behavior that would be absolutely inauthentic for me…

    Certain things, but not all things. My bet, without knowing you, is that you would enjoying playing the feminine role (in many situations) as much as you do the hard ass role.

    Like


  191. on September 23, 2008 at 12:07 am Comment_Bodice_Rippers

    ****
    203 Comment_Oops

    Since you “are a virgin”, very likely to be true, you would need to conduct research, and this would be a very good place.

    Er. That would presume I’m writing about sex. Which I’m not. Bodice-rippers aren’t really my thing.
    ***
    I mean really.

    People date. Not like an-over-the-top female romance novel(basically hard-core porn), but they do.

    Is it really so unlikely that one of your characters might go out on a date, or be hustled, or hustle a guy/girl.

    I mean REALLY. Of course you can write a book without these topics, and a very good one. Also, most books choose to ignore any actual dates/ect. for a variety of good reasons. But you are here, and trying to figure out what a player would say/do in a given situation in one of your books is hardly a poor reason to be here. This hardly involves explicit sex scenes, which by the way this site isn’t good for.

    Like


  192. Elizabeth 221 —

    I think you’re right that it’s quite possible I could be different (without being false) with someone I really wanted, but I’ve only felt that kind of heady passion once. I think I’m one of those people who don’t fall much, but fall hard when they do.

    If you had wanted to keep listening to what I had to say in the area of dating/sex exploring advice, I would have had quite a bit for you, just for who YOU are best as I can tell, and not at all generic, that mighht have been of some value to you. Might just possibly have been of a hell of a lot of value to you. Might have been worth a shot, anyway.

    I’ve never been sexually with or known a woman exactly like you, but I have know and been with a couple quite a bit like you. One in particular.

    Like


  193. Czar —

    I am amazed that none of the other girls has picked up on that. It explains everything.

    I guess then you haven’t read my conversations with Elizabeth, or not at all closely. That’s where it comes from.

    Like


  194. 225 – dougjnn: I remember you put a question mark after virgin. Did you just guess right or did you know?

    It means that it doesn’t make sense to include her in any sexual conversation – for now. It’s like trying to discus snow with some indigenous people from the equator.

    The guy who’ll win her heart will need patience and understanding. In return he’ll have a lot of fun witnessing her first cautious steps into unknown territory. If he’s well experienced and knows what to do, it be like watching a beautiful flower unfold.

    It is not despite but because of her repressed sexuality that the EMOTIONS these experiences will uncover inside of her will be overwhelming. I envy that guy.

    Like


  195. Czar 226–

    I remember you put a question mark after virgin. Did you just guess right or did you know?

    I know just the post you’re thinking of, but that was authored by Tupac Chopra who had read E. and me, not by me. I remember it because the question mark surprised me. E. had declared quite clearly but really quickly in passing, in a dependent clause.

    The guy who’ll win her heart will need patience and understanding. In return he’ll have a lot of fun witnessing her first cautious steps into unknown territory. If he’s well experienced and knows what to do, it be like watching a beautiful flower unfold.

    It is not despite but because of her repressed sexuality that the EMOTIONS these experiences will uncover inside of her will be overwhelming. I envy that guy.

    If she actually has an average, not to mention a high, sex drive, then what you say is absolutely true. I became convinced for awhile that in fact hers is very low. I’m no longer sure one way or another. I think it’s pretty hard to be. The evidence suggests low, with lots of hard and not easy impediments to getting there, but it doesn’t absolutely require low. I hope not low.

    If you imagine that she’s going to end up emotinally orbiting the right kind of man with enough intelligence AND sex appeal though, I’m quite certian you’re wrong.

    Classically women like E. have had torrid affairs (or been largely celibate), but not long and stable loving relationships. If they have had lasting marriages, they generally weren’t the love focuses of their life. Instead lovers were.

    Like


  196. 226: Czar:

    The guy who’ll win her heart will need patience and understanding. In return he’ll have a lot of fun witnessing her first cautious steps into unknown territory. If he’s well experienced and knows what to do, it be like watching a beautiful flower unfold.

    In both word and deed, Elizabeth worships *power* above all else.

    Ain’t gonna happen.

    Like


  197. 222 Usually Lurking

    My bet, without knowing you, is that you would enjoying playing the feminine role (in many situations) as much as you do the hard ass role.

    The hard ass role is not something I necessarily enjoy. It’s just something I am. 🙂

    223 Comment_Bodice_Rippers

    I’m not saying there’s nothing to be learned about human nature here. Just that I didn’t come here specifically with research in mind. I was reading Megan McArdle’s blog one day, and someone in her comments linked the site and asked her what she thought of it. I followed the link and was intrigued. I’m here because I’m curious, not because I’m doing anything as formal as research. 🙂

    224 dougjnn

    If you had wanted to keep listening to what I had to say in the area of dating/sex exploring advice, I would have had quite a bit for you, just for who YOU are best as I can tell, and not at all generic, that mighht have been of some value to you.

    Um…I’m not aware that I ever signaled an unwillingness to read what you (or anyone) had to say. I remember causing a firestorm over something I said — still not quite sure what it was — and things just kind of ended there.

    I’m always willing to hear (well, read) advice. Though not necessarily to heed it. 🙂

    226 Czar

    It is not despite but because of her repressed sexuality that the EMOTIONS these experiences will uncover inside of her will be overwhelming. I envy that guy.

    Um, thanks. I guess. That’s kind of sweet. Also kind of embarrassing. 🙂

    227 dougjnn

    Classically women like E. have had torrid affairs (or been largely celibate), but not long and stable loving relationships.

    This is true, if rather depressing.

    228 Tupac Chopra

    In both word and deed, Elizabeth worships *power* above all else.

    I’m curious: what have I said that makes you think that? Because I like my independence — am rather fanatic about it, in fact — and I tend to think that power and independence are often opposites. Powerful people are chained to their followers. That doesn’t appeal to me at all.

