There are one and more women between Cinderella and the Prince, who is handsome, charming, and has lots of money, status, and power. Cinderella acts to remove the female competition between her and the Prince so that she can take her rightful place as the Princess of the realm. The story line is generally consumed by scenes of females going at each other as they compete for the Alpha Male. The “bodice ripping” at the end of the chapters are thinly veiled rape fantasies. The Prince eventually finds Cinderella so “hot” that he cannot control himself. His lack of control excites her … because, it represents her final victory over the female competition who are unable to drive the Prince to sexual frenzy. The final scene fades as Cinderella takes her rightful place on the throne next to the Prince. Cinderella and the Prince live happily ever after.Women aren't just Alpha chasers, they are status-seeking intrasex assassin rape fantasists. And you're going to put THAT on your pedestal?
Sunday, February 15, 2015
Intrasex assassins
A commenter at Steve Sailer's succinctly describes what women want:
66 comments:
Indeed. The more you realise they're silly little creatures, and the more you treat them like dirt, the more they're drawn to you. This is something most men will never, and can never, accept.
"This is something most men will never, and can never, accept."
One wonders how this squares with natural selection. Seems like such a dramatic misunderstanding of reproductive realities would be rapidly and decisively selected away from.
Two word: competition anxiety.
I also believe this is part of why seemingly great sex lives dry up after marriage. If the man has decent character, it takes the competition off the table. When the competition goes, so does the anxiety that motivates the sex.
That's why it is so important for men to stay in shape. Women read that, on a subconscious level, as him remaining attractive to other women. It's also why they like to fatten up their husbands and render him less attractive.
Counter-intuitive, but it makes sense within the context of intrasex competition. Then they can't figure out why they don't want him anymore either.
The current reality is the opposite. Women don't acquire their wants and the result is the fantasies to keep them warm at night plus their cats. Cinderella reflects the still hot young girl with ambitions to be one thing, marriage with a prince. Marriage is often way down on the list even for rich women. A fantasy it still is. Perhaps the fantasy is actually having a fairy godmother who cares about you more than your mother will.
It's also why they like to fatten up their husbands and render him less attractive.
Are you saying they do this on purpose?
Are you saying they do this on purpose?
Not necessarily consciously, but yes. They'll tell a husband who is lifting weights that he is getting too big, just like they'll tell a woman who is losing weight that she is getting too skinny. Basically, their competitive instincts are at war with their sexual desires.
Interesting. It's something I've suspected.
If your wife is after you to work out more or dress better, that is a good sign. That means she is interested and she is invested in you. If she is after you to work out less or dress worse, that's indicative of a problem of some type. Could be competitive insecurity, could be she wants to lower you to her level.
Remember, women see relationships like men see sports. They see competition, strategy, offense, defense, etc. They'll try to take away other people's strengths while exploiting their weaknesses. It's not even a completely conscious activity, just as men in sports will instinctively react to opponents strenghts and weaknesses.
If a woman is threatened by how hot another woman's long hair is, she'll tell her she'll look cute with it short. She'll play the part of the little helper, the same way a basketball player will fake a pass or a shot.
'The more you realise they're silly little creatures, and the more you treat them like dirt, the more they're drawn to you. This is something most men will never, and can never, accept.'
Because it's false understanding. This only draws in women who have no idea what real love is supposed to look like or be about. Their idea of love is being treated like dirt because that's the only type of attention they ever got.
" And you're going to put THAT on your pedestal?"
Dumb question, but what's the alternative? I look at women, at least women I'm infatuated with, and I *want* to believe in them. I want them to be something more, something special. So it is that I convince myself that red flags aren't red flags. I forgive mistakes and rationalize and justify whatever I need to so I can hold onto the fantasy.
And when I finally can't ignore the base flaws, I'm disgusted. So I'm stuck between two extremes, and I honestly don't know how to find a middle ground. Either I'm fully committed to loving her, or I'm full of sour piss because she's not who I wanted her to be.
I don't know how to love someone I don't trust and respect. Maybe I'm a Gamma, what with the way I let all of this nonsense affect my mood on a daily basis. I really don't know.
' So I'm stuck between two extremes, and I honestly don't know how to find a middle ground.'
View them as human beings.
