Because they (men) can't do it all...
They are doing their bit for their fellow men. They cannot be responsible for educating women too.
I say mais bien sûr! to that. But of course!
These men have a point.
But alas, the logistics are hard to pull off.
For me personally, here are my hang ups: (some might say, excuses!)
1. I am an introverted, quiet woman in real life. That means what I say is often not taken seriously, and I am labelled 'naïve' a lot, mostly by other women. So although I have no problem with that, any message I might have is often lost in the ether.
2. (And this probably explains Reason No.1): I tend to shy away from precisely the kind of women I am tasked with 'educating', i.e. nasty Blue Pill women. They were ousted from my herd the minute I noticed how toxic they were. The few interactions I have with them don't go well. We are effectively 'mutually exclusive'.
In a rather selfish manner, I prefer the company of other Red Pill women, or just women who are not in any way conversant with Manosphere mentality (wouldn't know The Mansophere if it came and sat on their heads) but who are naturally good women to hang out with. I have several of these women around me. The older ones among them are what I call my 'Proverbs 31' or 'Titus 2' women.
Selfish because I learn more from them than they do from me, so I am in fact a parasite to them. It is not exactly a symbiotic relationship I have with these women, but I am sure they don't mind. And I shall return the favour to someone else when I am in their position :-)
3. I also think that men make good relationship advisors, for both men and women. And this is why no matter how good a female role model a woman has, she also needs a good male one. This is why fathers/big brothers/uncles are gold dust, and this is also why I spend time perusing Manosphere blogs, despite the (sometimes) vitriol :-)
So I am not in any way saying 'you do your own dirty work, fellas!'
It's more, 'sure, I'll do my best, but you could do it better!' So please carry on your good work! Educate us women, and you will be repaid handsomely for your efforts.
:-)
One commenter here is doing just that.
Totally unsolicited by me (I promise!) he offered me this post as a free gift :-)
Bless you Bill, you are a good man for doing this.
This is what Bill sent me. I post it as it was sent to me. No 'doctoring' on my part.
Bill can provide more info as and when required.
On this post, I am a mere bystander. Any questions should be addressed to Bill.
Feeding the Red Pill
I met a young woman at a conference in Las Vegas recently. She was working as an usher / conference staff assistant. Let's call her Anne.
She looked to be about 30. Tall (6 feet 1 inches), slender, nice facial
features. A pretty young woman in a city full of pretty young women. By Las
Vegas / NYC / Hollywood norms, she was about 80th percentile. In another other
major metro area, probably 90th or better.
I wasn't looking to pick her up. But I wanted to test out my Game. Why not try
it on an attractive young woman in the Heart of Darkness?
I had Anne's phone number in 5 minutes. I saw her a few more times as the
day went by and chatted with her briefly each time. She gave me escalating IOIs
as time passed.
She called me the next morning to meet for coffee before the conference started.
We had lunch together, then made a date for a private dinner that evening. IOIs
continued.
Here's what transpired at dinner:
** I toned down Game. She escalated the IOIs. Rather than respond to her
interest, I started feeding her bits of the Red Pill. **
Anne, l'm not planning in getting into your pants. If I was, we'd be well on our
way right now.
** Her eyes lock on mine, she blushes, then looks down and squirms a bit in her
seat. **
You and I both know that's true. So let's put that behind us, because it isn't
going to happen.
** She looks a bit puzzled, then smiles slightly. **
Anne, today you are 29. This year, you are going to be 30. That's a big
milestone. Your Twenties are about to be over. Where do you want to be in five
years?
"Uh, I don't know. I haven't really thought about it."
On your birthday in 2017, you're going to be 35. Right?"
"Yeah..."
Let's talk about where you see yourself on that day, when you turn 35.
Do you want to still be hustling for day jobs, living day to day, worrying about
whether you can make your next rent payment? Pay the minimum on your credit
cards? Put gas in your car?
"No."
What one thing would make your life more stable? Give you something to plan
around?
"A house. I want a house of my own."
You want a house. One that you own, even if it's with a mortgage. How do you get
from here to there?
** Blank look **
You need a steady job. One that has been paying well for a while, so that you've
been able to save up 5 or 10 percent of the purchase price for a down payment.
In almost any major city in America, a house starts at $100,000 or so. Often a
lot more. So you need to have a steady job long enough to be able to save up at
least $10,000.
Can you do that in your present circumstance?
"No."
If you can save $400 a month, you can have that down payment in two years. If
you can only save $200 every month, you will need over four years. That means
you need to have that job in the next year.
** We go into a small sidebar on why she should switch to Sales or Marketing
from her present modeling gig. **
Anne, you say you want a house by the time you turn 35. There is another route.
Marry a man who has a good, steady job who can buy that house. Or significantly
contribute towards buying that house.
"How did we go from wanting a house to me getting married?!"
Because the odds of you getting that house all by yourself aren't nearly as good
as the odds if you are married. To a good man with a steady job. Earning as much
or more than you. Especially if he is earning more than you. Does that make
sense?
"Yes. I see your point."
Do you want children?
"Huh? I don't know. How did we get to talking about children?"
Because we are talking about where you want to be at 35.
You are at the peak of your fertility right now. In the next few years it will
start to decline, if it hasn't already done so. Lots of doctors will tell you
that, if you are going to have children, you need to be done by 35. Certainly
before 40.
Fertility starts falling fast in your late thirties. Birth defects start rising
by 40. So you want to be done well before then. Age thirty-five is a good
target.
If you decide you want children, you probably want more than one. Spacing them
out by two or three years helps a lot. If for no other reason than having more
than one in diapers at a time is exhausting.
So if you want to have two children and be done by 35, then you need to have
that first baby in the next two or three years. By the time you turn 33. That's
in 2015. By 2014 would be better. That's two years away.
You and I both know that children need a mother and a father. Parents who will
stick together and raise those children to adulthood.
You don't want to end up as some guy's baby-mama, right?
"Oh hell no!"
Marriage takes work. A married couple need two or three years together to settle
into the relationship, before adding the stress of children. So if you are going
to have that first baby by your birthday in 2015, you need to be married by your
birthday in 2013.
That's next year.
** Wide eyes. Swallow hard. **
That means you need to find your future husband and father of your children THIS
YEAR.
"!!!"
Think about what I just said. Did I miss something? Did I say anything that
isn't true? Is my logic, my reasoning, my chain of causality flawed?
"No..."
So let's think about who that man is.
Think back to high school. Twelve years ago. The Year 2000. You are 17 years
old. You are blossoming into beautiful young womanhood.
** Smile. Blush. Far-away look. **
Who are the boys you remember being attracted to? Who did you have a little
tingle inside for?
"The jocks."
Of course. Good looking, self confident, graceful, exciting to be around. Alpha
males.
Did they treat you well? Did any of them offer you some sort of commitment? Or
comfort? Or support when you needed it?
"No."
Who do you remember from that last year of high school who would be suitable
husbands and fathers today? Steady jobs. No addictions to alcohol or drugs or
gambling? No baby-mama drama of their own?
"The quiet guys."
Yeah, the shy quiet guys. If the jocks were the Alphas, these guys are the
Betas. Solid, dependable, kind, supportive.
They were invisible to you. They didn't exist in your world. None of them gave
you the tingle deep inside like the Alpha males, did they?
"No..."
Do you think those guys, a dozen years later, have steady jobs and stable
incomes? Like the kind you need to qualify for a mortgage?
"I guess so. Probably."
What about the guys you had the tingles for? Think most of them are holding
good, steady jobs? are ready to commit to lifelong marriage and raising
children?
"Not many."
Or are they still bouncing from job to job, boozing it up, and chasing skirts?
Do they now have a baby-mama? Or two?
"Probably."
Which one would be there to help you buy that house?
"The quiet guy."
Which one would help you raise children? Be a father and not just a baby-daddy
to your future children?
"The quiet guy."
So why aren't you with one of those quiet guys?
** She goes into an explanation about how she just ended an 18 month
relationship with a dysfunctional Alpha. An alcoholic gambler who was all but
living in a casino. I stop her story after a few minutes. **
You wasted a year and a half of your young life. One-twentieth of your total
time on Earth. On this guy. Why?
"Well, at first he was fun. It was exciting. Then..."
At first, he made you feel special by doing fun, edgy stuff. Then, you felt
special because you thought you were special enough to fix him. Right?
"Yeah..." Eyes downcast.
You aren't that special.
** Her eyes snap open in shock and the beginnings of anger. **
Because no one is special enough to fix somebody like that. Not you. Not me. Not
Mother Theresa. No one.
Are you dating anyone right now?
"I'm on Match and Plenty of Fish."
Are you exclusively dating anyone?
"Well, almost. There is this one guy. He's smart, has a good job. He's a lawyer.
He has a house."
Do you have the tingles for him?
"Not really."
Do you think you could?
"Uh, I don't know."
Then try this: the next time you go on Match or PoF, look at each guy's photo
and profile. Find ONE good thing about him. It might be in his profile. It might
be in his photos.
Maybe his face isn't attractive, but he has a nice haircut. That should tell you
that he wasn't a winner in the genetic lottery (like you), but that he is trying
to make the best of what he has.
In the next week, look for something good in every man you meet, in person or
on-line.
After a week of doing that, take another look at the guy you are seeing. I bet
you'll find several good things about him that you never noticed before. Some of
those things might even spark the tingle.
** And this ended the conversation. **
What does everyone think?
I am thinking...how lucky was Anne to have met Bill at that precise time in her life...
But what what about Bill's message to Anne?
Fair or foul?
Scary or sane?
Any thoughts?
103 comments:
Hi, ST, PVW here.
I like Bill's advice; I'm glad he could provide that avuncular role in a way that was safe and respectful.
It is a shame that she might not have ever had that before?
What the heck are girls learning from their elders?
I'm just too old school, I suppose. These old school values are what I learned from my parents, that the alpha tingle boys are not the types any sane woman would want. Beta forever!
And I thank the good Lord that is what I have in Mr. PVW.
What is even sadder is that she seemed on track to be his pump and dump, but like a good male role model, he used it as a means of teaching her a valuable lesson.
Bill deserves a round of applause!
Even when Bill's massive self-control and amused confidence- that they're not proceeding to sex- is a DHV(!), Anne may be more receptive emotionally if a woman persuaded her.
Of course that is dependent on the type of woman.
A proverbs 31 wife might impart some practical advice tinged with grounded hope as an emotional spice.
A over-the-hill single career woman would freak out Anne's hamster (and other girls' !) with the despair and hamsterific panic that only the onset of modern spinsterhood can bring.
Notice I argue that a woman would be a better emotional messenger. Bill's logical argument is valid and strong; it holds up.
Bill's argument is fair, not foul - logically.
But Anne has few or no emotional attachment to any of these desirable end-games of home, children or husband. She expresses surprise each time the argument turns.
Most likely Anne is a self-victim of a probably very common delusion among the very prettiest of girls: that their beauty will last long, their staying power in relationships stays and their social persuasion will keep.
She has done little reflection on the long-term, when such a pretty girl has been at the top (in all ways). Very little emotional attachment and urgency is developed inside.