    Like


  198. Elizabeth, I don’t think you’re an “obnoxious hardass”. It seems to be an excuse. You’re probably a nice woman to most people. As I said, I have my own quirks that make it tough to meet compatible people. But you’re out in Idaho – it would seem to be very hard to find many guys compatible to you out there – where most people your age have families already. I can’t imagine spending my young, single days out there.

    All this writing by you has to have a purpose, and I don’t think you want to be alone forever. You want to find a very smart man, who looks decent, and won’t compete with you. Most smart, educated guys want the same in women. You can be somewhat competitive without being competitive with the man in your life. And some men will appreciate a woman who makes them wait, IF she is worth it. To those guys, you will be worth it. Just show them you like them. They’ll respond in kind.

    Like


  199. 227/228: I agree with both of you guys. To me Elizabeth seems like the kind of woman who loves the kind of guy this blog is all about. The mere fact that she lingers around is enough of proof.

    This speaks for an average to high sex drive, because you need to subtract the virginity.

    TC, if that’s what you mean – I can see that, too. Like most women, she craves a guy on the strong masculine side. Somebody who doesn’t take her shit. Yet he needs to be smart and well educated. An asshole with a Ph.D., so to say. That’s hard to find (and the niche of some of us on here), and she’s complaining about it.

    Her strong opinions have kept her from the guys she’s (sexually) most attracted to. So if that is what you are saying dougjnn, I agree with you. Methinks, too, she will eventually “fall” and maybe marry a beta who fulfills all the smartness criteria while refraining from being an ass (let alone asking for BJ’s etc.). He will awaken her sexuality, nonetheless. And, yes, that is when the bad boys will come into play and the affairs or serial flings set in.

    That’s the life story for most women out there.

    What I was referring to, though, was the hypothetical situation of an appreciating alpha guy out there winning her over and unleashing the Inner Beast. I am aware that that is not gonna happen…

    Like


  200. Initially attracted. I don’t have any trouble getting asked out on dates. But the guys can’t be anything more than superficially attracted, because when they find out I’m not into hooking up, they generally lose interest.

    I think the reason for this is twofold. One thing is that there are a lot of men out there looking for sex, not a girlfriend. Men, especially men of low character, seem to be pretty willing to share their bodies with women they hardly even like.
    The other thing is that I feel it may be femininity that makes a man willing to wait. And really seeing a romantic potential with the girl. A lot of men either assume a masculine girl is interested in casual sex, or do not see romantic potential with such a woman.

    That said, if you are looking for an unusual type of guy, like I am too, it may just take meeting lots of different men to finally meet him. It may also mean taking the risk of never meeting him at all, but I know you accept that risk as much as I do. That said working on yourself does maximize the chance that you meet the right guy and have the skills to understand him and have a smooth marriage.

    Like


  201. 230 Jack

    But you’re out in Idaho – it would seem to be very hard to find many guys compatible to you out there – where most people your age have families already. I can’t imagine spending my young, single days out there.

    The East Coast wasn’t any better. There might have been more young, single guys, but our personalities were incompatible. Idaho might have fewer people, but I have a better chance of finding someone who shares my values here than I do in a big city. Big cities are fun to visit, but I’d hate to live in one.

    To those guys, you will be worth it.

    Thanks. 🙂

    231 Czar

    To me Elizabeth seems like the kind of woman who loves the kind of guy this blog is all about.

    Not really, actually. I won’t say I’m not susceptible to charm, because I do find it very appealing, and I love sparring with charming player-types. And if you could combine that confident, witty charm with brilliance, courage, and loyalty, I’d probably find it irresistible.

    But this blog isn’t about brilliant, gallant men. There is little of honor, nobility, or generosity in what’s written here. This blog is about the base, not the supernal. The base is interesting, at times appealing, but I could never love someone who acted as coldly and carelessly as it’s recommended here to act. I could never love someone who treated me like something low and expendable. Thank God I have more pride than that.

    The mere fact that she lingers around is enough of proof.

    Eh, not really. I read this blog pretty much for the same reason I read biographies of Adolf Hitler: it describes something I want to understand. Not something I’d want to be (or to be around).

    An asshole with a Ph.D., so to say. That’s hard to find (and the niche of some of us on here), and she’s complaining about it.

    Actually, no. I have a very low tolerance for assholes. If I were ever to hook up with a player-type, it’d be a charming rogue, not an asshole. I really have no use for wanton cruelty.

    Her strong opinions have kept her from the guys she’s (sexually) most attracted to.

    The parenthetical is important there. I can’t remain attracted to a guy if I don’t like his personality. That’s one of the reasons why my crushes rarely last long. The guys who are most physically appealing rarely have the kind of personality I like, so I lose interest fast.

    Methinks, too, she will eventually “fall” and maybe marry a beta who fulfills all the smartness criteria while refraining from being an ass (let alone asking for BJ’s etc.). He will awaken her sexuality, nonetheless. And, yes, that is when the bad boys will come into play and the affairs or serial flings set in.

    Nope. I have a visceral hatred of traitors. I can’t abide disloyalty in other people, and I certainly wouldn’t be able to abide it in myself. Just as I wouldn’t hook up with someone whose personality I loathed, I wouldn’t marry someone I wasn’t strongly attracted to or had merely lukewarm feelings for. Sexual attraction is part of what separates love from friendship.

    232 Yours Truly

    That said, if you are looking for an unusual type of guy, like I am too, it may just take meeting lots of different men to finally meet him. It may also mean taking the risk of never meeting him at all, but I know you accept that risk as much as I do.

    Yes, precisely. I’m a risk-taker by nature; I don’t like playing it safe. And as any good risk-taker will tell you, we’re willing to accept the possibility that we’ll lose. 🙂

    Like


  202. on September 23, 2008 at 3:09 pm Usually Lurking

    The hard ass role is not something I necessarily enjoy. It’s just something I am.

    I am with Jack, this is a cop out.

