Here’s where it gets interesting for philosophers and warriors of Game alike: While mate guarding may offer some temporary or discrete relationship security, multiple acts of mate guarding will paradoxically increase longer term relationship fragility. The mechanism by which this LTR instability is generated is a status feedback loop; if a man mate guards, his woman will subconsciously evaluate his romantic worth downward because (her sensitive idware will reason) only a beta male would feel the need to mate guard. An alpha male would not; his aloofness would be perceived as proof of his impenetrable high status.At the end of the day, people will do what they decide to do. There is no controlling them; the failure of one totalitarian government after another has shown that not even the threat of lethal force will suffice. The only reliable "mate-guarding" tactic is to do absolutely nothing at all, except to be sufficiently desirable that it is eminently clear that you can find a new mate whenever you wish.
Yes, when a beta male mate guards, his girlfriend will proclaim in the moment her ego-stroked thrill at his display of jealousy, but over time the accretion of those displays will erode her charitable judgment of his mate value. This is why women are viscerally disgusted by the thought of overly “possessive” boyfriends.
Saturday, March 22, 2014
The mistake of mate-guarding
The Chateau explains why showing how much you care when a rival expresses interest in your woman is a problem:
28 comments:
I can see how this can create a difficult dichotomy.
On one hand a man is expected to defend against threats. On the other hand defending against a threat can be viewed as weakness, or a perceived weakness as a man. Since we know the female mind doesn't work the same as a mans, it means you may have to walk thin line between protective and possessive.
About 4 years ago I had real threat situation that the wife thought was act of passiveness. It resolved itself when she learned that the man flirting with her was a registered sex offender who was probably more interested in the kids than in her.
Yes, a woman wants to know that her man can fight off threats, and doing it once in a while might make her hot; but if it happens a lot, it tells her the man is weak. Strong men don't get challenged very often. The alpha in a pack of wolves doesn't have to fight off challengers every day, after all. If it gets to the point where he does, that means he's on the way down soon, and his pack will know it.
Just guessing here, but I would think that if she perceives an actual threat to her, she'll have no problem with him fending it off; quite the contrary. If the threat is not against her, but against his relationship with her, she'll see him as weak if he intervenes.
So mate guard stalker creeps and amog reasonable threats?
Just guessing here, but I would think that if she perceives an actual threat to her, she'll have no problem with him fending it off; quite the contrary. If the threat is not against her, but against his relationship with her, she'll see him as weak if he intervenes.
Yep.
It's probably different for married guys, particularly if you have kids, but I've always viewed this kind of thing as a shit test. If she wants to shut him down, she can do it without involving you. Every woman learns how to do that in her teens. If she actually plans to cheat she'll do that too, and you probably won't see it coming at all. If she's allowing a suitor to buzz around she's really waiting to see what you'll do. Maybe you'll lose her if you end up looking weak.
I'd probably just dump her. Who needs the aggravation?
I would side more with Cail's comments.
The advice here seems to be "never be less than perfect." Always being able to find someone else is not always sufficient to keep what you have.
Some of this is more like the "if you love it let it go" meme that is rather dubious.
Some aloofness is attractive. Too much is not good for a marriage.
Those who "mate guard" and are possessive of their women and have to have control over them are always narcissistic, i.e. of the "Dark Triad."
We have a dilemma here, don't we?
Considering how much CH and the manosphere espouses evolution and the alpha example in the animal kingdom I'm surprised there isn't more following the Lion's or Wolf's path of aggressively guarding your harem. But I guess you have to be in a small tribe setting for that to take place to begin with.
Oh, you can guard. Just guard by giving her that look, if she is enjoying the attention, that she is playing the worst part of her type. Call her a slut, with your eyes, dress her down, then laugh and go get yourself a drink. If she isn't interested, and you should know, laugh at the guy attempting to interlope as if his shoes are on backwards. Perhaps even give him some tips. Or just ignore him completely.
If she is really yours, you shouldn't have any issue, just... a little fun from time to time.
The advice here seems to be "never be less than perfect."
Well, yeah. That's the goal.
Sure, you'll fall short, we all do. But if you start rationalizing it, you'll fall even shorter, and then shorter, and shorter...
Alpha mindset = failures mean either you did something wrong or else just got unlucky, but in either case, next time you will almost certainly do better, especially since you learned something from this mistake.
Gamma mindset = failure is nobody's fault, you can't blame yourself, if only so and so hadn't done such and such, but they'll probably do it again next time, the game is rigged, it's all hopeless, there's nothing you can do, you're a victim of circumstance.
If the threat is not against her, but against his relationship with her, she'll see him as weak if he intervenes.
The paradox is that a woman does want to be possessed by her man, but doesn't want him to be "possessive." So if he makes her tingle, then seeing him defend his ownership of her can be exciting and make her feel safe. But if he has to do it too often, he looks weak, and then she doesn't want to belong to him anymore and her entire perception changes.
Also, it's one thing to take on a challenger man-to-man, taking for granted that she's with you. It's completely different to nag her about how she reacts to other men, which is what a BETA is much more likely to do. That just makes you look insecure. Showing any insecurity about her attraction to you will kill it faster than anything.
Another one of those hard-to-make choices; emulating alpha can be really difficult many times. I suppose the rule should be 1/10 cockblocking, the rest of the time act firm and unconcerned; perhaps laugh it off if her eyes wander off, be serious but not peevish if someone else tries to hit on your girl.
CailCoroshev: The paradox is that a woman does want to be possessed by her man, but doesn't want him to be "possessive."
I don't know if that is so true. Women want to be owned, i.e., possessed. What they don't want is for their mate to have a needy possession. Rather a strong man who both owns her and keeps her in her place is desired; but not a weaker man mate guarding because he is afraid and fearful of losing her.
fuark me....too much aloofness backfires. Im a classic case of it.