Without such essence, it is easy to see why she is surprised, and darn lucky to have Bill shock her with this talk. A veritable hamsterific miracle.
So,
A wise man could deliver a logically fair but emotionally foul message. Foul in the undesirable sense (why bother with husband-hunting for a year; back to alpha-hunting like the last 10 yrs!)
A wise woman can deliver an emotionally fair message. The reward of comfort and solace and love comes after humility and earnestness.
A bitter spinster can deliver an emotionally scary message. The terror comes when the looks fade, fortunes dive, and there is seemingly no way out! I hope this does not come, but I fear it will for many girls.
As moral degeneracy reigns until the misandry bubble pops, nothing is sane anymore.
@ PVW,
"Bill deserves a round of applause!"
N'est-ce pas?
I think it's wonderful that there are men like him around.
"What is even sadder is that she seemed on track to be his pump and dump, but like a good male role model, he used it as a means of teaching her a valuable lesson."
Yes, it certainly looked like things were heading that way until Bill steered her in a different direction, doesn't it?
But in her defence, Bill did tell me that he never got any vibes from her that she was 'easy'. But I am sure with persistence on his part, he could have 'scored' as the Brits say, had he wanted to. So kudos to Bill all round.
"Beta forever!"
Um, can I add 'with a touch of alpha'? Is this acceptable?
:-)
I too love Bill's advice. My one worry is whether that lawyer that Anne was lukewarm about would have perhaps headed into marriage with someone who for him would have been a 'reluctant bride', had Anne been hardnosed about her self-interest. I think this is why Bill's advice to see him as 'a good thing' after taking a good look around to see what else there is out there (which is a whole lot worse than this lawyer), is such great advice, because she really would begin to see him as 'king' and therefore more 'alpha' in her eyes, as opposed to the guy she forced herself to marry because he was the one who could provide her with the house she wanted...
Subtle shift in mindset but one which makes all the difference. At least the difference between a woman who will love a man for life, no matter what, and a woman who will divorce-rape a man out of contempt later on because she felt compelled to walk up the aisle with him when she really didn't want to.
Having said that, those alphas were clearly wrong for Anne all these years, and she definitely needed to steer clear of them.
That much is clear enough, even to me!!
:-)
@ Rasana,
What a great summary!
I like your appraisal of the situation. It makes a lot of sense to me.
I agree with you that Bill's advice is very logical. The problem is (and this might sound strange to any man reading this - perhaps too logical and scary, for a woman at Anne's age.
And I think the reason is partly due to the crazy times we all live in...we are all subject to it in some way).
Anne's case is perhaps a little extreme, in the sense that she was actively pursuing alphas. I know of other women who would have been happy with a beta from a young age, but even that deluded them...
Somehow I am trying to have a little debate with myself as to who is scarier to listen to: Bill or a bitter old spinster.
I think given this choice, I would pick Bill any day!
Hahahaha!
ST
"Beta forever!"
Um, can I add 'with a touch of alpha'? Is this acceptable?
PVW:
I think that is fine; I suppose I wrote "beta forever," because I have always found most appealing the men who are on the beta side.
Yet, in retrospect, as I think of the "lingo," all of them ones I admire have had a touch of alpha, this strong sense of themselves and so forth, the dominance, so to speak.
As for alphas like this young woman was with, I have never found them appealing in any fashion whatsoever...If anything, the typ of man she was dealing with probably needed more beta to balance out the craziness of the alpha....
@ PVW,
It is a shame that she might not have ever had that before?
What the heck are girls learning from their elders?
Towards the end of our conversation, Anne said, "I wish my dad..." I think she intended to say, "I wish my dad had told me all of this."
Anne's parents divorced about the time she hit puberty, in the mid-1990s. From what I gathered, her father became a distant figure and mostly a "Disneyland Dad". I think he tried to keep some connection with her, but limited it to the easy / happy things. Never tried to teach her about the harsh realities of life.
Anne also hinted that she often didn't make enough from her acting / modeling gigs to make ends meet and Dad periodically sent money.
From what I can tell, Dad helped Anne avoid growing up and facing the realities of life.
@ Anonymous,
"Beta forever!"
Um, can I add 'with a touch of alpha'? Is this acceptable?
I doubt that SpaceTraveller will complain if I make a quick pitch for Athol Kay at marriedmansexlife.com.
Athol is a great advocate for men balancing Alpha and Beta qualities in their marriages.
Bill
As for the comments about my logical arguments, I'm a Meyers-Briggs INTJ. Repeated professional tests over the past 25 years, the results keep hitting the same slot.
Danny of dannyfrom504 and Professor Mentu of universityofman are also INTJs, as are a disproportionate share of their readers.
Carefully reasoned, logical arguments are our stock in trade.
Bill
@ST
I guess it's time for me to take a piss in this pool filed with estrogen and "beta fool-ever" eating piranhas... ;-)
ST now you know what Grasshopper meant when he said "sisters before misters.."... no mater what woman does she'll always be a victim... victim of men, herself, maybe even victim of patriarchy from a galaxy far, far away... ;-) poor, poor her... she just kept tripping and there was always an alpha co*k where she landed... poor, poor thing... ;-) Not one comment said: She got what she deserved... why would any beta fool now step in and rewarded her, for her "bad behavior"? ;-)
Why is it for women more important how you say it, than what you say?? It's like killing the messenger for bringing the bad news...
@Bill
Do you realize that you just gave her a perfect idea on how to exploit some sucker? ;-)
...well your best days are over... alpha co*k isn't going to bring you the house and other crap... you better go for "beta fool" that's used to getting what's left from "alphas"... and another "beta fool" bites the dust...
@Metak
Why is it for women more important how you say it, than what you say?? It's like killing the messenger for bringing the bad news...
What's really funny is that when I first read this comment, I bristled. :P
I don't have any explanation for why women think this way, and I'm not going to try to justify it. But I don't think you're going to get anywhere complaining about it, either, Metak. Women are not going to change any more than men are.
@metak,
Do you realize that you just gave her a perfect idea on how to exploit some sucker? ;-)
Yes.
Anne has been trying to eat soup with a knife. She gets little of the nutritious broth and none of the tasty pieces of meat and vegetables. Periodically, she cuts her tongue trying to lick off what little clings to it.
I introduced her to a spoon. I helped her see how she can get things that are likely of value to her by looking at the world differently.
Maybe her mother told her, "Soup needs spoons like fish need bicycles." I dunno.
But now she has the concept of "spoon" in her head. Maybe, after this collision with reality, she will:
A. Dust herself off and proceed as if nothing ever happened,
B. Start eating soup with a spoon, or
C. See how grrrrls have used spoons to gouge out the eyeballs of men who don't make them haaaaappy and do the same. She will gag down those eyeballs, ignoring the tasty and nutricious soup, while her grrrrl-friends cheer her on. And tell herself that raw eyeballs are better than soup because eating eyeballs is a sign of grrrrl-power.
I dunno.
Bill
@Bellita
I'm not complaining... it's ridiculous to me...
If someone is yelling: You fu*kin idiot what are you waiting... the tornado is coming this way!! ;-)
If I get chance I'll just respond to him: I don't like your tone mister... ;-) who are you to yell at me this way... ;-)
@ Bellita,
Nice to see you. Thanks for encouraging ST to run this.
Bill
@Bill
D. You're forgetting that for some women eating eyeballs is better than nutritious soup (they're not ignoring the soup)... ;-)
Never rule out the psychopaths... ;-)
@metak,
If know all about sociopaths / psychopaths.
All three of my wives had it to some degree, with #2 being deeply down that road.
By "crazy" detector has become quite sensitive, since I took the Red Pill a year ago. SpaceTraveller knows some of my past and recent history.
I got none of those vibes off of Anne. She might do A and she might do B. C is the default setting for the BPD gals. Normal women under 30 or so may contemplate C (because it is painted as acceptable in popular culture), but rarely go there.
Bill
@Bill
You're welcome. :) I think what you said to Anne is good advice.
But I also wonder how far the practical application can go.
Your advice for her to train herself to see something good in every man she meets is something Private Man has been saying for some time as well. And I think it reflects the way a man sees women. Something else I learned from the Manosphere is that unless a woman is truly obese or hideous, a man will be able to find something to like about her. A woman can probably make a habit of this and become a kinder, more pleasant person to be around . . . but will it also affect attraction?
If Anne matures enough to realize that "jocks" are truly poor choices for marriage and to avoid them . . . does it follow that she will find herself drawn to non-jocks? She may be lucky and find a quiet, dependable type who also happens to fulfill whatever athletic/confident/macho baseline is her non-negotiable, but that will be because she looked deeper, for something more--not because she looked for something different.
@ Bill,
First of all, thank you Bill for this!
Nothing like a real-life example to get us all thinking about this stuff.
"Athol is a great advocate for men balancing Alpha and Beta qualities in their marriages."
Amen to that. I am a real fan of 'displays of alpha' as well as 'beta qualities'. It should not be 'one or the other' but 'both'.
@ Metak,
"Do you realize that you just gave her a perfect idea on how to exploit some sucker? ;-)"
I knew someone would take issue with this :-)
I must admit, that was my first thought too, but I have reflected a bit on this, and now I feel differently.
As Bill explains, Anne is not actually the worst of the bunch. I have heard of, and I am sure you also have heard of women who are much further down the 'alpha chasing' road than Anne.
All Anne needed was to have someone steer her gently towards the path she needs to go.
This is why I think Bill's advice goes far beyond even what most wise men would give. I agree with Bellita in that his specific advice to see 'something good' in a 'beta' man is what would help her the most, because it would enable her to really see the value of such a man as opposed to simply a meal ticket.
So if she can manage to do this, she can still make a great wife for someone good.
Madonna she may not be, but remember she is no whore either!
So all in all, I reckon Bill's advice was superlative, but even more importantly, the person he advises is at a good place to receive that advice, (we hope).
Maybe because she is still young (she is only 29 afterall...), or maybe because she was able to induce in Bill this 'avuncular' role, as PVW put it (and credit to her by the way for this - some women are just not able to elicit this sort of thing from even good men). But something tells me Anne could be one of the lucky ones who turns her life around some day soon.
Sure, Bill's message hurts. It's not an easy pill to swallow, this. But Anne did quite well considering this was possibly the first time she was hearing this message.
There are worse reactions to Bill's advice than hers.
@ Bell,
"A woman can probably make a habit of this and become a kinder, more pleasant person to be around . . . but will it also affect attraction?"
In Anne's case (and I know you were asking a general question here), I think she is lucky because she had no trouble attracting alphas before, so she would most likely have no trouble attracting betas too.
The thing is, the SMP is a bit different from the MMP...so that's a possible fly in the ointment for her...
"She may be lucky and find a quiet, dependable type who also happens to fulfill whatever athletic/confident/macho baseline is her non-negotiable, but that will be because she looked deeper, for something more--not because she looked for something different."
This is so crucial, Bell. And I suspect this is what Metak is getting at.
Men really ought to look out for this sort of thing before they marry any woman...