The competition angles are almost endless. Before marriage, women seen to see sex as beating out the competition .... no matter how sleezy or promiscous the man, he's with her even as he is free to be with others, if only for that night. After marriage, a man truly has chosen her, but she doesn't see it that way.... she's now her only option, and without the competition, she sees that as an obligation rather than a victory.
Think basketball. Which victory do you enjoy more... the one where you win game 7 by one point, or the one you win easily because the other team can't compete? This isn't how we see our relationships, but it's more common among women than we realize.
View them as human beings.
View us as female human beings. Not by-proxy men. Accept what we are.
~ Stingray
"View them as human beings."
This sounds fair. At first. But then I wonder: do I love and respect humans who make bad life decisions? No, not really. So. Why would I love and respect a woman who wants to be taken by an asshole "bad boy"? It's pathetic. I judge her as pathetic, just as I judge any other human being who makes that decision.
I try to divorce pathetic people from my mind. I don't typically loathe them, of course, but that's only because I never expected more out of them. I reserve my loathing for those whom I did expect more of, who (I feel) ripped the carpet out from under my feet. Was it fair of me to expect more of them? Probably not.
I try to surround myself with high-value people. The more I learn about the nature of women in general, the more I wonder how many high-value women exist. At least by my definition. Perhaps I need to reevaluate my definition.
I view them as human beings. I know about the biological differences.
'I try to surround myself with high-value people. The more I learn about the nature of women in general, the more I wonder how many high-value women exist. At least by my definition. Perhaps I need to reevaluate my definition. '
Well what's your definition of a high-value person?
That comment was for James. Men like James tend to think that men and women are equal even when the evidence is staring at them and that is why they struggle.
~ Stingray
Dumb question, but what's the alternative?
Accept reality.
This sounds fair. At first. But then I wonder: do I love and respect humans who make bad life decisions? No, not really. So. Why would I love and respect a woman who wants to be taken by an asshole "bad boy"? It's pathetic. I judge her as pathetic, just as I judge any other human being who makes that decision.
You are a Gamma. Listen to you. Look how fast you are to write them off as "pathetic". Do you have any idea how many insanely bad life decisions I, or most men, have made? The difference is that being a man, you think a man's risky bad ideas are cool, or at the very least, aren't applicable now. That's bullshit to say you don't respect men who have made bad decisions. I guarantee you do.
And worse, you're actually proto-butthurt over bad decisions that a woman might have been TEMPTED to make, and in fact resisted. That's crazy. Of course a woman wants to be fucked hard by an asshole bad boy. Condemning her for that is like condemning you for wanting to fuck a porn star with ridiculous implants.
Don't play thought police. Judge behavior, not desire. It's not her fault that you can't be bothered to behave in a manner she finds sexy.
Hearing a woman say she's not attracted to bad boys and assholes is about as convincing as listening to Stewart telling his fiance that he's disgusted by strippers at the beginning of The Hangover.
I don't know why it is hard to grasp that men and women are attracted to different things, and different things that are not good for them.
'Men like James tend to think that men and women are equal even when the evidence is staring at them and that is why they struggle.'
Ah.
James, accept reality. View them as human beings. They have flaws just like us...but they aren't necessarily the same flaws. Women's flaw is they can be deceived by smooth talk that makes them feel good. Men's flaw is that they can be deceived by women.
Bad boys and assholes have the art of deception down...this is not to congratulate them, because they eventually get exposed...this is just to point out what women have to go through.
"Well what's your definition of a high-value person?"
Off the top of my head:
Integrity. Honesty. Strong work ethic. Loyalty. Thoughtful. Logical. Committed.
Someone who's in touch with their emotions, but not ruled by them. Someone who takes care of their body. Someone who doesn't spend more than they make. Someone with a career. Someone who builds up the people around them, as opposed to tearing them down. Someone who can avoid temptation. Someone who can enjoy and add to an interesting conversation. Someone who pays attention to what's going on around them, both provincially and globally. Someone who laughs at a funny joke. Someone who responds with wit.
Someone who recognizes other high-value people. And walks away from low-value people.
All of the above said, I just read Vox's reply, and I'm giving it thought at the moment.
"Accept reality."
This, I assume, is the cure. To no longer be a Gamma requires accepting reality. The difficulty lies in not just accepting that it's real, but in reprogramming myself to actually care about someone I find emotionally unattractive.