Off-topic but is it me getting older (26), or do a lot of young girls in their 20s look really old nowadays.
For some of them it really stands out, they look 30 or older, and some nearing the end of their 20s I'd have guessed nearly 40!
Maybe it's me just naturally looking at women who are a tad older than I used to, or is it all the parting and the "wild" (as they put it) lifestyle that wears them out? I know we grumble about used up women etc, but a lot of these young girls are really looking it. And that's not even including all the multiple tonne shoggoths.
Females are aging BADLY anymore. Not enough fat in their diets, I think. Too many fools buying into the low-fat, high carb myth?
Matamoros, that's what I meant. When a woman says a man is "possessive," she means she feels like he's trying to control her against her will, suppressing her free spirit or whatever. That's very different from her fantasy of being possessed by a man who fully turns her on, just like in all her romance porn.
It's a catch-22: if you're dominant enough that your woman enjoys being possessed by you, she's very unlikely to stray in the first place, so you won't have any reason to mate-guard. She might flirt with a guy in front of you as a shit-test, but you can stop that by drawing a line. On the other hand, if you have reason to mate-guard, she's probably already stopped enjoying your possession, so she'll see whatever you do as the needy type.
Thinking on Bond villains, remember the one who had Kim Basinger on his boat? Never Say Never Again.
And he gets crazy jealous when Bond kisses her right in front of the mirrors? From that moment forward, you just couldn't respect that villain anymore. Compare that with many of the other Bond villains, who have Dark Triad in abundance and never seem to lack for female company. The ones who get all butthurt and jealous of Bond lose a lot of appeal as the movie progresses.
Bob, I noticed after meeting my wife, who is South American, that white women show age much more rapidly than do darker-skinned ladies. The flip side of that coin is that brown-skinned women often just turn into a dumpster fire after age 45 or 3 kids... but a significant portion have the Racquel Welch/Sophia Lauren MILF gene, too.
Been there, wrote that:
http://therationalmale.com/2012/08/27/girls-night-out
"The secret of the GNO (girls night out) shit test is, the truth of the matter is, that if a woman is determined to cheat on you, there’s really nothing you can do about it. You can protect your own genetic interests, but whether it’s on a GNO or with some guy from the office, if a woman wants to fuck, she’ll find a way to fuck and all the psychological, possessive arm twisting in the world wont change that desire. The covert message in this is what’s important."
Rollo
I don't care to much. I figure if a woman is the type to leave for someone else, she's not a person I'd want around in first place.
What Lindauer think guys do on a GNO.
Don't buy Lindauer.
Every single primate mate guards. Alpha primates hoard and guard females and punish male interlopes. I cannot recall a single historical human Alpha figure that did not also hoard and guard his harem, punishing harshly interlopers. It's as Alpha as guarding your person, food source, children, status or your place in the hierarchy. Letting some monkey come in and take from you without penalty is the epitome of weakness.
Now, it may be argued that it is futile, particularly in a modern society where hoarding females and punishing interlopers is not tolerated (particularly for the average wanna-be Alpha mimicking chump). It may be argued that it makes no sense given the social mayhem that exists between the genders. But mate guarding is instinctively Alpha and every man of (true) power will use his power to guard his mate(s).
Those that argue a "True Alpha" just hits it and lets some Beta raise his offspring have a dearth of historical examples to cite.
I'm compelled to point out too that many of the comments here, as well as the CH article predicates their actions on what the female wants or how she views her man is he intervenes. for example:
CH: "his woman will subconsciously evaluate his romantic worth downward because (her sensitive idware will reason) only a beta male would feel the need to mate guard. An alpha male would not; his aloofness would be perceived as proof of his impenetrable high status."
The supporting basis for the "Alpha Male's" behavior is how his female will perceive his actions. Stop and think about that for a moment. What kind of Alpha Male bases his behavior on how he is perceived by a female? This rationale is nothing but placating the female and yielding to her frame lest you lose her.
Tried and tested advice for the up and comers: Reprimand your girl if she green-lights other men. Kick her to the curb if she keeps it up. Have a backbone in front of other men or they will walk all over you and take whats yours fearing no reprisal. Anything else wreaks of a spineless cuckold chump.
Amritsar escorts service
Call girl in Amritsar
Amritsar Escorts
Amritsar Call girls
Escort in Amritsar
Independent Escort in Amritsar
Amritsar independent escorts
Escorts service Amritsar
Amritsar Escorts Agency
Amritsar Female Escorts
Amritsar independent Escorts
Females are aging BADLY anymore. Not enough fat in their diets, I think. Too many fools buying into the low-fat, high carb myth?
Males age faster than females do, according to this: http://thehotbodsquad.com/take-care-of-your-face/, which means female age like fine wine and cheese while males wilt too quickly.
Other than that, avoid dating and/or marrying female models, soldiers, cops, or firefighters. They tend to upstage other men.
Tried and tested advice for the up and comers: Reprimand your girl if she green-lights other men. Kick her to the curb if she keeps it up. Have a backbone in front of other men or they will walk all over you and take whats yours fearing no reprisal. Anything else wreaks of a spineless cuckold chump.
My husband does that with me. He reprimands me a lot like my dad does for green-lighting other men. He's so devoted like my dad that he red-lights others a lot.
About 4 years ago I had real threat situation that the wife thought was act of passiveness. It resolved itself when she learned that the man flirting with her was a registered sex offender who was probably more interested in the kids than in her.
It's no wonder women also cheat with sex offenders who even frame the husband for child molestation and rob him of his money when it's not the husband's fault but the manstress's, or male mistress's.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.