Monday, January 28, 2013

The hamster quit running

Danny has an amusing post on providing a woman with a useful wakeup call:
I asked her what made her think I’d be interested in being with her. Her hamster replied-
 
“Well, you’ve always had a thing for me.”

I told her I don’t recall ever having a thing for her, and if I did it was back in 2004 (it was 2010 at the time). She seemed dumbfounded. The hamster quit running and went and took a shit in the corner. 

This woman is a CLASSIC example of a woman hitting the wall. She spent her early years in the navy, got out and focused on her career then found out they don’t hand out husbands, and her hypergamous ass wasn’t attractive to the men in her dating pool that were pulling 22 year olds.

She was invisible to men.  She was simply a “co-worker”, the competition. She was no longer the “hot girl” in the office. Men quit flirting with her lest they suffer a sexual harassment suit. She called me out of the blue. She gave me the standard, “why can’t I find a BF. “I have a great job, make great money, I’m well-educated, I’ve travelled. What’s wrong with me.” 

My answer was simply: “The problem is you need to find a GF. Men don’t give a fuck about any of the crap you listed. I’m more attracted to the chick serving me fries at my burger place than a 30-year old business women.”
That's the fact.  Looking back, it never occurred to me that I ought to keep dating the daughter of one of America's most famous Fortune 500 CEOs at the time because it would be of material advantage to me.  I dumped her for a stripper who didn't graduate from high school and was living on her own at 17.  It never even crossed my mind that I should be attracted to the daughter of an even more famous CEO simply because her daddy was wealthy and on the cover of Forbes and Fortune.

I'm not saying there aren't mercenaries and male gold diggers out there, but the point is that they are not SEXUALLY ATTRACTED to the female trappings of what is more properly considered male success.  It's rather like men wondering why women aren't attracted to how nice they look in a dress and makeup.  It doesn't matter how pretty he looks, it's not going to do anything for the average woman, in fact, it's probably going to turn her off.

Women sexually respond to money and status.  They don't just find them to be signals, they will literally get wet at the sight of sufficiently impressive cars and houses.  I've seen it happen.  There is nothing wrong with that, but the problem is that very few of them understand that men do not do so.

Not all men understand the score either, but some do.  Back in the early 90's, there was a guy who drove a Ferrari around Minneapolis with the license plate GOTUWET.  (No, that wasn't me, I drove a Porsche with 2GQ4U.)*  And the thing is, for all the eye-rolling and protestations it inspired, there is absolutely no question that it did exactly what it promised.  Not on every woman who saw it, but certainly more than were required.

I should also point out that "I'm well-traveled" is an extraordinarily unwise point for a woman to use to market herself.  The average American man tends to hear that as "I've been sexually penetrated in various European capitals by swarthy, effete foreigners.  Fake a French accent, buy me an expensive glass of wine and I'll be on my back within an hour."  Think about it; any man to whom that might theoretically appeal has probably been abroad himself and knows perfectly well how the girls in his study program were spending their evenings.

* Just kidding.  About the license plate.

190 comments:

Pepper said...

Hmmm...eye opening post...I've always thought I was less desirable to men because of my clerk position and lack of material accomplishments. But now that I think about it, the two relationships I am aware of where the women make more money than the men are really really strained. Being kind of low on the material hierarchy also expands the pool of potential men because both blue and white collar workers have material advantage. I know how to smile pretty and keep my mouth shut. I may not be so bad off after all...Thanks, VD.

asdf said...

I wouldn't say men don't give a crap about any of those things. Only that their value is way below youth, fertility, and feminity.

Also some of those traits correlate to SWPLdom, and SWPLdom is bad.

Pablo said...

"I'm well-traveled"
As in a highway?
Hahahahaha!

PVW said...

Dannyfrom 504: I asked her what made her think I’d be interested in being with her. Her hamster replied-

“Well, you’ve always had a thing for me.”

I told her I don’t recall ever having a thing for her, and if I did it was back in 2004 (it was 2010 at the time). She seemed dumbfounded. The hamster quit running and went and took a shit in the corner.

This woman is a CLASSIC example of a woman hitting the wall. She spent her early years in the navy, got out and focused on her career then found out they don’t hand out husbands, and her hypergamous ass wasn’t attractive to the men in her dating pool that were pulling 22 year olds.

Me: I suppose what struck me the most about the post was the role of social media in warping the woman's sense of reality.

So he thought you were cute in 2004, but nothing came of it, no relationship, nothing at all, they happened to connect no facebook, and she imagines that somehow they could create something from nothing...Just unbelievable.

Why in the world would any woman dream of imagining that some kind of facebook connection would mean anything all these years later, just because he once thought you were "cute, pretty," whatever. Six years of no contact, six years of each person going on with their lives....

Perhaps that is why I'm not on facebook at all. If folks who knew me "way back in the day" wanted to be in touch with me, they would have done so over the years and through the normal channels.

I would have imagined that being in the military would have been an ideal environment for finding a partner. What is the male:female ratio, some ridiculous figure in favor of the fewer women who serve? It seems in that kind of environment, a pretty young woman who was marriage-mined would be able to clean up.

taterearl said...

"Women sexually respond to money and status. They don't just find them to be signals, they will literally get wet at the sight of sufficiently impressive cars and houses."

Why don't they just cut out the middleman and marry the banks?

Trust said...

@ taterearl said...
Why don't they just cut out the middleman and marry the banks?
___________

Don't give those pandering for votes any ideas

herenvardo said...

“I have a great job, make great money, I’m well-educated, I’ve travelled. What’s wrong with me.”

At this point, I would've steepled my fingers like a Bond villain, and said, 'Which of those things you listed would make a good wife?'

- and watched as horrible truth slowly dawned.

Rollo Tomassi said...

Status, wealth and the other rewards that result from ‘professional’ life are conditions women have for MEN in attraction. That’s not to discount men being physically attractive or other conditions, but women have far more conditions for their intimacy than men, and these conditions are predicated on characteristics that prove a man as a good provider for her and any future offspring’s security. These male characteristics (or sometimes just the prospects of a man attaining them) are defined by women as having value and are therefore attractive. Attractive enough to make a man with these qualities one to be competed over with other women. Women define what is masculine, they define what male traits have value for their investment of intimacy. Men define what is feminine, they define what female traits have value for their investment of their provision of security and meeting the condition criteria women place on them for their intimacy.

Women in the professional realm would like the conditions for attraction to be predicated upon their professional status (wealth), individual merit and/or aspects of their personal integrity, and a whole list of esoteric qualities, but they still fight against men’s basic impulses - she’s-go-to-be-hot! If a woman is attractive, a man is more than happy to have her foot the bill regardless of comparative incomes, it’s just icing on the cake for us, but this is analogous to a woman who marries a rich guy who also happens to be good looking and fun in bed.

whoism3 said...

I keep telling women the worst thing to do is to write on your dating profile that one of the 5 things you can't live without is your passport. Most men who are not oil baron's a media conglomerate moguls will see:

- a woman who has too much free time on her hands
- expensive and deficit creating tastes in travel
- experienced too many locales where 1 night romances may have ensued
- is someone who is in constant need of change and experiencing new things, which does not bode well for a lifetime pairing

Is that what you really want to signal?

Of course you do.. you're trying to get the oil baron aren't you.

SarahsDaughter said...

When I used to have fear about it, I hated it when old acquaintances would friend request my husband. Now it's a fun little game. I like to call it the cougar prowl (I know, he's not a young guy but I still like the phrase).

She finds his profile - "he still looks good (especially when he has the picture of him in his Class A uniform as his profile picture), what's that? married with children..hmmm must be a provider. Let's see if I can spark some old interest."

What follows from the wall beaten cougar is ALWAYS some sort of reminiscing. "Remember when we used to do x, y, or z."

Old acquaintances who are not on the prowl will say something about me or our children.

Then we look through her pictures of her reinvented self at various bars cougaring it up with other "girls night outers."

Occasionally they've aged well and look presentable. What they can't do is hide the fact that they've either been A)not marriage material up until this point or B)have children who have suffered a blown up home.

And, what always prevails is this from my husband: I finally have trained up this one (me) after 17 years, I don't have the energy to even attempt to train up another.

dannyfrom504 said...

thanks for the linkage brother. i appreciate it. i even set her up with a reader. lol.

stay up.

Russell said...

"Women sexually respond to money and status. They don't just find them to be signals, they will literally get wet at the sight of sufficiently impressive cars and houses."

Drives a stake through the nonsense that conspicuous consumption is driven solely for the need to display power and wealth. Clearly, one of the practical applications of such wealth was to bed hot, young women.

Mina said...

How about an outdoorsy, young, attractive and very fit woman of under 24 with a BSEE (and an interesting but not necessarily well-paying engineering job in manufacturing) that doesn't get hit on by "average" guys - only really smart manly guys (alphas?)

Is it something different about her or something different about the guys that are attracted to a woman like that?

Or this is just an outlier situation that the manosphere doesn't really consider?

SarahsDaughter said...

2GQ4U

Spacebunny, do you vacillate as I do when the man anthems come on ("Sexy and I Know it" or "I'm too sexy" whether to record it or just sit back and watch the show?

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle yeah...

Stickwick said...

Money and status are nice, but they've never been my primary attractors. I'm primarily attracted to elite military men -- a Delta Force operative is my equivalent of a CEO driving a Ferrari -- and every time I see one I get weak in the knees. So, as a young woman, I decided I wanted to be in the Marines, which was the most elite force open to a woman at the time. I wasn't conscious of it, but I must have genuinely believed that a man would value my military status simply because that's what I valued. Looking back, it's laughable. I'm glad I didn't get in, because I almost certainly would've missed out on marriage and rediscovering my femininity.

Mike43 said...

They did; well, not the banks. They married the government in the form of single parenthood. Even if you married, as soon as you're divorced the state is all over it. Approving the terms, collecting and disbursing money, etc.

So in effect, they did just marry the bank.

Josh said...

Spacebunny, do you vacillate as I do when the man anthems come on ("Sexy and I Know it" or "I'm too sexy" whether to record it or just sit back and watch the show?Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle yeah...

Girl look at that body...

VD said...

I work out

Californio_6th_ gen said...

I remember when I first met my ex-wife. Later she claimed I misrepresented my financial status. I pointed out that I was completely honest (maybe too honest in retrospect). Her response? "I thought you were lying." Later in life I realized that the biggest impediment to getting what I wanted with women was.....me. So I changed (and am continuously evolving.)

P.S. - "well travelled" hahahahahha!
http://www.theonion.com/articles/european-men-are-so-much-more-romantic-than-americ,11552/

Huggums said...

"How about an outdoorsy, young, attractive and very fit woman of under 24 with a BSEE (and an interesting but not necessarily well-paying engineering job in manufacturing) that doesn't get hit on by 'average' guys - only really smart manly guys (alphas?)