I imagine it is really difficult to tease this one out...but it must be done. I really feel strongly about this.
@ Metak,
"ST now you know what Grasshopper meant when he said "sisters before misters.."... no mater what woman does she'll always be a victim... victim of men, herself, maybe even victim of patriarchy from a galaxy far, far away... ;-) poor, poor her... she just kept tripping and there was always an alpha co*k where she landed... poor, poor thing... ;-)"
I am sure you didn't mean this to be funny, but somehow it made me laugh out loud :-)
I think I get what you are hinting at. But somehow I don't think this is the impression I get about Anne. At least it doesn't sound that bad in her case...
Perhaps I have put Anne on a pedestal a bit, because I see her as associated with Bill (in a way she is Bill's 'girl' as in his daughter or niece) and consequently, I can't see her in a bad light lol.
But that possibility aside, I honestly know that there is plenty worse than Anne out there. So I can't be too harsh on her...
@ Bill,
Why does it not surprise me that Anne's father was out of the picture?
The importance of Dad...
Thank God you became another 'Dad' for her at a time when she needed one...
@ST
she would most likely have no trouble attracting betas too.
What I meant was, will Anne be attracted to "betas"? :P
I touched on this in my direct reply to Bill but wanted to expand it . . .
Can "sparking the tingle" really be done? I'm honestly wondering.
There are several things that make me skeptical . . . Fist, that dicussion Grasshopper and I were having in the infamous "All You Can Eat" thread. ;) I suggested that men think of themselves as "steak" and Grasshopper said he didn't understand why women had to have "steak." Second, another man who pointed out to me that whenever a woman is not attracted to a man, the situation is framed as the man's fault or responsibility. Third, some of the drive-by male commenters HUS attracts now and then have said that a woman will never truly be attracted to a "beta" any more than a man will ever truly be attracted to an obese woman who cusses like a sailor and has bad skin.
Now, what is the common thread of all these insights?
It is the idea that a woman cannot brainwash herself into feeling attracted to a man. Even if she knows intellectually that he is the "right" man.
(Note that this is different from looking deeper and finding something in him that she already is attracted to. But even this is assuming that men already have that "something.")
And that's why a woman will frame this as the man's onus (to be "steak"--Sigh!). And then the man might ask, as Bill does, "Why can't you find something to admire, and nurture it in your mind? It could grow into true attraction!" I think that's because this is the way men approach the opposite sex. But as I told Grasshopper, even if there is a "clit test" that women subject all men to, he would be stunned to know how few men would pass the first round of auditions without a little bit of "peacocking."
I'm not saying that this is right or wrong, just that what seems like a winning solution may not be as practical as it seems.
@Bill
Three wives??? ;-)
I'll trust your "crazy" detector on this one... ;-)
but at the same time I'll also trust my gambling instinct and place my money on option A... great odds!!! ;-)
@Bellita
Like most theories this one also fails in practice... I'm afraid...
@ST
Why are you treating her like a 6 year old child? ST I'll disagree with you till I'm alive apparently... ;-)
How on Earth would Bill (no disrespect) know what is the right path for her to go? At least in my opinion what Bill said to her wasn't really a red pill because most women know how their value drops based on many factors... yet many choose to ignore it (lie to themselves)... than cognitive dissonance kicks in... ;-) dear God help me... ;-)
"
I think I get what you are hinting at. But somehow I don't think this is the impression I get about Anne. At least it doesn't sound that bad in her case..."
That was my whole point... women will never be "harsh" to other women and that's why I was laughing so hard the last time when PVW mentioned that women should be somehow involved in passing laws.. and other crap for man's rights... ;-) run for the hills when you hear that rhetoric... ;-)
@ST
"I find that I can indeed be incredibly harsh on women who I believe are doing something gravely wrong, you know, like the 'single mother by choice' crowd. So much so that I find it uncharitable of me.
And in fact it is often said that the harshest critic of a woman will always be another woman."
Maybe I'll witness that "harshness" for myself someday... ;-)
What I meant was that women never take real action against other women... it doesn't matter if nearly 70% of rape accusations are false, women don't do a thing against those that are lying... that was one example but I'm already off topic.. ;-)
critic? yes... aren't critics those, that don't do anything, but think that they know best? ;-)
Bell,
"What I meant was, will Anne be attracted to "betas"? :P"
Ah! Now I understand.
Hm...I see what you mean.
Trust you to ask the really hard questions, Bell!
;)
I like the idea of 'emotional honesty' very much.
For that reason, I think if a woman is not attracetd to a man (sexually or otherwise), it just won't work longterm. Whereas by the same token, if a man is sexually attracted to a woman but not emotionally/intellectually, that can be achieved in due course, because it takes more time anyway in most men to achieve this. Note however that I don't think that a lack of sexual attraction for a woman in a man can be glossed over (hence my frustration at Connie in the film 'Firelight' for hanging onto Charles when he had made no advances towards her in 10 years).
So if you are saying that this 'clit test' cannot be artificially induced, i.e. 'intellectualised', then my honest self will say 'I agree with ya sista!'
But some people swear by it. So much so that I am persuaded it can be done for some women. Maybe a minority?
The evidence is also there for all to see. In arranged marriages of old, and even those still performed today in some cultures, the women 'grow to love' their husbands not having had the benefit of the 'clit test' prior to marriage...
Unless I am missing something.
But somehow, I just know that this won't be me.
I am too afraid of failure to ever take that chance, personally. I have a mortal fear of divorce. Is there a 'phobia' word which describes this? If so, there would be my mugshot right next to it in the dictionary :-)
But I am sure there are braver women than me out there who will take that chance and win.
I applaud them, and have respect for them. Because they have more 'faith' than me on this issue.
In my defence however, I should perhaps say that I am also taking a leap of faith, but just in the opposite direction :-) Because afterall, my attitude could result in me never marrying. But I stand by my attitude nonetheless because I really wouldn't want to be someone's 'reluctant bride' and hurt him one day. I just know I wouldn't and couldn't do that. Given that awful choice I would rather be alone.
"And then the man might ask, as Bill does, "Why can't you find something to admire, and nurture it in your mind? It could grow into true attraction!" I think that's because this is the way men approach the opposite sex."
Bell, I think you've hit the nail on the head. A man might find a woman sexually attractive, and then slowly the intellectual/emotinal attraction follows over time once he sees something he likes in the woman. So yes, they can 'grow' their love for a woman.
It's less straightforward in a woman though. And I think the decision is taken much more quickly by women. Men may appear to fall 'in love' faster than women, but I think that's just 'sexual attraction'. True love develops much slower in a man, I suspect. Somewhere in between a man's sexual attraction time and his true love time, a woman decides if the man is someone she can love, really love forever.
@ Metak,
"That was my whole point... women will never be "harsh" to other women..."
Metak,
I find that I can indeed be incredibly harsh on women who I believe are doing something gravely wrong, you know, like the 'single mother by choice' crowd. So much so that I find it uncharitable of me.
And in fact it is often said that the harshest critic of a woman will always be another woman.
But...when it is clear that someone is just slightly off the mark, and more importantly would be receptive to good advice, I feel compelled to give them a break. It's only fair, no?
She's just a kid, not much older than you. If she were my kid sister, I would want to help her rather than bash her. Sure, if she were a repeat offender after all my best efforts, then I might be tempted to kick her to the curb. But it would perhaps take a lot for me to get to that point...
PS: Metak, I edited my comment, hence it appears after you already responded to mine!
Metak,
"What I meant was that women never take real action against other women..."
Agreed.
By way of explanantion, see the first few lines of the OP and my attempt to give reasons (cough, cough, excuses :-) as to why it is difficult for women to do this to one another. These are just my reasons, though. I am sure there are other similar reasons experienced by others who want to try this.
@Metak
What I meant was that women never take real action against other women... it doesn't matter if nearly 70% of rape accusations are false, women don't do a thing against those that are lying...
My initial reaction: "That is your example???"
I'm not saying it's an unimportant issue, but basically, all you're saying is that women are not harsh on other women in the areas you want them to be.
On the other hand, I could give you countless examples of women being harsh on other women that you would brush off because those areas aren't important to you. Here's one . . .
I know someone who works as a paralegal who says that the WORST juror to have if you are suing a doctor for misdiagnosing breast cancer is a fellow woman, especially if she is in the same age and social bracket as you are. The woman juror will always find a way to blame the woman plaintiff for believing the doctor, even if the latter got a second or even opinion from other doctors and took a million other reasonable precautions.
Do you think the rationalization hamster is terrible when helping a woman make excuses for a man? It's even worse when it's goading her on to show no mercy to another woman.
@Bellita
"I know someone who works as a paralegal who says that the WORST juror to have if you are suing a doctor for misdiagnosing breast cancer is a fellow woman, especially if she is in the same age and social bracket as you are. The woman juror will always find a way to blame the woman plaintiff for believing the doctor, even if the latter got a second or even opinion from other doctors and took a million other reasonable precautions."
My initial reaction: "That is your example???" ;-)
Honestly even if I sound like a pig or whatever... I don't care. ;-)
Of course it comes in areas that I want them to be... woman can go to thousands of doctors for diagnosis... what do I care about that. Doctor is just a human like all of us... you choose who you're gonna trust...
What's the number of those cases I wonder? ;-)
ST said
I am a real fan of 'displays of alpha' as well as 'beta qualities'. It should not be 'one or the other' but 'both'.
Gold!!!
I don't have a problem with going against the sisterhood. I'll speak up,lol. But Metak is right, it's not common for women. I suppose it's easier for me because to do otherwise causes me health problems. Some people get sick from bottling up feelings. I get sick from bottling up ideas (intj thing?)
The thing is, I'm not always effective. I can usually appeal to rational women, but my ideas need to be crouched in more emotional language to appeal to other women. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes we just end up annoying each other. Sometimes I make some nasty enemies, lol. Delivery of the message is even more important than the message itself.
Bellita makes a good point. Would the young lady find herself able to be attracted and sustain attraction to someone who is beta. As long as he can ballance alpha and beta, I think so.
Though, I think attraction cues can be changed. Though I don't think that this happens without changing yourself, and getting good and disgusted with the results of toxic attraction. YMMV.
@ST
I've just remembered that I was once haunted by another woman's advice that is the opposite of what I'm arguing here.
She told her daughter: "Always marry a man who loves you more than you love him, because women can learn to love but men can't."
Perhaps this is related to what JV was saying about oxytocin and bonding. And I don't doubt that women in arranged marriages can make the best of their situations by learning to love, given some time. But I don't know if I could do it.
I should perhaps say that I am also taking a leap of faith, but just in the opposite direction :-) Because afterall, my attitude could result in me never marrying. But I stand by my attitude nonetheless because I really wouldn't want to be someone's 'reluctant bride' and hurt him one day. I just know I wouldn't and couldn't do that. Given that awful choice I would rather be alone.
I know exactly what you mean. And you will appreciate advice Dogsquat once left on my blog . . . He said that a woman should never martyr herself for a man because then she cheats both herself and him of an honest, fulfilling love. I totally agree with him, even as I know that I may risk never marrying if I stick to my convictions.