    Like


  203. Elizabeth – you want what every woman wants. Nothing special here.

    You want to admire the guy? Well, that’s what “game” is all about. He is cold. You think he is strong. He is cocky. You think is confident and charming. He “negs” you, busts your balls and doesn’t take your shit? You think he has got what it takes to “handle” a strong woman like you. He commands other guys around and tells you about an ambitious goal in life that he vigorously pursues. You see character, personality and something to admire.

    As any other female, you are smart in leaving nice guys behind. Unlike other women you are too smart to see through the players’ facade. But you are not smart enough to understand that your dream man is an oxymoron.

    Like


  204. ASCII indignation… nice one

    Like


  205. 239 – Elizabeth: Say I would be that kind of guy – what would YOU have to offer in return?

    Like


  206. Aiming to be a “man of mystery”? Probably smart. People are more likely to take advice from a mysterious figure than a Fannie Mae lobbyist or an accountant for the Department of Parks.

    Like


  207. 243 Czar

    Elizabeth: Say I would be that kind of guy – what would YOU have to offer in return?

    Well, that’s the thing. If the guy existed, he might not like me in return. Or he might like me as a friend, but not romantically. Or he might be attracted to me, but not be interested in a serious relationship. Or he might be attracted to me, and interested in a serious relationship, but not interested in a serious relationship with me in particular.

    Obviously love takes more than finding the right person for you. You also have to be the right person for your potential partner. And actually, it’s quite possible I wouldn’t be the right person for that kind of man. He might want someone who’s very much into playing a supportive, emotional role, which I am not. Or someone who’s sweeter than I am. Or nicer. Or not as competitive. Or a multitude of other things.

    I’m not saying I’m such a great catch that no man in the world is worthy of me. I’m just saying I haven’t found someone that I particularly want. Finding someone I wanted who also wanted me — that’s another hurdle entirely.

    Like


  208. 248 Yours Truly

    A cold, calculating player is a loser. A naive, artless boy is also a loser. They are two sides of the same coin. Both are cowards. One is imprisoning his penis, the other is imprisoning his heart. A penis without a heart is worthless, a heart without a penis unmanly.

    Yes, yes, yes. And mega props to the expression! Your last sentence should become a maxim. 😀

    A confident, passionate, powerful man is a winner. He gets how the world works and is able to immerse himself in it. He is at ease with his heart and his penis, so he can be loving and sexual, unite himself with a woman in body and soul. Anything else, in my opinion, is not worth taking off my panties for.

    Again, yes, yes, yes. I do not understand people who find coldness or indifference sexy. When people are cold to me, i want nothing to do with them. When people are indifferent to me, I want nothing to do with them. And there’s a big difference between being loving and being cloying. I think a lot of men unfortunately think that by being the latter, they’re being the former, and their problems result not from treating a woman well, but from being clingy and not giving her any room to breathe. (And yes, a lot of women make the same mistake with their men.)

    Like


  209. on September 23, 2008 at 5:46 pm Usually Lurking

    A cold, calculating player is a loser. …

    A confident, passionate, powerful man is a winner.

    YT, I am a fan. However, what specific applicable advice would you offer to the lonely, frustrated man? How is he liekly to gain real confidence?

    Also, in his attempt to get “how the world works”, what specifically should he learn about girls so that he can be sexual?

    Again, be specific.

    Like


  210. YT, I am a fan. However, what specific applicable advice would you offer to the lonely, frustrated man? How is he liekly to gain real confidence?

    Learn about the body and the mind and how they relate to eachother, by experience. Reading books helps, but feeling it is what teaches you.
    Have standards of what you want to reach that come from the heart. Work towards those goals.
    Be your best self. You need not be perfect, but formidable.
    When you know you are all that and not just pretending to be it, confidence is inevitable.

    Also, in his attempt to get “how the world works”, what specifically should he learn about girls so that he can be sexual?

    Specific is a whole book, I am going to the movies, so I can de a few sentences.

    It is fine to learn all the player stuff, the Machiavellian stuff, for it is one way to view the world. As long as you realise this is just the point of view that excludes everything but the mammal. Mammals will respond to it blindly, but humans can be more than mammals alone, we also have an upper body, a heart, a mind. To learn about the hearts and minds of those who have them, the soft, new ageish love manuals will do. Think John Gray, Cherie Carter-Scott. Then realise that we are not ghosts, minds that operate without bodies. Some of us may be, but those are the castrato’s we are not interested in. Let your sexual energy fill your heart, let the energy from your heart fill your loins, use your mind, embody your body with your soul and let your mind shatter in rapture and rise anew from the ashes like a phoenix.

    The rest of my time is for Elizabeth 😉

    Like


  211. Yes, yes, yes. And mega props to the expression! Your last sentence should become a maxim. 😀

    Is honored!

    Again, yes, yes, yes. I do not understand people who find coldness or indifference sexy. When people are cold to me, i want nothing to do with them. When people are indifferent to me, I want nothing to do with them. And there’s a big difference between being loving and being cloying. I think a lot of men unfortunately think that by being the latter, they’re being the former, and their problems result not from treating a woman well, but from being clingy and not giving her any room to breathe. (And yes, a lot of women make the same mistake with their men.)

    This is true. Unfortunately few people have patience in our world of instant gratification and true confidence is rare. So they chase the shadows of it, the going through the motions without knowing the real thing.
    Charm without heart is glib, confidence without trust is cockiness etc. On the same note cherishing without trust is clinging and giving without having builds frustration. The frustrated chump and the heartless bastard are one and the same. Shadows. Empty shells.

    Like


  212. on September 23, 2008 at 6:57 pm Usually Lurking

    Learn about the body and the mind …
    Have standards of what you want to reach that come from the heart. Work towards those goals.
    Be your best self.

    I was being serious, please, be specific.

    Lonely, frustrated guys turn to Game (Mystery, Pickup 101, David Deangelo, Real Social Dynamics, whatever) because they offer specific guidance. Concrete, specific, applicable advice.

    Good or bad, it can be understood and applied.