Is it something different about her or something different about the guys that are attracted to a woman like that?

Or this is just an outlier situation that the manosphere doesn't really consider?"

@Mina

It's not that hard to grasp. Men are attracted to youth and beauty. We are largely indifferent to your occupation or hobbies unless they bode ill for your future fidelity, attractiveness, or personality. If she's outdoorsy, that just sounds like she'll stay in shape. Haven't met too many women in engineering, but the ones I have are alright.

Huggums said...

"* Just kidding. About the license plate."

It's out there now, Vox.

Jack Amok said...

How about an outdoorsy, young, attractive and very fit woman of under 24 with a BSEE

eh? Not sure about the underlying question. If a woman is really attractive, "average" guys will tend to avoid hitting on her becaues a) she's unlikely to say yes, and b) she's likely to have a potentially dangerous alpha boyfriend hanging around.

Jack Amok said...

Haven't met too many women in engineering, but the ones I have are alright.


I've been in engineering my entire adult life. I agree, female engineers are usually okay. Engineers tend to be highly practical people. It's an occupation where shit has to work in the end. Either the bridge stands up or the bridge falls down. People who shy away from reality tests like that aren't attracted to engineering.

So women engineers are practical and figure out what works. And spending a lot of time as the only chick among many reasonably eligible men, I think they figure out pretty quick how well a little bit of femininity works.

Mina said...

I could see how the woman in Danny's scenario would be generally considered a bad bet that even any average guy would avoid a LTR with her.

What if you changed the scenario and in this scenario the woman in the original post is an identical twin to the girl serving you fries at the local burger joint. Same size breasts, too for all you boob freaks.

So now you have two super attractive young women - the difference between them is that one has a career and big brain and the other one is unmotivated and unambitious enough to be totally happy slinging hash at the local diner.

Which one are most men going to want for a LTR?

Jabari said...

The one who is a genuinely happy and pleasant person, who enjoys spending time with me, supports me, and shares my core values (spending habits, outlook on life, etc).

The "problem" with "career" (and the way it's worded there) is that way too often the career is of higher priority and importance than the partner.

Similarly, the "problem" with the "big brain" is that it's often rebellious - she thinks she's smarter (or IS smarter) and therefore won't accept the man's decisions on certain things. Angry "I told you so"s are not good for relationships either...

Stickwick said...

Which one are most men going to want for a LTR?

Mina, men who are serious about having a wife and a mother for their children are looking for someone who has wifely and motherly qualities. Here's what they're wondering: Is she loyal, will she prioritize supporting her husband, is she warm and kind? As Jabari pointed out, a career often gets in the way of the first two things. If you doubt that, listen to the Dr. Laura show sometime. You'll hear women lament how they don't feel important after giving up a high-powered career to stay home and take care of a husband and kids. They resent it, and the husband and kids suffer. So, as long as Miss Hash-slinger is loyal, kind, and not lazy, a wise man would likely prefer her over Miss Career.

Mina said...

So smart women with careers just need majorly alpha men (they will put their foot down) who also happen to be really smart (someone worthy of respect.)

The question is are smart, highly alpha men looking for something that's different than what the average man in the manosphere is looking for?

dannyfrom504 said...

Mina-
you're oversimplifying and reaching.

we DO.NOT. base attraction on your socio-economic status. you're missing the point. we base our interest on you based on your femininity and overall personality, and looks.

WHAT YOU DO, means shit. i'll support you in your work endeavors, but it doesn't make me more or less attracted to you.

the masculine attracts the feminine and vice versa. but men don't place the same emphasis on your occupation as women place it on ours.

hypergamy anyone.

Mina said...

Danny: not my point, but thanks for playing.

SarahsDaughter said...

"the other one is unmotivated and unambitious enough to be totally happy slinging hash at the local diner."

Having worked at said place of slinging hash, my income reflected the service I gave, and it was sweet. $50K/year working 30 hours/week.

Unmotivated and unambitious? Hardly. And what does a man see? A woman who serves. Who pays attention to detail and requests by strangers. How much more so will she serve the needs of a man she's married to.

And - I learned how to make a really mean sammich.

Daniel said...

I hope you drive around (at least on special occasions) a beater Kubelwagen now, so you can smirk at the masses with 02AUBUG on your bumper.

Mina said...

... although now that I think about it for a moment, you actually kind of provide a good illustration of my point.

. said...

"I'm well-traveled"
As in a highway?


As in an airport restroom toilet seat.

women engineers are practical and figure out what works. And spending a lot of time as the only chick among many reasonably eligible men, I think they figure out pretty quick how well a little bit of femininity works.

The problem is that as one of the few females in a highly-male environment (and one in which the males are highly prone to beta orbiting and supplication), female engineers have a wildly exaggerated view of their own SMV.

Mina said...

"female engineers have a wildly exaggerated view of their own SMV"

I don't disagree, esp if you consider the existence of only one marketplace to be a basic truth.

Daniel said...

So smart women with careers just need majorly alpha men (they will put their foot down) who also happen to be really smart (someone worthy of respect.)

Highly unlikely, Mina. If LTR is the goal, smart women seeking smart alpha will avoid careers as much as possible. This doesn't necessarily mean "no job" but it does mean "my work is ultimately unimportant" and easily discarded. She will live a life that either naturally or willingly fits into the life of the target alpha, and she will be hot and capable of submission.

Her "career" is irrelevant. If she wants to pursue the career thing, she should just do that. Smart alpha male has no need whatsoever for a working gal who can't take care of his house and future kids. At some point, that career is going to be exposed for a plaything or an idol, and it will need to be dispensed with.

The second question, between diner gal and career gal is also a two-parter:

It is irrelevant on one hand. The lady is likely leaving either job, and career skills have no bearing on home life skills.

On the other hand, most men, including alphas, will take the hash-slinger in a heartbeat. They are an alliance without entanglements. A lot of career girls think they are owed respect because they bought a Certificate of Achievement from a school and have earned the Cubicle of Destiny at a subsidized corporation. Her big mistake is that she's going to think that makes her smart.

It doesn't. Worse, it makes her prideful. Even worse, it makes her prideful in something more idiotic than her beauty, which - though it fades - is actually a real thing. Being about as smart as 50% of the population isn't an attractant, but what is a turn-off is women who fall into that category and believe they've got some special man-magnet between the ears, that just seems to be on the fritz for some reason right now (probably because men are defective, right?)

Intelligence is not now, and never has been, a romantic bond. The rare "intelligent" couple is forged on normal attractions, and the IQ factor is, statistically, almost always going to have a discrepancy. In other words, a woman who gets an alpha isn't going to give a damn if she's smarter than him, because he's going to be the relatively dumb top dog on top of her.

Anonymous said...

Careful here not sure if the entire manosphere agrees.

http://nexxtlevelup.com/game/smart-girls

Most STEM guys are beta orbitors because they lack the social graces of game.

Daniel said...

Annie, what are you even suggesting? Men are not a consensus club. There's nothing in that article that indicates men are attracted to careerists who think they are smart.

Der Hahn said...

Mina, your hypothetical double-plus extra alpha male is not looking for anything different than your average guy in an LTR. There maybe a few outliers but in general they are not looking for a project or for challenge. Men dislike drama.

The more alpha a man is, the more femininity he can demand from an LTR partner.

For non-LTR, however, “young, attractive and very fit woman of under 24” will probably win out over the drama.

Mina said...

Anonymous sees where I was going with this. Good catch.

Jimmy said...

"Most STEM guys are beta orbitors because they lack the social graces of game."

This is a contradiction. Game gives them social graces.

Many guys in STEM become more alpha-like from their earning potential and their increase in status, while those who skate by eventually have lesser status.

This isn't high school anymore. Women who don't learn about how relationships work never do.

Days of Broken Arrows said...

"Mina, your hypothetical double-plus extra alpha male is not looking for anything different than your average guy in an LTR. There maybe a few outliers but in general they are not looking for a project or for challenge. Men dislike drama."

Actually, Alpha guys tend to go for models. They want everything the average guy wants, but a few points higher. My brother is like this. Where I had sevens, he had nines and tens. Never did "career" or whatever figure into it.

All you have to do to see what Alphas want is to look at who the top athletes, musicians and self-made businessmen settle down with. Their either models or look like them.

Der Hahn said...

Days, I think we substantially agree.

As her hat tip to Annonie @12:47 makes clear, she's trying to play the old "only real men rise to the challenge of my bitchy career woman fabulous-ness" card.

Which isn’t even really supported by the post at the link.

Johnny Caustic said...

Pepper: I've always thought I was less desirable to men because of my clerk position and lack of material accomplishments.

You know, until I read this, I didn't really believe in Vox's assertion that there are women who think this way. Seeing someone actually say it in the first-person makes it real. I'm kind of stunned...there really are women who actually think these things?

ajw308 said...

Mina,
You nipped a classic punchline in the bud.

The women engineers I know, many have moved to HR or marketing. Probably the most competent one I know spends lots of time managing shift personnel only because her employer depends on her for so much and there she can minimize a major problem for him, not because she wants out of the engineering work.

As a rule-of-thumb, the average female engineer is less feminine than the ideal (but aren't most women nowadays?).

Nate said...

i would make the point... that it isn't that her money is a negative.

Its that we're apathetic about it. If she's rich... great. If she's not... Great.

Is she hot? Is she happy?

those are the two primary questions that Alphas ask.

Career girls generally are not happy.

This is skews the results to make it look like we actually care. We don't. We just want happy and hot.

Nate said...

A for the record... I married DrWho when she was a hot blonde new college grad without a dime of debt who wanted to be a mommy more than she wanted to be a doctor.

Nate said...

"They want everything the average guy wants, but a few points higher."

No. Every guy wants 10s. the difference alphas get them.

bogo said...

Sorry, got sidetracked with Danny's link to Female Ejaculation article....oh.. yeah, great post Vox, thanks for sharing.

Carlotta said...

@ Mina, you are missing the point. You are buying into the lie by saying only a really macho alpha could handle you.

Your career is not a good thing to a man looking for a wife. You are not on equal footing with the chick at the dinner. You are benath her in appeal for an LTR. It isn't that only an Alpha could handle you, it is that they don't want to marry you.

Career minded is a no go for many reasons that have been covered here in all their gory glory.

If you are young and hot you still have a chance. But if you are like the lady in the article it is time to compromise big time if you want a marriage and family.

Carlotta said...

@ Nate, so then why did your wife become Dr. Who and you became Mr. Mom?

Maybe this is the setup for Mina then?

Cail Corishev said...

Mina, your career is about as important to a man as his preference in hockey teams is to you. His only concern about it is that it not get in the way, just as you won't care what sports teams he likes as long as he's not obsessed enough about them that it leads to ignoring you.