What I'm hearing is that, at heart, I'm a misogynist.
"That's bullshit to say you don't respect men who have made bad decisions. I guarantee you do.
It depends on the bad decision in question. I think a lot of men are pathetic. Crack dealers, for instance. Or men who don't take care of their children. But in fairness, if we're talking about sexual conquests, you're right. I don't judge men harshly based on who they slept with in the past. I do, however, judge them severely if they've committed infidelity.
"Don't play thought police. Judge behavior, not desire."
I wasn't aware that I was. Playing thought police, that is. In my mind, I was referring to actions when I wrote what I wrote. Specifically, I was referring to "decisions" being made, as opposed to thoughts being thought.
But upon examination, there may be a grain of truth to the accusation that I'm "proto-butthurt" at the idea that a woman might even be so much as tempted.
"I don't know why it is hard to grasp that men and women are attracted to different things...
It's not hard to grasp. A guy like me doesn't want to believe it because I'm specifically looking for what I find attractive in life. Which is more than just a warm firm body with a wet center. It's as difficult for me to change that about myself as it is for a woman to not be attracted to a bad boy asshole.
For what it's worth, I'm trying here. I'm trying hard to accept reality.
"I judge her as pathetic"
You're taking this too personally, which is also taking responsibility. You're too close to her. Your expectations should be more basic... Trust. Then cut them out.
Anyone who says they are disappointed in some one is putting on a guilt trip. Nice try.
Then do your best to become that high value person. Judging people as pathetic is a sign of low value. God certainly doesn't look at us like that.
People have free will...some people use that will for the betterment of mankind and themselves, some people use that will to sow discord and destroy. It's up to God as to assign the value they have at the end.
If you don't want spend your life with people who sow discord and destroy...that's fine. Judging them as pathetic though is wrong thinking.
" Integrity. Honesty. Strong work ethic. Loyalty. Thoughtful. Logical. Committed."
That's high value to men, not women.
It's one thing to argue men and women are equal, it's another to argue they are the same.
That's high value to men, not women.
And I'm a man. That's my list. It's what I'm looking for. But if it doesn't exist, perhaps I should redefine what I'm looking for and convince myself that I'm attracted to something else. That's what I was saying.
Or maybe it does exist.
The more replies I read, the more I'm considering that I may be fundamentally flawed. I may be using the attention of women to bump up my ego when and where I can. And then holding these women to impossible standards.
" And I'm a man. That's my list."
Fair enough. You're right, it was your list.
Unfortunately, men who value this also tend to exhibit it, and will therefore struggle keeping the interest of most otherwise honorable women.
This is because even good women, I may even say especially good women, don't understand (and have been lied to) about how polar opposite their thoughts and their tingles are.
For what it's worth, I'm trying here. I'm trying hard to accept reality.
I understand that. I accept that. But reality hits harder than any words here can. Remember that reality doesn't depend upon your acceptance of it. What you're wrestling with is exiting your delusions. And you MUST do it if you're going to become the man you think you are.
That you even want, let alone expect these qualities in a woman is evidence of your rank which is more evidence of how your beliefs are limiting and your potential will never be closed to being realized.
Vox, what have you observed in Italy? Do Italian women react to certain approaches that American women would ignore or find insulting? Any hints that feminism is close to making its mark in a real way?
Sorry to veer off topic, but seeing as how your view on nearly everything is different from nearly ever blogger, Id definitely be interested in your thoughts and experiences as a traveling ex-pat. Not an entire blog devoted to it, but a post here and there would be interesting and helpful.
I'm going to burn my mexican neighbors alive you see, and want to know how annoying and uncivilized Italians can be. Thats my main reason for asking. Do you want to burn your neighbors alive?
@Matt's comment:
Okay. Serious question then. What qualities should I want/expect? If I'm to be cut from the clothe higher ranks are made of?
Youre missing the point. You think Warren Beatty cares how many men Annete bening had before him? You think he cares that she wants to be choked during sex? He can go out tonight if he wanted and get 20 yr old girls to let him piss in their mouths. He knows he found a woman who met his personality requirements, will be loyal and a wife and thats it.
Im just using Beatty as an example. Replace him with any married Alpha.
Youll find the more women you get the less you care about them and their history.