    What you offered may be helpful, but, being so generic, I know that it would have been useless to me.

    So, to win the minds of those men who wish not to be “cowards”, offer something specific and concrete that they can get there hands on.

    No need to for a book, just 3 or 4 pieces of advice.

    Like


  213. 229 Elizabeth:

    I’m curious: what have I said that makes you think that? Because I like my independence — am rather fanatic about it, in fact — and I tend to think that power and independence are often opposites.

    I meant “power” in the sense of excessive autonomy, independence, and competence.

    Don’t tell me your “Dark Knight” is not one of power…

    Like


  214. 255 and 257 were me, BTW

    Like


  215. No need to for a book, just 3 or 4 pieces of advice.

    Usually Lurking, here’s my advice.

    Stop being so bitter. Specifically, stop being so bitter on behalf of the lonely, loser guys who don’t have “game.” They are not your problem to fix. You say you changed yourself, lost some weight, and got girlfriends. Great for you!

    Now, will you please quit trying to make girls feel guilty about these guys and asking them for “specific advice” as to how to score. What are we girls supposed to do? Take them on as charity cases? Dispense amazing advice for these guys to use on ourselves? I thought people were only supposed to more successful others of their own gender, when it comes to advice of this nature?

    I think Yours Truly’s words are chock full of goodness, and yet you call them “useless” and “generic” because they don’t offer direct ways for a guy to get into her pants. Well boo hoo to you, I say. She’s not looking for guys like you. She’s looking for better men, men with hearts and penises and not afraid to use both.

    Like


  216. except to the amen choir of the sisterhood who need their egos stroked by the soothing sounds of oprah-fied runny shit.

    Pot. Kettle. Black. Only for you, Mystery = Oprah.

    btw, hope, i can feel the hate in you bubbling to the surface. excellent! let your hate flow through you. let it animate you. soon, you will be… my victim.

    It’s not so much hate as it is… annoyance. It’s his total lack of perception.

    You, on the other hand, are very perceptive. Hence you see that I’m getting annoyed.

    Hate is much like love. A motivation, not an emotion.

    Like


  217. on September 23, 2008 at 7:28 pm Usually Lurking

    They are not your problem to fix.

    I am assuming that you say the same thing to all the women who look to help the lonely wallflowers?

    You say you changed yourself, lost some weight, and got girlfriends. Great for you!

    I care about more than just myself.

    Now, will you please quit trying to make girls feel guilty about these guys and asking them for “specific advice” as to how to score.

    I only ask those that put down “Game”. So many are looking to tear down what they can not build up. And why the fuck do you care? When I said I was a fan of “Yours Truly”, I meant it. And if she thinks that these men are cowards, then I want to know what she thinks they should do. What they should specifically do.

    I think Yours Truly’s words are chock full of goodness, and yet you call them “useless” and “generic” because they don’t offer direct ways for a guy to get into her pants.

    I said that it would have been useless to me. And it would have been. I, like every other guy, was fed all sorts of generic platitudes. To list a perenial favorite, “Just be yourself”, wasn’t helping anyone.

    She’s not looking for guys like you.

    What made you think I was asking her out?

    She’s looking for better men, men with hearts

    Hope, who the fuck to do you think you are? You think you know me? You don’t know shit. But I will tell you what I know:

    I know that you came on here countless times dropping all sorts of sob stories about your childhood when no one asked. Did I jump down your throat? FUCK NO!

    I wouldn’t think of it.

    But I ask a commenter a question, with sincerity, and what do you do? Shove your fucking nose where it doesn’t belong.

    Cunt, you have no idea what kind of heart I have. I care enough to try to help some lonely, hurting guys. You care enough to try and shit on him.

    Fuck Off.

    Like


  218. Usually Lurking, I’ve been pleasant to you all along, and you’ve always been the one shoving your nose where it doesn’t belong.

    So now the shoe’s on the other foot. And you show that you can’t handle what you’ve constantly tried to dish out to me.

    Thanks.

    Like


  219. 252 Yours Truly

    The rest of my time is for Elizabeth

    I promise to spend it well. 😀

    Like


  220. “feelgood platitudes completely divorced from reality”

    … which is the actual key to the chastity belt of most of the females on this board, btw.

    Like


  221. 231 Czar:

    I agree with both of you guys. To me Elizabeth seems like the kind of woman who loves the kind of guy this blog is all about. The mere fact that she lingers around is enough of proof. This speaks for an average to high sex drive, because you need to subtract the virginity.

    I don’t know, maybe you’re right. But it has got to be buried, man. BURIED.

    Elizabeth, do you masturbate? Are you orgasmic?

    Elizabeth might very well have a stable of wild horses held under tight reign, but I’m doubtful. OTOH, she obviously has lots of impulse, but all that bio-energy is being shunted upwards into her big brain, where it finds release in her writing. Her and DA are similar in this regard. It wouldn’t surprise me if Elizabeth, like DA, had a somewhat largeish head on top of an anemic body. The balance between mind and body is way out of wack.

    Here is Dr. Chopra’s Rx for Liz:

    – undertake some form of body-oriented therapy like Feldenkrais, Alexander Technique, or ideally, Yoga (but make sure it is of the Iyengar variety). You don’t want some pop-yoga place in the city either, you want one run by silver-haired, ex-hippie crunchy granola grandmas. Pay extra attention to your breathing and the tension in your diaphragm as you do the excercizes.

    – take some time out every week to explore your body in a quiet safe environment. Pleasure yourself. Don’t rush anything, just let your thoughts stray as you lazily brush your hand over parts of your body that don’t normally see the light of day. (Extra credit: take photos of this and mail them to [tupac_chopra] @ [yahoo.com])

    – find some literary porn. Romance novels will do but I suspect there are some women authors out there who specialize in the more carnal aspects of women’s fantasies. This way, if the writer is good, and you find her engaging, you will have opened a conduit from your mental world into your physiological one.

    Get back to me and report the results.