@ Metak,
For sure, I get what you are saying: you are only interested in what affects you, or could potentially affect you. It's only human afterall.
To take you back to the false rape example you give, I am not sure what you want as a potential course of action by other women. Incredible as this may sound to you, if a woman is not one of those who is falsely accusing men of rape, she may not actually be aware of this problem!
It is only in the Manosphere that one hears of stuff like this. False rape accusations are not exactly mainstream news.
And even if one is 'educated' on this subject, thanks to The Manosphere, what can a woman do? On an individual level if a female friend of mine told me of her intention to falsely accuse someone of a crime as serious as rape, I would of course advise her not to. But could I take it any further than that? I guess not. Not unless I was called to take a stand by a court of law in a case of suspected contempt of court or perjury on her part.
And then in the wider sense, what can a woman do? The very idea that a woman is fighting a cause such as this (a very grey area at best) is tricky ground for a woman, you understand that, I'm sure! And even if it is clear that particular cases are indeed cases of false accusatons, how can a woman help other than be part of the legal system?
Ideas needed lol...
Bellita said
a woman should never martyr herself for a man because then she cheats both herself and him of an honest, fulfilling love. I totally agree with him, even as I know that I may risk never marrying if I stick to my convictions.
Exactly. And this is where my arguement for changing cues breaks down. I can see it (and have done it) for some cues that can result in toxic disasters. So help me, I can't and don't want to give up cues toward confidence. Yet, in this day and age, this is an alpha marker. So, would the young lady be able to switch from alpha to beta completely. I think there would have to be at least a trait or two of alpha.
@Metak
Honestly even if I sound like a pig or whatever... I don't care. ;-)
Hahahaha! But thank you for proving my point that there can be all the evidence in the world that women are harsh on other women and a man will never believe it, only because women are not harsh on other women in the way that men are harsh on other men and in the areas that men want them to be harsh.
But if you're going to bring up rape cases . . . Fake rape cases, with women supporting other women against men, are very new. Before this, the injustice was that women would bend over backwards to "blame the victim." Sometimes we still do. A few years ago, there was a case in my country: a girl who was out with her boyfriend one night was abducted and gang raped by several men. (They had to knock the boyfriend unconscious before they took her away.) When the girl didn't come home and her mother tried calling her mobile phone, one of the men answered it and bragged about what he and his buddies were doing. When the girl's body was finally found, it was unspeakably mutilated. And when the story broke, there were women asking, "What was she doing out at night with her boyfriend???"
ST has also blogged about circumcision, and the oddness of older women insisting that younger women suffer what they suffered.
One thing I did not mention in the "Golddiggers" thread was that one reason my millionaire friend has a good chance of snagging a millionaire husband is that the women in her circle can be vicious about "guarding" their eligible men.
Along those lines . . . I remember telling an American friend of mine, who was asking about the Philippines under US rule, that one reason there was little intermarriage between Filipina women and American men until after WWII was that American women had a problem with it. But most of the latter were evacuated before the war, and weren't around to protest after the Liberation, when the GIs started finding "war brides."
On a lighter note, here's something you can experiment with . . . Try dating a girl your mother and sisters don't like. It won't matter that she's a great girl; they will find SOMETHING wrong with her.
@ST
That was just one example... there are many others... I'm already going off topic.. ;-)
@ST & Bellita @ JV
What if a man said to you: I want a wife that would have "kitchen-cooking traits", then when she's outside of bedroom she would have to have "Madonna traits" and "whore like qualities" in bedroom...
Gold... isn't it...? ;-)
so simple... how could I missed it..
just pick what's best for you from every pile and you're done... ;-)
@Metak
What if a man said to you
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, so you'll have to spell it out.
I'm especially confused because ST, JV and I have been hearing men "say" those things to us all over the Manosphere. It's not as if you're springing a revelation here.
Bell,
"Always marry a man who loves you more than you love him, because women can learn to love but men can't."
I too have heard this saying many times. From very wise people, no less. But for the life of me, I can't work out why there is something wrong with it. I am wondering if it is a question of definition somewhere? What is meant by 'love' for example?
I shall have to go think about this one and come back with a sensible answer, if I can find it :-)
@ JV,
"Would the young lady find herself able to be attracted and sustain attraction to someone who is beta. As long as he can ballance alpha and beta, I think so."
This is why I am a believer in 'Game'. Anything in fact that can help a man get his foot in the door.
"The thing is, I'm not always effective."
This is what I am trying to explain to Metak. Sometimes it is really hard to get through to some women, as a woman. The same woman might listen to a man with the same message.
JV, I just realised something funny. Speaking of 'definitions', I notice that PVW and I both agree that a man should have both 'alpha' and 'beta' qualities.
A man who has both of these, I call my 'alpha', or my 'king'. PVW calls her husband (who has both 'alpha' and 'beta' qualities) her 'beta'.
Hahahahahaha!
I now understand why Grasshopper was so upset in previous threads with me going on about 'alpha' when I really meant 'both alpha and beta'.
I also think Bellita has previously nailed this one on the head when she declared that a woman will seek both 'steak' and the 'sizzle', and that the 'sizzle' without the 'steak' is worthless.
And then we will promptly proceed to call the combination of 'steak and sizzle' whatever we want!
Which confuses men who only hear 'we want the nice guy' from women who proceed to run after men who are anything but, at least on the surface. Who knows what she sees in him?
:-)
Then again, no-one ever says women are simple, do they?
@Bellita
"I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, so you'll have to spell it out.
I'm especially confused because ST, JV and I have been hearing men "say" those things to us all over the Manosphere. It's not as if you're springing a revelation here."
It was just funny how ST said:
"Amen to that. I am a real fan of 'displays of alpha' as well as 'beta qualities'. It should not be 'one or the other' but 'both'."
That's why it was funny to me...
Both sides wasting time on something they'll never agree... more laugh for me... ;-)
@ST
"This is why I am a believer in 'Game'. Anything in fact that can help a man get his foot in the door."
I'm a believer in old saying and attitude that comes from country that I was born in... and it goes like this: if a woman start nagging or is unsatisfied in any way, there's the door... leave I won't stop you... just close the door when you leave... ;-)
no pain, no game... ;-)
@ ST
Lol, Your right. We're confusing the men with our terminology. I guess I thought we'd been mentioning the alpha/beta ballance enough to make that point clear, but perhaps not. I think that I'll try harder to be clearer on that.
Bell,
"Try dating a girl your mother and sisters don't like. It won't matter that she's a great girl; they will find SOMETHING wrong with her."
Hahahahaha!
Hell on Earth for the poor young woman.
Extremely unusually, I come from a family (and I mean my whole extended family here!) where none of the women have had a bad mother-in-law. I hope this trend continues.
*rubs chin*
"What if a man said to you: I want a wife that would have "kitchen-cooking traits", then when she's outside of bedroom she would have to have "Madonna traits" and "whore like qualities" in bedroom..."
Metak! I am surprised at you, bro.
I would never even look at a man who didn't want these things.
Isn't that much clear to you already?
Like Bellita, I am confused, mate.
Is this a trick question?
@JV
For all my insistence that "women" cannot change (by which all I mean is that I cannot change), you should see what I put myself through trying to change. :P
A few months ago, I flipped through a book on Chinese face reading in my friend's house. One thing it said was that a certain forehead/hairline in a man indicates drive and ambition in his career and a tendency to want more than one woman at a time. (You won't be surprised to hear that it's a forehead/hairline found on many men who are successful with women.) After reading that, every time I even saw a man I found attractive who had that feature, I made myself mentally stamp "CHEATER" on his forehead.
Exactly the opposite of what Bill has told Anne to do! Hahahaha! But while it has made me more wary of those men, it doesn't make it easier to feel drawn to men whose foreheads/hairlines indicate they will be more loyal.
(But now I'm being too literal. Of course I know there is more to a man than this feature. I'm just underlining the point that getting a woman to stop choosing "cads" is not the same as getting her to start choosing "dads.")
PS -- I should add that Chinese face reading, while a fun thing to laugh about with a friend while flipping through a magazine full of celebrities' photos, is not necessarily the best way to pick a relationship partner. :P That was just an example of me being strange.
Metak,
"I'm a believer in old saying and attitude that comes from country that I was born in... and it goes like this: if a woman start nagging or is unsatisfied in any way, there's the door... leave I won't stop you... just close the door when you leave... ;-)
no pain, no game... ;-)"
You are making my point!!!
THIS is pure Game :-)
Bell,
"PS -- I should add that Chinese face reading, while a fun thing to laugh about with a friend while flipping through a magazine full of celebrities' photos, is not necessarily the best way to pick a relationship partner. :P That was just an example of me being strange."
Um, does this book give an analysis of ears?
If so, how can I get a copy?
Don't care what you say, Bell, I am choosing my future husband according to what this book says.
:-)
@ST
"Metak! I am surprised at you, bro.
I would never even look at a man who didn't want these things.
Isn't that much clear to you already?"
Hellooo? ;-) I was trying to point out how "preoccupied" are some people when it comes to thinking about their "ideal" partner or whatever... ;-) that's why they stay single... ;-) at the end no one is good enough for them... ;-)
@ Bellita
Oh, you're in good company. Lol. I'd probably be looking at foreheads too.
@ST
Why do you have to ruin everything for me... I though our fake marriage was annulled? ;-) you're still closing the door? ;-)
When you use word like Game... it sounds like Gay-me... ;-)
@ Metak,
"I was trying to point out how "preoccupied" are some people when it comes to thinking about their "ideal" partner or whatever... ;-) that's why they stay single... ;-) at the end no one is good enough for them..."
Mais non!
I think it's great to put their 'non-negotiables' out there. That way, whoever meets their demands can pair up with them. In fact I think it's the best way. People should have stamps on their forehead which say things like 'tall, dark and handsome' or 'big breasts' or 'SAHM/homeschooling Mom' or 'millionaire'. That way, it's clear who wants what, and there is no need for a 'black market' where shady deals are going on :-)
I think Bellita made this point in her 'weedkiller' post.
I think it's those who don't make this clear who will forever remain single, because no-one knows what they want...
"Why do you have to ruin everything for me... I though our fake marriage was annulled? ;-) you're still closing the door? ;-)
When you use word like Game... it sounds like Gay-me... ;-)"
Hey baby, from what I remember of our short but euphoric marriage, you were definitely not gay, tiger ;)
@ST
Yes... maybe a bar code on forehead would be even better... women and their big brother state wet dreams... :-)
"non-negotiables" are one thing... they're necessary foundation... but you have to know where to draw the line...
that's what I was saying...
I guess I'm not that much into this whole "Manosphere" thing... putting ridiculous words on basic values and attitudes...
"Hey baby, from what I remember of our short but euphoric marriage, you were definitely not gay, tiger ;)"
Now, I'm curious... why have we decided to annul the marriage? ;-) Was it for my gambling, hookers, ... or any other addiction...? ;-)
"Now, I'm curious... why have we decided to annul the marriage? ;-) Was it for my gambling, hookers, ... or any other addiction...? ;-)"
No, apparently it was because I got too fat and nagged you a lot.