You should be working on yourself and women of all types will be drawn to you. But none will be snowflakes. Unless they're 13. But you dont want that. I hope.
Its obvious from your complaints that women dont like you either. The sluts or the saints.
As for your personality. .fake it til you make it actually works. Just be sure to do actual work on yourself. Youth, femininity, intelligence and submissiveness is what you should keep an eye out for. Worry about the rest later.
My wife made the mistake of seeing 50 shades with a girlfriend today. If says a lot that 10s of millions of women fantasize about men doing things that can land the men in prison. To say woman are a challenge is to understate the dilemma for decent men.
So. Is Earl Thomas merely a perfect little Christian White Knight? Or is Earl a sock puppet for a woman, here to bring his/her skewed (and screwed) version of "reality" to the blue pills attempting to change their lives?
I'm drunk, reading Vox, listening to 'Vienna' by Ultravox, and wondering how much contact he has had with Dyal. Life is good.
An alpha might not care about what his girlfriend did prior to their meeting but Warren Beatey vs State of C A will find he is not the AMOG. You should care about what a future wife did before meeting you because all the data suggests if she rides the carasol she has a dramatically higher chance of divorce and the state does not care how alpha you are at the club. We live in strange times. Women leave alphas because you are never the apex alpha. Someone always makes more money, is better looking, or sexier. Unless you are George Clooney. But plenty of Hollywood alphas have broken marriages they did not intend.
If you are not alpha - than yeah - you better seriously consider her past before you decide to commit.
What Hollywood Alphas are you talking about?
I dont mean Roissy Alpha. I mean Alpha Alpha, Kissinger Ghengis Khan Alpha.
And when an Alpha does have a destroyed marriage, it usually involves the wife losing her mind, destroying property, self mutilating or threatening suicide.
See: O.G. celebrity chef Marco Pierre White.
Im not saying it doesnt matter, but it needs to be put into context. Most skanks are not marrying Alpha males. They marry whimpy deltas and gammas, rape them in court and move on, maybe collecting a few kids or mini dogs along the way.
As a rule skanks will lose interest and cheat/divorce because by default only low value men will marry them. Most are 6's. Alphas dont marry 6's. A womans past is written all over her face. High value men with a lot of women have the pick of the litter. They know who to avoid because they know what they're looking at when they see it. Low value men dont see a womans true self when they look at the. All they see are carefully made up faces and feel like winners because a woman is showing interest. They've had very few experiences with women and don't know when she's showing her real face if she does.
Btw, if you want to see someone who maintains frame like a stone cold killer, watch Marco Pierre White clips on youtube. It helps that hes over 6' tall, but it is interesting to see how female interviewers and react to him. Not saying he hasnt failed ever, but when building yourself and working on body language, its something to keep in mind when visualizing the action before actualizing the vision.
@James Beech: Dumb question, but what's the alternative? I look at women, at least women I'm infatuated with, and I *want* to believe in them.
The answer--at least, the answer that has worked for me--is to see women as children. To be precise, a slightly more mature version of children, but certainly not as mature as men.
How do we treat our children?
- We don't trust them to make good decisions. Never mind picking sex partners; we don't even trust them to pick a healthy dinner.
- We don't let them lead us. It's just absurd to let a child make decisions for a grown man.
- Yet despite these terrible flaws, we love and cherish them. Nobody hates a child for being unable to live well independently.
- We also protect them and make decisions for them, because we know they're better off under our authority than under their own authority.
All of these apply (to a lesser degree) to women.
do I love and respect humans who make bad life decisions? ... I judge her as pathetic.
Do you judge children who choose cotton candy for dinner as "pathetic"? What's the difference?
I'm really serious here. The most important mental shift I ever made was to start seeing women as high-ranking children. It removed all the guilt I used to feel about trying to lead them or presume that I can make better decisions for them than they can make for themselves.
You would rightly judge a man who chooses cotton candy for dinner as pathetic. Not so for a child, but you would rightly assume the authority to force your child to make a better choice.
Your task now is to move women into that same mental category, and to understand that doing so isn't misogyny; it's loving and caring for women.
Integrity. Honesty. Strong work ethic. Loyalty. Thoughtful. Logical. Committed.