    HTH

    Like


  222. on September 23, 2008 at 8:03 pm Usually Lurking

    Out of nowhere:
    Stop being so bitter…Well boo hoo to you

    Then:
    I’ve been pleasant to you all along

    you’ve always been the one shoving your nose where it doesn’t belong.

    Hope, please educate me. I would love to hear this.

    And you show that you can’t handle what you’ve constantly tried to dish out to me.

    Yeah, because I was calling you bitter, or anything else for that matter. I never called you anything. What I woudl do, is after hearing you agree with someone that Game is empty, or whatever, is ask you for some specific alternative. A perfectly reasonable thing to do.

    And, I was never looking to make you or anyone else feel guilty, until I realized that the “haters” had no alternative to offer.

    And i am still not pissing on “Yours Truly”, just you. I think that she is smart and I would love to hear what she might have to offer.

    Like


  223. @ Elizabeth

    you need to find a man with the ego and status to meet your ‘gallant’ criteria

    Like


  224. 267 – TC: You have to grant me that I stopped replying to her after she started the self-deprecating again. Hers is even more annoying than DA’s, because E completely talks out of her ass when it comes to things like love, sex and relationships. She lives in a dreamworld and stubbornly resists any attempt of people to open her eyes.
    I know I should have listened to dougjnn all along – he’s figured her out weeks ago.

    Anyways, knowing her better, I have more than a hunch that E doesn’t touch herself. In my experience this could leave her unorgasmic on top of all else. So sad. At this point a magic wand seems like her only way out. No way she’s gonna follow your advice either.

    Like


  225. in other words, find a nice cat

    Like


  226. Thanks to you guys for injecting some realism back in here and rescuing this comments section from the 7th circle of empty platitude hell.

    Like


  227. on September 23, 2008 at 8:48 pm Usually Lurking

    Approaching girls was a problem, keeping them never was.

    Like


  228. the game that gets you laid is the same game that keeps your relationships happy. oh sure, there are minor adjustments to be made when trnasitioning from wild tomcat to domesticated tabby, but the core principles are the same.

    I think that’s BS, actually.

    Like


  229. on September 23, 2008 at 9:19 pm Usually Lurking

    so tell me again why you are seeking advice

    I’m not. If someone wants to say that game is empty or the life of a coward or whatever the shaming mechanism of the week is, then fine, back it up with something.

    At first, I was honestly curious to see what real alternative some hater had. But they had none. But still, I get curious to see if any of these people are willing to offer anything useful beyond generic platitudes.

    Like


  230. Tupac Chopra 282 —

    Preach it bro.

    Like


  231. UL post number 275- I agree. I enjoy reading this blog and Roosh but what I really enjoy about Roosh’s blog is how he posts about other things beside P8ss.y. Some of his posts are completely game free.

    Like


  232. 278 – UL: “Approaching girls was a problem, keeping them never was.”

    I hate to break it to you, bro’, but “keeping” her is different from owning her heart (and pussy).

    Will she stick around with a rug to trample on?

    Hell, yes!

    If she’s not a 10 to begin with – and no chance you would get that fine a lady without game – she’ll be mighty happy to have a presentable “nice guy” boyfriend.

    In that situation don’t be surprised if she needs to close her eyes to climax, though. She’ll be thinking of the other night when she screamed one of your best friends name at the top of your lungs, because he asked her whose pussy it is.

    Like


  233. Wow, a few hours out of the house, and this thread has exploded! I should have brought some popcorn…

    Well, I have a yogurt, that wil do!

    Like


  234. @Elizabeth- LOL
    Yours Truly, when you’re ready to hop a plane to start our hot lesbian affair, let me know.If Hope and Chic Noir wanted to come too, we could create quite the scandal.

    So there would be a chocolate honeydip
    An Oriental sweet
    One German sausage
    and a multi ethinic American bag of goodies

    The tape would be enough to make all of the men here forget about the Wall Street crash.
    Our scissors would cut them for days.

    Like


  235. Elizabeth 288 —

    276 dougjnn: It would seem the answer has been a resounding “not much”.

    E: Yes, I get it, you don’t think I have much to offer. I got the point several days ago. Really, I did. My mind isn’t that feeble.

    No you don’t get it all all, nor is the reason “feeblemindedness” as you ironically discount, playing to the sympathetic in your audience.

    Re read this a few times, the part you chose to ignore, what the post was actually about and the part you dismissively quoted was mere (accurate) prelude to:

    You Elizabeth would be well advised, very well advised, to seek out a temporary affair with a very sexy man, whether or not he’s smart enough for you. It would be a good place to start. Guarding your heart is such a hollow conceit in your case. Eternal frostbite is the real danger for you.

    Oh sure, hold something back emotionally. I seriously doubt that will be all that challenging for you though. But if it is as Czar for one thinks, then be sure to do it.

    If you’re going to respond to what I said to you, even dismissively, why don’t you respond to that? To the obvious meat of what I said? Why are you avoiding that?

    Like


  236. 295 Yours Truly:

    A man who is a sociopath by nature does not need to learn game. It is amazingly sad that people who have gotten over the glamour of wanting to date a sociopath would buy into the glamour of wanting to be one.

    [at podium]

    This award would neither have been possible nor necessary without all you fine ladies’ help.

    Thank You.

    *bows*

    Like


  237. 290 chicnoir

    The tape would be enough to make all of the men here forget about the Wall Street crash.

    And the sales will make it the salvation of the American economy. And, in turn, the world’s. How heroic we are, saving the world like that!

    295 Yours Truly

    I have yogurt and a modest selection of toys, but getting out of the country is challenging

    It’s okay. I have a friend with a private plane, and I know an airport where they don’t ask too many questions. 😉

    I also know some naughty words in Latin, to add the classy element.

    Excellent. I know a little Greek, too, and a smattering of Spanish.

    Love the restaurant metaphor.

    Like


  238. Mea Defutata,

    It’s okay. I have a friend with a private plane, and I know an airport where they don’t ask too many questions. 😉

    Outstanding. I will prepare my room.

