Why Gender Feminists Ignore Science That Doesn’t Confirm Their Beliefs.

why-gender-feminists-ignore-science-that-doesnt-confirm-their-beliefs

I know I recently shared a cartoon about whether men and women were different. I found it amusing in how it acknowledged and poked fun at common gender stereotypes. Whether or not each stereotype applies to you doesn’t undermine the idea that such stereotypes apply to a lot of people – including my wife and I.

Today’s post is a little more serious, because it talks about something that is unique and dangerous in our partisan post-fact world: the idea that beliefs about how the world should work are more valid than facts about how the world actually does work.

There is nothing wrong with being a feminist. Hell, I’m a feminist because I believe women are equal and they deserve 100% equal rights and opportunity…

Witness this article in the LA Times, which poses a very challenging question: “Are gender feminists and transgender activists undermining science?” Now, to be clear: there is nothing wrong with being a feminist. Hell, I’m a feminist because I believe women are equal and they deserve 100% equal rights and opportunity (a stance I don’t even know one can argue with). Similarly, there is nothing wrong with being transgender. The reason this piece was written is that their respective political beliefs fly in the face of science as much as a belief in creationism flies in the face of evolution.

“Gender feminists — who are distinct from traditional equity feminists — refuse to acknowledge the role of evolution in shaping the human brain, and instead promote the idea that sex differences are caused by a socialization process that begins at birth. Gender, according to them, is a construct; we are born as blank slates and it is parents and society at large that produce the differences we see between women and men in adulthood… 

But group of researchers…found that brains could be correctly identified as female or male with 69% to 77% accuracy. In another study, published in 2016, researchers used a larger sample in conjunction with higher-resolution neuroimaging and were able to successfully classify a brain by its sex 93% of the time.”

Feelings don’t override facts.

I don’t have any stake in the outcome of this. If women and men’s brains are exactly the same, I’m fine with that, too. I’m just looking for facts to help us better understand the world. Scientists use the scientific method and either eliminate theories or affirm theories to educate the general public. Vaccines don’t cause autism. Natural supplements don’t work. Climate change is real. Women’s fertility plummets after 40. And yes, women and men are different biologically. Whether you want to hear this or agree with this doesn’t change that this is the scientific consensus. Feelings don’t override facts.

The author of the LA Times piece, Debra W Soh, continues, “In my experience, proponents touting the “blank slate” view are willing to agree, in private conversations, that neurological sex differences do exist, but they fear that acknowledging as much publicly will justify female oppression. This is backward. As it stands, female-typical traits are seen as inferior and less worthy of respect. This is the real issue the movement fails to address: Nobody wants to be female-typical, not even women.

Distortion of science hinders progress. When gender feminists start refuting basic biology, people stop listening, and the larger point about equality is lost.”

Do you know anybody whose beliefs are anti-science and will not be changed by overwhelming evidence? Your thoughts, as always, are greatly appreciated.

Join our conversation (358 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    KK

    “Do you know anybody whose beliefs are anti-science and will not be changed by overwhelming evidence?”

    Yes, the red pill crew.

    1. 1.1
      AAORK

      I think the intent here is to point out the danger of allowing your beliefs of how the world should work to override facts about how the world actually does work. You don’t seem to recognize this danger in your comment. It looks like this article really is for you. 🙂

      1. 1.1.1
        KK

        “I think the intent here is to point out the danger of allowing your beliefs of how the world should work to override facts about how the world actually does work”.

        Yes. 100%! Which is exactly why my comment is not only not dangerous (huh?), but true. Red pillers often argue about how the world SHOULD work, while simultaneously pushing an agenda about how they think the world does work, which is false. The world doesn’t work the way they claim.

        1. AAORK

          Hmm k looks like “red pill” is a trigger phrase for you. Maybe you’ve been reciting these thoughts to your mirror for too long? If so, I can understand how difficult change and growth would be for you. You are free to keep clinging to your beliefs, but in the meantime reality continues on .. 🙂

        2. KK

          AAORK,

          Let’s apply a little logic here, shall we? 😊 The phrase “red pill” is not a trigger for me. Judging by your first comment, it is a trigger for you, sir. I’ll tell you what does trigger me… The same false assertions made over and over and over again. Those false assertions are the exact dialogue used on red pill websites.

          Also, your first statement is basically saying that my statement is wrong. Now, AAORK, surely you know if you’re going to disagree with someone, it behooves you to tell them HOW they are wrong. By all means, if you’re beliefs are somehow superior, let’s hear them. 😊

    2. 1.2
      Evan Marc Katz

      KK, I disagree with the red pill crew for many reasons – mostly their abhorrent language surrounding women and feminism. But what part of their belief system or agenda is anti-science. If anything, they rightly point out that women are generally hypergamous – driven by attraction to seek out men who are more impressive and alpha, while the “nice guy” sits on the sidelines waiting for her to come to her senses. Sounds a lot like reality to me. Seem to me that their problem is not so much their science but their messaging and tone.

      1. 1.2.1
        Shaukat

        If anything, they rightly point out that women are generally hypergamous – driven by attraction to seek out men who are more impressive and alpha, while the “nice guy” sits on the sidelines waiting for her to come to her senses.

        Precisely. This is exactly what I was pointing to on the previous thread, kk, when I stated that some of the red pill messaging can be toxic, but that other parts, specifically those associated with female psychology and self-improvement are correct and useful. You’re turned off by some of the language they use, but telling an inexperienced young guy who is frustrated with the mixed signals sent by women to chew the red pill hard is the best type of dating advice someone can give.

        1. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          If anything, they rightly point out that women are generally hypergamous – driven by attraction to seek out men who are more impressive and alpha

          And men never do that. They never suddenly become very successful and/or famous and chuck their first wives for someone hotter and younger.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          Sort of misses the point, Emily. We’re talking about generalities – always.

          a. The claim was that Red Pillers are anti-science. I asked for proof of that. Not sure I received it.
          b. The refutation to women being largely hypergamous was met with “But men–” which is a secondary argument that doesn’t disprove female hypergamy.
          c. When dealing with large populations we must generalize. Men are, in general, taller than women. That doesn’t mean there aren’t millions of women who are taller than men. Both are true. Similarly, we can point to men “trading up” but I think women are more inclined to date taller, richer, smarter, hotter, men while men are more content with “attractive and accepts me as I am.”

        3. KK

          Shaukat,

          Yes, you did say that and when I asked what exactly you were talking about you never responded. What aspects of female psychology do they espouse that are both true and useful?

          Also, I find your statements contradictory by saying that their messaging is toxic but ALSO the best dating advice a young, frustrated man can receive.

        4. Emily, the original

          Similarly, we can point to men “trading up” but I think women are more inclined to date taller, richer, smarter, hotter, men while men are more content with “attractive and accepts me as I am.”

          I think a lot of people, both men and women, try to land the best person they can.

        5. Shaukat

          KK, I didn’t respond with specific examples then because I think it would be inappropriate to embed links to other dating advice sites on this blog. However, there are numerous sites for men based on one aspect of red pill philosophy that emphasizes the importance of female psychology and male self-improvement in the areas of confidence and appearance.

          Also, I said that the language they use is sometimes toxic, not the general message. To be clear, however, there are two different strands of red pill ideology that seem to be floating around: the truly toxic stuff flips the radical feminist script and argues that men are the oppressed gender, that laws are rigged against men and in favor of women, that the latter enjoy all sorts of advantages and structure the rules of society, etc. I don’t at all subscribe to that strand.

          The more helpful stuff simply explains mating strategies employed by both genders, offers a theory as to why some men repeatedly fail, and then advises them on how they can improve their lot in life instead of complaining about how society and women are unfair. In fact, I don’t think this type of advice would differ very much from what EMK would offer his clients.

           

        6. KK

          Shaukat,

          “I didn’t respond with specific examples then because I think it would be inappropriate to embed links to other dating advice sites on this blog”.

          The reason I asked for specific examples is because, off the top of my head, the only reference I can think of to female psychology is the belief that women have inferior brains… hamster brains, hind brains…

        7. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          I think a lot of people, both men and women, try to land the best person they can.

          I believe that that is more a female than a male trait.  Men will often attempt to have sex with the hottest woman that they can land, but they generally go for a much safer bet when looking for a mate due to the female tendency to participate in hypergamy.

           

        8. Persephone

          Nope.  Not me. I am like Emily’s words. I want someone who is attractive and accepts me as I am.

      2. 1.2.2
        Jeremy

        Yes and no.  On the one hand, much of their philosophy is based on observation…..of a specific type of woman in specific settings (bars, pick-up clubs, etc).  Observations are extrapolated to the gender as a whole in a non-scientific way.  Further, lots of pseudo-science such as the mis-interpretation of research showing that women are more attracted to one type of man during the follicular phase of their cycle and a different type of man during the luteal phase.  The researcher herself who first described this has commented that the red-pill interpretation of her research is false.

         

        So while I agree with you that the tone and messaging are highly problematic, the observations are over-generalized and the biology and evo-psych are largely mis-interpreted.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          Exactly Jeremy!

          One big thing men write into manosphere blogs about is divorce, especially when the wife leaves the husband for another man or soon after parting winds up in a relationship with one.  The aggrieved man is assured by the RPers that he got screwed because women are ruthlessly hypergamous after marriage.  They combine research done on women’s dating goals before marriage with men’s negative observations and experience with divorce then say, Voila!  It’s not you dude!  Blame hypergamy!