The exception to this would be betas who have actually been trained to want a career woman, but you don't want one of them anyway.

Carlotta said...

@ Johnny, Pepper isn't the only one. I totally bought that.

Cail Corishev said...

I'm kind of stunned...there really are women who actually think these things?

Sure, just as there are many men who think, "Women won't be attracted to me because I'm heavy/balding/short/whatever." Men and women both tend to look at what attracts them, project it onto the other sex, and assume it will work for or against themselves in the same way.

Daniel said...

Career girls generally are not happy.

This. This. This.

It is no more difficult for an alpha to get a "smart career" girl so Annie's article is idiotic. There's no more "challenge" for an alpha to get the hot MIT physicist than it is for him to get the hot hash-slinger, regardless of how dumb he may be.

If he's alpha, he's alpha. He gets who he wants, not vice versa.

From the girl's perspective, she needs to disregard her career credentials (because, at best, they are as useful as her elementary school participation ribbons, and at worst, they make her unhappy) and just focus on being hot and happy. If that incidentally means career stuff, fine (i.e. careering makes her hot and happy).

I just doubt that it will for most women. I know some happy female biologists, pharmacists, doctors and even two attorneys (corporate), who are delightful women married to alphas or high betas (vox's beta, not BETA).

They hardly ever talk about their jobs, but their kids, husband and home life (vacations, day-to-day, etc.) all the time. The career thing is, from an outsider's perspective, a hobby that they are grateful they have time for.

None of the alphas give a rip about what their wives do for work, as far as social status goes. The beta sort of does, but only as a - "yeah, my wife is almost good enough for me" sort of way.

Put it another way for the smart career girl: if you are willing to be married to a man who determines whether or not you work, at his pleasure, then you may be alpha-wife material. If not, stop hunting him down. He's not ever going to see you as anything more than a sleepover, what with you buried under all that recalcitrance.

Stingray said...

**Raises hand.

Oh yeah. Definitely used to think this.

A short time after my first child was born I decided that I really loved staying home (it was never a question of if I would or not) and that I would be very happy never working again. I wasn't sure how my husband would feel about this. I broached it with him saying "Would you be put out if, after the kids are out of the house, I never worked again (as long as I don't need to)?" My husband was thrilled and I was stunned. He said it made him feel like a million bucks me never wanting to work again.

Pip said...

"Career girls generally are not happy.

This. This. This."

...is wrong wrong wrong, provided the career is something they enjoy instead of a do-this-or-starve job. It's just like men, really. Men and women with jobs they like love to work. I know I do.

Nate said...

"...is wrong wrong wrong, provided the career is something they enjoy instead of a do-this-or-starve job. It's just like men, really. Men and women with jobs they like love to work. I know I do."

Pip... are you male or female?

SarahsDaughter said...

Pip, you are talking as an outlier.

Most career women I know like what they do. This does not translate into a non bitchy person. My bad if I'm wrong translating "bitchy" to mean "not haaapy".

Most men I know are pleasant. Even when they don't like what they do for work.

Nate said...

"@ Nate, so then why did your wife become Dr. Who and you became Mr. Mom? "

Whoa there sally. I'm not Mr Mom. I'm Mr Dad. I am the head of my house. This is not even remotely in question.

Now... why? We got married right out of college... I was working and she was applying to med school. We both wanted kids... but wanted to wait a year or so before hand. So we did... but mostly it just ended up that she had trouble getting knocked up. I kept working... supporting her.. doing my thing. She's doing hers... very traditional really. I was supporting her.

All the way through med school... she still was having issues getting knocked up. Tried all kinds of things. Finally... not until residency did we get it done.

So now... here we are staring down the barrel... either live on her residency salary alone... and me stay home with the baby... or we both keep working... and pay to have some day care worker ignore my kid.

Understand at this point we already owed lots on medical school. Oh sure... I was supporting her... but no recent college grad makes enough to pay for that. Consequently... you're past the point of no return. She HAS to become a doctor now... because there is no way to pay the student loan otherwise... and no... you can't file bankruptcy on that shit. On top of that... did the math real quick and realized that given what she was going to make when she got her first real job... i would have to make 40K a year... just to break EVEN on the taxes... because of the bracket jump. So I checked out. I stay home and homeschool and build rifles... and ride motorcycles and help run the church. That... and I drink bourbon and smoke cigars.

so now you know.

And no. I do not recommend this to other couples. If DrWho and I could switch today and she'd be at home and I'd be the anesthesiologist... we would. Doesn't work that way though.

Nate said...

"Most career women I know like what they do. This does not translate into a non bitchy person. My bad if I'm wrong translating "bitchy" to mean "not haaapy". "

Career women are significantly less happy than married stay-at-home types.

This isn't even remotely debatable.

Brad Andrews said...

Nate, that would not fit with the idea that most people ultimately connect with those at about their same SMV.

I know you label me a beta, but I never aimed at 10s for the few women I pursued. I might have taken one who fell in my lap, but while I wanted a decent thin figure, perfect beauty was far more important than a 10.

Anonymous said...

Fem@#$# have convinced women they can be like men and the result of this equality is the mistaken belief that men are attracted to roughly the same things that women are.

For the first 5 years of my marriage my wife used to say "You only married me for my earnings" which I would politely respond with something like "Look, I do greatly appreciate you supporting our family while I get my business off the ground but I did turn down a job at IBM making pretty good money to do this"

So I can attest to reversed income roles being a strain, mainly from her as I wasn't intimidated by it. I knew I was working hard to build something useful and didn't need the short term dollar amount validation of it.

Amusingly, since I started making more money than her she more correctly says "You only married me for my ass" which was pretty much why I pursued her to begin with. And despite approaching 40 and having 3 kids still looks good owing to the effort she puts in to get down to her "marriage weight", as she calls it, after each kid.

I would just add that while the ass got my attention what got her the ring was her femininity and specifically my belief that she would be committed to our family over her own self, which she has been. Of course, that is something they work very hard to beat out of every girl in feminist school.

Desert Cat said...

Mina, that link from anonymous does not lead you where I think you may want to go. A hardcore gamer might enjoy the challenge of a smart career woman. But only because he is playing. If you're looking for a stable LTR then you're not looking at hardcore gamers to fulfill your wishes. Alphas, Beta providers, Delta schlubs all want nice women, not "smart" women.

Now there's nothing at all wrong with smart. Being an engineer myself, I have a soft spot in my heart for nerd girls and might favor one who also had the requisite femininity. But, femininity first, geek cred second.

Pip said...

Female.

"Career women are significantly less happy than married stay-at-home types. This isn't even remotely debatable."

Sure it is. It's just job dependent. The other vets I work with, and their support staffs, to a person love their jobs. (I work out of a truck or stay on-site, but share billing staff with an office in WT.) My partner just moved from being a judicial clerk to a transactional private practice in a big city. I know many of his co-workers. Most love their jobs. I don't know any who actively hate it.

Those are the circles I run in. They are happy.

VD said...

So smart women with careers just need majorly alpha men (they will put their foot down) who also happen to be really smart (someone worthy of respect.)

Therein lies the problem. Such women need majorly alpha really smart men, but such men are smart enough to want nothing to do with them.

I am considerably smarter than the average smart career girl. I married an extremely pretty nanny after mostly dating strippers and models. I have a number of very wealthy friends who own multiple companies, and to a man they are with beautiful women who have IQs that are maybe 2/3s of their own. At best. That's normal.

The men who are with smart women tend to be of lower socio-sexual rank. The Science Fiction Writers Association, the male component of which is basically a collection of gamma males, is absolutely filled with men married to doctors, professors, and other smart women.

Sure it is. It's just job dependent.

No, Pip, it is not. Pull your head out of "the circles you run in" and read the relevant statistics.

None of the alphas give a rip about what their wives do for work, as far as social status goes. The beta sort of does, but only as a - "yeah, my wife is almost good enough for me" sort of way.

And the gamma is extremely proud of his wife's career and not infrequently is proud to claim that she can kick his ass too.

Nate said...

"Nate, that would not fit with the idea that most people ultimately connect with those at about their same SMV."

What people end up with and what they want are not the same.

You may have a mustang... but that doesn't mean you don't want a lamborgini.

TimP said...

Umm, Pip. The original quote from Nate says "generally" not "always", and Daniel specifically says that if a Woman's career is making her happy it would be indirectly making her more desirable as well. And mentions specific examples from his own life of women whose career is making them happy.

That's a rather amusing example of solipsism. :-)

Another possible problem with Career girls is "busyness". (I'm not positive that this is a problem for other men, but I suspect it is) By that I don't mean that her life is full of things, but that it's full of things that she "has to do". It's when everything is planned out months in advance, and is absolutely necessary. "No I can't get together with the group for a games night anytime over the next fortnight, I've got too much on." (sometimes you really are very busy, but the vast majority of busyness in the Western World is just created by the busy person themselves)

Nate said...

"Sure it is. It's just job dependent. The other vets I work with, and their support staffs, to a person love their jobs. (I work out of a truck or stay on-site, but share billing staff with an office in WT.)"

This is particularly amusing to me given that the farriers are all talking about how the local vets have stopped hiring female vet grads because as soon as they get can they run off and get married and knocked up and never work again.

Nate said...

"I am considerably smarter than the average smart career girl. I married an extremely pretty nanny after mostly dating strippers and models. I have a number of very wealthy friends who own multiple companies, and to a man they are with beautiful women who have IQs that are maybe 2/3s of their own'"

Ok... but isn't 2/3rds of Big Chilly's IQ still something like 2SD?

Nate said...

"So smart women with careers just need majorly alpha men (they will put their foot down) who also happen to be really smart (someone worthy of respect.)"

I would just remind folks that Proverbs type wives earned money. They ran businesses. they didn't spend all day watching soaps or at the spa. fathers weren't the sole bread winners. Hell in most cases the fathers weren't the bread winners at all. new testament life looked nothing like leave it to beaver.

ThatGuy said...

The women in IT need to learn this - constantly saying "Aren't any good men" and are convinced it isn't them.

Even going so far as to blame living in the middle of the country as the problem. Go look at the profile pictures. Run Hamster Run.


CynicAle said...

Prediction @Pip will leave her "Partner" sooner than later. FTR:Men don't want a partner - that's for business arrangements.

Mina said...

In case anyone cares:

Insofar as the line of questioning: I already know "the end of the story" ... I personally am not shopping or on the market or really even interested in what's selling on the market these days. I don't care. I am much older than most of you think I am (and probably older than most of you) and am well beyond it :-)

I was looking for an answer to a specific question, which I feel I have resolved to my satisfaction. Thank you.

Stingray said...

Now Nate, it is entirely dependent on the mustang

Nate said...

Stingray... Given your moniker... I expect better from you.

Nate said...