@ST
"No, apparently it was because I got too fat and nagged you a lot."
...and I thought it was something "manly" ;-)... why do I have a feeling you're hiding something... ;-)
enough of my crap... ;-)
"why do I have a feeling you're hiding something... ;-)"
Not hiding anything at all.
It's all there in the court papers...
:-)
Teasing aside, I do see your point, Metak.
@Metak
I was trying to point out how "preoccupied" are some people when it comes to thinking about their "ideal" partner or whatever... ;-) that's why they stay single... ;-) at the end no one is good enough for them... ;-)
Metak, I think ST, JV and I are already very aware that with our specific non-negotiables, we risk remaining single. So I'm still not sure what you're trying to make us realize.
@ST
Yes, there was an analysis of ears. Hahahaha! I remember that if the earlobes are attached to the head, it means someone is very attached to family as well. And I recall this particular aspect because a male friend who came over later had such earlobes. This friend always complains about his parents asking him to do things for them. When I told him, "I'll bet that if your parents ever told you, 'Okay, son, we don't need you any longer. Take your freedom and have fun!' that you wouldn't last a day before demanding they let you back into their lives!" I meant it as a joke, but he got really quiet after I said it, which made me think it might be true after all. Hahahaha! I'll remind him of it the next time he complains. ;)
@JV
Foreheads, mouths, noses . . . It never ends. ;)
@Bellita
"Metak, I think ST, JV and I are already very aware that with our specific non-negotiables, we risk remaining single. So I'm still not sure what you're trying to make us realize."
I was (pointlessly) trying to suggest that maybe, just maybe you should take another look at those non-negotiables and check if there's something that's not supposed to be there...
but if you're 100% sure there's nothing "wrong"... then just ignore me...
@Metak
We seem to be talking past each other.
The point that I have been trying to make is that even if a woman can be made to believe that she is "wrong," she will not automatically fall head over heels with what is "right." Whittling down the laundry list is an intellectual exercise, but a woman cannot think herself into feeling attraction for the man she is "supposed" to want. (It goes the same way for men, I'm sure.)
You may snort at the Manosphere, but it is what got me evaluating my own "non-negotiables" long before you launched into your pointless lecture about it here. ;) One thing I remember is a man saying that women should pick two things from their laundry lists and not expect to get anything else. For a mental exercise, I picked my two. They were: a) serious Catholic, and b) good provider.
Now, did you notice I still made that assumption all women do when they say what they want in a man? ;) Women who say they want a "nice guy" are envisioning some "alpha" who treats them nicely, which is a whole other thing entirely . . . and in typical feminine fashion, I imagined that this fellow was, along with being religious and established in his career, attractive to me. :P
And what this means for women is that we can only pick one item from the list now! Because the second non-negotiable is that we find the man attractive. And it's really a non-negotiable for me because I would feel as if I were cheating a man if I married him without being 100% in love with him.
Holy poverty with the man I love, here I come! ;)
@Bellita
"We seem to be talking past each other."
You're right... I forgot what you were writing in your earlier post... my bad.
One thing is for sure, I wouldn't want to be a woman with religious and moral values in this day and age... you have it so much worse than before...
"Holy poverty with the man I love, here I come! ;)"
there's a huge choice of homeless men... pick one! ;-)
@ Metak,
"...there's a huge choice of homeless men... pick one! ;-)"
Yes, but are they Catholic homeless men...
Hahahahahaha!
PVW at ST:
I stepped away and came back; what happened earlier? Things just blew up!
It is funny, but I didn't even think in terms of "sisters before misters" in replying to Bill's story.
I replied in light of having been around men all my life who undertake a leadership role in taking care of the young ones.
He interacted with her the way daddies and uncles in my world do, and that is something I appreciate.
I must say, though, the daddies I know would have been scoffing not only at the alphas, but at the modeling gigs.
Daddy type in PVW"s world: "I didn't raise you and send you to school to date bad boys, hang out in bars/clubs/casinos and try to model! I sent you to school to look for a decent man and to put something in your head that will enable you to support yourself regardless of what!"
As for me chatting to her "woman to woman," that sort of thing would not have come up in that context. I don't make it a habit of trying to talk to young women in public like that. I think only a daddy type could get away with it.
In real life, I've acted as mentors to younger women, but it is built upon some foundation: familial, long acquaintanceship, friendship, but only when I realize she is interested in getting guidance from me.
But even then, it can be a delicate matter, thus making mentoring difficult: is she open to taking advice? Can she see where she is going wrong? Is the matter too painful, shameful for her to talk about?
I've been harsh with some of them when I see them going on a path that seemed crazy.
@ PVW,
"I stepped away and came back; what happened earlier? Things just blew up!"
Welcome to the Metak show :-)
With the Euro 2012 football (soccer) competition going on now in Poland/Ukraine, it may be appropriate to ask you: Do you know the Italian footballer Mario Balotelli? If not, Wiki him. You won't regret it. Oh wait, actually you might :-)
If Metak doesn't take offense, I reckon he could be Metak's kindred spirit/brother. He lives in his own world with his own rules and as such is largely 'misunderstood'. But I 'get' him :-) And I know exactly why he ruffles everyone's feathers like he does. I think Metak is a bit like this :-)
Fabulous if you ask me. (Unless they ruffle my feathers and then of course it's not funny anymore).
*LOL*
"As for me chatting to her "woman to woman," that sort of thing would not have come up in that context. I don't make it a habit of trying to talk to young women in public like that. I think only a daddy type could get away with it."
More and more I am finding this to be true. I am struggling even to get off the ground when talking in private to people I already know. Can't imagine trying it in public with strangers, even when I get to the age and stage of life (i.e. married with kids of my own) where this might be appropriate. It takes a special kind of 'guts' to do this.
"Daddy type in PVW"s world: "I didn't raise you and send you to school to date bad boys, hang out in bars/clubs/casinos and try to model! I sent you to school to look for a decent man and to put something in your head that will enable you to support yourself regardless of what!"
Either this type of Daddy simply doesn't exist anymore, or if he does, he is not allowed to do his job, or if he is allowed, his intended target doesn't get his message for whatever reason: either she is blocked from doing so from other sources or she is conditioned not to 'hear' Dad even if she is listening. These are my conclusions from watching teenage-age girls around these days.
"But even then, it can be a delicate matter, thus making mentoring difficult: is she open to taking advice? Can she see where she is going wrong? Is the matter too painful, shameful for her to talk about?"
Hahahahaha!
I think you are helping Rasana make his point, which is that women in imparting advice to a youngster are often too emotional about it! (And bearing in mind you are an INTJ woman, who is the least emotional of all women, imagine how emotional the average woman can get about this!)
A man will just get in there, give his brutal message bluntly and leave (kind of like how Bill did it) and won't stop to consider the wherefores and whys of it all. So to the receiving woman it all seems far too abrupt and 'stark'. But in fact that might be what she needs. The shock factor :-)
In this sense, a woman might be far too 'soft' and thus inefficient (unless she is the bitter old spinster type that Rasana talks about, in which case she is a scary old cautionary tale, with as much efficacy as the brutal man :-)
THIS is why it is a man's job to do this sort of thing.
Another argument for 'bring back Daddy into the home'! Or more precisely 'don't chuck him out in the first place'!
Funny how we can go round and round in circles and still arrive at the same old conclusions every time!
@ST
"If Metak doesn't take offense, I reckon he could be Metak's kindred spirit/brother. He lives in his own world with his own rules and as such is largely 'misunderstood'. But I 'get' him :-) And I know exactly why he ruffles everyone's feathers like he does. I think Metak is a bit like this :-)
Fabulous if you ask me. (Unless they ruffle my feathers and then of course it's not funny anymore."
None taken... ;-)
Why would I live my life by the rules that other people use to limit their experience of life...? black sheep goes away... ;-)
I wish I was 'fabulous' as Balotelli.. ;-)
It has been put to my attention that I have to be careful with other people because I can leave deep scars on psyche.. that's why I use humor... ;-)
What's the point with being PC, always worrying for other peoples feelings...?
I don't have a remote control over what they feel, or do I? ;-) psychopath here ;-)
@PVW
Bill's story and later the comments were so funny to me because I see it all time.. women like that one from the story later 'tricking' some 'beta' when their best days with 'alphas' are over.. (or am I just imagining?)... and I get it PVW why "beta" qualities are important for women when looking for husband... those are the men that are accustomed to and don't really mind to bend over and say 'use me...' aka the prison bit*h... ;-)
I know you're older and you were raised with traditional views...
I'm always making a joke out of everything because everyone is so damn 'serious' about everything... ;-)
If you're happy the next person will tell you that you shouldn't be happy... that you need some kind of external reason to be happy.. so quit being happy... ;-)
Metak,
:)
Glad you didn't take offense! I should point out that Balotelli was a bit of a 'wrong' example to use. He is by no means an 'ideal', I have to point out. I just find him really funny...
He had a car accident a while back (he wasn't hurt and neither was anyone else, I think) and when the police turned up they found a ridiculously large amount of cash on him. When they asked him why he had so much money on him, he simply replied 'Cos I'm rich!'
Hahahahaha!
But alas, he also is a 'bad boy' in many other ways...and I am not putting him up as any sort of epitome of ideal manhood.
He just triggers off my 'guilty pleasures' switch because he is incredibly amusing to watch. No-one is quite like him, and for this reason he is a natural 'peacock'. Hm, and we wonder why he is never short of a girlfriend or three?
:-)
"I don't have a remote control over what they feel, or do I? ;-)"
No-one has this power.
But lacking this power does not turn one into a psychopath!
(At least I hope not).
@Bill…
One more thing to consider when doing the math is not simply to add up the years until the baby is born – but to add up the years until the children are fully raised and out of the house on their own.
Children are at least a 25-35 year commitment. She meets Mr. Right today – figure about 1 year courtship minimum, 1 year breaking in marriage and getting settled minimum then having the kids over the next 2-5 years. Each one will be somewhere between 21 and 25 years old when they finish school and maybe another year back at home looking for a job before they leave home. Add it up.
So starting a family at age 30 means she could be as old as 65 when the last one leaves the house finally. That leaves an awfully short window of time to prepare for retirement. Does she want to burden her kids at an age when they are just getting started in life with having to worry about supporting her in her old age?
This is more a red pill for a man than a woman because providing for the family is the man’s responsibility. Providing means til death do us part – meaning retirement years too.
This was a huge red pill for me when I first did this math.
Grasshopper.
@B…”as I told Grasshopper, even if there is a "clit test" that women subject all men to, he would be stunned to know ..."
I am stun proof at this point B. Nothing women say or do really stun me anymore. Stun City is in the rear view mirror now and fading fast as I travel the road of life.
@ST… “…I now understand why Grasshopper was so upset in previous threads with me going on about 'alpha' when I really meant 'both alpha and beta'…”
Note to self: Don’t go by what ST actually says – go by what she meant to say but didn’t. ; - )
You were wearing the blue shirt that day, remember? I thought I was safe… ; - )
Kidding aside, maybe you should have a “ground rules” sticky thread in this forum where we define terms. One would be when the women here say “alpha” they mean an alpha/beta mixture. Stuff like that.