          They also will fail to critically evaluate studies or will manipulate and mis-interpret results if it affirms their beliefs.  A few years back, a study came out from two University of Denver researchers that was widely promoted by The National Marriage Project (Which did awesome research when it was housed at Rutgers University under Dr. David Popenoe, but has published and promoted flawed research since moving to the Univ. of Virginia under a new director.  Nathan had an awesome explanation on this on another post) that “showed” that the more pre-marital sexual partners a woman had, the more likely she was to be dissatisfied in marriage.  The RP crew jumped all over this study because it confirmed their belief that sex before marriage ruins women as wives (yet they concurrently spend a lot of internet space complaining that women are mean because they won’t have casual sex with them).

          The big problem here?  To reach their conclusions, the researchers took a known data analytical method, then reduced the data set points by half and applied a statistical model to it that had never been used in research before.  I would post a link to the study, but after trying to get there from several general media write up links, and even the link given on the red pill reddit site, I got repeated error messages.  The study also never underwent peer review, it was directly released to the public. Other researchers in the field of marriage and relationships have criticized the study not only on a methodological basis, but also for failing to consider alternative explanations for results and falsely suggesting a causal relationship instead instead of a correlation.  Just for the record, the research in this area is mixed.  Some studies show a link, some don’t.  Some show a correlation between increasing #s of pre-marital sexual partners and subsequent marital dissatisfaction for both men and women.

      3. 1.2.3
        KK

        Evan,

        “But what part of their belief system or agenda is anti-science”.

        What part of their belief system or agenda is backed by real science?

        The hypergamy theory… Go to any highschool and the most popular kids are dating each other. The less popular kids are pining over the popular kids. This isn’t about one sex behaving differently than another sex. Each desires who they see as best. This continues on into adulthood. If you’re highly desired by the highly desirable, no problems. But if you’re not as highly desired, you can either choose to be alone or adjust your expectations.

        1. Chance

          KK,

          I’m not sure that your response to Evan is accurate, and I will try to explain.

          What you’ve described is a common misconception that people have about hypergamy.  More specifically, what you are describing is the natural tendency for people to optimize, which is often conflated with hypergamy.  However, the two concepts aren’t the same.  You are right in that both men and women have a tendency to optimize, which is why both men and women desire to have the “best” partner possible.  However, hypergamy (as I understand it) is driven by deep-seated doubts and insecurities that women have about ensuring that they attract and secure the best partner possible, which men don’t have to the same degree.

          As a result, while both men and women would prefer the best partner, I think that women are much more heavily invested in ensuring that they attain the best partner.  This makes sense on the surface because, historically, women had much more riding on their decision to choose a life partner than men (probably no longer true today given current social and legal constructs).  This is why I believe that the idea of “settling” is so much more terrifying to women than it is to men, and as a result, we hear women discuss their fear of “settling” with much greater frequency than men.  Do men want to settle?  Of course not, but the idea of settling to men isn’t the anathema that it is to women.  This is why I think that men generally are more able to be content in a marriage that is a 6 or a 7 on a scale of 1-10 than women.

          As a result of these deep-seated fears, insecurities, and anxieties, I believe that a woman has a stronger propensity to “trade up” when she is presented with what she perceives is a better option.  Does this mean all women want to trade up, or that no men want to trade up?  Of course not, but I think the propensity is stronger in women.

          All of this doesn’t mean that men don’t have their own unique propensities because we are more polygamous by nature.  I think that the most clear illustration of female hypergamy and male polygamy manifests in how men and women cheat.  Men are much more likely to seek additional sexual partners, while women are much more likely to seek a “better” sexual partner – who will also serve as a life partner – to replace her current partner.

        2. KK

          Chance,

          If the difference between hypergamy and optimization is as you understand it to be:  “However, hypergamy (as I understand it) is driven by deep-seated doubts and insecurities that women have about ensuring that they attract and secure the best partner possible, which men don’t have to the same degree”….

          How can one prove this scientifically? Isn’t this just a theory? If so, how can one be sure that when a man is optomizing, he isn’t in actuality also being hypergamous?

        3. Chance

          KK, of course it’s a theory.  It’s very hard to prove any observations regarding the behavioral tendencies of entire groups of people in a controlled environment.  However, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t general tendencies that can be gleaned from observation.

        4. Shaukat

          KK, by female psychology I was referring specifically to how it mediates, and pertains to, mating strategies. There is a good deal of scientific literature on this, though some of it does fall within the EP field, which is by nature difficult to substantiate.

          However, even evolutionary biologists agree on some of the basics. Men and women evolved through different sexual selection strategies, a proposition that reaches back to Darwinian theory. Due to the fact that only women have the capacity to become impregnated and bear children, their ability to successfully reproduce, dependent on the massive time investment required to see a pregnancy to term, became anchored to their ability to rigorously discriminate among sexual partners and only select those with the best genes (physical strength, health, etc), and/or resources.

          Hypergamy is thus just the modern manifestation of this historical and evolutionary process, though it is of course also mediated by new societal pressures and constraints.

          To be clear, this doesn’t at all mean that women are held hostage by their hypergamy, as GWTF stated when referencing certain extremist red pill sites, just as men aren’t held hostage by their high sex drives and testosterone levels. Once consciousness emerged, a number of impulses and instincts could be subsumed and controlled.

        5. KK

          Chance,

          “KK, of course it’s a theory.  It’s very hard to prove any observations regarding the behavioral tendencies of entire groups of people in a controlled environment”.

          And earlier you stated, “I’m not sure that your response to Evan is accurate, and I will try to explain”.

          Okay. But my statement to Evan, or question rather, “What part of their belief system or agenda is backed by real science?”

          What am I missing? No one has given any scientific data to prove the claims being made. That was my original point in statement # 1.

        6. Evan Marc Katz

          Sorry, KK, the onus is on you to illustrate how they are somehow anti-science or making false claims based on wishful thinking. I think their rhetoric is extreme and distasteful, but, at the core, they make some valid points – just like their feminist counterparts do when they complain about men.

        7. Chance

          KK,

           

          “If so, how can one be sure that when a man is optomizing, he isn’t in actuality also being hypergamous?”

           

          One could argue this in the same way that one could argue that women can also be polygamous by having the desire to have an additional sexual partner (because the desire can be there in some/many women, but it isn’t as pronounced).  However, hypergamous and polygamous impulses are stronger in women and men, respectively.  Hence, this is why some people say that women are hypergamous and that men are polygamous.  In reality, women are just more hypergamous than men and men are just more polygamous than women.

        8. KK

          Shaukat,

          Got it… theories not backed by science.

          Mind if I ask which red pill sites are not extremists. Like GWTF, anything I’ve read caused me to wish for brain bleach as well.

        9. KK

          Evan,

          Respectfully, that’s news to me.

          I have never been told by anyone, and I do mean never, that the onus is on the person questioning the validity of a claim. The onus is always on the person making the claim to provide evidence of said claim. In science and in law, respectively.

          The original question had to do with “anti scientific beliefs”. That is exactly what has been provided in this comment section. The beliefs espoused, whether they have any validity or not (questionable), are still anti scientific.

        10. Evan Marc Katz

          Correction, KK: YOU made the claim that MGTOWs were anti-science. The onus is on YOU to back that up.

          I’m certainly not going to go research it in order to continue this conversation.

        11. Shaukat

          Shaukat,

          Got it… theories not backed by science.

          KK, not only are those theories backed by science, but in fact there is a scientific consensus behind such theories. If you knew how evolution works, based on the selection of specific advantageous traits generated by migration, drift, and mutation, then you would know this. Regarding data, experiments have been conducted with other primates that demonstrate changes in mating behavior when testosterone is introduced into female rhesus monkeys for example. The absence of the capacity to become impregnated in males, and the presence of specific hormones, also the product of evolution, absolutely determine different mating strategies.

          Also, on a different thread you recently made this statement:

          it’s important to acknowledge most women are looking for a “protector”, among other things.

          What scientific data do you have to support this claim, aside from your own observations?

           

        12. Emily, the original

          KK,

          Go to any highschool and the most popular kids are dating each other. The less popular kids are pining over the popular kids. This isn’t about one sex behaving differently than another sex. Each desires who they see as best. This continues on into adulthood. If you’re highly desired by the highly desirable, no problems. But if you’re not as highly desired, you can either choose to be alone or adjust your expectations.

          This succinctly sums up every dating issue there is in one neat paragraph. Everybody wants one of the cool kids.

        13. KK

          “Correction, KK: YOU made the claim that MGTOWs were anti-science. The onus is on YOU to back that up”.

          Yes, Evan, I made that claim by answering the question YOU posed. If scientific studies have been done that back up claims made by the manosphere, they should be relatively easy to find. I still haven’t seen any.

          Shaukat’s response about a rhesus monkey has nothing to do with the subject. Your post states that it’s dangerous to have these false beliefs. I agree. To claim that women are not only more hypergamous than men, but that this hypergamy continues even after marriage is false. It’s a dangerous belief because it’s untrue. No one has provided any evidence. The RP’s are using their own anecdotal experiences to substantiate their claims and everyone else is doing the same. Nothing new.

        14. Evan Marc Katz

          This is a mind-bending conversation, KK: “Yes, Evan, I made that claim by answering the question YOU posed. If scientific studies have been done that back up claims made by the manosphere.”

          I didn’t make claims about the manosphere. I only alluded to the idea that hypergamy was a real thing. Full stop.

          That doesn’t mean that manosphere men are good guys. It doesn’t mean their rhetoric is nice or fair. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t outlandish fringe claims that may not square with reality (women leaving husbands for richer men, for example).

          So honestly, let’s stop this silliness. I cited one thing that I believe the manosphere has right – that women routinely look for more impressive men based on looks, height, education, money. Hypergamy is neither “bad” or “wrong,” but I fail to see how you can deny this with a straight face.