"None of the alphas give a rip about what their wives do for work, as far as social status goes"

ding ding ding

Anesthesiology is legitimately interesting... and the stories she comes home with are vastly amusing... Note:she spares me the stupid hospital girl drama that every single institution in america has. Apart from that she asks advice on handling various situations... other doctors... and I handle the business of her being a doctor... all the BS documentation and contract crap... I run the corporation.

Yes.

I sign my wife's paycheck.

Nate said...

that said... apart from being proud of her for her accomplishments... I don't really give a damn.

Mina said...

@Nate: I'd love to know under what circumstances you have occasion to speak to farriers?

Stingray said...

I expect better from you.

Oooh, ouch.

It's not my favorite mind you. Just going with your own examples.

My favorite and a very close second.

I like to hear them rumble. Mmmmmmm

Jack Amok said...

Smart, alpha guys like to marry beautiful, loyal, kind women. Preferable IQ is probably in the 100 - 110 range, indicative of good genetics so the offspring will be smart, but not high enough to be indicative of dangerous instability often associated with very high IQ.

Guys who are +2 or 3 SDs on the IQ scale need to father children with normal women of the kids run the risk of being extremly fragile mentally.

Sorry, would-be breeders of a SuperRace.


Anonymous said...

Anon from 12:33

Just to clairfy no one has said anything that I do not disagree with. Yes a woman's career is irrelevant if she finds that Alpha. But there's the rub, Alpha's and even greater Beta's are hard to come by! The comments in general are intimating that a good life strategy for women is to avoid education because it actually devalues you. I'm sorry but I do not agree, granted it doesn't add to your value but it doesn't devalue you if your a red pill woman.

My point in drawing attention to Virgil's post about smart women was to point out that some Alpha's like smart woman for a variety of reasons.

I would also add for hypergamous reasons the field is limited for mate selection if your stuck behind the counter at McDonalds. Hypergamy is a feature not a bug, right? Most important of all you can't guarantee every woman who wants to will find a husband. In those cases they have a right and I would say responsiblity to see to their own welfare.
I am mentoring a young woman who wants to marry and is following all the advice on the manosphere, but nothing so far. She has chosen to go to school as a back up plan.

SarahsDaughter said...

Anon,
While this isn't an option for red pill women who don't have red pill daddies, it is the plan of action for red pill families like ours: our daughters will go from our home to their husband's home. There will be no need for a back up plan. Their job until they are married is to learn all that I know of how to care for a home and all they'll need to know to homeschool their children. They will continue in their education but it is not for future employment but perhaps business ownership.

Nate said...

"@Nate: I'd love to know under what circumstances you have occasion to speak to farriers?"

My brother is one... and I go to church with two.

out of curiosity... why should it be odd that a guy that lives on 40 acres out in the middle of nowhere with a bunch of critters shouldn't know farriers?

Nate said...

stingray... posting porn all over VD's blog...


Good girl.

rycamor said...

Nate said...
Anesthesiology is legitimately interesting... and the stories she comes home with are vastly amusing...


That is one plus of being married to a medical girl. We don't have much time for it these days, but I enjoy the stories whenever she does a few per diem stints at the hospital. Of course, we don't live near Miami anymore, so the stories don't have quite the drama (she worked with one doctor who loved to bring out the Cuba card: "I was a political prisoner, and I have a gun and I will shoot you!"). The same guy actually tried to run over another doctor in the parking lot.

Anonymous said...

Sarah's Daughter,

I appreciate your insight, your blog is one I check weekly. However I still find it wise in this day and age to have the ability to be as self sustaining as possible if need be. The problem I see for my mentee is that there are not alot of men who are interested at this time in history in being the kind of man who can and will take on the responsiblitly of a wife and family.

Could you clarify what you mean by "They will continue in their education but it is not for future employment but perhaps business ownership."

mmaier2112 said...

Nate "Good girl".... I LOL'd.

Stingray said...

Nate,

It's my favorite kind. ;)

SarahsDaughter said...

"They will continue in their education but it is not for future employment but perhaps business ownership."

Employment requires their submission to another man/woman other than their father or husband. It also contributes to them taking from the workforce a job that a family provider could have. They will have no need for that.

Business ownership, however, is vastly different. They are both very creative. Our little one wants to buy a gumball machine and start her own gumball route. She is saving her money to do that. There are thousands of business ideas that will teach them the very valuable Proverbs 31 lessons and will give them a plethora of knowledge of finances. (The older one has a writing bug...don't know where that comes from) In no way are we opposed to women making money. We will not, however, send our daughters out into the feminist world, knowing the nature of women. Even with as awesome parents as they have ;) they are girls. And can be just as influenced by the evil that lurks in this world as the next women (including me).

SarahsDaughter said...

"The problem I see for my mentee is that there are not alot of men who are interested at this time in history in being the kind of man who can and will take on the responsiblitly of a wife and family."

This is not my experience...guys? Is it true?

Nate said...

"This is not my experience...guys? Is it true?"

Not from my experience.

from what I've seen there are plenty of guys out there looking for a woman worth manning up for... they just can't find them.

Mina said...

Nate: how exactly would I have come to know you live on acreage and have critters? interesting that.

do you ride?

Nate said...

Mina... I sometimes forget that there are new folks always coming around that don't know us regulars.

Nate said...

oh... the horses I ride are steel.

For now.

There are fences that need built before the horses and cattle arrive.

Cail Corishev said...

"This is not my experience...guys? Is it true?"

Pretty much the opposite. If a woman isn't hideous or so socially withdrawn that men can't approach her, and she doesn't think herself a 10 who has to hold out for Mr. Perfect, she'll have no trouble finding a decent husband. I know reasonably attractive women -- not supermodels -- who have had more marriage proposals than many guys have had girlfriends. A 7+ will always have at least one suitor in the picture, without trying, and can take her pick from a few.

A male 7, on the other hand, will need to be a natural alpha or learn game to have much chance of attracting and keeping a decent woman, and he may go months or even years in between opportunities if he doesn't turn dating into a second job.

Mina said...

so you've never ridden but you're going to go out and buy horses and start riding? just like that, huh?

good luck. that doesn't usually end well. but it is kind of fun to watch.

Nate said...

Mina

I didn't say I've never ridden. I said I don't currently have horses.

Wicket Gate said...

Sarah's Daughter- You scare me. Mostly I'm frightened FOR you and your daughters. I've been reading this blog for some time (without comment) and your sweet, convicted, sometimes self-righteous, universally judgmental, confident in your beliefs, posts. I remember when I believed as you do. I spoke your speak and walked your talk. I have 4 children. I homeschooled them all, rigorously. They are accomplished in many disciplines; they all now have scholarships to top schools. Read the Bible cover to cover, out loud to them every year. Ground my own wheat, baked my own bread, kept myself in top physical condition. Faithfully submitted to my husband in all things. Completely believed God would honor my devotion by a strong family and a loving husband. I left out free will. By saying that your daughters will go from your home to their husbands with no need for a back-up plan you are assuring that they have no choices.You are teaching them that they have control over the outcomes of their relationship's success or not. You are leaving out free will. Something God never does. Can you guarantee that these husbands you find for your daughters will love, cherish and be faithful to them? Can you guarantee the men they marry will have the loving relationship you appear to enjoy with your own spouse? If you COULD control that should you? God never controls. We have the choice to love or not love. That's exactly why he gave us free-will. You are removing their choices by trying to force the outcome to be the perfect world you want for them. Your desire is understandable but so young in its attempt to control. I pray everything works out for you and your children exactly as you have planned. But God has a way of wanting your heart not your perfectly prescribed plans. Many of my friends are still of the "quiver-full" philosophy. Several have more than 10 children. Many are girls. I am watching the outcome. When you don't prepare your daughters to be able to have choices you are preparing them to be abused.

papabear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
papabear said...

Wicket Gate: your post is what passes for wisdom in this world.

Pip said...

"No, Pip, it is not. Pull your head out of "the circles you run in" and read the relevant statistics."

Yes, VD, it is. You need to differentiate between McJobs and actual careers. I have nothing against SAH men and women (so long as I'm not somehow paying the bill) but this notion that the armies of professional women who are working away at careers of their choosing that they trained for a long time are secretly unhappy is bushwah.

"Umm, Pip. The original quote from Nate says "generally" not "always", and Daniel specifically says..." blah blah blah

I'm responding to "Career women are significantly less happy than married stay-at-home types" and I'm saying: not the career women I know. And by career women I don't mean McJob-holding placekeepers.

"That's a rather amusing example of solipsism. :-)"

Nah, "Nate" isn't any more guilty of solipsism then anybody else around here.

"This is particularly amusing to me given that the farriers are all talking about how the local vets have stopped hiring female vet grads because as soon as they get can they run off and get married and knocked up and never work again."

Then who are they hiring? Something like 2/3 of vets grads are female. What's really hilarious to me is that the local large animals vets (half of whom are female in my neck of the woods, at least under 50) are actually hiring plenty of female DVMs.

"Prediction @Pip will leave her "Partner" sooner than later. FTR:Men don't want a partner - that's for business arrangements."

One thing our unwedded bliss has certainly provided over the years is job security for its naysayers.

Jack Amok said...

Nate,

Quick question, have you ever seen Mina and Asher together at the same time?

Either they're the same person, or we really ought to set them up together for a date.

Jack Amok said...

The problem I see for my mentee is that there are not alot of men who are interested at this time in history in being the kind of man who can and will take on the responsiblitly of a wife and family

There are a lot of guys - the majority really - who do very much want to take on that responsibility. They have two problems (three really):

One, they have a hard time finding decent women who aren't completely unreasonable in their own demands.

Two, the government and the beclowned economy it presides over makes being a provider damned hard these days. Eh, probably no harder than it was four hundred years ago, but definitely harder than it was fifty years ago. Coupled with the above-average maintenance costs most women advertise they come with these days, a lot of guys feel like they aren't in a postiion to do it.

Three, the problem that enables the other two to exist, is that as a society we've failed to teach men how to be men. There's legions of guys who want to be husbands and fathers, but don't have a clue how to win over a decent wife or succeed in a corkscrewy culture.

This blog, Athols' blog, even Roissy's, are positive steps to fixing that. But it'll take time.

VD said...

I would also add for hypergamous reasons the field is limited for mate selection if your stuck behind the counter at McDonalds. Hypergamy is a feature not a bug, right? Most important of all you can't guarantee every woman who wants to will find a husband. In those cases they have a right and I would say responsiblity to see to their own welfare.

You are failing to correctly grasp the consequences of hypergamy. The woman who is stuck behind the counter at McDonald's will have a GREATER choice of potential husbands because her hypergamy will allow her to choose from a greater pool given her lower status.