@Metak… “…if a woman start nagging … there's the door... leave I won't stop you... just close the door when you leave...”
Trouble is most women won’t even close the door when they leave and I am too lazy to get out of my easy chair to go shut it. If it’s winter then the house will get cold.
So I would say “and don’t even bother closing the door when you leave”. That way she will close it just to spite me. The house stays warm and I don’t have to get up. See how that works.
Grasshopper
@Grasshopper
"So I would say “and don’t even bother closing the door when you leave”. That way she will close it just to spite me. The house stays warm and I don’t have to get up. See how that works."
You might give her that pleasure but in my case closing the door is just the test.. ;-) if she closes the door then you can expect revenge.. ;-) while she's leaving, you watch her just to be sure, and to be supportive at what she's doing... ;-) then you change the locks, missus and you know the drill... ;-)
ST re Balloletti(sp?)--PVW responds:
It is so funny you mentioned him. I was just at the gym this afternoon (it is 6:30 pm where I am) when I saw the game between England and Italy; so I'm sure I must have seen him in his glory!
Are you British? Another guy exercising nearby, I could tell he was so happy Italy won. As a native English-speaking Anglican woman (I could not resist), I rooted for England!
PVW on INTJ women talking to other women: What I find is that although the INTJ people I know can be fairly rational and logical, they do have their emotional moments, and talking to another woman about a sensitive topic like this, I can do the rational thing, but that might not get across as much as the emotional, but it is not always a comfortable space for all involved.
Metak:
PVW why "beta" qualities are important for women when looking for husband... those are the men that are accustomed to and don't really mind to bend over and say 'use me...' aka the prison bit*h... ;-)
PVW replies:
But in the best of marriages, it is mutual, each spouse gives a lot, to keep things going.
@ Grasshopper,
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa...
A thousand times!
:-)
Can I just add (just one last time for clarity), when I say 'my alpha' I don't just mean 'alpha and beta' but 'alpha and beta' in the right order as well...alpha first (when we first encounter each other), then beta, then alpha again, then beta, and so on...)
Hahahahahahha!
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa...
A million times!
I am wearing green, Grasshopper...
Go figure...
Just messing with ya :-)
But you're a good sport, so I am sure you forgive me.
Metak on the other hand...
Lol.
By the way, you two are really starting to gang up together, aren't you? The brotherhood and all that...
Bros before hos!
:-)
(To be fair, you could probably say the same about Bellita and me ;)
Um, is it too late to say 'we still love ya guys! We just have a funny way of showing it'!
(Note to self: if this doesn't work, I shall have to find a really dignified face-saving move...)
:-)
@ PVW,
You can't possibly miss Balotelli. He's the one with the mohican...
Yes I am British, and as such, I should be sad right now...
But...there are (aherm!) externuating circumstances as to why I am not exactly crying into my pillow right now, which I cannot go into...
;)
Let's just say I am not so much sad for England as happy for Italy.
To be fair, both sides played well. But there has to be a loser at the end of the match...
By the way, how do I contact you for our upcoming collaboration? Do you prefer to email me at the address given?
Time to speak for myself...
@ Bellita
Your post of 23 June 1355 Texas time was the money shot.
It is the idea that a woman cannot brainwash herself into feeling attracted to a man. Even if she knows intellectually that he is the "right" man.
(Note that this is different from looking deeper and finding something in him that she already is attracted to. But even this is assuming that men already have that "something.")
I don't know if Anne will look deeply into her boyfriend and find the tingle. Maybe he has the qualities to give her the tingle. Maybe not.
Bellita, you raised the question that I was wondering: Can a woman find her way there? Or is she a slave to her neurochemistry?
@ SpaceTraveller,
... I think if a woman is not attracetd to a man (sexually or otherwise), it just won't work longterm...
So if you are saying that this 'clit test' cannot be artificially induced, i.e. 'intellectualised', then my honest self will say 'I agree with ya sista!'
But some people swear by it. So much so that I am persuaded it can be done for some women. Maybe a minority?
The evidence is also there for all to see. In arranged marriages of old, and even those still performed today in some cultures, the women 'grow to love' their husbands not having had the benefit of the 'clit test' prior to marriage...
A great question. I don't know the answer. Maybe it depends upon personality type. Maybe a MBTI NT quadrant women can find her way there. I dunno.
@ PVW,
Thanks for the kind comments.
@ Grasshopper,
Good point about the math.
Glad to see this post generate some interest.
Bill
@ Bill
Thank YOU! Very good post on ST's end and yours. As always, the comments made me think.
Bill's advice was cleary right but the chances the gal would act on it must be south of 5%. She is good looking. She wants alphas until she can't get them any more. So it is written. So it is said.
@ Bill and Bell,
I think the attraction can be generated somehow, I really do...'Sparking the tingle', by the way, whilst accurate, made me think of a car engine (!) I think it is not the first sign that a woman is attracted to a man, of course, but it should come at some point before she commits to him, otherwise she won't feel 'right' in the subsequent relationship.
I promised to gather my thoughts on why the advice to pick a man who shows more love than the woman is not great advice. I think this an attraction killer, for a woman, aka a man being too 'beta' early on. I think this advice only works in an era where people are in general 'self-sacrificing' and 'noble' in their actions. That time is long gone. And besides, even some of the arranged marriages from 30 years ago are now collapsing as the young bride of 1978 who followed the above advice now feels she wasted her life on someone she never loved (despite the effects of oxytocin - um, do the levels of this go down after a long time, or do they keep rising each time there is uh, an encounter. If so, then a sexless marriage is surely devoid of oxytocin by default!). The successful marriages here, I suspect are those where the wife was accidentally 'Gamed' throughout the marriage especially from the beginning :-)
So in Anne's case, if she is 'meh' about that lawyer, perhaps it is because despite his social status he was too quick to compliment her on her beauty. Perhaps he 'pedestalised' her immediately and as such gave her the impression that he was lucky to have her. Instant attraction killer. This beta display should come much later in a relationship! So poor Anne (notice I am playing the victim on her behalf) is left thinking, 'where are all the good men that I could fall for'?
If only lawyer boy could have made her think, 'hm, would I ever be able to get him'...I think Anne would have been much more grateful for him right at the start of her relationship with him and that would have been enough to 'spark the tingle'.
I don't know if it is too late now for him? Can she suddenly be made to see the good in him after a bad start? Now that's a tricky one. I really hope she can, but perhaps it would involve him doing something different? Maybe Bill should find him and feed HIM the Red Pill too!
And pass on Grasshopper's insight while he's at it :-)
Senior Beta,
:-)
Spoken like a man!
Are women more optimistic than men, in general, or are men rightfully more sceptical because they see the world for what it really is as opposed to through rose-tinted glasses (like I do sometimes)?
Or am I just willing Anne to 'make it' so I appear more of a hopeless romatic than I really am?
Hahahahahaha!
Reading my own comment back to myself, it really does sound like I am suggesting that building attraction for a woman is a man's job and women are 'slaves to their neurochemistry' as Bill suggested. That would not be true, so in the interests of clarity (Grasshopper, this is for you especially :-) I should state that it takes a certain maturity in a woman to know what is 'gold' as opposed to what is 'shiny' in a man. Anne may have been chasing 'shiny' all her life. If lawyer boy really is 'gold' and she cannot see it, no amount of 'display of confidence' on his part will let her see that. In which case he would be better off seeking a woman who really does see him as 'gold' in her own eyes. (And yes, I am thinking: how tragic for a young woman that she needs to be convinced of something else when there is a man under her nose that most other women would kill for!)She has to do her part, and the rest will naturally follow. In Anne's case I have no doubt that the maturation process has already been set in motion by Bill sitting her down and delivering a few hometruths to her. I don't think she will forget Bill in a hurry.
@ST
my thoughts on why the advice to pick a man who shows more love than the woman is not great advice.
When I shared that advice a woman received from her mother, I kept a few relevant details back.
The first is that in the Philippines, there are no divorce laws. You can prove that a marriage is null and void or you can get a legal separation while remaining married, but you can't get divorced. So if you marry the wrong person, you are stuck for life. In the interest of self-preservation, you'd try to marry someone whose love for your is greater than your love for him . . . or of course, for her!
But there is a reason women might seem to have more to lose than men. Under the present laws, a woman can be prosecuted for committing adultery, because she cuckolds or risks cuckolding her husband. BUT a man can be prosecuted only for "concubinage," which is basically diverting resources from his legal family to an "extra" family (even if it is only a mistress). This is not to say that the law guarantees perfect fidelity on the part of women, of course, but it's true that a married man can have as many affairs as he likes and not get in trouble as long as he isn't financially supporting the other women. (The irony is that all his children are legally entitled to support, so a smart mistress will try to have a child as soon as possible.)
The third detail is that the mother who gave this advice to her daughter was herself a married man's long-time mistress! :P He fathered (but after some time, did not help support) her two children. She spent the rest of her life struggling to make ends meet and pining over a man who didn't love her as much as she loved him. (She never found another man.)
And yet her daughter, who has been happily married for years, says that that is the best advice her mother ever gave her!
So here we have, from the other side of the world, a legal situation that seems to favor one sex over the other, causing the other sex to be calculating in the search for a mate. Sound familiar? ;)
Bell,
"Sound familiar?"
Never heard of this situation before ;)
Can I just ask - are the laws in the Philippines linked to religion, i.e. is the state married to the faith of the land so to speak?
I actually think that the laws are fair, in the sense that they take into account the natural tendencies of both sexes and hence the worst fears of the opposite sex. When a man cheats, the primary fear for his wife is that she is now in competition with another woman for his resources. The sexual component of the infidelity, whilst important of course (and certainly things like STD spring to mind amongst other considerations), it has to be minor compared with the risk of being abandoned or reduced resources/validation, no? It's not hard to imagine this line of thinking, is it? When a woman cheats, yes, there is a strong chance a man might be hooked into caring for another man's child. So personally, I think the laws are sensibly thought-out. Now although it looks like I support the view that a man should be let off being tried for adultery, that is not the case at all. Because I spot a loophole in these laws to redress the balance. How many mistresses are mistresses without a financial arrangement of some sort? There's the loophole...
Doesn't surprise me that the woman who gives this advice did the opposite of that, i.e. she was with a man who clearly did not love her as much as she did him...
In that case I understand why she gave her daughter this advice.
I am not sure that advice like this borne out of a negative scenario like this woman's situation is ideal. Simply because it is 'knee jerk' advice. I must admit, whenever I have heard this advice, it is usually in a similar 'knee jerk' fashion in reaction to an undesirable situation.
So the daughter in this story is blessed that this advice did not harm her chances in any way. In many ways it reminds me of the advice some women give to their daughters to 'kill your own snakes' because they were financially dependent on their husbands and things didn't work out well. One just swings from one extreme to the other without working out what the root cause of the problem was first. Because guess what will happen to daughter: she will become one of those 'strong and independent types' who will not know how to accept a gift from a man because she is so determined to 'kill her own snakes' and provide for herself...and that won't go well either. Then guess what she will tell her own daughter? You guessed it: 'be more feminine, show some vulnerability - men like that!'