          In the meantime, your attacks on everything else are irrelevant – especially to the original blog post.

        15. KK

          Shaukat,

          “What scientific data do you have to support this claim, aside from your own observations”?

          I never made that claim. You, however, are claiming that your comments are backed by scientists. They’re not.

        16. Shaukat

          Shaukat’s response about a rhesus monkey has nothing to do with the subject

          It’s quite relevant because studies of other primates help shed light on the differences in mating strategies employed by humans, and the differences in male/female strategies is the basis for female hypergamy and the male tendency toward polygamy. This is such an obvious point that I don’t why you’re showing so much resistance to it. Read Rollo Tomassi’s post (#11) for more detail.

        17. KK

          That’s great, Shaukat. But no matter what we may have in common with other primates, we’re still human. In our modern day civilization, (hopefully) we’re taught civilized behaviors. Now, I’ll agree some people don’t act much more civilized than rhesus monkeys. But we still have the ability to decipher between right and wrong, good and bad, etc. I could go into all the other ways in which we are (hopefully) superior, but surely I don’t have to. Knowledge, consequences, and the ability to predict consequences are a part of our decision making process. Animals act out of instinct alone.

      4. 1.2.4
        Tron Swanson

        “If anything, they rightly point out that women are generally hypergamous”

        My god…what a time to be alive.

        I am going to get a big glass of chocolate milk, read the comments, contribute, and enjoy.

      5. 1.2.5
        GoWiththeFlow

        Evan,

        What part of the red pill crew’s belief system or agenda is anti-science?

        Just in the area of hypergamy:

        Yes women want to date and marry the best man they can. RP bloggers extrapolate that into areas where studies show this not to be true.  Specifically that married women continue to be hypergamous and are actively looking to trade up after they are married.  There is no scientific evidence of this.

         

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          “Specifically that married women continue to be hypergamous and are actively looking to trade up after they are married.”

          I wasn’t aware of this. This is a central tenet of RedPill philosophy? Or just a fringe subset?

          Extreme thinking is false in all forms; it doesn’t invalidate a moderate point of view that hypergamy is a real thing.

          I’m a dating coach for women. I hear it every day on the phone.

        2. Emily, the original

          But don’t most people end up marrying someone who is similar to them in education, physical attractiveness status, etc.?

        3. Chance

          GWTF, I would argue that the idea that women are actively looking to trade up while they are married is a bastardization of the idea that the manosphere has of hypergamy.  I believe the idea is that women have a stronger propensity to trade up when presented with what is perceived to be a better option than men do, but most women do not give in to this relatively stronger propensity (just like most men override their relatively stronger desire to have sex with many women when they are married).

        4. GoWiththeFlow

          Evan,

          I wrote more about this in my response to Jeremy above.  Fortunately or unfortunately, I took a really deep dive into the manosphere about three to four years ago.  There’s not enough brain bleach out there to treat the worst of what I read!

          Their philosophy is that women are primal base creatures who are prisoners of their ruthless hypergamous drives.  These drives are THE enduring and lifelong determiner of a woman’s behavior all throughout her lifespan.  All a man can do is be aware of the inherently evil nature of women and either avoid them or manage them as best as possible.

        5. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          (just like most men override their relatively stronger desire to have sex with many women when they are married).

          I’m sure there are man who are like what you describe, but from my limited perspective (and I admit it’s limited), I just don’t see it. I see a lot of men going to work and supporting their families. They barely so much as flirt with other women. They are just very focused on their work and not exactly exuding some kind of repressed sexual energy.

        6. Evan Marc Katz

          Emily, to acknowledge both of your points:

          a. I spend ZERO time looking to flirt with other women. I work from home. I have my wife and kids here all the time. I’m very happily married in a cocooned domestic bliss.

          b. I have plenty of desire to have sex with other people. I have just largely buried and ignored that desire for the sake of my marriage. It’s a pragmatic decision. Like being an alcoholic and avoiding bars, I don’t put myself in the position to flirt – not because I don’t desire other women, but because I do.

          BOTH statements are true and they don’t inherently contradict each other. This is the kind of nuance that often gets lost in these back and forth gendered arguments. Both the women and men arguing here have valid points – yet they both tend to be pretty bad at acknowledging the truth of the other side. Sorry, everybody.

        7. Emily, the original

          Evan,

          not because I don’t desire other women, but because I do.

          But is it more of a generalized desire or do you actively have to stay away from a specific woman/women because you are so drawn to them, you are worried you will be tempted? As if they are luring you to the other side. Those are two different things, no?

        8. Evan Marc Katz

          Both. In general, I avoid temptation. I don’t make new girl friends. I don’t get phone numbers. I usually play the role of dating coach with single women to avoid flirting with them. Also, occasionally I meet someone I’m very attracted to and I have enough experience to avoid spending too much time with them – specifically to not develop a crush. Hope that makes sense.

        9. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily,

          “But don’t most people end up marrying someone who is similar to them in education, physical attractiveness status, etc.?”

          When I was doing a quick web search to try and find the research study I mentioned above (that is no longer available apparently) I was on the red pill subreddit (I need a shower now) and there was a thread where the commenters were excoriating the female author of an online review article that posits that hypergamy is a thing of the past and is being replaced by assortive/assortative/associative mating.  She makes a compelling case, although I haven’t been able to take a deep dive into the many studies she cites.

          I guess the two aren’t mutually exclusive.  You can assortatively wind up marrying another college grad who’s the same age, same racial/ethnic and religious background, but he’s an orthodontist where your previous ex-boyfriend was an mid-level sales rep.  Your husband and ex-boyfriend are in the same college educated class, but the husband, earning power wise, is more towards the upper end of the class level than the ex-BF.

          I WON’T link the RP subreddit on Evan’s blog, but you can google it using the article.  Watch the RP guys lose their $#!t because someone (and egads a woman at that) has challenged a belief that they hold dear.

        10. Chance

          Hi Emily, to further Evan’s point:  most men would be willing to have sex with the majority of women we see in our everyday lives.  Even married men, but they just don’t do it.  I would venture to guess that the average man pictures multiple women naked throughout the course of a day, and this number is positively related to how to many women he sees throughout the day.  There’s a good chance that he’s thinking about having sex with them, too.  Again, talking about married men here as well.

           

          Also, generally speaking, the more time a man has on his hands, the more he will masturbate.  When the typical man masturbates, he is almost never thinking about his partner even if his sex life with his partner is perfectly healthy.  We hide this from the women in our lives because this reality can be hurtful to them, but it helps us to remain faithful.

           

          Finally, if men were able to express their sexuality without social, familial or legal repercussions, men would be propositioning multiple women a day for quickies behind the bushes (or even in plain sight!).  It’s an insanely relentless drive that I wish we didn’t have.  In fact, it’s a damned cruel mistress.

        11. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          I don’t think women have to constantly try to fight an urge to dump their husband to trade up.  If a woman does that, it’s pretty much a calculated deliberate act, not necessarily actions that are driven by subconscious drives.

          I do think men and women have different priorities and use different strategies when dating with the ultimate goal of an LTR and marriage, especially when having kids together is in the equation.  Both men and women do what they do and when they mutually agree to commit long term they are each saying this is it for me.  Not okay, I’ll marry you but still have my eye open for the chance to trade up.

          The red pill guys, by claiming that women divorce perfectly good husbands because the primal part of their brains are always looking for a chance to trade up, are both reassuring themselves and being reassured by the community that they are not at fault and need not look at themselves.  It’s like putting a band aid on a deep cut that really needs stitches.  It feels better in the short term, but by not addressing the wound properly, long term issues can arise.

        12. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          Hypergamy is a thing of the past and is being replaced by assortive/assortative/associative mating.

          Yes, it’s called assortative mating. Susan Walsh writes about it a lot on her blog, “Hooking Up Smart.” For the most part, when I see a couple (or meet the spouse of a friend or co-worker), the couple “makes sense” in terms of their matched level of attractiveness, job status, etc.

          I WON’T link the RP subreddit on Evan’s blog, but you can google it using the article. 

          I might pass on that if you don’t mind! 🙂 I’m freaked out enough by what I read on this blog and I’m sure it’s tame compared to red pill stuff.

          Chance,

          to further Evan’s point:  most men would be willing to have sex with the majority of women we see in our everyday lives.

          Then why settle down with one woman? I’m not being sarcastic. I’m serious. I have to say that the chasm is too wide. The differences between men and women are too great. It’s too much work to try to figure out the other side.

        13. Chance

          GWTF,

           

          “I don’t think women have to constantly try to fight an urge to dump their husband to trade up.”

           

          “Not okay, I’ll marry you but still have my eye open for the chance to trade up.”

           

          I didn’t say that.  I said that I think women have a stronger relative propensity to trade up.  In addition, this isn’t something that would really affect most women until (if it ever happens) they are receiving the attentions of a man who is perceived as better.

           

          “The red pill guys, by claiming that women divorce perfectly good husbands because the primal part of their brains are always looking for a chance to trade up, are both reassuring themselves and being reassured by the community that they are not at fault and need not look at themselves.  It’s like putting a band aid on a deep cut that really needs stitches.  It feels better in the short term, but by not addressing the wound properly, long term issues can arise.”

           

          I have no idea what these guys think, and the level of investment you’ve shown in trying to debunk any examination of the dynamic leads me to believe that your interpretation of their message is heavily influenced by your biases (perhaps because you don’t like their overall tone).  I will say this with a fair amount of confidence:  for every wife who was truly unhappy and leaves her husband for another man, there is one who became “unhappy” when she began to receive the attentions of a prospect that she considered to be better.  Then, she re-writes the history of the relationship to make her husband the problem so she can justify leaving him.  To be honest, as it relates to the dissolved marriages that I’ve witnessed, every single instance where the woman left the man for another man has followed the latter script.