Integrity, loyalty, and logic are male values. To a lesser degree, so is honesty. Women are not capable of these to the same degree as men are; they're not even capable of understanding them to the same degree. Just accept it. (Women are just as capable of a strong work ethic, though.) Women have compensating strengths: nurturing, relational, emotional, fluid, feminine.
The difficulty lies in not just accepting that it's real, but in reprogramming myself to actually care about someone I find emotionally unattractive.
There are some kinds of connection you should seek from your male friends, not from women. Women are plenty emotionally attractive, but you have to appreciate them for different things. Children aren't the perfect analogy here (what we love about children is very different from what we love about women), but would you go to a child to talk about your most intimate personal problems, or to get wise life advice, or to get a logical answer to a hard question, or to find someone who will support you through hard times? Of course not. Don't expect these things from a woman either.
The more replies I read, the more I'm considering that I may be fundamentally flawed. I may be ... holding these women to impossible standards.
I don't think you're flawed, but I think you have the very common modern condition (among men) of not understanding that women are not men with tits.
Most of us have grown up with a bizarre, ahistorical egalitarianism that blinds us to women's proper position in the social hierarchy below men. So men are really confused about what women are capable of. Unfortunately, the relationship between a parent and a child is the only hierarchical relationship that is still sanctioned by modern society, so that's what I use as a starting point to explain the natural order of humanity, which ought to be hierarchical everywhere. The most important bit is to understand that as a man, you should rightfully have authority over women, and that authority does not devalue the women--just as having authority over your child does not devalue your child, but elevates him.
"Dumb question, but what's the alternative?"
Climb up onto the pedestal yourself. The view is nicer.
James:
To no longer be a Gamma requires accepting reality
Necessary, but not sufficient. To no longer be Gamma requires not just accepting reality but believing you can truimph over it. It requires believing that you can influence reality if you work at it.
Reality is never exactly what we want. The Alpha response is to look for ways to shape reality so that it suits the Alpha better. The Gamma response is to either pretend reality is different, or else bitch and moan that someone else hasn't done the work for you.
You've gotten over the first part, you're not deluding yourself any longer. But now you have to get over the second part. You can't be butt-hurt that things aren't how you wish they were. You have to find the self-confidence to think you can make reality better. Start with small wins, but convince yourself you have power to make changes.
Seems like such a dramatic misunderstanding of reproductive realities would be rapidly and decisively selected away from.
Two world wars killed a LOT of our alpha and beta males. The women had to settle for someone, and unless you were lucky, you had to settle for a Delta or something.
"The Alpha response is to look for ways to shape reality so that it suits the Alpha better."
In the words of Frank Abagnale Jr., "I concur."
Crucial, really. Be the decider. Be the one to act and not react.
'So. Is Earl Thomas merely a perfect little Christian White Knight? Or is Earl a sock puppet for a woman, here to bring his/her skewed (and screwed) version of "reality" to the blue pills attempting to change their lives?'
No.
@MATT
Kissinger/Ghangis Khan alpha. Talk about moving the goal posts! A man who set back the Asian world 100 years and killed 20 million people and a famous secretary of state. How are those relevant to even the normal everyday alpha? They are not. The problem with these "what is alpha" discussions is that when anyone gets push back the answer is always that they meant a different kind of alpha.
Why would an alpha care if the girl he liked had been a skank - I thought alphas don't care about the past. Or to be more specific, I argued even alphas should be concerned about a high n marriage partner because even alphas can be destroyed by the state and high N are more likely to be divorcing. You say alphas don't marry high N? I thought alphas did not need to care about that? A female 10 in todays society who is not super religious is going to have a high N. If alpha has pick of litter, why would he not pick her?
@JP
How does the draft differentiate between alphas, betas, and so on? How does combat? And if combat does, would braver or less brave people be selected for survival. In tribal times the mortality rate for men in combat was up to 80%. Men who lived to be old enough to fight died fighting by the time they were 30. If world wars killed lots of alphas and betas, why would that matter today? Would we see a difference in countries that had more fatalities such as Germans vs the US? Anyway I have no idea, but your comment is bizarre.
I think I'm starting to understand. Knowing reality isn't the same as accepting reality. I can flail against it, mutter brokenly about it, or pragmatically and cheerfully make the best of it.