My wife, a nanny, had her choice of a) professional athlete, b) doctor, c) a number of junior executives reporting to the CEO for whom she worked. She went with d) owner of game developer. Her low job status combined with her high SMV gave her maximum choice.

That's the hypergamy paradox. The higher a woman goes, the less choice she has. It's why female doctors are usually married to doctors and female PhDs are usually married to PhDs. The pretty girl with the lowly job has the widest range of options. The ugly girl with the successful career may have none at all.

Yes, VD, it is. You need to differentiate between McJobs and actual careers. I have nothing against SAH men and women (so long as I'm not somehow paying the bill) but this notion that the armies of professional women who are working away at careers of their choosing that they trained for a long time are secretly unhappy is bushwah.

You have no idea what you're talking about. It has absolutely nothing to do with McJobs. Professional women working away at careers of their choosing are the literal PROFILE of the typical unhappy worker.

"A survey of white-collar workers has produced a profile of an unhappy person at work—and she’s likely a female lawyer or doctor. According to the profile, the unhappy worker is a 42-year-old unmarried woman with a household income under $100,000 working in a professional position."

Note that women used to be more happy before the middle class women entered the workforce en masse. Women have always worked, but no one ever cared about the one-third of them who don't write books and newspaper articles about how oppressed they are.

"The study by the US National Bureau of Economic Research found that while post-war era happiness surveys found women were noticeable happier than men, the difference had eroded to 'zero'. Its authors, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers of the University of Pennsylvania, found that in the U.S., women's happiness had fallen 'both absolutely and relatively to that of men'."

The secondary reason, I suspect, is that careers render women less marriageable due to hypergamy and their marriages less stable - don't even try to quibble over that one, as there is considerable statistical evidence for it - so their reduced likelihood of marrying and remaining married tends to make them unhappier and less satisfied than their counterparts.

The main reason is that work sucks. That's why they have to give you money in order to get you to do it. The fact that I love designing games doesn't mean that I always want to be working on the specific project for which I'm getting paid.

VD said...

Sarah's Daughter- You scare me. Mostly I'm frightened FOR you and your daughters.

Rabbits gonna rabbit.

When you don't prepare your daughters to be able to have choices you are preparing them to be abused.

When you live in fear, you often create the very monster of which you are most afraid. How can you claim to have homeschooled your daughters properly if you left them intellectually unprepared to make choices.

Do you not see that pushing your daughters into college, debt, and career is actually removing choice from them?

Brad Andrews said...

Nate,

> You may have a mustang... but that doesn't mean you don't want a lamborgini.

I am still not convinced, though I don't give much of a hoot about cars either way. I have always been someone who wants what I want and pretty much ignores everything else.

Perhaps I am a snowflake and you are right for "most men," but I tend to think more than a few are like me and I am not completely unique. I never sought the 10.

Note that the last line in my previous post didn't make sense. I have no idea what I was meaning, but my point was that a spiritual focus and a thin figure (with some chest) was far more important than overall beauty by the world's standards.

Josh said...

Perhaps I am a snowflake and you are right for "most men," but I tend to think more than a few are like me and I am not completely unique. I never sought the 10.

Sought does not mean want. It means pursue. So, maybe you did not seek the 10 because you had a correct view of your SMV. Of course being a christian might also be impacting that choice as well.

SarahsDaughter said...

Completely believed God would honor my devotion by a strong family and a loving husband. Wicket Gate

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job...

You are very confused as to the reason I do what I do.

Nate said...

Yes, VD, it is. You need to differentiate between McJobs and actual careers. I have nothing against SAH men and women (so long as I'm not somehow paying the bill) but this notion that the armies of professional women who are working away at careers of their choosing that they trained for a long time are secretly unhappy is bushwah."

no.

No it isn't.

What's amusing is that you've deluded yourself into thinking otherwise.

After a time... all jobs... are just jobs. My wife is a badass anesthesiologist. She stops hearts and sometimes keeps people awake and pain free while surgeons do OPEN BRAIN surgery.

It doesnt get a lot more badass career wise than that... particularly when you work like 30 hours a week and make NFL money.

yet... she still readily admits she'd be happier being a stay-at-home mom. this is a pattern I see all the time in female doctors.

Nate said...

jack... mina jumps to the occasional conclusion... but there is a massive gap between Agent Asher and her.

Nate said...

"I am still not convinced, though I don't give much of a hoot about cars either way. I have always been someone who wants what I want and pretty much ignores everything else."

/facepalm

You're aware that there are spiritual girls who really love jesus who also happen to be hotter than jessica alba in arizona right??? Well... if you were an alpha... you would.

Mina said...

Nate: ok ... I could definitely get rich with all the people who have showed up for a "trail ride" and didn't have a clue how to hold the reins much less actually sit correctly.

So - we're going to need pictures. ;-)

Nate said...

dear God girl... what on earth gave you the impression that I was a city boy?

Nate said...

i can share an amusing story though... DrWho grew up on horses. her daddy was a part time farrier... her kin were all horse people and she had her own.

We hadn't been dating very long when we went to see some of her kin folk at their little farm outside murfreesboro. Julie wanted to ride... and her kin folks didn't mind so off we went. they did warn us of course about the black that could get a little rank.

So....

Of course... Julie said she'd take the black. No way right? I mean I've been around horses and I've ridden... but not as much as julie. No matter. I still had to take the black. She gave me the amused.. "ok...sure!" look...

So... we got them saddled mostly uneventfully... the black swole his belly up... thinking I'd be a dumbass... so I waited for him to exhale and finished up.

black was already acting a little huffy... but DrWho had mounted up on what was clearly the most laid back polite horse ever. So I figured this guy thought I was a bitch... and decided i should make it clear that I wasn't.

I climbed up and took the reins firm. probly firmer than I ended. or maybe I just grabbed the shit out of them... who knows.

What I do know is that big son of bitch reached for the sky and damned near got it. I held on for dear life and jerked the reins trying to get his head down and turned... and succeeded... for the most part. he appeared to settle down for about a split second... then he bolted. WEEEEE!!!! he tried the "scrape him off on the fence" trick... and he tried the "hit his head on the low limb" trick... and he reared a couple more times... but we eventually came to an understanding. I was gonna ride his sorry ass. After all that... I rode him up beside DrWho who was just sitting on her comfy polite mare... and tried to make it look like all of that had happened on purpose.

We rode quite a bit after that... and our experiences were far less eventful.

Mina said...

Looking at this list of "what to do and what not to do" and reviewing my own life in the rearview mirror what I gleen is this script was developed as a generalization of the behavior of generally average people of generally average intelligence.

Like any bell curve within a bell curve there are some that are "more" or "less" but the generalization is meant to apply mainly to the middle or average person.

I did all of the things on this list that the woman is not supposed to do in life and my man looked for exactly the opposite of what he was supposed to look for in a wife ... yet here we are decades later.

The only two possible logical conclusions from that are either:
1. The generalization doesn't work (the explosion of the manosphere the "red pill" lifestyle would tend to disprove that)
or
2. There is a set of people for which the generalization doesn't apply

As for #2 I am not speaking of myself as the "people" - based on my analysis the man's influence here is most important. Personally I am nothing special as far as looks or personality - the only thing I can point to different about me than most average women is my intelligence.

What that tells me is there is a set of men out there who seek out and desire intellectually challenging women. What the manosphere tells me that they are not prepared to deal with or consider that man exists. He is outside the bell curve to which the script applies.

Is my logic faulty or there are other options here that I am not considering?

Nate said...

"2. There is a set of people for which the generalization doesn't apply "

No. What it means is... some folks do win the lottery.

Game is the notion that the lottery is a shitty retirement plan... and an attempt to create a more reliable one.

Mina said...

.. and yes solipsism and all that but I do assume and extrapolate that if if my life worked out this way there must be others.

The fact is that my husband was not the first man who sought me out specifically over prettier, shapelier, (and dumber!) girls when I was in my 20s.

So, given that I know these men are out there and I have met and interacted with them, I cannot and do not believe that my situation is "unique".

Further I'll offer that dismissing my logic out of hand as "Solipsism" would simply confirm my conclusion ...

Mina said...

So: Option #3 We both got lucky and this has happened to no one else, ever, in modern times and it's completely dumb luck that it all worked out.

I find that very difficult to believe. Seems like a Hail Mary to me.

Mina said...

"Game is the notion that the lottery is a shitty retirement plan... and an attempt to create a more reliable one."

Right. Because most people fall into the middle of the bell curve. So, for most people, the Game Script works perfectly.

I agree.

Nate said...

"So: Option #3 We both got lucky and this has happened to no one else, ever, in modern times and it's completely dumb luck that it all worked out. "

No. lots of people win the lottery to varying degrees.

As for it being dumb luck... to a large degree... yes. that is the case. Its dumb luck that you met someone that happens to be just as willing to commit as you are. But its not luck that it lasted. its the commitment that makes it last.

Mina said...

Right. Which proves both of my conclusions.

1. Game theory applies mainly to people in the middle of the bell curve and is extremely useful for helping remove the Lottery effect and provide a more reliably good outcome.

2. All precepts of Game theory do not apply to all people all the time.

Nate said...

Mina... where did you see anyone claim that all game theory applied to everyone equally?

When has anyone claimed alphas give a shit about game?

Nate said...

Also.. your bell curve assumption is false. The lower you are on the spectrum... the more it helps you.

Mina said...

"Mina... where did you see anyone claim that all game theory applied to everyone equally?"

Women in particular who wander in are specifically told that the Game script is absolute and sacrosanct. Had I found the manosphere when I was 22 years old my life could have turned out much differently, had I taken the criticism and absolutism to heart.

The fact is that for some higher-intelligent women, there is a man out there for whom the script doesn't matter and with whom she will have a great life as a wife and also doing the things that she has ambition to do.

There is no reason for them to believe that a generalization written around the average person of average intelligence means that men that don't fit the profile don't exist.

"When has anyone claimed alphas give a shit about game?" - I'm glad you said that because it again proves my point perfectly. These particular alpha types don't give a shit about game or the bell curve guy or any script that applies to them.

They are marching to the tune of their own drummer and looking for a particular type of woman that the manosphere seems insistent on drumming out of existence.

Those men are not being served by the efforts of the manosphere, they are being sabatoged by them.

Nate said...

"They are marching to the tune of their own drummer and looking for a particular type of woman that the manosphere seems insistent on drumming out of existence. "

I don't think there are a lot of men out there looking for feminists... and if they are... they get what they deserve.

Mina said...

Nate: Your horse story did nothing but convince me that you failed to be a leader to your horse.

Horses perform at their very best when they want to follow and perform for a leader, not when they are being man-handled by a bully.
They are a lot like wives in that respect. ;-)

Tact is critically important. I hope you learn some before your next riding adventures.