        14. Chris

          The red pill guys, by claiming that women divorce perfectly good husbands because the primal part of their brains are always looking for a chance to trade up

          They do claim that yes. Thus they also claim if you don’t want your gf/wife to lose interest in you and probably seek out other men, you have to be constantly convincing her primal brain that you are a dominant, alpha male. Not by acting like an abusive asshole – far from it, but by being self confident, happy, never displaying any significant weaknesses, and always deflecting her concerns and anxieties. I think there is a little bit of truth here, but mostly it is an overgeneralization.

          being reassured by the community that they are not at fault and need not look at themselves

          I do think RPers exaggerate these “hypergamous” impulses. On the other hand it does seem to be true that women tend to lose sexual interest in their partners much quicker than men do. Of course the man always has at least some role to play in this. But very rarely is the man entirely responsible, although some women seem to want to put all the blame on the man, every time, if the wife does lose interest.

           

        15. Emily, the original

          Evan,

          Also, occasionally I meet someone I’m very attracted to and I have enough experience to avoid spending too much time with them – specifically to not develop a crush. Hope that makes sense.

          Thanks for answering. I work with about 200 men. Most of them are married. I have been there five years and there’s only one I make a point of avoiding. There’s no one else there I really worry about developing a crush on, even if I think several of them are attractive or I enjoy chatting with them. I’m almost afraid to ask the men their percentages if they worked for a large company with 200 women. How many of those women are they crushing on to the point of needing to avoid them?

        16. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          “I think women have a stronger relative propensity to trade up.  In addition, this isn’t something that would really affect most women until (if it ever happens) they are receiving the attentions of a man who is perceived as better.”

          “I will say this with a fair amount of confidence:  for every wife who was truly unhappy and leaves her husband for another man, there is one who became “unhappy” when she began to receive the attentions of a prospect that she considered to be better.”

          The vast majority of men don’t do complicated.  A single, marriage minded man has plenty of options amongst single women.  They don’t go poaching married women to find their spouse!

          On the second statement, where is your data?  Even in the uncommon instances where women leave their marriages for other men, most of those relationships never result in marriage, and those that do have a very high failure rate.

          Continuing on in your comment:  “Then, she re-writes the history of the relationship to make her husband the problem so she can justify leaving him.  To be honest, as it relates to the dissolved marriages that I’ve witnessed, every single instance where the woman left the man for another man has followed the latter script.”

          Wow, you made that statement after saying this of me:  “I have no idea what these guys think, and the level of investment you’ve shown in trying to debunk any examination of the dynamic leads me to believe that your interpretation of their message is heavily influenced by your biases (perhaps because you don’t like their overall tone).”

          Pot. Kettle. Black.

        17. GoWiththeFlow

          Chris,

          “Thus they also claim if you don’t want your gf/wife to lose interest in you and probably seek out other men, you have to be constantly convincing her primal brain that you are a dominant, alpha male. Not by acting like an abusive asshole – far from it, but by being self confident, happy, never displaying any significant weaknesses, and always deflecting her concerns and anxieties.”

          I don’t know Chris, so called “dread game” sounds like a pretty emotionally abusive tactic to me.  The thing is on Rational Male, Dalrock, and Roosh’s blogs the messages are rarely positive.  The narrative and language promotes viewing a woman partner as an enemy that needs to be insulted (negging), managed or manipulated by causing her to feel insecure and fearful.

           

        18. Chance

          Evan, I don’t know what you are referring to in regards to how you agree with GWTF, but many of her arguments in this thread are based on hyperbolic interpretations of what is actually being said.  Also, in regards to her response to Chris, my understanding of dread inspiration is nothing like how she is portraying it.  My understanding is that it is simply a reassertion of oneself so that you become more attractive to your partner, and not some machiavellian strategy to manipulate and harm your partner.

        19. Chance

          Hi GWTF,

           

          “The vast majority of men don’t do complicated.  A single, marriage minded man has plenty of options amongst single women.  They don’t go poaching married women to find their spouse!”

           

          This doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.  I’ve seen it happen many times.  Mind you, I’m not claiming that most people do this.

           

          “On the second statement, where is your data?”

           

          They are anecdotes.  In the absence of empirical data, anecdotes are the best we have.  While they aren’t as useful as empirical data, that doesn’t mean that they should be dismissed entirely just because no one has cared to perform a study on the subject.  I also don’t have data to support my observation that men often come up with rationalizations for why they stray, but it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen.

        20. KK

          “They are anecdotes.  In the absence of empirical data, anecdotes are the best we have.  While they aren’t as useful as empirical data, that doesn’t mean that they should be dismissed entirely just because no one has cared to perform a study on the subject”.

          Thank you, Chance, for agreeing with my original comment. There is no scientific data to back up claims made by the manosphere! 😊

          You’re right. Anecdotal experience is important. It’s so important that it’s used to inform our thoughts and opinions on a variety of issues. The problems arise when our anecdotal experiences become biased. When you can no longer see another human for who they really are. When all you can see is gender, race, economic status and make negative assumptions about that person, you know you’ve crossed over into biased territory. That is what I’ve seen from some of your comments here. That is what the ladies are saying they see in the manosphere. It’s completely biased nonsense.

        21. Chance

          KK, everyone’s comments here are influenced by their own biases, including yours.

        22. KK

          Chance,

          I don’t think men are inherently bad or evil or screwed up in some way. I try to judge each individual by their own behavior. Of course, I may have some biases I’m not even completely aware of and others I fully embrace.

          Your comments strongly suggest that you think women are inherently inferior.

        23. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          “. . .many of her arguments in this thread are based on hyperbolic interpretations of what is actually being said.”

          Actually no, they’re not.

          Chris, Jeremy, and Shaukat are able to go on manosphere “game” sites, and as Jeremy says, distill out the useful information from the hate.  But some men can’t or won’t, the one’s who take it to the extremes.

          For instance Chris said, “. . . if you don’t want your gf/wife to lose interest in you and probably seek out other men, you have to be constantly convincing her primal brain that you are a dominant, alpha male. Not by acting like an abusive asshole – far from it, but by being self confident, happy, never displaying any significant weaknesses, and always deflecting her concerns and anxieties. I think there is a little bit of truth here, but mostly it is an overgeneralization.”

          This is where the grains of wisdom are found.  Be your best self have integrity with boundaries and your wife or girlfriend will respond.

          Since Chris is familiar with some of the red pill philosophy, I knew he would know what “dread game” entails.  I didn’t conflate what Chris said about self-improvement and inner attitude and behavior changes with the extreme end of the spectrum of behavior some RPers advocate to ensure a wife won’t cheat on you and remains attracted to you.

          What “dread game” is is literally that:  Instilling dread in a woman.  Intentionally inserting in the relationship uncertainty and mistrust.  That she can’t be certain you will remain faithful, that the man will leave if the women doesn’t “shape up” either literally or figuratively.  (Some RPers are obsessed with how to get wives to lose weight.  It’s a slap in their face if she’s not model slim.)

          The men are supposed to do this in conjunction with knocking the woman down.  Using their silly hitting-the-wall theory, they “remind” their wife that if her age doesn’t start with a 2 that her SMV has taken a flying leap off a cliff and therefore she should be grateful if her man doesn’t cheat on her.  It’s not about a man raising his self esteem and his partner value in his wife’s eyes.  It’s about shifting the whole frame of the relationship to one where she better be damned sure to keep him happy because she’s worthless and he can leave her at any time.

          I said, “The vast majority of men don’t do complicated.  A single, marriage minded man has plenty of options amongst single women.  They don’t go poaching married women to find their spouse!”

          You replied, “This doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.  I’ve seen it happen many times.  Mind you, I’m not claiming that most people do this.”

          But that’s what the manosphere claims.  That with only a unicorn rare exception, all women do this or on on the verge of doing this at any moment to their boyfriend or husband.  If you went and said your last sentence to them “I’m not claiming that most [women] do this” to a red pill guy he would laugh, roll his eyes and say “Sure! NAWALT!”  Because they have an acronym to respond to anyone who says that not all women are like that, because they truly believe they are.

        24. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          But don’t most people end up marrying someone who is similar to them in education, physical attractiveness status, etc.?

          I know a lot of couples where the husband is college educated and the wife is not a college graduate.  I know very few couples where the educational attainment levels are reversed.

          I am always amazed by the number of non-college graduate women who honestly believe that they have a chance with me on the dating sites.  How many men who are high school graduates seriously think that they have a chance with a woman who holds a graduate degree?  Heck, men who hold an undergraduate degree generally know better than to attempt to hit on a woman who holds a graduate degree, but a woman who holds an undergraduate degree thinks nothing of hitting on a guy who holds a graduate degree.

      6. 1.2.6
        Persephone

        Sounds like you are deep into the myths we have in our Western Society.  If this was purely biology, it would be universal among all cultures. It is not.

    3. 1.3
      Tron Swanson

      I don’t know if I count as red pill, but I am 100% pro-science. Heck, I’m practically a transhumanist.

  2. 2
    GoWiththeFlow

    “Do you know anybody whose beliefs are anti-science and will not be changed by overwhelming evidence?”

    Oh my gosh, YES!!!

    This has much wider negative effects than just undermining their own argument on their pet subject.  It undermines all science and even the assumption that cold hard facts should back up theory.  Now all that is required for many is just passionate belief.