So:
1. Stop catching feelings.
2. Only put women on pedestals if it makes it easier to see up their skirts.
For me, it's difficult. I was largely raised by a single mom, with nothing but a couple of hardly-ever-there random step-dads along the way. I was raised to respect women and, this is the unfortunate part, to expect women and men to be the same. My mother's nose for men was bitter, and she looked down that bitter nose, and she left me with an obligation to be something more. Along the way, society has certainly reinforced my belief system. At least, verbally.
The problem with actions is that they don't always speak louder than words. Not in a literal sense. They speak louder when it comes to meaning, certainly, but dear God, when it comes to hearing actions and recognizing polite society lies, how willfully deaf I can be.
I always thought that Disney's Cinderella would have been better if as Cinderella was fitted into the shoe and getting into the carriage, she casually looked over at her stepmother and said something like "Take a good look at those soldiers ... you'll be seeing them again REAL soon..."
Most alphas I've met tend to wife up virgins or very low count hotties. I've never met an alpha who has wifed up a high count girl. True the girl could lie I suppose and I am not privy to whatever bedroom conversations happened on the subject. It just seems to work out that way in my observation. The problem with accepting reality today vs. accepting it years ago is that today it shoved in your face and implanted on your cheek with a hot branding iron. It was possible not too long ago to be a gamma/delta/whatever greek letter of the alphabet we are using to signify a worthless piece of shit this week and *still* get a low count or zero count girl. Societal controls did help in this regard. Now society basically is designed to make women into whores by its very design so unless you are super alpha or marry her when she's 12 you're going to get a well used girl. That should suffice to knock her off whatever pedestal you might have put her on but also (speaking for myself) kills any possible feelings I could label as love and replaces them mainly with indifference.
It is still possible to get a "a low count or zero count girl" for marriage. The thing about PUA is the focus is on short term mating. By focusing on very attractive women who sleep around a lot and possibly with you, you get what you want. Otherwise, date women who clearly don't have much sexual experience. These inexperienced women are invisible to most men in the same way most men are invisible to sluts. Inexperience women are hidden gems. They are usually not visible and available due their nature. You'll have to find them.
I was largely raised by a single mom, with nothing but a couple of hardly-ever-there random step-dads along the way.
That may explain a lot. Gammas are basically straight men with female thought patterns. If you were raised without credible male influences, you probably absorbed a lot of female-specific behavior patterns. Problems solving is an area where men and women are very different. Women, being so much weaker, are used to either having a man or a group solve her problems, so her problem-solving skills tend towards convincing others to do the work.
Many women can, especially if driven by necessitly (such as being a single mother), cowgirl up and solve their own problems. But when they do, there's frequently a palpable sense of resentment that she had to do it herself. Likely also a sense of personal failure, since she clearly failed to convince someone else to do it.
You probably picked up on that. You need to realize you're supposed to be the one solving the problems, and take joy in it.
I was raised to respect women and, this is the unfortunate part, to expect women and men to be the same.
Men and women are both equally worthy of respect, but they earn it in different ways. A woman isn't supposed to earn respect by spending her 20's working some pointless cubicle career by day and partying up a storm by night. And you're not supposed to earn it by passive-aggressive moping around waiting for good fortune to fall in your lap. So while you work on overcoming the lies you were told and being a better man, just remember that the women you meet have been taught their own set of lies. They're just like you used to be, deluded about how things really are and making bad choices because of it.
Now, you have a choice. You can be bitter that they're no better than you were and complain that they haven't fixed themselves, or you can take reality as you find it and look for ways to improve the situation. One way is the old you, one way is the you you're trying to be. No plainer way to put it. You're smart enough to see the truth, now you need to be bold enough to do something with it.
Bon chance, mon ami.
Youll find the more women you get the less you care about them and their history.
What about telegony?
@JP @Kyle Smith
I suspect that plenty of deltas and gammas were killed in the World Wars too; wimpy BETA behavior is by no means restricted to the countries that lost a lot men. (Think Sweden, for example.) The main effect would have been to increase the attractiveness of the girls in the next generation as the surviving veterans ignore the fugs and fatties. This might help explain why German, Russian, and Japanese women seem to be more attractive.
@Remo
I think ALPHAs are more likely to know from experience, behavior, and even appearance if a girl is high-N or not. Regardless, I'm sure that plenty have sexual relationships with high-N girls, or may even have short-term marriages if the ALPHAs in question are either poor and/or they don't give a sh!t about the institution itself.