And round and round we go.
I think it's better to look at why something did not work and study the different components as to why it didn't work, rather than pick what just looks like the likely culprit and nuke it.
Example: 'nice guys finish last'.
So nice guy decides to stop being nice.
Wrong.
The problem was not that he was 'nice'. The problem was that he was nice only, and nothing else. He needs to show some dominance first. Then and only then should he be 'nice'. Then the woman who says 'I want a nice guy' but really means 'I want a strong man who will also be nice to me' gets her wish :)
Swinging too far to the other extreme has its own problems...
I speak as an authority on extremes :-)
This happens to be my specialty so I understand very well where this can lead one...
Bell,
"And when the story broke, there were women asking, "What was she doing out at night with her boyfriend???"
This is a little-known fact that when Princess Diana died, lots of people were asking (notably women): what was she doing in Paris with a *rat* like Dodi Fayed?
(In reference to the rumour that he was a bit of a player).
So even someone like Princess Di was not immune to this harshness by women. Even in death, as is the case with the woman you mention who was mutilated.
@Bill (and Everyone)
Can a woman find her way there? Or is she a slave to her neurochemistry?
We might as well ask if men are slaves to their neurochemistry for being attracted to women who display certain fertility cues. If you are implying that letting our wiring guide us is a bad thing, then I'll have to disagree.
In a world where the people we are wired to be attracted to are rare or unavailable, happiness seems to depend on going against our natural wiring. But what if the wiring really is "wiser"? What if our happiness depends on finding certain traits in a mate because these are good traits?
JV occasionally points out that traits like confidence and social dominance are "alpha" markers that women have been trained to recognize over thousands of years, even if they find mostly superficial expression in our modern world. I grin now to remember one exchange she had with Metak about preserving society. (She was all for it; Metak said that was just like a woman, who needs civilized society's protections so much more than men do.) The irony is that the traits JV is attracted to are precisely what she will need her husband to have if the worst case scenario happens and civilization crumbles. In any case, we're assuming that modern civilization is healthy for everyone, when it's kind of obvious that it isn't. So why is it a better measure of a good mate than what our wiring tells us?
I say there is another solution--and one that is better than going against one's nature (which would make anyone, male or female, miserable anyway). I think the women's task now is to conduct ourselves in such a manner that we bring out the traits we long for in men. And I believe it is easier to do than we think.
A friend who read my old blog told me that her husband didn't become confident and more ambitious until after they were married. And when she remarked on the change, he told her that it was her believing in him which helped him believe in himself. (ST, remember the husband who scandalized CD because he told his wife before their marriage that he didn't care about climbing the corporate ladder, so they'd always be poor? This is the same husband! And now he's actually climbing! So there, CD! Hahahaha!)
A couple of years ago, a male friend and I were discussing a lively thread on a traditionalist Catholic blog. Someone had just reminisced about the manly Catholic men we used to see in showbiz who admitted in interviews that they just wanted to find nice Catholic girls to bring home to mom, and had wondered why male Catholic celebrities aren't like that any longer. My male friend scoffed, "Because nice Catholic girls aren't around any longer either!" Apparently, the former is a function of the latter!
I have so many more thoughts on this--on why it's feasible and on what women can actually do--but I'll have to wait until later to share more of them.
@ST
I actually think that the laws are fair, in the sense that they take into account the natural tendencies of both sexes and hence the worst fears of the opposite sex.
I also think the laws are fair because their foremost consideration is the family. Of course it would hurt the family if a woman passed off another man's child as her husband's. And it would hurt the family if a man had to split resources. (How the law squares this with the obligation on the man to provide for illegitimate children, I don't know!)
I don't know to what extent the laws have been influenced by the Catholic Church. Having no divorce is an obvious one, but everything else seems to be something one can arrive at without religion.
This is a little-known fact that when Princess Diana died, lots of people were asking (notably women): what was she doing in Paris with a *rat* like Dodi Fayed?
May I confess, ST, that I've long thought that Diana brought much of her misery onto herself. Not her husband's adultery, of course, but the stalking of the paparazzi. I think she liked using the media as a weapon, even if she ended up cutting herself fatally on the blade. This is not to say that I absolve the photographers of any wrong, just that I'm very harsh when it comes to rich and famous women who still find something to complain about. ;)
I'll stop commenting now, before I make myself look any more heartless . . .
Bellita!
"I think the women's task now is to conduct ourselves in such a manner that we bring out the traits we long for in men. And I believe it is easier to do than we think."
You speak the Truth.
And I adore you for it :-)
Everything you say above sounds so incredibly non-PC. But I know it works.
I have said before that women are the 'relationship experts' of this world, and as such, it is THEM/WE that Nature 'aids and abets' to set things up and keep things moving. Yes, in this broken-down system we call today's SMP, men have to do their bit more and more as women get less and less mature.
The husband of S_____ is typical of most men. He will 'react' to a woman's femininity. Paradoxically, a woman who submits herself to a masculine man is happier in herself too because all the ducks of Nature line up well when this happens. S_______ was patient with him, and now she gets her 'reward'. Hard decision to take at the beginning though...to accept 'poverty' when you know you want children can't be easy... and some might even say 'foolhardy'. But people know what they have prioritised in their lives and make their decisions accordingly. So choosing 'wholesome family life' over 'money' may have been hard, but so worth it in the end.
How nice when we see evidence of things working the way they should...
"I also think the laws are fair because their foremost consideration is the family."
The best reason of all, of course...
"I'll stop commenting now, before I make myself look any more heartless . . ."
Did I mention that I was one of those asking the question as to what she was doing in Paris with Dodi...
Proves the point we were both trying to make to Metak, no?
Like you, I don't want to think of myself as 'heartless'. But the Truth is, I am, at least when it comes to a woman I perceive as doing something wrong.
And somehow, I am more forgiving of a man.
Unless he is hurting... a woman!
:-)
@ST
"Proves the point we were both trying to make to Metak, no?"
My dear ex wife from alternate universe I beg of you... stop.. ;-)
What you perceive as heartless is nowhere near it.. ;-)
When it comes to government interfering in peoples business I completely reject it because the power grab never ends! Relationship between a man and a woman is their responsibility. At least it should be..
p.s. I'm suspicious.. you wouldn't believe how accurate my 'predictions' are..
@Bellita
I believe that 'wiring' fails immediately when you realize that you're a intelligent being.. intelligent meaning that you're aware of your own existence..
When you do that you can always change and modify your 'wiring'..
Even when it comes to ultimate 'wiring' to stay alive.. survival.. you can always end your life.. you can choose not to reproduce.. no matter how powerful the 'wiring'..
@Metak
Being able to modify one's natural inclinations doesn't mean every modification is good. Realizing this is also part of being an intelligent being.
@Bellita
Looking at what is good is different for every person...
I never said how it's good or bad for anything... there are no good or bad things... things just are.. we decide what is good and what is bad.. every individual decides that for himself..
@Metak
Now you'll have to do that "Explain it to me like I'm a six year old" thing that ST occasionally asks because I'm not sure what you were trying to tell me.
I brought up the wiring to say that it's there for a good reason and that we probably should not go against it just to be happy. When you addressed me, I read your comment to mean that happiness is such a precious goal that we should do everything to achieve it.
(When I wrote that last paragraph, I was reminded of the song with the lyrics, "If you want to be happy for the rest of your life/ Never make a pretty woman your wife/ So from my personal point of view/ Get an ugly girl to marry you!" It's a joke, of course, but let's say a man takes this advice and rewires himself so that he is happy to be married to an "ugly girl." How is his happiness different from that of a drug addict in the middle of a hallucination?)
@Bellita
"I brought up the wiring to say that it's there for a good reason and that we probably should not go against it just to be happy."
Wiring is there and it's set to some default setting... and yes I can't disagree more with you.. you should always go against it if you want to.
Just to be happy? ;-) This is the part where we go our separate way...
Everything is there for a reason... even for you to go against it and experience what you want...
So why does his happiness concern you? You might think he's a fool or that he's not happy... etc.
but for him it's real as it can be! Happiness is not some constant that could be applied to all people.. When we have a choice between pleasure and pain.. we always choose closer to what we perceive as pleasure and further away from what we perceive as pain..
I should really stay away from philosophy, science... ;-) and from posting comments..
@B... "…If you want to be happy for the rest of your life/ Never make a pretty woman your wife… let's say a man takes this advice … How is his happiness different from that of a drug addict in the middle of a hallucination?...”
A later verse in that song references the virtue of this ugly woman as being able to “cook meals on time” and “..Yeah she’s ugly but she sure can cook…”
Have you ever heard the expression that the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach?
We are wired to eat too. It’s a survival thing. I think that particular wiring trumps the wiring for wanting good looks in a mate. Looks aren’t the only thing that attracts.
That's how a man can be happy with an "ugly" woman.
Grasshopper
@Metak
So why does his happiness concern you?
It doesn't! Hahahaha! What concerns me is people thinking that the way things are means they have no choice but to choose a course of action that lets them adapt to the status quo, when they can actually choose another course of action that lets them change the status quo.
If a man wanted to follow the advice in the song and marry an "ugly girl," I certainly wouldn't interfere! I'd be a bit baffled, though, if he did it while there were also a lot of pretty women in the vicinity. I would wonder at his faulty reasoning, even if I never questioned him about it. I would assume that he thought he wasn't good enough to raise his standards.
And that's close to what I'm saying here. If Bill's advice depressed Anne, it would have been because she took it to mean that she would have to put up with undiluted "beta" for the rest of her life, if she wants a lasting marriage. What I'm suggesting here is that more men are "alpha" than this advice makes them seem. Anne just has to figure out how to bring it out in a man who is actually worthwhile, by being a woman who is also worthwhile.
@Grasshopper
I don't have more time to explain now, but I think you'll get the gist of what I mean by reading my answer to Metak above. I'm not being completely literal here.
That the "ugly girl" can cook well means that the man has standards that are still being met. This is about not lowering your standards as long as you can hold yourself to a high standard as well.
@Bellita
Ay, ay, ay mi Bellita... ;-)
Please, please stop with the whole Greek alphabet thing when you're talking about men... we're not just letters.. we have feelings too... ;-) hahaha
You assume his reasoning is faulty.. his standards could be completely different from what is considered to be a norm..
Grasshopper said that she has to be a good cook. I would add to cooking skills ST's sense of humor and playfulness and you would get qualities that are far more important.. at least to me.. :-)
One thing I realized from this post and comments is how 'easy' it is for a man to 'like' a woman.. but it's so 'complicated' the other way.. ;-)
@B…
Please don’t worry about not being able to respond right away.
An ugly woman who has developed gourmet cooking skills may not be the very best I could ever do but at some point we all have to put a stake in the ground and make a decision.
At age 20 I might pass her by. At age 35 maybe not. That is not lowering my standards.