    For example, I like to watch Bill Maher’s show on HBO.  One thing he does that drives me absolutely nuts is that he rails against people who won’t accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is real and is a danger to the planet and humans, while at the same time disbelieving the overwhelming scientific evidence that vaccines are safe and good for public health.  His huge blind spot is that by denying the scientific evidence on vaccines and instead giving higher weighting to his passionate belief that they are unnecessary and unsafe, he undermines the validity of science as a whole including the science of climate change that he is also passionate about, but where his passionate belief is supported by a huge body of science.

    Because so many people are willing to jettison science if it does not back up their closely held beliefs, this has also helped enable the rise of junk science and the willful misreporting and manipulation of data.  The scientific process is perverted.

    1. 2.1
      KK

      GWTF,

      “Because so many people are willing to jettison science if it does not back up their closely held beliefs, this has also helped enable the rise of junk science and the willful misreporting and manipulation of data.  The scientific process is perverted”.

      True!

      I think this is especially true in psychology and evolutionary psychology. Because they are dealing mainly with “theories”, each theory can be refuted with an opposing theory. For instance, some psychologists believe that all forms of mental illness are biologically based. Others believe these illnesses are brought on through circumstances like childhood abuse or some form of trauma. And a third group believes that although they are biologically based, there won’t be any manifestations of these illnesses until a trauma occurs, which suggests that if someone doesn’t have faulty biology, they aren’t at risk. Personally, I think mental illnesses like depression, anxiety, and PTSD, sometimes have a biological basis and sometimes they don’t.

  3. 3
    Jeremy

    Evan, you wrote “when gender feminists start refuting basic biology, people stop listening.”  Is this true?  Basic rule in behavioral economics regarding the availability heuristic:  The more we hear something, the more likely we are to believe it is true, and the more important we believe it to be.  Absolutely regardless of the objective truth of the subject, or lack thereof.

     

    Most anti-vaxxers believe their beliefs, not because they have read any research, but because they heard, over and over, about links between MMR vaccine and autism.  They tune out the research because they don’t trust the medical industrial complex and big pharma which they fear influenced the research.  We think those pe9ple are irrational.  But most people who believe that global warming is a problem do so, not because they’ve read studies, but because they heard about it on the news.  They tune out contrary opinions because they don’t trust the industrial complex, which they fear has influenced those opinions.

     

    My opinion (which might be wrong) is that people believe what they believe because they want to believe it or they fear it might be true.  NOT because there is objective evidence for any particular belief.  If enough people hear the theories of gender feminism, and particularly if enough people WANT to believe them, they will believe them, not tune them out, regardless of what “science” says.  And the world will have yet another irrational belief-set accepted by millions….

     

    1. 3.1
      GoWiththeFlow

      I think you’re onto something when you talk about fear motivating what a person believes.

      From the linked article:  “The author of the LA Times piece, Debra W Soh, continues, “In my experience, proponents touting the “blank slate” view are willing to agree, in private conversations, that neurological sex differences do exist, but they fear that acknowledging as much publicly will justify female oppression.”

      People who are anti-vaxxers FEAR harm from the vaccines which is a more immediate concern that fear of polio, measles, rubella, etc. because in developed countries they have not seen or experienced the death and disability from disease outbreaks that occurred before vaccines were developed.  But they all likely know a kid with an autism spectrum disorder.

      Fear is primal.  And once you’re in the primal area of the brain, logic is reduced to background noise.

    2. 3.2
      KK

      Jeremy,

      I think you nailed it. Fear is the basis of ALL these groups on the fringe. From extreme feminists to the manosphere. These fears are most often irrational fears and are so powerful they can quickly and easily morph into hatred. Hitler is a popular example of this. From anti vaxers to anti police to anti Christian…. The list is endless.

  4. 4
    Jeremy

    Regarding Red Pill, some of the info is good.  What was specifically helpful for me, when I was having marital difficulties (as I’ve discussed elsewhere) was the fact that although I was behaving according to popular assessments of how I should behave (prioritize her, listen to her, put her needs ahead of yours, etc), the red pillars told me that I was behaving like a supplicating Beta, and that no woman would be attracted to such a man.  They were not entirely wrong, but they were not entirely right either.  But without the influence of both advice sets, I would not have achieved the balance I eventually did.

     

    Notions of “alpha” and “beta’ are taken too far there… they need to be tempered into arousal and comfort QUALITIES, rather than people – and if understood that way, the advice is helpful.  Hypergamy needs to be understood as the notion that while men have a single track of attraction (is she hot or not), women’s long-term attraction is contingent on a dual pathway based on 1) attraction and 2) RESPECT.  And that if she loses respect for the man, her attraction will wane.  That is why women want a nice guy with balls (the balls being the attractive part), while men want a cool girl.  NOT a cool girl with boundaries – just a cool girl.  Her boundaries need to be with other men, not the man she is with (or rather, if she feels the need to maintain boundaries, they are for her own benefit, not for the benefit of his attraction to her).  Her long-term attraction depends on respect, his does not.  It isn’t that she needs him to make more money, necessarily, unless that’s what she needs to respect him.

     

    The men in the ‘sphere accuse Evan of being “purple pill” – but that is a high complement IMHO.  Distilling red pill advice to the useful tidbits, extracting the hate and mis-information, and keeping the useful left-overs….that is something rare and important.  This is why I can not entirely dismiss red pill philosophy without understanding which parts of it are relevant.

    1. 4.1
      GoWiththeFlow

      Jeremy,

      You wrote–“. . . while men want a cool girl.  NOT a cool girl with boundaries – just a cool girl.  Her boundaries need to be with other men, not the man she is with (or rather, if she feels the need to maintain boundaries, they are for her own benefit, not for the benefit of his attraction to her).”

      Okay, I totally don’t know what that means. Why do men not want a cool girl with boundaries?  In my experience, and the experience of other women friends, the women who put in a lot of effort early in the relationship to meet a boyfriend’s needs always get dumped.  If they  pick him up from the airport at 2 am when they need to be at work at 7, cook his favorite meals, let him always pick what show to watch, are understanding when he doesn’t want to go with her to a work function, they get dumped.  In Evan’s interview with Kim Seltzer last week, this was briefly discussed and Evan said these are women with no “edge”.

      As far as reading content on the most popular red pill sites, it seems like a near impossible endeavor to “distill the useful tidbits” while “extracting the hate and misinformation.”  Is there no where else on the web to get this information–a “purple pill” site?  I would hate it if the only place a person could find info on an effective counseling method for rape victims with PTSD was on a site where 99 out of 100 posts were on some version of all sex is rape.

      1. 4.1.1
        Evan Marc Katz

        Jeremy’s normally great but I honestly don’t know what he’s talking about.

        In Love U, I posit that most women want a “nice guy with balls” while men prefer the “cool girl with boundaries”.

        No boundaries = no self-esteem. Who wants that?

      2. 4.1.2
        Jeremy

        Let me be clear: I am not advocating that women should have no boundaries.  Nor am I advocating that men should not respect their wives/girlfriends.  They should, and they should.  I certainly do.  What I am talking about specifically is the difference of how men and women (generally) view the concept of respect as pertaining to attraction.

         

        I respect my wife.  The fact that I respect her for her intelligence, her abilities, her values, etc has made me fall more deeply in love with her throughout the years.  But love and attraction are two different things!  While it is true that if a person falls out of love they may fall out of attraction, attraction can exist with or without love.  And I posit that male attraction to women does not depend on respect.  That is why men can become attracted to women regardless of their career or education or the impact they make on the world, relying much more on the way the women make them feel.

         

        Whereas, IME, women do not just rely on the way men make them feel.  They need to respect the men they are with.  Not for a one night stand, but for a long term relationship.  The respect must be present, not just for love to develop, but for attraction to be maintained.  THIS is the difference.  This is what leads to the notion of hypergamy.  It is why women want a man who is “better” – better at what?  Better at whatever she values so that she can respect him.  And those parameters will be different for different women, depending on what they respect.

         

        Regarding the “cool girl with boundaries”…..I guess it depends on what we mean when we say ‘boundaries.”  Men want women who have boundaries with other men.  Not with them.  Some men like a challenge when initially dating a woman – for them, her playing hard to get may help spark his attraction (though not for me) – but once in a relationship, boundaries get annoying.  No husband ever said of his wife – She refused to go to my sister’s house because they don’t get along, that’s SO HOT because I respect her for her boundaries.   I asked her to go to the store for me but she was too tired and said no….that’s SO HOT because she has boundaries.  No.  Whereas, to my shock and surprise, women do find a man’s boundaries to be attractive, as long as he does not exercise them with her too often.  But the occasional “no” from a man is attractive to women, while a “no” from a woman is not generally attractive to men.  Confident women are attractive.  Women who have boundaries with other people are attractive.  Women who have boundaries with men when first dating are attractive.  But not within a relationship.  IMHO.

        1. Stacy2

          while a “no” from a woman is not generally attractive to men.

          Perhaps you don’t know yourself (or your peers) as well as you think. Whether it is “attractive” to them or not is not really relevant. Yeah i am sure that any guy would theoretically like the idea of having a woman who is just sitting there ready to fulfill all of his requests. Any guy’s wet dream. In the words of Gillian Flynn “go ahead, shit on me, i am the cool girl” (c) Right? Unfortunately this never leads to good outcomes for the woman in question. This guy may find it desirable, but he will either use and abuse her or dump her. To counter your examples, no guy has ever said “omg my girlfriend is so cool she let me play video games the entire weekend while cleaning out the yard and going to her parents’ house for dinner by herself! She’s a keeper I must give her a spa gift card as a token of appreciation!”. Nope. This is not the monologue that goes on in his head. More like, he’s upset she didn’t pick up his favorite beer on the way back – she must be a very selfish girlfriend to not think of him!