- and wear a helmet. it's not "cool" but you only have one brain. I have been riding for over 40 years and I wear one every ride - I have even broke several (that could have been my skull.) better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. They have attractive mans helmets with leather tooling these days.

Mina said...

"I don't think there are a lot of men out there looking for feminists... and if they are... they get what they deserve."

Nate: "I don't like your logic and I dismiss it."

Mina: "I win."


Josh said...

Mina,

How old are you, and how long have you been married?

Mina said...

How old are you - Old. Older than you think.

How long have you been married - Forever.

Josh said...

It's a serious question.

Your experience might be different than the current sexual and marriage market today because of when it occurred.

But by all means, if you prefer to get sassy, we're not opposed to administering corporal punishment.

Mina said...

well, when you put it that way ...

I was born in the early 60s and got married in the mid 80s

"Your experience might be different than the current sexual and marriage market today because of when it occurred."

This is a very interesting idea and one I didn't consider.

Cail Corishev said...

What that tells me is there is a set of men out there who seek out and desire intellectually challenging women. What the manosphere tells me that they are not prepared to deal with or consider that man exists.

Not at all. The manosphere and close-by environs are the only place I've heard assortive mating by IQ discussed. Yes, smart guys tend to pair off with smart girls. It's hard to tell how much of that is because life throws them together in school and occupation, which are also highly stratified by IQ, and how much is actual preference, though. Using myself as an example, my IQ was tested at 160, and I've always thought I liked smart women. But after a couple of disastrous relationships, I realized what really happened was I would fall for a girl based on looks and personality and then convince myself that she was smart. I'd see that she liked a particular book series, or could hold up her end of a conversation about something mildly obscure, and tell myself, "Hey, she's really a lot smarter than people give her credit for; that C average in high school means nothing." Only after the relationship soured could I see that she was of average smarts after all. And the one time I did start a relationship where I was counting on her intelligence to make up for the lack of physical attraction, that was the biggest disaster of all.

The truth seems to be: if she's hot, she'll seem smart.

Your original question asked about a young, fit, attractive, brainy chick whom alphas approach by average guys seem to avoid. It wasn't clear what you were asking, so I think some assumed you were unhappy with this situation and looking for advice (wanting more normal guys who might be more into commitment), and others figured you were just bragging. But you seem to have taken offense at the idea that your intelligence just isn't relevant. If a 160-IQ woman says, "How can I attract better husband material," the best advice for her will be the same as if an 80-IQ woman were asking the question: stay fit, be feminine, and don't carry around a bunch of baggage or a chip on your shoulder. Being smart or having a cool job just isn't part of the equation (except as a potential negative, as many noted).

Yes, there are outliers. There are guys who have fetishes for really fat chicks, after all. So maybe there's a guy out there who's determined to marry no less than a 150 IQ. But he still wants her to be hot. He'd prefer a hot 150 to a dumpy 150, so again, the advice to a woman seeking him is the same.

Yes, if you're an extreme outlier who's attracted to something unusual, then game won't help a man find you. But he's not trying to find you, he's trying to find the right woman for him. The idea that, if you have unusual appetites, there's a guy out there who fits them perfectly, is special snowflake thinking. It's the same thinking that sends men stumbling through relationships passively waiting for one to just "click." That crap is for the movies.

Cail Corishev said...

These particular alpha types don't give a shit about game

Alphas don't care about game because they already do it naturally; they don't have to learn it. That's kinda the definition of the term. I'm not sure what "particular alpha types" you're talking about, if they exist at all.

Josh said...

The fact is that for some higher-intelligent women, there is a man out there for whom the script doesn't matter and with whom she will have a great life as a wife and also doing the things that she has ambition to do.

Those men are called gamma males.

VD said...

2. There is a set of people for which the generalization doesn't apply

This is correct. Which is true of ALL generalizations applied to 7 billion people.

Personally I am nothing special as far as looks or personality - the only thing I can point to different about me than most average women is my intelligence. What that tells me is there is a set of men out there who seek out and desire intellectually challenging women. What the manosphere tells me that they are not prepared to deal with or consider that man exists. He is outside the bell curve to which the script applies.

Is my logic faulty or there are other options here that I am not considering?


Your logic is faulty. The fact that you think your only redeeming quality is intelligence doesn't indicate that your husband feels that way.

Moreover, Game theory does not state that no man is attracted to intelligence, only that men do not generally view intelligence to be an attraction factor the way women do. I even provided an example of men who are inordinately likely to be paired off with an intelligent women; science fiction writers.

Let me ask you two questions. Does your husband wear glasses or contacts? And does he have facial hair?

Which proves both of my conclusions.

1. Game theory applies mainly to people in the middle of the bell curve and is extremely useful for helping remove the Lottery effect and provide a more reliably good outcome.

2. All precepts of Game theory do not apply to all people all the time.


No, (1) does not follow and is incorrect. (2) is completely obvious and is has been stated by every single Game theoretician at one point or another.

VD said...

"When has anyone claimed alphas give a shit about game?" - I'm glad you said that because it again proves my point perfectly. These particular alpha types don't give a shit about game or the bell curve guy or any script that applies to them.

They are marching to the tune of their own drummer and looking for a particular type of woman that the manosphere seems insistent on drumming out of existence.

Those men are not being served by the efforts of the manosphere, they are being sabatoged by them.


No, it doesn't do that at all, and you're badly undermining your claim to be intelligent.

Alphas don't care about Game because THEY ALREADY HAVE IT. Game is the conscious systematization and emulation of natural Alpha behavior.

The men who "march to their own drummer" are Sigmas. Sigmas are unpredictable. They might make a fetish of smart girls. They also might make a fetish of wearing the skins of smart girls as masks.

I am an example of sigma. So is Ted Bundy.

What you're actually talking about is gamma males. Intelligence appeals to them because their brains are more feminine than the average man's.

Josh said...

What you're actually talking about is gamma males. Intelligence appeals to them because their brains are more feminine than the average man's.

So first we had gamma males claiming that they too are sigmas.

Now we have women married to gammas claiming that their gamma husbands are actually sigmas.

Because...obviously, if they're married to a sigma, they have a much higher sexual value than if they were married to a plain old gamma.

Josh said...

What you're actually talking about is gamma males. Intelligence appeals to them because their brains are more feminine than the average man's.

Do you think that's really it, or are they just engaging in rationalizing their marriage to manjawed career feminists?

Mina said...

Vox I am not an expert like you are but I have read as much about the "alpha male" as I could and I have discussed it with my husband. I watch his interaction with me and with groups.

I am very confident that he is 100% what you call a 'wolf alpha' and always has been - naturally. I can assure you there is zero% femininization there. Absolutely positively zero. I have read the Gamma and Sigma in detail and those traits do not describe him.

His personality and behavior are what lead me to believe the "outside the bell curve" alpha male exists. The fact that he is not the only one I have personally encountered (or dated before getting married) tells me he is not unique.

So either I misunderstand the definition or I misread someone I have lived with most of my life.

... and - Why is this statement wrong?
1. Game theory applies mainly to people in the middle of the bell curve and is extremely useful for helping remove the Lottery effect and provide a more reliably good outcome.

because a. Game applies to everyone, not just the middle of the bell or because b. it's not used for providing a more reliably good outcome for men seeking marriage?

If a. then wouldn't my 2nd conclusion "2. All precepts of Game theory do not apply to all people all the time. " also be wrong?

Mina said...

Here's the definition I was working from:

Ian Ironwood - three alphas

Josh said...

Mina,

What was your husband's N before he married you?

How would you rate yourself on a 1-10 scale?

Are you hotter than your husband's exes?

How dominant is your husband socially? Is he a leader of men?

Mina said...

Let me ask you two questions. Does your husband wear glasses or contacts?
No - he refuses to even wear reading glasses and needs them desperately

And does he have facial hair?
No. He is very athletic looking and acting, and very fit. Very much a man's man. Super competitive, smart, tough, no-nonsense.

Not a gamma.

Josh said...

I think the "wolf alpha" concept is really just dressing up a beta, delta, or gamma in alpha clothing. Or it could be a contextual alpha.

If you have to re-define term x so that y and z are also x, you're not x.

Josh said...

This is a very interesting idea and one I didn't consider.

That is text book solipsism, by the way.

Mina said...

Josh: If you read the link at Ian's site, that description is my husband. 100%

Ian says that it's Vox's definition, not his. I am just going by what these two guys that are supposed to know are telling me.

http://theredpillroom.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-three-alphas.html

Josh said...

Ian says that it's Vox's definition, not his. I am just going by what these two guys that are supposed to know are telling me.

Vox doesn't have a definition for "wolf alpha."

"wolf alpha" is an attempt to play the "look, I'm an alpha too!" game.

It's the male hamster version of inner beauty.

Mina said...

Josh: I asked for additional conclusions and no I didn't consider that the timing of when I grew up would be a factor.

It seems logical to me that some possibilities will be overlooked.

You guys: always with the labelling. It's a form of dismissal.

VD said...

Ian says that it's Vox's definition, not his. I am just going by what these two guys that are supposed to know are telling me.

Ian's take on the three alphas is incorrect, in my opinion. He's too focused on the social and not enough on the sexual. It reminds me a little of the IT guy who argued for the concept of a "stealth alpha", the unsung competent hero that everyone ignores.

Let's start with the basics. 1) Have most of the women in your social circle expressed some degree of attraction to your husband, even to the point of inspiring some feelings of jealousy in you? 2) Is your husband the leader to whom most of the men in your social circle look for approval and guidance?

Mina said...

Again: Ian Ironwood and Vox forwarded the definitions. I accept them at face value.

Shouldn't I? They are the experts.

Or are you just upset that he is not fitting the profile you wanted him to fit?

Josh said...

It also falls into the "build a better beta" model championed by Susan Walsh and, to a lesser extent, Athol Kay.

By re-defining a beta as a "wolf alpha", it's an attempt to convince women that they should be attracted to a voxian beta or delta because it's just "another form of alpha."

VD said...

I think the "wolf alpha" concept is really just dressing up a beta, delta, or gamma in alpha clothing. Or it could be a contextual alpha.

The adjective modifies the noun.... Actually, Ian is just describing behavior that has nothing to do with one's socio-sexual status. Let me revise my initial conclusion; it's not so much wrong as irrelevant with regards to distinguishing one S-S rank from another.

Read the descriptions. The "wolf alpha" could just as easily be the "wolf delta".

"Wolf Deltas, unlike Bull Deltas, are more interested in finding an excellent wife and devoting themselves utterly to their family."

That has nothing whatsoever to do with socio-sexual rank.

Josh said...

Or are you just upset that he is not fitting the profile you wanted him to fit?

I'm not upset at all. I have no emotional attachment to wherever your husband falls on the hierarchy. You, however, do, thus I think you're engaging in projection.

Mina said...