As ST said earlier in this thread “…I should state that it takes a certain maturity in a woman to know what is 'gold' …”
Same applies for men.
Grasshopper
@Metak… “…One thing I realized from this post and comments is how 'easy' it is for a man to 'like' a woman.. but it's so 'complicated' the other way…”
A buddy of mine used to say “the uglier she is the better cook she has to be”.
How much easier can it get than this?
Grasshopper
@Grasshopper
My aunt is great cook and she found a husband that gives her everything.. my cousin went to her for cooking lessons before she got married.. ;-)
so simple... ;-)
Badger has an interesting post that explores some of the same territory touched on by Bellita.
http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/the-body-agenda-doesnt-lie/
Bill
@Bill
I have a problem with that definition of "Body Agenda" at the beginning..
By that definition body (like brain is an alien inside the body.. ;-) is using the brain to get the job done..? Body is a very sophisticated biological computer but it's purpose is to allow consciousness to experience and interact in this particular reality..
If every cell in our body has in it's core 'programing' function to multiply and replace, why would it then be any different for a body as a whole? I don't see any 'tricking' here...
It's only logical.. or is my sneaky body tricking my brain an the latter trying to trick the infinite consciousness that's using it? ;-) ;-)
wow. gone for a few days and THIS is what happens? smh.
well, ST....i'm not cleaning up this mess. lol.
@ Metak,
"One thing I realized from this post and comments is how 'easy' it is for a man to 'like' a woman.. but it's so 'complicated' the other way..."
This can be summarised in the phrase: Men are simple, women are complicated.
!!!
Clearly, women's 'wiring' is a bit more, shall we say, 'scrambled' in comparison to men's.
Hahahahaha!
(Just knowing that is half the battle, Metak...)
"What you perceive as heartless is nowhere near it..."
Really? I am astonished at this! To be asking what someone was doing at the time she died to me is the pinnacle of heartlessness (to my own shame I did this nonetheless) so it surprises me that you think there could be worse examples...
But then again, I see now why Bell said that unless it is a 'heartlessness' directed at you, or men in general, you are unlikely to see the depth of the 'heartlessness'. This makes sense. Bravo to Bell for making this point, and bravo to you for proving it to me :-)
"A buddy of mine used to say “the uglier she is the better cook she has to be”. "
Ah, I was going to declare my superlative cooking skills but I shan't now...
:-)
"wow. gone for a few days and THIS is what happens? smh.
well, ST....i'm not cleaning up this mess. lol."
Danny!
:-)
This is all Bill's fault. I am just an innocent little bystander here...
Hahahahahaha!
Now Bill is going to come at me with 'Now just a minute...'
:-)
How's me Brody, Danny?
And you?
ST-
Brody needs to get his teeth cleaned this weekend. i'm NOT looking forward to it. he recovers HORRIBLY from anesthesia. it's heartbreaking.
i'm ok. you know, just in therapy. lol. but i learned a valuable lesson: never chase klonipin with scotch. WOWZAH!!!!
@Metak
One thing I realized from this post and comments is how 'easy' it is for a man to 'like' a woman.. but it's so 'complicated' the other way.. ;-)
I have realized that as well! And let me tell you that it's no picnic from this end!
@Grasshopper
An ugly woman who has developed gourmet cooking skills may not be the very best I could ever do but at some point we all have to put a stake in the ground and make a decision.
My mistake was equating the man's compromise in the song with the dilemma I have defined with women. (Again, if I've learned anything from the Gendersphere, it is that there are no exact equivalents between the sexes.) Of course a man would be able to make the trade-off and still be very happy. But I don't think a woman would be able to without feeling that she has cheated herself and him of true happinesss (or without being a complete martyr in the marriage). This means that the solution for her is what I've heard described in the Gendersphere as the "Roll Your Own Alpha" strategy.
(Metak, I don't like using the Greek letters, either, and avoid doing so as much as possible. But sometimes I'm in a hurry . . . and sometimes I'm quoting!)
Men seem to agree that a woman's support and affection can bring out certain traits in them that even they knew weren't there. The problem with modern women is that they expect a man already to have those traits before they will give him a chance. My proposed solution is that modern women relearn those essential feminine arts.
Here's really simplistic analogy that I hope will make my point a little clearer. (I know I'm not at my articulate best right now!) Let's say you run into another "Anne" for whom you can be "Bill." But this "Anne" is twenty pounds overweight and can't cook, but still expects to find some gorgeous, rich guy who will love her unconditionally and sweep her off her feet. Now, if you told her that she'll never get the man she's dreaming of (because he can choose from among slimmer women with better domestic skills), you'd be perfectly correct. And then you might, as "Bill," tell "Anne" that her best bet at marital bliss is to learn to be happy with an average-looking, average-earning but kind and funny man. You'd also be correct . . . but you also would have assumed that "Anne" will never change.
So in this He Said/She Said show that is "Bill and Bell" (Thanks to ST for pointing out the way our names sound together. Hahahaha!), the "Bell" character would tell "Anne" to change. That is, to start working out and to start learning to cook. If she's going to have high standards, then she should first make herself meet high standards. (She should also know what men's standards are instead of projecting her own standards for men onto herself.)
In a nutshell, I don't think high standards are the problem if women can be realistic about what we can get. And I think the first step is being realistic about what we ourselves can do. It also seems to be a win-win situation inasmuch as men respond very well to women making these feminine changes in ourselves.
@Bill
Thank you for linking Badger's post! I'll have to let the insights stew a bit longer before I can react to them properly, though. :)
@ Danny,
Klonipin and scotch? That's two sedatives effectively :-)
Stay up.
Um, maybe not, after klonipin and scotch, mate.
*smile*
Poor darling Brody. But does he really need his teeth cleaned? I was not complaining when I was 'in' and now, I am sure Lady Bailey is not either...
:-)
@ Bellita,
Wow, I need some time to digest your last comment. You do come up with some unique insights, you do!
But I couldn't help but laugh out loud at this:
'Roll your own Alpha'.
Roll your own Alpha?
Alphas are cigarettes now?
Hahahahahaha!
Ah, so that's why they are so bad for one's health :-)
(Unless you mean the nicotine-free version...or maybe women should smoke 'em without inhaling...)
This could be another one of your 'specials' that I keep quoting till I am 95 and toothless lol. Your 'steak and sizzle' as well as your 'pizza' and 'potato' ones are still embedded in my grey matter...
'Roll your own Alpha'...
Brilliant analogy. Very funny and gets to the point :-)
And your point is a very good one, I must say. I am very impressed by it. Sincerely.
Hey - you keep teaching women logic and I won't be able to charm them into my bed, they'll start going for the quiet dependable guys, rather than the exciting ones who get their juices flowing... :)
I wish you luck. I gave up on being that guy long ago since I saw no return in it. Of course, I doubt I could ever go back now - I'm addicted to young women, and you know what the French say? Viva la difference... And I love how each is different, yet the same... But it's like flavors of ice-cream - sometimes, I want chocolate, others vanilla, and other rocky-road. I doubt I could be happy with just one flavor any more... Of course, you are talking to that 29 year old, and more often than not, they are starting to think along those lines themselves. That's way I like the 18-25 bracket - lots of fun, very attractive, and not too bright when it comes to thinking about farther than the next hour - at best...
@B… “…I think the women's task now is to conduct ourselves in such a manner that we bring out the traits we long for in men…”
“…it was her believing in him which helped him believe in himself…”
“…The problem with modern women is that they expect a man already to have those traits before they will give him a chance. My proposed solution is that modern women relearn those essential feminine arts...”
Kudos for these gems B. Really great insights. Thank you.
In the final analysis it is a partnership each one both man and woman contributing to the other’s welfare and each gleaning sustenance from the other. Neither party can be selfish and make it work.
Grasshopper
@ST…”…Ah, I was going to declare my superlative cooking skills but I shan't now... :-)…”
You tease! My favorite dish is Chicken Curry. Which I thought was Indian but I learned it has British origins. You have British origins, yes?
You see how my imagination is running wild now… ; - )
Grasshopper
@ Anonymous @ 8:41AM
Welcome to The Sanctuary, Roosh :-)
Just kidding...
I think your comment (which, by the way I am aware was addressed to Bill, not me) might be 'tongue in cheek' and I should be able to see the funny side.
But I can't.
Even though these women you talk about are willingly ruining their own lives. You are not forcing them into your bed.
But I somehow cannot 'take a joke' where this is concerned if your intent is to just 'have fun with them and then toss them aside' as opposed to 'I wanted a real relationship with a young woman but things didn't work out in the end'.
I got a sudden case of 'sense of humour failure', I'm afraid. It doesn't happen very often...but when it does, it bothers me deeply.
A young woman such as the ones you mention are like 'children' to my mind, because let's face it, a lot of them do have the mental age of children from the earlier part of the last century...
I know my thinking on this is not right - they are adults and should be treated as such.
But we both know they are really not...which is not your fault, of course...
I won't judge you for your honest comment as a man (precisely because I am not not a man), and I hope you won't judge me for my equally honest reaction to it as a woman (because you are not a woman).
This is one of the areas that I would always find I reach a stalemate...I cannot and won't ever see things any differently than I do now. And I suspect, the same for you :-)
So we will have to agree to disagree on this one (even if you weren't addressing me in the first place and I barged in on your conversation with Bill :-)
@ Grasshopper,
:-)
It's the other way round: Curry has Indian origins but is now firmly British...
And yes, I do make a mean chicken curry!
But...if I made you a legendary chicken curry, would you then see me as ugly? That's the question!
Um, could this remain rhetorical, please?
:-)
PS: Re Bellita's last few comments, aren't they just marvellous jewels? She's quite the philosopher, our Bell!
:-)
Roll your own alpha? I think that expression is going to be stuck in my head, lol.
Re: "Roll Your Own Alpha"
Apparently, the expression is not as familiar as I thought! I can't remember where I first read it, but it was likely at HUS.
@Grasshopper and @ST
Thanks for your compliments, but I can't really take any credit! :) These insights were floating around in the Manosphere long before I came across them. What I'm doing is rephrasing them in a way that makes them more accessible (and I hope, more helpful!) to women.
@ST… “...if I made you a legendary chicken curry, would you then see me as ugly? …”
In searching the internet just now for the origins of curry I came across an interesting morsel.
Curry is considered an aphrodisiac.
I think that will serve as my rhetorical answer to your rhetorical question…. ; -)
Grasshopper
@ Grasshopper,
Hahaha.
Clever answer!
I mean, clever non-answer to my non-question :-)
@ SpaceTraveller,
Nice moderating of the discussion.
As usual, Bellita drilled down to the core issue that my post raised. She found the Getchen frage of this step in the dance between the sexes..
Over 100 responses and you only had to write an intro. Nice work if you can find it.
And I didn't catch that Anonymous @ 0841 was directing his comments to me. So no need to apologize for answering him in my place. I didn't realize the ball was in my court.
BTW, thanks for the prayers and good wishes.
Bill
Bill,
Thank YOU.
I second your thoughts on Bellita.
Post a Comment