           

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Jeremy,

          That does clear it up.

          I do think that there is a difference in playing hard to get, which is game playing, and having boundaries like when a guy you’ve been seeing for two months send you a 9pm wannabe booty-call text–“Are you doing anything?  Wan to come over?”  In the latter case it’s more the woman deciding she’s going to do what’s best for her–“Ya know I’ve had a hard day and I need to be up early, so no thanks, and good night.”–than doing something as a specific deliberate tactic to insert distance or create uncertainty.

          “But the occasional “no” from a man is attractive to women, while a “no” from a woman is not generally attractive to men.”  On a subconscious level it is when the request was somewhat out of line and would really inconvenience and burden the guy.  But if a man is one big “no” machine to every little request, then it becomes annoying.  In that scenario the guy is over working the “with balls” part and forgetting the “nice guy” part.  There has to be a balance.  I think in a nutshell that’s the big problem with the whole red-pill philosophy, it’s all about working the balls part.  But since there’s no balance on most of their sites, the only discussion of the nice guy part is that it’s all bad.  So a lot of red pill adherents kill the nice guy within and try to be all balls.

        3. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          They need to respect the men they are with.  Not for a one night stand, but for a long term relationship.  The respect must be present, not just for love to develop, but for attraction to be maintained.

          I completely agree with you on this. But of course there are 2 different kinds of respect. A woman can respect a man as a person, think he is kind, generous, honest, etc. But the most important is that she respect him as a man. If she has the feeling she can walk all over him or that he’ll never say no because he is always trying to please her and win her over, she’ll lose her attraction for him.

        4. Jeremy

          GWTF, I completely agree with you.  There needs to be nice along with balls :).  Not just for a woman’s attraction, but for a man to maintain self-respect and see himself as a decent human being.  Balance is needed.

           

          Emily, I agree with you.  You and I often seem to be on the same page.  BTW, I liked your recent post referencing neurotransmitters, though I considered raising a “nerd alert” comment 🙂

           

          Stacy – I agree with you too.  The boundaries you mentioned are important – and especially important for women to prevent themselves from being abused and having their self-respect degraded.  But the difference is that if a man firmly told a woman about his boundaries, she would be more attracted to him because she would respect him.  If a woman firmly told a man about those boundaries he’d say “ok” and likely understand, but would not be more attracted to her because of them.

        5. GoWiththeFlow

          Jeremy,

          I think where being respected by her man plays out in a woman’s psyche is in the “comfort” qualities you talk about.  If a man told his wife that he respected her sharp mind or her ability make money in the stock market, she wouldn’t say “Really!  I so want to jump you right now!”  But she knows he has really gotten to know the her that is contained within the attractive packaging.

          On the other side of the gender divide, there are men I know (thinking of one in particular) who I respect for their brilliant minds, intellectual curiosity, and initiative, but that I would not be interested in for a romantic/sexual relationship because other facets of their personality are a hot mess and/or they display poor character/make poor choices.  I guess it’s a balance of trust and respect.  If a man went way aggressive dread game on me, I might respect his ability to hurt me, and if I’m really emotionally beaten down I may not conceive of being able to leave him, but I sure as heck wouldn’t trust him with my heart.

        6. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          BTW, I liked your recent post referencing neurotransmitters, though I considered raising a “nerd alert” comment 

          I will cop to a certain amount of nerd. 🙂

      3. 4.1.3
        Stacy2

         If they  pick him up from the airport at 2 am when they need to be at work at 7, cook his favorite meals, let him always pick what show to watch, are understanding when he doesn’t want to go with her to a work function, they get dumped. 

        Totally. But not always. Sometimes they don’t get dumped. They get proposed to, get married and then proceed to be taken advantage of for the duration – or until they wise up and become real uncool bitches and everything falls into place!

        1. Jeremy

          Stacy, by boundaries I don’t mean a woman allowing herself to be shit on or abused. I don’t know if you read my post on another topic where I discussed the difference between effort and work in a relationship. The difference being reciprocation. No man or woman should allow themselves to be taken advantage of in a one sided relationship. Boundaries in that respect are important. I am discussing the role of respect in attraction, not in basic human decency.

           

          Women are attracted to nice guys with balls, but when push comes to shove, the balls are the attractive part. Men may be attracted to cool girls with boundaries…. But it is the coolness that is the attractive part. Men assume women like niceness because that’s what men like. Women assume that men like boundaries because that’s what women like.

           

          Perhaps I am just projecting. I don’t claim all men are like this, and Evan disagreeing makes me somewhat reluctant to insist that this is so. But it is my experience and observation, and I spend a lot of time observing.

        2. Stacy2

          Jeremy,

          I guess if we begin to assign different meanings to the same terms, we can talk past each other forever. To me, having boundaries means having things.i.will.not.do.period. Not for my boyfriend, not for my husband, not ever because – these are my boundaries and things I will not do. For example: I won’t do a threesome. I won’t go partying with you if I have a client meeting at 7am. I won’t allow you to not pay your share of rent for 2 months. Etc. (these are merely examples, not my personal boundaries necessarily).

  5. 5
    Tron Swanson

    Here’s my take on all this.

    People are individuals. Yeah, if you’re a member of a certain gender, there may be a very good chance that you have this trait or that trait…but I try to look at people as individuals first, and not make assumptions. Seeing people as Borg-like members of a group, and not as individuals, is the cause of many major social problems, IMHO. Unfortunately, my lived experiences have sabotaged me in this area, because they’ve confirmed many of my more cynical assumptions. But I still try to force myself to keep an open mind, because I know that I’m not like most guys, and I hope to find girls that aren’t like most girls. So, I’m not surprised to find out that most people’s brains conform to a sort of gender blueprint, but there’s still a sizable minority that don’t fit the mold. That gives me hope.

    I think that both men and women have to deal with unfairness–sometimes one gender has more unfairness to deal with than the other, but I think that the unfairness ultimately “balances out,” even if it’s in different aspects of life. Men have problems that women don’t have to worry about, and vice-versa. But there are time periods when it’s equally bad for both. As an example, I wouldn’t want to be a man or a woman in the 1950s. Extreme social pressure for both genders to get married; men being stuck as the sole provider; women stuck with limited options in life.

    I used to want a relationship–never marriage or kids, but a relationship. When I was younger, I knew very little about women, because they had nothing to do with me. As I’ve spent more time around them, I’ve come to a better understanding of them…but it’s also lessened my attraction toward them. Women have long pushed men to view them as more than just sex objects, but I think that it sort of backfired. Many men can appreciate women as sex objects, and as sort of magical, romantic creatures. But if they stop romanticizing them and putting them on a pedestal, and view them as people–judging them by the same standards they judge men–the attraction fades, or even turns into revulsion. A man will put up with just about anything from a sex goddess; a man will have limits when it comes to dealing with another person. In this area, I think that women got exactly what they asked for, but it wasn’t what they expected.

    I’m in my late thirties, and when I was younger, the social push at the time was to view men and women as basically interchangeable. It’s very odd for me to hear women now say that they want masculine men, because I was taught the exact opposite, when I was younger. I think this is where many “nice guys” came from. “Women don’t want you to act traditionally masculine, they just want you to treat them compassionately.” Let’s be honest, both genders tend to say they want one thing while actually wanting another. With men, it’s more transparent, or at least more mocked, while women are still able to deny the truth.

    MGTOW certainly has its dangerous and depressing elements, but it helped me get through a very rough period in my life. Look, I’m a man who lacks the traits that women want, and when you combine that with my lack of interest in relationships, I was pretty much doomed from the start. I wish that I’d spent much less effort on women than I did. It isn’t tough to vilify certain parts of this group, but, honestly, where else can a man go when he doesn’t want to have his value defined by how successful he is with women? Or when he wants to interact with women as little as possible, but doesn’t want to go be a hermit? On other parts of the Internet, if you express doubts about women or the dating game or men’s role in society, you get branded with all sorts of names, and you basically get shunned. The male suicide rate is ridiculous, but if you dare to suggest that men may be a victim in one or two areas of life, or that we’re struggling and need help, you get hit with an avalanche of “But this group and that group has it worse!” They very well may, but it’s assumed that if you say that we need to help Tribe A, you must want to ignore Tribes B-Z.

    As I said earlier, I try to view people as individuals…but I also recognize the truth of what Evan is saying. Someone may be 95% unique from others in their gender, but there are a few biologically-driven traits that are likely to be there, or at least have the strong potential to be there. You can put a stereotypical straight guy next to a stereotypical gay guy, and they’re as different as night and day…except when it comes to wanting lots of sex. I found many “unicorns”–women that I felt were different–but they ended up wanting the same things that most women want. So, while I’d never be presumptuous enough to say, “Oh, I know women, I can tell you about her personality without even meeting her.” No, but I can strongly guess that she’ll have this one particular trait–say, wanting kids–which is a very influential one. And even if she doesn’t, she still has a biological propensity for it.

    So, women are individuals, and we should strive to treat them as such…but most have certain very powerful drives, just like men, and both genders have the right to watch out for themselves. I don’t blame a woman for not walking down a dark alley any more than I blame a man for not risking divorce.

    Sorry for the length of this post.