    Excellent. I know a little Greek, too, and a smattering of Spanish.

    Marvellous! I read some ancient Greek, but my keyboard confines me to this alphabet.

    Like


  239. even a sociopath can improve his batting average.

    You are right.

    Do you want to be known as a sociopath?

    Like


  240. somehow missed this:

    Czar:
    “feelgood platitudes completely divorced from reality”

    … which is the actual key to the chastity belt of most of the females on this board, btw.

    Genius.

    wink wink nudge nudge

    Like


  241. 294 dougjnn

    If you’re going to respond to what I said to you, even dismissively, why don’t you respond to that? To the obvious meat of what I said? Why are you avoiding that?

    Because it’s not advice I’m comfortable following. I am not interested in a fling with someone I feel nothing for, no matter how good-looking he might be.

    I’m more than willing to shake hands, so to speak, and cordially drop the subject. I understand why people don’t think I have a future in romance. I respect that opinion. I understand why people might not think my opinion matters much in areas of romance. That’s fine: they can take it with a grain of salt. Heck, they can take it with an entire salt mine. What I don’t understand is the hostility about it, when I haven’t condemned people for following their own preferences. If I end up alone, that’s no one’s problem but mine. I’m not going to take it out on the world — I have plenty of things that will occupy my time. So I don’t see the need for people to get so personal about it, or to be offended by my impending frigid old maidhood. It’s my life, the situation is what it is, and that’s that.

    So yes. I do get it. You guys think I have nothing to offer in that arena. That’s fine. Let’s move on, shall we?

    Like


  242. I also know some naughty words in Latin, to add the classy element.

    Excellent. I know a little Greek, too, and a smattering of Spanish.

    Love the restaurant metaphor.,

    Je parle un peu Francais.

    Elizabeth if you are a 27 year old virgin then good for you. Let me assure that you are missing nothing by holding out. the liCk is the only enjoyable part anyway.

    Like


  243. :

    Czar:
    “feelgood platitudes completely divorced from reality”

    … which is the actual key to the chastity belt of most of the females on this board

    ?

    Like


  244. Elizabeth 305 —

    Because it’s not advice I’m comfortable following. I am not interested in a fling with someone I feel nothing for, no matter how good-looking he might be.

    Since you yourself recognize that it’s at least a live possibility that celibacy and an “old maid” unpared future are the road you’re on, one might think you’d be willing to venture outside your comfort zone, to take a flyer, to try the improbable of success, just to see what happens. You will note that I wasn’t suggesting that you make a practive of casual affairs from hence forward and evermore. I was suggesting a kickstart, an ice breaker, rolling the dice.

    I don’t in fact any longer spend much time or effort talking to you, as I did what a week ago or something for several days. I am willing to leave you alone. I mentioned that you didn’t seem to want to listen to my advice and you responded saying it was rather me who’d gotten mad or irritated at you for some reason you claimed not to understand, and that I then stopped giving it. So I gave some, considering all you’ve said.

    So yes. I do get it. You guys think I have nothing to offer in that arena. That’s fine. Let’s move on, shall we?

    It’s nowhere near as categorial, clear cut or simple as that. It’s more that you keep placing impossible hurdles, and it seems after awhile as though that’s rather by subconsious design. Myself, Tupac, Czar and other guys have all been intrigued by you, and at one time or another convinced you had deep heat but had only greatly inhibited it for one reason or another.

    Beyond that it’s clear to me that a stable long term and also deeply involved relationship with you will be extremely difficult and taxing for any alpha male with alternatives and drive. I’m not saying none will make a go of it, only that it’s a very narrow market. You seem to agree with this. I’ve never wanted to sugar coat or sell some seductive bill of goods. It’s a discussion, not the prelude to a romp.

    At least it’s clear to me that that’s how things stand now. It’s also clear to me that until you’ve actually DONE some sexual congress and then some romance exploration, there are many things you’ll never really know about yourself, or be able to accurately tell others.

    Since in your case the hurdles to a full on love affair are so high and daunting, there is a whole lot be said for tasting some sexuality without deep love first, EVEN IF IT MAKES YOU UNCOMFORTABLE.

    I’m tempted to say “thnk of Rome”.

    I am not interested in a fling with someone I feel nothing for, no matter how good-looking he might be.

    I didn’t say “good looking”. I said sexy. Sexy to YOU, whatever combo of things does, or can in some cases, do that for you. If you feel he’s really sexy, you do feel something for him. Some sexual attraction. If you don’t feel that for any guys you ever see at all — well, we’re back to very low sex drive. For that I don’t have much remedy. It’s not my area of interest I guess you could say.

    I said before I wouldn’t suggest an affair with a married man, but that was when I was focusing on a relationship that met your love first wishes. That seems so remote to me now if you don’t break down your dam of sexual inhibition somewhat first, that I think you first need to get laid by someone who seems very SEXY to you. If that’s your DA or Leutenant Governor or whoever and you can catch his eye, you catch my drift. You need to kick start your motor girl.

    Else what are you doing here?

    Swatting back all well intentioned but not beta suckup efforts to help you, it seems.

    Like


  245. Czar 266

    someone else: “feelgood platitudes completely divorced from reality”

    Czar: … which is the actual key to the chastity belt of most of the females on this board, btw.

    Zing!!

    Well said bro. (You know who I’m thinking of in particular.)

    (I don’t think we need fret too much re: Yours Truly. She may remain too low volume for many tastes, but she’s going into circulation soon I think.)

    Like


  246. Marlboro Man 310–

    Oh what rubbish. You know nothing.

    Like


  247. 309 dougjnn quoth Liz:

    Because it’s not advice I’m comfortable following. I am not interested in a fling with someone I feel nothing for, no matter how good-looking he might be.