1) Have most of the women in your social circle expressed some degree of attraction to your husband, even to the point of inspiring some feelings of jealousy in you?
I don't get jealous but yes most of the very few women I socialize with find him attractive and would love to do him.

2) Is your husband the leader to whom most of the men in your social circle look for approval and guidance?
Yes. Definitely. When he is around, he leads and they follow. And they are all tough guys of various ilk. Mostly hard drinking hard living kinds of manly men characters.

VD said...

Again: Ian Ironwood and Vox forwarded the definitions. I accept them at face value. Shouldn't I? They are the experts.

You didn't apply them correctly. You have to use mine first, then you can use Ian's. You can't use Ian's without first determining that your husband is an Alpha by my standard.

Josh said...

Read the descriptions. The "wolf alpha" could just as easily be the "wolf delta".

Oh, ok. So it's more of a mindset towards time preferences, sexual partners, etc?

Although I'm not sure where the "bear" subtype fits in. Wouldn't someone who is asexual fall outside the ss hierarchy?

Mina said...

I am unable to find your original definition. I was only able to find Ian's. Can I have a link, please?

Mina said...

Vox: Your general definition of alpha was him in high school / college.

I think Ian's definition fits him better now after many years of marriage.

VD said...

Okay, if he is sexually dominant and socially dominant, he is obviously an alpha. That's hardly difficult.

This raises the question of why you consider yourself much more intelligent than attractive. Are you considerably smarter than he is?

VD said...

I am unable to find your original definition. I was only able to find Ian's. Can I have a link, please?

Upper right corner, Foundations: The Hierarchy.

I think Ian's definition fits him better now after many years of marriage.

Ian's definitions are irrelevant from my perspective. I don't care what people's goals happen to be, especially given that they tend to be dynamic over time. But if that's his thing, that's certainly fine by me.

Mina said...

He is much smarter than I am. More secure and confident, too.

I am average looking. Short, small boobs, but I keep myself in perfect shape and pretty clean most of the time (I am mostly outside with the horses in my free time.)

Feminine? Not so much ... I live mostly in breeches, chaps or jeans. We drink and shoot pool in the basement, that's when I make an effort to wear things he likes to see me in or when we go out to dinner or to a party. He does not allow me to wear make up. At all.

So - if what he wanted was someone younger, prettier and more feminine than me, she would have been easy for him to find and acquire. Obviously that is not what attracts him. He tells me outright in no uncertain terms: "it's your big, beautiful brain". (Well - and he really does love my ass. But that's a whole 'nother topic and certainly not worth marrying someone for, ha!)

To Josh's point the only reason dissecting my husband is interesting is because he is an alpha and he doesn't fit the stereotype of what an alpha male should be looking for. I am not the woman that any alpha male should have been looking for - and my life to that point included things that should have put me on the "shun" list. Yet here we are. Decades later.

Why? My conclusion: Because some alpha men are looking for something other than what the manosphere says they should be looking for - they value intelligence and are willing to over look some of what's been done by the woman on the "what not to do" list in order to have her. Given of course she's not grossly fat, ugly, pick-your-poison as well.

I also don't want to let this point get confused: my being an engineer is interesting not because I think my husband is "interested" in my career or engineering but because I have the kind of brain that makes it possible for me to be an engineer. He does not put huge value into me being a "career woman" (neither do I really, it's mental stimulation more than anything else) - He does like that the money kind of pays for the horse habit. He likes that I'm smart and engineering is an indication of that intelligence. But love my career or that I'm a "career woman"? No. It's not a attraction item. That part of the general assertion on the thread I do agree with.

Mina said...

BTW: Wanted to thank you for the opportunity to explore this concept on your blog and for everyone's patience as the discussion developed.

I am meeting the man himself at his Chicago office today at 5pm for drinks at the Green Mill with all his buddies/crew, then we're off to the Soundgarden concert and a probable very late start tomorrow morning.

So, I'll be leaving to catch the train in a little while - Enjoy gnawing while I'm gone! :-)

VD said...

So - if what he wanted was someone younger, prettier and more feminine than me, she would have been easy for him to find and acquire.

Ah, I see now. It's a chemistry and comfort thing. You're quite fortunate, that's one of the more stable foundations. The thing is, he likes your intelligence, but it's not the main factor; ask him if he'd theoretically prefer trade you in on a woman who is an SD smarter.

I'm guessing the answer is no. Which should answer your point about your intelligence being your main draw. You sound personable and relatively laid-back, which counts for a lot with most men, particularly intelligent men who hate distractions, disturbances, and drama.

Nate said...

"Nate: Your horse story did nothing but convince me that you failed to be a leader to your horse.

Horses perform at their very best when they want to follow and perform for a leader, not when they are being man-handled by a bully.
They are a lot like wives in that respect. ;-)

Tact is critically important. I hope you learn some before your next riding adventures. "

Mina... you really don't read well at all. I'm going to chalk it up to old age.

I was 18 when that happened.

Daniel said...

Mina, you are underrating your attractiveness: fit, a nice ass and breeches? Come on, girl.

He's smarter than you. He could give a rip about your brains. He's being polite and complimenting you as a platform to compliment your ass.

I compliment my wife on her (lower than mine) intelligence all the time...the same way I tell my children. I'm genuinely surprised she figured something out that I thought might be beyond her. It has nothing to do with my attraction to her, although I suppose it might make her feel more secure and loved (and long-term attraction to me) but that isn't the point of it all.

You were hot without makeup when you were younger and insecure about yourself. He liked what he saw and the fact that you were a straight-up farm girl with no drama. His whatever they are calling it now: youth goggles or whatever - still sees you in that light.

You are failing to note that you are a mildly insecure aging natural happy hottie with a committed alpha husband who fits the textbook descriptions of the hierarchy pretty much close to perfectly.

And if that's your only problem in the world, keep on rocking.

Otherwise, you have my deepest sympathies at marrying up to the max, staying fit, natural and foxy, and having a committed relationship that falls neatly into the big box of model Game non-outliers!

Anonymous said...

In contrast to the belief of the commentors here is the evidence of male doctors. Male doctors marry female doctors or PhD geneticists. The lowest they marry are female RNs.
My husband has taught surgery to medical students for 20 years, and is adamant male students chose only intelligent wives.

Daniel said...

Sure, Annie. You are having reading comprehension problems.

No one ever said doctors don't marry PhDs.

If you are seriously going to tell me, however, that the majority of alpha surgeons don't marry wives dumber than them, I think I have a bridge you might be interested in.

And when you suggest that the lowest they marry is RNs, you are saying that the lowest they marry is college graduates, which is pretty much the largest pool of midwits out there.

You need to read more carefully. Why on earth does your husband have to advocate for something (intelligence) that allegedly these doctors are naturally attracted to?

Because, Annie, no man is attracted to intelligence. Intelligence in a wife is a consolation prize for some men, a damnation for others, and for most? Absolutely irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

@Daniel,
So you are intelligent and married a dumb wife. OKay, we get it. Justify away.

SarahsDaughter said...

Is reading comprehension still an indicator of intelligence?

Daniel said...

I assume you are using the royal we, Annie, or are you there with your husband's harem of hot genius marriagable macrocephalics?

I'm curious: what scientific research did this man of science do in order to come to the conclusion that young doctors would be better off by "marrying smart?"

Carlotta said...

@ Sarah's Daughter, keep rocking. Don't worry about all the warnings.

@ Nate, thanks for answering the personal question. No snark, just honestly wanted to know.

@ Mina, HE thinks your hot. He knows you like to consider yourself smart, so he compliments you in a way he knows you will like.

My Husband tells me I am the smartest women he knows, then he grabs my tits and ass. It is kind of like how they compliment your hair when you scream that you had it done and no one noticed. They are doing it to be nice, then just want to grab something.

Just enjoy.

Nate said...

". Male doctors marry female doctors or PhD geneticists. The lowest they marry are female RNs. "

BAHAHAHAHA

I literally know 4 male doctors that married their hot PAs.

kadir karabaş said...

XXX vids porn teenpornwatchx movie. Free porn movie pornfuckyx videos. High porn videos pornhubhd porn.

Mina said...

@Nate: Why I said what I did about your horse story wasn't because of ~what~ happened but how you ~conveyed~ the story (my reading comprehension is generally good and what you communicated was quite clear): "I was going to ride his sorry ass", "jerked the reins" , “I figured this guy thought I was a bitch... and decided i should make it clear that I wasn't.”, “big son of bitch reached for the sky”. These are not the words of a tactful, thoughtful rider who would show his horse the way by being a leader. These are the words of a person willing to bully a gentle animal for no reason other that to prove he can. No real horse person would talk this way about a ride or a horse, even if they were talking today about a ride 20 years ago.

For example how do these statements communicate a current understanding and knowledge of horses? “He wasn't understanding my cues so I should have taken a minute to clarify them for him before heading out”, “I asked with one rein for him to turn his head and 'give' with softness to create a connection before our ride”, “he started to lift his front end and I decided that either asking him to drop his head or pivot his hindquarters would be better choices”.

The language you chose to convey the story does not imply that you hold any respect for horses today or that you have any understanding today as to how you likely caused his bad behavior then.

Horses are prey animals - that means they are instinctively afraid of animals that act like predators. So if you jump on his back and act like a cougar you shouldn't be surprised if he reacts as though he expects to be eaten. Manly man western riders like Pat Parelli, Buck Brannaman and Clinton Anderson are not made less manly by the fact that they treat horses tactfully – they “get” the fact that bullying a fearful, helpless and gentle animal that is willing to give itself to you if you ask it properly is the mark of a lesser man. I hope you will, too.

Mina said...

Clinton Anderson and Mindy - freestyle

Watch this video and see if you think this cowboy shows his horse he's not a bitch, or calls his horse a son of a bitch, or refers to getting on as "riding his sorry ass" ... the riding starts at 4:17 but the free style at the beginning is stupendous.

Horses are prey animals. They won't perform like the one in the video if you beat them and bully them - Clinton is a leader and the horse willingly follows. That is what enables the horse's true beauty and effortless athletic performance. (note: he is not cracking the whip to cue the horse, it is a prop for the show)

Xenophon of ancient Greece - "nothing forced can ever be beautiful"

"Xenophon: Athenian historian, disciple of Socrates, and cavalry officer. Xenophon applied the nascent philosophical training he received from the great Athenian philosopher--as well as his experience with the cavalry--to the art of horse training for military purposes, writing the classic treatise on the subject.

In his search for the root of ideal horse training, Xenophon hit on the idea of training horses by teaching the horse to trust humans and allowing the horse to enjoy itself while performing complex cavalry maneuvers--a clear improvement over older methods of punishing the horse for its failures."

These philosophies are still in use today and are considered the "classical" method of horse training ... from which Clinton Anderson, Pat Parelli, Buck Brannaman, et al, take their cue.