  6. 6
    Drawtheline

    Wow what a depressing thread of man spewing lies about women .  First of all, the only reason why a woman would want to marry up is because she didn’t have the potential to be up .  Today she can be a doctor or a lawyer  or a president band she doesn’t have to marry up  she can be up .  Up until now the old-style thinking of hypergamy was valid. If a woman isn’t allowed to be the president,  she married the president .  And it’s not to say that men don’t throw away the old and get trophy wives which is just as insidious.  These are all the negative aspects of men and women that I really don’t like .  I left a billionaire family because my guy cheated on me .   I married down and he cheated on me .  And now I’m single and dating .  I judge men by their character and if they’re cute and how he treats me. Is he loyal ?  Does he have my best interests in mind ?  Am I his number one ?   Am I safe with him ?  Can I trust him ? I most likely won’t get married again .  No hypergamy for me, but  if there is that one guy out there who can prove that he’s not like all the rest, I might give him a shot .

    1. 6.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      a) If I spewed any lies, please let me know what they were. I will gladly retract anything that is factually false.

      b) Your man cheated on you because he had low character, not because you “married down”.

      c) Your questions about loyalty, best interests, trust and safety are EXACTLY the cornerstone of what I teach in my products and courses.

      d) “There is that one guy out there who can prove that he’s not like all the rest, I might give him a shot.” Beliefs like this about men will largely push good men away.

  7. 7
    John

    The gender feminists are afraid of male-domination, so they ignore science to promote their unscientific views to protect their egos and perceived threats. That is it.

    The radical manosphere guys are terrified of being dominated by women.

    Fears hate facts.

    Each gender is paranoid that the other side wants to destroy them. It is a projection of their own hatred.

    You can also witness this hatred in great abundance on the comments of this blog

     

     

     

  8. 8
    Noquay

    As a biologist, I can attest that yes, men’s and women’s brains are different. Human evolutionary time is long, where true evolutionary change takes thousands of years. Regardless of how many smartphones and other crap of society we may possess, our brains are still those of hunter-gatherers. Men waged war and hunted big game, women did everything else.  Frankly, I am glad to have a women’s brain; one that easily multitasks, is keenly observant, who feels openly.

    Changing socioeconomic structure and gender roles overlies our brains basic way of doing things, muddying the mating waters. My take on the red-pillers (based upon my experiences of them in this region, and I could well be wrong) is that they’re mainly folk that are/were from lower educational levels, such as my own family, who have been hit hardest by changes in the job markets in this country. In short, their world, for the most part, no longer exists. They’re scared and they’re lashing out. They want to be the old style providers yet cannot be.

    As an older, successful, female reluctantly thrown back into the dating world, I have a different take on hypergamy. When I was married, we lived far more frugally and simply than I do now yet those were the happiest days of my life. Trading up was unthinkable. The times I wanted to trade up were more about the relationship not being workable due to poor behaviors such as cheating, irresponsibility, and growing incompatibility.

    Added to all this are the rising costs of living, and that many of us older folk wind up supporting/caretaking our parents who came from a generation that didn’t prepare well for old age. Add to that insecure jobs and retirement plans, perhaps adult kids that wind up back in the nest, and we really cannot afford to “mate down”, especially to a mate that cannot or will not support themselves or has failed to plan and save for their future.  A lot of trading up might just be self preservation.

  9. 9
    Stacy

    For every woman I know who has decided to ‘trade up’, I know at least 5 women who could CERTAINLY do better, get propositions to do better, but still stay with the (sometimes) broke, abusive asshole (and especially if she has a kid by him).  Blame oxytocin, blame nature, blame nurture…but it’s consistently the same. This ‘women always want to trade up’ philosophy is incorrect when we fall in love/start having intercourse. But in essence, everyone wants the best they can get (even IF women have a stronger propensity to do so but so what)?  However, when a woman creates a soul tie with a man, it is very difficult to get rid of her even if George Clooney walks in the room.

    And the only fact you can tie to women divorcing men more is that women initiate divorces more.  That says nothing about the whys. I divorced because my ex cheated. I am YET to meet a woman who divorced her husband because he was too nice and she wanted to trade up.

    1. 9.1
      DeeGee

      I was dumped by a woman after more than a year dating, because I was too nice and she wanted to trade up. She was a widow. When we started dating she was shy, frumpy, dressed down. I treated her very well, her self-esteem improved dramatically, she lost weight, bleached her teeth, got contacts, got a boob job, started dressing nice. Other guys started hitting on her, which she loved and which drove her self-esteem higher. She ended up cheating on me with the typical tall dark handsome wealthier guy. And then left our relationship to pursue him. Hypergamy. Why would our being married have made any difference, we had been dating for more than a year. She still had it in her to cheat on me, a ring and contract would not have made any difference.

      1. 9.1.1
        Stacy

        @DeeGee

        Sounds to me like she just wasn’t that into you from the beginning but couldn’t do better so she ‘settled’ (in her head anyway) for you. But this is not a woman thing. It’s a human and immaturity thing. Also, she had low self esteem and was probably feeling the high of getting some attention she never had  before. An immature man would have probably done the same thing with some improvements as well. A man who was never able to bed many women who tried to get a girlfriend in his 20s with no luck, and suddenly he looks better, makes more money and becomes eligible in his 30s and now wants to play the field forever – we’ve heard and seen the story a million times over.

        1. DeeGee

          Stacy – While I do agree with your recent post.  Then perhaps she should have been honest with both of us and broke off the relationship instead of, or before, cheating.  It is those types of decisions, like cheating, that cause so much damage.  People need to, or should have to, take responsibility for their action. And they shouldn’t get a free pass on that type of behavior “because we’ve seen it a million times”.
          Me, I am long over it now.  The point of my relaying my personal story was that I was exceptionally nice to her and that many women are hypergamous.  So I still oppose your original comment “I am YET to meet a woman who divorced her husband because he was too nice and she wanted to trade up.”
          And I still completely disagree with “However, when a woman creates a soul tie with a man, it is very difficult to get rid of her even if George Clooney walks in the room.”  She may not leave her man, because she knows she won’t have any chance with George, but she will sure be dreaming and fantasizing about George, and probably nagging at her man that he needs to be more like George.

        2. KK

          DeeGee,

          Your ex-girlfriend’s behavior was inexcusable. Full stop.

          It’s up to you if you want to try to understand WHY (even though it’s inexcusable) she acted the way she did or if you want to use that experience as one more reason to paint all women with the same broad brush.

          (1) She is character flawed. If she decided she was done with the relationship or if she found she was more attracted to someone else, she should have ended the relationship. Period.

          (2) She was not your wife. She was a girlfriend of one year. You stated, “So I still oppose your original comment “I am YET to meet a woman who divorced her husband because he was too nice and she wanted to trade up.”

          (3) “And I still completely disagree with “However, when a woman creates a soul tie with a man, it is very difficult to get rid of her even if George Clooney walks in the room.” We, as women, are telling you that when we are in love with a man, he IS our George Clooney. Stacy, I believe, was just trying to explain that we don’t care about other men; regardless of how impressive they might be.

          (4) You explained what happened in a nutshell but I don’t know if you completely understand what happened. You met a widow. A little dumpy and frumpy and a little down on herself…. Men AND women would be wise to avoid dating people who don’t have their act together. Your story is a perfect illustration. She used you. I know you know this, and I know it does NOT excuse her behavior, but if you could focus your attention on more confident women in the future, it would be to your benefit. Don’t find someone that needs to be saved. There are people that have been at low points in their life that met their spouse during that time period and are eternally grateful, BUT I think it’s a risky proposition.

          By the way, refer back to #1. The other details are just that.

        3. GoWiththeFlow

          DeeGee, KK, and Stacy,

          DeeGee, since you mentioned that your girlfriend enjoyed getting hit on by other men.  I want to point out that this may have been a red flag depending upon the specifics.

          Sure most women are flattered when men find them attractive.  But every time I was in an exclusive relationship, I took steps to make sure the number of men actually hitting on me was low.  This was done on my part to try and prevent any awkward moments, and I didn’t ever want to give anyone the impression that I wasn’t taken.  If I was at an event and my boyfriend wasn’t by my side, if another man started talking to me, I would work it into the conversation that I was there with someone.  “Yes I’m enjoying the music.  I’m so glad my boyfriend thought of it!”  If it was a girls’ night out I might say, “I’m attached but was voted in as both designated driver and wing-woman tonight.”

          If your now ex wasn’t letting these men know soon after meeting in a social situation, then that may be an indication she wasn’t fully invested in the relationship.  For instance if you were at the bar waiting to get drinks and you notice she is talking to a guy for 15 minutes, yet when you return, he is surprised to hear she is there with someone.  Also, watch if she consistently introduces you as “My friend” or just “DeeGee.”  I would always introduce my guy as “My Boyfriend, XXX.”

          As someone who spent too long with some partners because I failed to see red flags that said JNTIY, I know it’s hard to look back and say to yourself, “Why did I ignore that?”

      2. 9.1.2
        Stacy

        @DeeGee,

        This reply is to the comment you made to my last comment (there was no reply button under it).

        Yes, your ex should have been honest and I am not excusing her behavior. But I don’t know if you saw my other comment about my current boyfriend who dated a woman for a year before me but did not call her his girlfriend even though she wanted him to. He was honest but he did not ‘upgrade’ her to girlfriend although he was willing to sleep with her. I got the girlfriend title in 6 weeks. That’s hypergamy at its finest. We all are that way. We know if we can do considerably better and try to do so. What your ex did to you was unkind and it sounds like she used you for the moment. And, that’s a horrible thing to do. But it’s not a woman vs. man trait at all. If this was a woman trait, then why do many women stay in abusive relationships with ‘loser’ men much more than men do? Women stay with men who cheat on them all the time but men hardly do, etc.  And, many of these women can ‘do better’ on paper. You men complain that women stay with men that aren’t good for them all the time (because she’s in love). On the other hand, you accuse women of always trying to trade up? Which one is it? Anyway, I guess we will agree to disagree.