    You need to get your head around the concept of simple pleasure it seems. Have you ever been to a masseuse? If not, you should. If you are not comfortable with even that, you do need some form of therapy. If you are comfortable with that, then you ought consider the possibility to finding a man whom you can take things further with. A massage can take place in other parts of your body, you know. Even your vagina. You need to learn to honor pleasure as such without tying it up with all sorts of vague romantic ideals. That can come later. But you need the basics first.

    doug:

    Since in your case the hurdles to a full on love affair are so high and daunting, there is a whole lot be said for tasting some sexuality without deep love first, EVEN IF IT MAKES YOU UNCOMFORTABLE.

    Doug, she’s TERRIFIED.

    Simply…terrified.

    Like


  248. Tupac Chopra 308 —

    Yeah.

    It does not appeal to me to be mean after that. But jeeessssh. I know you hear me.

    I can only reiterate that looks are only part of female hotness. Essential but not sufficient.

    Like


  249. 315 chic naive:

    I don’t follow.

    If you think the only good part to sex is getting your kitty licked, you are no longer on my Cool People List.

    Like


  250. hate to break it to you, bro’, but “keeping” her is different from owning her heart (and pussy)….don’t be surprised if she needs to close her eyes to climax, though. She’ll be thinking of the other night when she screamed one of your best friends name at the top of your lungs, because he asked her whose pussy it is.

    paranoia and fear here — no confidence that he can turn on a woman just being who he is. You don’t have to keep a woman at a distance playing silly mind games to keep her interested. If you’re a good lover, she’ll bond to you just fine.

    Like


  251. 320 MQ:

    paranoia and fear here

    I used to think that.

    Until I read this:

    http://womensinfidelity.com/

    Like


  252. @Tupac- It’s the only part I enjoy. I didn’t say it was the only good part because different women like different things.

    Like


  253. 322 chic:

    *plonk*

    Like


  254. Tupac- I changed that pic so I don’t get why it’s in my avatar. Or is *plonk* to my response.

    Like


  255. 322 Marlboro Man:

    I don’t think self-loathing is healthy. Better to accept yourself. If there are things that you’d rather were different, then the only logical course of action is to take steps to make that change. When someone can’t or won’t, then things often stay the same.

    That’s all well and good, but you didn’t answer my question

    Like


  256. on September 24, 2008 at 8:11 am Alphalpha Sprout

    God, I love this blog.

    Like


  257. (I don’t think we need fret too much re: Yours Truly. She may remain too low volume for many tastes, but she’s going into circulation soon I think.)

    What do you mean with circulation and low volume?

    Like


  258. Marlboro man has some very good points.

    1 – genetics/hormonal profile

    I personally have made changes to my hormone levels that my doc said would be impossible without meds. There is no scientific proof that everyone’s hormones can be changed naturally, but I am not the only one.

    Like


  259. “I personally have made changes to my hormone levels that my doc said would be impossible”

    Are you going to reveal to us that you underwent gender transformation?

    Like


  260. 305 – “What I don’t understand is the hostility about it … I don’t see the need for people to get so personal about it”

    Nobody is offended by your misery.

    What’s so annoying is that you comment on things you have absolutely no clue about.

    When being called out on that, you start repeating your sob story over and over again.

    If people respond by giving advice, you won’t listen and basically tell people to fuck off.

    And then you stand there and are surprised about the hate? Really?

    Like


  261. Are you going to reveal to us that you underwent gender transformation?

    LOL!

    No, I doubt that would be possible to achieve naturally.

    Like


  262. 333 Yours Truly:

    I personally have made changes to my hormone levels that my doc said would be impossible without meds. There is no scientific proof that everyone’s hormones can be changed naturally, but I am not the only one.

    Bringing subclinical levels of hormone deficiency back up to normal != elevating normal levels to supraphysiological ones.

    hth

    Like


  263. 306 – “you are missing nothing by holding out. the liCk is the only enjoyable part anyway.”

    And yet another penis-hating girl on this blog.

    Bad boring beta sex much, hm?

    At least you are telling Elizabeth what she wants to hear.

    Repeat after me: Stay miserable! Sex is bad! No lesser men for me than Prince Charming! I am not worthy! Love is not for me!

    Like


  264. Anon,

    I thought edge of normal range to optimal was what was discussed here, if not, I stand corrected.

    Elizabeth,

    Sex can be marvellous and mind blowing, but closing your heart to have sex with a hot guy who feels nothing for you will not bring you there. But you know this already.

    Like


  265. 244 Elizabeth

    Um…ASCII?

    [We interrupt our regularly scheduled miscommunication for this important public service announcement!]

    ASCII (“American Standard Code for Information Interchange”) is the code computers use to represent text. When you get right down to it, computers really just work with numbers. Everything else — pictures, words, sound, etc. — has to be represented in terms of numbers in order for a computer to handle it.

    For instance, if you type “Hello”, you will most likely be etching the sequence of numbers 72-101-108-108-111 somewhere into your computer’s memory. Meanwhile, whatever computer program you’re using will see these numbers and tell the monitor to display a picture of an “H” here, an “e” there, two “l”‘s just so, and an “o” at the end. If you then send the word over the Internet in some manner, it’s actually the sequence 72-101-108-108-111 that’ll be traveling. You trust the computer on the other end to translate it back to an image of the word “Hello” for the hot guy on the other end to read.

    Almost all of the time, you don’t need to be aware of this at all — it’s the job of programmers and hardware designers to put together a system that handles this all seamlessly. There’s one esoteric application of knowing what the underlying codes are that has come in handy for me once in a blue moon, though.

    Imagine the horror of your “L” key jamming at the most inopportune time. How, pray tell, are you going to bring the hot guy du jour under your spell then? Sometimes “Hi” just isn’t going to do. And sometimes you just can’t wait until you have a replacement keyboard.

    Well, it turns out there’s another way to enter letters into your computer, that doesn’t rely on the luck of having a nearby “l” to copy and paste. (Though, yeah, 99% of the time, copying an “l” and typing lots of Ctrl-V’s is the best quick fix. But what’ll you do if it’s the “V” key that jammed instead?) Does your keyboard have a numeric keypad on the right side? Then hold down the “Alt” key, and type “108” on that keypad. Voila!