@hank.jim
Another strategy is to keep open to meeting women in places where you'd least expect to do so. You won't find a potential low-N wife in a dive bar or nightclub.
"So. Why would I love and respect a woman who wants to be taken by an asshole "bad boy"? It's pathetic."
It is not pathetic. It is their nature. They cannot help their desires. A wise man will account for and understand human nature. There is no point despising people for being human.
Also, while it is vital a woman respect her man, I see no particular reason a man needs to respect his woman in order to have a happy relationship.
"And I'm a man. That's my list. It's what I'm looking for."
You need two lists. One for men you wish to befriend, and one for women in whom you are interested.
Having the same list for both is unrealistic And unwise.Accomplishments, education, career, logical prowess, gentlemanly sense of fair play, scintillating conversational skills - lukely to be absent and mostly irrelevant to if a woman makes good mate material. Don't disqualify women for not being men. It is important that she be loyal to you but women do not understand or define loyalty the same way men do. She also needs to be pleasant and desirous of pleasing you and competent to manage a household.
Women very frequently believe men are attracted to the same traits in women, that women find attractive in men
Don't make the similar mistake of believing that the same traits that make 'a good man' also make 'a good woman'
"How does the draft differentiate between alphas, betas, and so on?"
Not all soldiers in WW I were drafted. The BEF, the best force on the field, were mostly volunteers. This army was wiped out in the first few months of bloody battles.
But even in a draft, which sort of man is likely ti be a draft dodger? Who fills the ranks of the sick, malingering, or self inflicted wounds? Who volunteers for the dangerous missions and who hangs back and lets other men go first? That said, I have no idea if this effect is large enough to have any sort of influence on a nations genetics.
@Kyle Smith
You wont find a large number of 10's with HighN because they don't usually have the emotional and psychological problems that drive women to become sluts.
I'd dodge the draft in a heartbeat. I'm not dying for thr United States of Mexico.
But even in a draft, which sort of man is likely ti be a draft dodger? Who fills the ranks of the sick, malingering, or self inflicted wounds? Who volunteers for the dangerous missions and who hangs back and lets other men go first? That said, I have no idea if this effect is large enough to have any sort of influence on a nations genetics.
@Dewave
Perhaps there are Afghanistan/Iraq War vets lurking here who could provide a rundown of the sociosexual status of frontline troops vs. REMFs. But those would only be a survey of those who actually volunteer.
MATT's point is valid too, but I wouldn't be surprised if men are now much more cynical about the motivations of their government than they were in WW1 and WW2, in which case ALPHAs would be more likely to duck out now (and survive the war) than they would have been back then.
MATT's point is valid too, but I wouldn't be surprised if men are now much more cynical about the motivations of their government than they were in WW1 and WW2, in which case ALPHAs would be more likely to duck out now (and survive the war) than they would have been back then.
That's a really good point. Prior to WWI, the notion of combat was very romantic. Not the smarmy Valentine's Day version of "romantic" that women have, but the masculine version of it, definition 4a from M-W:
4 a: marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized
The mud and blood of that war soaked most of the romance out of war for Europeans, and WWII finished it off for Americans.
Another thing to keep in mind, Alphas do thing on purpose, and war used to be - assuming you survived, but Alphas are okay with risk taking - used to be a ticket to status and even wealth. Not so much anymore. 3GW turned soldiers into replacable cogs. Alphas don't really like being replacable cogs.
War in the present time is a pointless endeavor meant to make the rich elites richer. There's nothing romantic about it.
If you are defending your homeland that's one thing...being forced to be the middleman between two waring countries you have no real tie to is another.
@James Beech -- there are some women who have most of the characteristics you're looking for. Not many, but they do exist. Still, we want to be led, provided for, and protected, even if we can mostly take care of ourselves.
I always thought that Disney's Cinderella would have been better if as Cinderella was fitted into the shoe and getting into the carriage, she casually looked over at her stepmother and said something like "Take a good look at those soldiers ... you'll be seeing them again REAL soon..."
That's not Cinderella at all. She's humble and sweet, not vengeful. What an ugly thing for her to say, and completely out of character.
Thank you for this effort
مصراوى توب
رياضة كرة القدم
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.