Mina said...

I appreciate the effort folks took to read my posts. At this point I think I tend to mostly agree with you, esp after our night out last night (some interesting incidents and interactions I experienced; got hit on twice - once by a man and once by a woman LOL)

Part of the point I trying to was make is that a more intelligent woman is generally going to seek mental stimulation through a career. “Having a career” does seem to be one thing on the "what not to do" list as Pip was bluntly told at the outset of this thread and as is highlighted in the original post.

So based on your responses I wonder how can it be simultaneously OK for a woman to be more intelligent than average (implies she probably has a career) and yet continue to include “having a career” on the "what not to do" list" if a woman wants to find a good man to marry?

This is where I am getting a little lost in your conclusion.

About "women don't hang onto careers once the baby comes" (see responses to Pip) - while I do understand that it's a Generalization and "not all women are like that", it seems pretty evident to me that the above average intelligence woman is going to be more likely than any generalized average woman to keep her job and maintain her career even if she has kids.

I am really surprised that Nate personally knows three women who took all the time and trouble to go to 8+ years of vet school, had the brains to get the 4.0 grades to get in and were then willing to immediately throw that away when kids came along. Seems like either the farriers misunderstood or the story is a gross exaggeration - which horsey people are prone to (referring to the farriers and the employer vets.)

I'd certainly question the character and integrity of someone who'd go through all that school, do well, invest tons of $$ and then ditch her job as soon as she got pregnant. Seems like the lack of character and integrity in those women would be the root of that problem. Which I guess is a lot of what Game Theory is about: women's lack of character and integrity and trying to prevent the situation of them acting out solely based on hypergamy, right?

So maybe the answer is that its ok for a woman to have a career if she's intelligent and feels she needs one for the mental stimulation as long as she also has the character and integrity to commit to it, but to a lessor degree than she commits to her marriage? Assuming that the man interested in her/married to her is more intelligent than she is and also pretty heavy in the alpha tendencies. Does that sound right?

Mina said...

"The thing is, he likes your intelligence, but it's not the main factor; ask him if he'd theoretically prefer trade you in on a woman who is an SD smarter."

This is a great question. Very smart. :-D

"intelligent men who hate distractions, disturbances, and drama."

That is so him. To a "T"

I am really glad I took the time to write. You invested a lot of time reading and replying to me. I appreciate it.

Mina said...

"So maybe the answer is that its ok for a woman to have a career if she's intelligent and feels she needs one for the mental stimulation as long as she also has the character and integrity to commit to it, but to a lessor degree than she commits to her marriage? Assuming that the man interested in her/married to her is more intelligent than she is and also pretty heavy in the alpha tendencies. Does that sound right? "

"That's the hypergamy paradox. The higher a woman goes, the less choice she has."

If I had to boil down my understanding from the top of the thread to the bottom:

Above average intelligent females have a limited potential pool of mates, because most men do not want to marry women more intelligent than they are. Having a career they are committed to reduces that pool even further. You say that the men in the pool who would be interested in these women would rather have the hash slinging waitress at the burger joint, all other things being equal (looks, boob size, femininity,etc) I say that some of the men in the pool would be more interested in the more intelligent woman than the burger joint woman.

By now you've boiled that above average intelligent woman's potential pool of mates down to a really low %. Probably statistically insignificant. She will never find him - or they will never find each other. At the end of the day, the best bet for an above average intelligence woman is to be pretty, in shape, have good character and integrity, be fun to talk to / hang around with and hope that men overlook the fact that she is smarter than them and/or has a career.

The logic seems to support it. Do I understand it yet?


Brad Andrews said...

> You're aware that there are spiritual girls who really love jesus who also happen to be hotter than jessica alba in arizona right??? Well... if you were an alpha... you would.

Then I am not an alpha. So? I didn't pursue those. I could have, but I didn't and had no pull to do so. That was my point.

I pursue what I want to pursue, only slightly driven by outside influences. Your assertion (and Josh's) would only be true if I had a deep desire for that.

Believe what you want though....

Mina said...

another bloggers view on the issue:

"One final and important point: intelligence is still undoubtedly a positive trait in women, so long as it does not undermine the man's strength by exceeding his. One of my favorite qualities of my most recent ex-girlfriend was her willingness and ability to talk for hours about our observations, ideas, and experiences related to a vast variety of subjects. She was always curious and often pensive. She was probably the smartest girl I have ever dated, and it might not be a coincidence that she was my most serious girlfriend.

So to conclude: a woman's intelligence is undoubtedly an attractive quality, but it has the negative side-effect of undermining a man's ability to feel powerful, and a woman's ability to admire him. The moral? Seek out men that are smarter than you, or at least, men that you still admire greatly in spite of their lesser intelligence. Keep at an arm's length any man whose overall abilities you start to question. Be cognizant of his feelings of strength in the relationship, always making sure that he feels - or rather, knows - that he is more powerful than you. And finally, smarter-than-average women: rest assured that your intelligence is not a negative in the dating world. While it is true that unintelligent men might be turned off by their own relative inability, your intelligence will be highly valued by the men you find most attractive - that is, the smartest ones."

http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2013/01/what-men-think-about-your-intelligence.html

Daniel said...

That other blogger is dead, dead, dead wrong, and mixing up the signals to a laughable degree. His advice is horrid.

Intelligence can be overcome and accommodated in the dating world, but for women, it is most certainly a negative. A smart guy who can get a girl who is dumber than him who knows she's dumber than him will take her over the girl who is dumber than him but thinks she's really intelligent.

Better advice to women is to stop taking excessive pride/concern in your intelligence. It isn't something you had anything to do with, and it doesn't make you special.

Anonymous said...

@Daniel, you've helped me to understand that men in the blogosphere who deny that women's intelligence can be attractive, are either 1) kinda dumb or insecure about their intelligence, or 2) intelligent men who married dumb wives and feel the need to justify.

Thanks again.

Cail Corishev said...

He tells me outright in no uncertain terms: "it's your big, beautiful brain". (Well - and he really does love my ass. But that's a whole 'nother topic and certainly not worth marrying someone for, ha!)

It becomes clear now. He married you for your looks (and personality), like any normal male, but he honestly admires your intelligence. Nothing at all wrong with that. He's also not an idiot, so he knows women prefer to be complimented on their intelligence, or anything but their looks, so he does that. He's not lying, but he's not going out of his way to break down the details either.

As I mentioned in my previous comment, when a guy is hot for a woman, she seems smart to him -- and fun, and virtuous, and caring, etc. But it starts with "does she give me a special feeling in my pants," and that happens way before he gets a glimpse at your mind. Don't sell your ass short: a nice ass represents fitness, health, reproductive potential, and good sex, so it is a worthy reason to get married -- at least as worthy a reason as a good brain.

At the end of the day, the best bet for an above average intelligence woman is to be pretty, in shape, have good character and integrity, be fun to talk to / hang around with and hope that men overlook the fact that she is smarter than them and/or has a career.

I'd say that's a decent summation of it, though as I said before, you could change "above average intelligence woman" to "woman" and the exact same advice would apply. Thing is, there are different ways to be smart. Some smart people can't help but flaunt it, coming off like a genius version of Cliff Claven with a pompous opinion about everything, always willing to jump in and tell you when you're wrong. Others learn to have some tact, keep their knowledge to themselves most of the time, pick their spots when it can be helpful, and offer it in a non-offensive way.

Likewise, a smart woman can apply her intelligence to developing homemaking skills from cooking to budgeting, to understanding men and what a man needs, to learning "finishing school" skills like music and dance, and ultimately to finding a good husband and helping to raise and educate their kids. Or she can focus on a PhD and getting into the top firm in town, then squeeze dates into work lunches, talk a lot about her academic achievements and career goals, and wonder why men seem intimidated by her. (They're not; they're just not looking for a boss.)

Lastly, I think you overstate the problem a smart woman will have finding a smarter man. Unless you're in the stratosphere up at 200 IQ or something, that shouldn't be that hard. For one thing, the female bell curve is steeper than the male, which means that as you get to the higher (or lower) ends, there are more men than women. So if you're a +2SD gal targeting +3SD guys, there may be more men for you percentage-wise than if you were average looking for a +1SD. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but if you follow me: the ratio of +3SD men to +1SD men may actually be higher than the ratio of +2SD women to +0SD women, giving you more men to choose from (as long as you know where to find them and don't mind sorting through a lot of nerds). Anyone know if that's the case?

Mina said...

"Lastly, I think you overstate the problem a smart woman will have finding a smarter man"

I see what you're saying, my point was more that the pool of men > +1SD is small, and the fact that a woman has a career makes it smaller as some large percentage of those +1SD will be more interested in burger joint girl than career girl.

I like where you're going too, I hope you get an answer. An interesting tack to take.

Mina said...

"I'd say that's a decent summation of it, though as I said before, you could change "above average intelligence woman" to "woman" and the exact same advice would apply."

- Exactly. What I was saying in other words: Even for above average smart women the advice is the same as it is for women in general.

So, the generalization does apply to the entire bell curve after all.

Daniel said...

Glad to help, Annie. Any anonymous dolt I can assist on the way to childless spinsterhood, thereby improving our culture's gene pool, is a sweet victory for the educational process.

Serious question though: why, under any circumstances would an intelligent man with a wife dumber than him ever need to justify such a relationship?

More simply: how is it unjust to marry someone of lesser intelligence?

Mina said...

"you've helped me to understand that men in the blogosphere who deny that women's intelligence can be attractive, are either 1) kinda dumb or insecure about their intelligence"

I do think there is a bit of element in this too. Present company (Vox) excluded of course. I reserve judgement on the rest of the blog respondents for now ...

And actually I give Daniel a lot of credit too - Many of his point were right on target, his logic is very sound and he was more than willing to spend time analyzing what I wrote and replying to it thoughtfully. This is not the work of an unintelligent or insecure person.

You however are responding to him in a very closed posture and seem unwilling to consider his viewpoint, esp if you are mentoring above average intelligence women who are trying to get married!

Mina said...

My apologies, Cail Corishev - also lots of good info and your posts were super helpful.

For some reason I was mixing you and Daniel together. Your logic is similarly assembled.

Nate said...

" No real horse person would talk this way about a ride or a horse, even if they were talking today about a ride 20 years ago. "

Again... you have no idea how this works.

I conveyed the sentiments exactly as I felt them at the time. The thoughts that went through my head at the time.

And do spare me the "real horse person" bullshit.

I've seen the mostest realest horse person in the world pinned on the ground and nearly EATEN by a particularly angry horse.

Horse whisperer my ass.

Mina said...

"How do you know when Nate something ignorant about horses?"

"His mouth is moving (his fingers are typing on the keyboard)"

I rest my case.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.