    “Okay, that’s nice, but how are you supposed to remember what the codes are?”

    It turns out there’s a simple pattern. For a capital letter, figure out what letter of the alphabet it is (“H” is the 8th letter, for instance), and add 64 (8+64=72). Lowercase, add 96 instead (“L” is the 12th letter, 12+96=108).

    [And now we return to your regular programming. Will Elizabeth be voted off the island of subhumanity? Will she care?]

    Like


  266. Yours Truly 332 —

    What do you mean with circulation and low volume?

    By circulation I mean that I think that pretty soon you are going to be kicking up your searching /putting yourself out there to find Mr. Right, or Mr. Right for now.

    By low volume I mean that you are entirely or largely a “love first” girl, and not going to join the slut parade, that can afterall be lots of fun for many of us guys, if not a happy hunting ground for long term girlfriends or wives.

    In other words, you should be pleased YT — though accuracy and insight, rather than pleasing you, was my purpose.

    Like


  267. 209 dougjnn

    What lead you to clean up your earlier promiscuity when you re-entered the mate market following your first marriage? I promise there is no baiting intent in these questions.

    Were you a sex slut earlier on to “buy” attention/affection/love only?

    No, because I wasn’t interested in forming relationships. I did a number of one night stands where the guys wanted more, and I was looking elsewhere. It was more for the variety of sexual experience. The love was there on my part as it’s a part of my being, but few attachments were made. The relationships I had were in the span of months and ended on good terms, all.

    Was the just sex fun when you were younger but less fun as you got a bit older?

    Sex took on more seriousness as I got older. In essence sex caused me to get more attached.

    Did you reform because although the just sex sluttery could be fun, it wasn’t worth the cost to your reputation and hence your ability to attract better men for a committed relationship?

    I wasn’t trying to “reform” myself. I never felt there was anything morally wrong with being promiscuous, I just basically sowed my wild oats till I reached the limits of what that lifestyle can offer. You can’t drop something, you’ve never experienced.

    Or finally were the male hot enough to f*ck just for fun pickings slimer in the time and place you found yourself following your first marriage, past your teenage and young twenties years and with the large volume of tasty men mostly then taken?

    No, no, no, and no. I don’t believe in shortages of any kind.

    Like


  268. Sara 346 —

    Thanks Sara, that’s intriguing.

    I’ve always known you are a very high estrogen girl. It seems you may be high T as well.

    Deluged by sex hormones be you, our Sara. 😉

    Like


  269. In other words, you should be pleased YT — though accuracy and insight, rather than pleasing you, was my purpose.

    Thanks for explaining!

    Like


  270. 338 Czar:

    306 – “you are missing nothing by holding out. the liCk is the only enjoyable part anyway.”

    And yet another penis-hating girl on this blog.

    Bad boring beta sex much, hm?

    At least you are telling Elizabeth what she wants to hear.

    Repeat after me: Stay miserable! Sex is bad! No lesser men for me than Prince Charming! I am not worthy! Love is not for me!

    Czar, do you think that Chic — being the fine black woman that she is — might have had some experience with the cherry-poppin’ jerks out there, became frustrated due to her inablility to saddle them, subsequently dabbled with some betas and reached the conclusion that she would rather have NO sex than LAME sex with her new beta suitors because they couldn’t “work the middle and hit the sides” like her former alphas?

    *I* think so. Why, yes…yes, I do believe she did!

    Do you, Chic Noir, feel any affinity with this woman’s plight?:

    Like


  271. Tupac 349 —

    Great minds think alike.

    Also, that absolute classic video you link came big time to my mind when this whole, um topic, with CN surfaced.

    I’m not sure the answer is she had it and fled. She may have pre fled, if you follow my drift. But i sure think the issue was out there if you follow.

    Like


  272. Yes, I do Tupac. She taught me so much about men. I watched that video with a few of my male associates and they all agreed that she was on the money. So I say prayed up and I didn’t let my former boyfriend hit the bottom.

    because they couldn’t “work the middle and hit the sides” like her former alphas?

    It has never been worked right. Thats why I give up:(

    doujnn said: She may have pre fled, if you follow my drift. But i sure think the issue was out there if you follow

    ???

    Like


  273. 351 Chic:

    It has never been worked right. Thats why I give up:(

    So you feel that betas are good for not much besides sexless marriages?

    Like


  274. This blog appears to be win. I am not fully qualified to judge the level of win. But it does seem to be genuine.

    Please keep up the good work.

    Like


  275. […] of women living in the same house as him [and no, it was not a multiple dorm situation]  While gaming an Amazonian Alpha woman on the side.   And he managed this in spite of (rather than because of) one of these women being completely […]

    Like


  276. The Amazonian Alpha:

    “Her great virtue is strength of character: she will not readily back down and is usually possessed of physical and moral courage. Her great weakness is pride, which may lead her to serious errors in judgment. . . .

    The Alpha Amazon will almost certainly be a Daddy’s Girl, but unlike the Neurotic Heartbreaker, her relationship with her father will not have been interrupted by early death or marital breakdown. Unlike the Eternal Ingenue, her father is probably also a very successful man, a dominant Alpha male who was either born to money and power or who acquired it through his own drive or gifts.”

    CORDELIA
    Good my lord,
    You have begot me, bred me, loved me: I
    Return those duties back as are right fit,
    Obey you, love you, and most honour you.
    Why have my sisters husbands, if they say
    They love you all? Haply, when I shall wed,
    That lord whose hand must take my plight shall carry
    Half my love with him, half my care and duty:
    Sure, I shall never marry like my sisters,
    To love my father all.

    * * *

    KING LEAR
    I loved her most, and thought to set my rest
    On her kind nursery. Hence, and avoid my sight!
    So be my grave my peace, as here I give
    Her father’s heart from her! . . .
    Let pride, which she calls plainness, marry her.

    Like


  277. LOL, this is hilarious.

    Like