  10. 10
    KK

    Evan said,

    “Like being an alcoholic and avoiding bars, I don’t put myself in the position to flirt – not because I don’t desire other women, but because I do”.

    Wow. I never knew remaining faithful was so difficult for men. Thank you for enlightening all of us.

    And yes, I read the entire comment. Both of them, actually. Just… wow.

    1. 10.1
      Chance

      That is correct, KK.  When a man commits to a monogamous LTR or marriage, it is an enormous commitment, and one that most women are unable to fully appreciate due to biological differences.

      1. 10.1.1
        KK

        You’re right, Chance. Most women will not be able to fully appreciate that. Fidelity is a minimal expectation in a marriage. You won’t be getting praised on a daily basis for keeping it in your pants.

        1. Buck25

          KK,

          With all due respect, no reason any man should expect to be praised for “keeping it in his pants” once he made a promise to do so. There’s no particular virtue in adhering to a minimal standard of character. Whether that’s difficult (in this case, it involves considerable restraint, at times), is beside the point. So are a lot of other things.  For a man of integrity, giving his word is optional; keeping it is not.

        2. KK

          Yes, Buck, I agree with you. Hell, did I word my previous response wrong also? 😉

        3. Buck25

          KK,

          I was trying to reinforce the point you made, from a male perspective. If anything, I worded the first part of my comment badly. That said, I also think Chance’s remark that a commitment to a monogamous relationship is a big deal for a man (especially a man who is used to a lot of options and/or has/has had a very active sex life with numerous women), is correct. That can be a very difficult promise for a man to keep, and the more difficult if his circumstances place him in the path of considerable temptation/opportunity to cheat. That said, integrity(for a man of honor) is NOT optional; cheating, on the other hand, IS. (If any man ever died  from not dipping his wick in every well he could have, I am not aware of it).

          The bottom line, I would think, is that a man needs to be sure he both loves a woman he commits to, enough to be faithful to his promise to her for the duration, and that he has enough self-discipline to do so. I never did get this idea of marrying a woman “less desirable” so that she would presumably “have to put up with cheating”. Why bother in the first place? A “marriage of convenience”, from what I’ve seen, is rarely either a marriage, or convenient.

        4. KK

          “I never did get this idea of marrying a woman “less desirable” so that she would presumably “have to put up with cheating”. Why bother in the first place? A “marriage of convenience”, from what I’ve seen, is rarely either a marriage, or convenient”.

          I agree, Buck. 100%.

    2. 10.2
      Evan Marc Katz

      It’s not “difficult,” KK. That’s another word you’re putting in my mouth.

      But as a man who likes women, has plenty of past experience, and enjoyed being single but much prefers being married, it seems to me that, if anything, I’m being both honest and ethical. Yet I’m still being judged for this by you. Just…wow.

      1. 10.2.1
        KK

        No judgement, Evan. Just shock. Maybe “difficult” was the incorrect term. I’m not sure what term to use when comparing fidelity to being a dry drunk. Sorry.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          They both involve temptation and a conscious decision not to act on your basest impules for short-term pleasure. In fact, I think it’s quite an apt comparison. The fact that you don’t only underscores my original point – women and men, by and large, see things differently.

          Men, driven by testosterone, are driven for more variety and will sleep with anyone attractive. Women tend to want to LIKE a man before sleeping with him. The only cognitive dissonance going on here is yours. I’m presenting you with a clear picture of reality and your mind is boggled by it.

          That’s on you to square – not on reality, men or testosterone to change because you don’t like what you see.

        2. KK

          “The only cognitive dissonance going on here is yours”.

          Did I claim you were experiencing cognitive dissonance? I don’t believe so. I just expressed surprise. Not sure how I have cognitive dissonance just because no man has ever explained their challenges ?  (sorry, not sure what term is acceptable to you) in regards to marital fidelity.

      2. 10.2.2
        Adrian

        Hi Evan,

        This exchange from some of the female commentors regarding your acknowledgement of being sexually attracted to other women while still being married exemplifies my frustration in the last post about stereotypes.

        It just seems that women have a unrealistic view of what a good man is. Like the backlash you receive from women Evan when you admit that you watch porn or that you find other women more physically attractive than your wife; yet you would never cheat on her or intentionally do her wrong in any way; in fact you are happily married.

        I really love your blog Evan but I find myself desiring to visit it less and less because of things like this. Of course this is nothing against the commentors personally but I hope you can see how reading comments like the ones you received after your statement can cause some without your level of experience to think women automatically see men in a negative light unless he lacks “normal” male desires or it will cause a good man to lie about something innocent (referring to the post you did about the girlfriend asking her boyfriend is she better looking than Angelia Jolie).

        So Evan how do you deal with it? Or how did you deal with it when you were single and had to read the comments section daily?

        Again it is not a person attack on anyone because many of the female commentors say many good things about men as well.

        …   …   …

        Oh and as a side note Evan, I think it’s not just me who has gotten burnt out from battling against all the negative misconceptions (or blog jadedness as Tom10 calls it). The comments section use to be more balanced, you had guys like Nathan, Karl R, and even Karmic Equation (though she was a woman) that openly challenged women on certain issues but where are they now? Why did they leave? Life I’m sure but it gets old hearing and then trying to convince women over and over that men aren’t evil just because he likes sex.

        I believe you once said that your site has a million readers and of those about 4% are men. So that is about 40,000 or more men that read your blog daily. But you only have about half a dozen regular commentors. With the exception of Jeremy (again this is not a personal attack on the other male commenters) most of the male commenters are not always positive with their comments about women.

        What’s my point Evan…

        I know that you don’t care too much about the comments section for various reasons and you don’t have time to be on every post so you try to stay out of it, but I think you should consider the impact of this. You have millions of women and thousands of men that are getting good or bad impressions of the opposite sex based only on about half a dozen regular commentors.

        Should you care? I don’t know but what happens with the women who comes to your site for the first time and reads one of the male regulars saying that women are constantly trying to “trade up” regardless of how faithful her man is? Or what happens with the man who reads your blog for the first time that reads one of the female comments sayings it’s shocking but married men only want to fuck everything regardless of how giving his wife is.

         

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Thanks for your comment, Adrian. You are more earnest than most, so I will answer earnestly:

          “It just seems that women have a unrealistic view of what a good man is. Like the backlash you receive from women Evan when you admit that you watch porn or that you find other women more physically attractive than your wife.”

          That’s right. It’s important to acknowledge that there a millions of women who put up with TOO much shit from men. Cheating. Lying. Porn addiction. They are so wary of men because of those experiences that they’ve essentially adopted a zero-tolerance black and white worldview: “if my man even LOOKS at another woman, much less is friends with her or finds her attractive, I’m going to go ballistic.” It’s an overdeveloped defense mechanism that is designed to protect their hearts, but really pushes normal men away. Which brings me to my next point:

          “So Evan how do you deal with it? Or how did you deal with it when you were single and had to read the comments section daily?”

          I feel I have a pretty strong grasp on reality, a pretty good understanding of both men and women, and empathy for both sides who talk past each other. If anything, I see myself as a moderator. I don’t take sides. I speak truth and let the fringes fight it out. But just as in politics, the loudest voices are often the most unreasonable. Unfortunately, they drown out the rest of the conversation and people begin to think there are no moderates anymore. There are.

          “I think it’s not just me who has gotten burnt out from battling against all the negative misconceptions (or blog jadedness as Tom10 calls it). The comments section use to be more balanced, you had guys like Nathan, Karl R, and even Karmic Equation (though she was a woman) that openly challenged women on certain issues but where are they now? Why did they leave? Life I’m sure but it gets old hearing and then trying to convince women over and over that men aren’t evil just because he likes sex.”

          After 10 years of this, I know that people have lives. If Karl is happily married, how much does he want to be my proxy in speaking logic to emotion? Not very much. You lose the desire for the fight when you’ve already won. Happily married people are rarely the best blog commenters, even if they’re the most valuable. They just don’t have the desire to speak truth to every angry, emotional, misguided person who resents the opposite sex. I don’t have a choice. This is my job and I ain’t going anywhere.

          “I believe you once said that your site has a million readers and of those about 4% are men. So that is about 40,000 or more men that read your blog daily. But you only have about half a dozen regular commentors. With the exception of Jeremy (again this is not a personal attack on the other male commenters) most of the male commenters are not always positive with their comments about women.”

          Your numbers aren’t quite right, my friend. My blog got 10M readers last year total. 23% were men. That’s 2.3M men who read at least one post last year (not daily). Yesterday, 22K women read and 6K men read. That’s neither here nor there. Most people bounce off the blog. They hit the page, read a post and leave. The people who comment here are not necessarily a representation of all readers; they’re just the most vocal cross-section of people who like to comment on blogs. I’ve read the New York Times online for 15 years. I’ve never commented on a post. I rarely even look at comments. Point is that the comments are for those who like the comments. If you don’t like the comments – or being part of the discussion – then simply stop commenting. There’s no reason to stop reading though.

          “I know that you don’t care too much about the comments section for various reasons and you don’t have time to be on every post so you try to stay out of it, but I think you should consider the impact of this. You have millions of women and thousands of men that are getting good or bad impressions of the opposite sex based only on about half a dozen regular commentors. Should you care? I don’t know but what happens with the women who comes to your site for the first time and reads one of the male regulars saying that women are constantly trying to “trade up” regardless of how faithful her man is? Or what happens with the man who reads your blog for the first time that reads one of the female comments sayings it’s shocking but married men only want to fuck everything regardless of how giving his wife is.”

          I do care. I just don’t know what to do about it. My choices:

          a. Shut down comments section entirely out of fear that others won’t pay attention to my writing, but only the mutual bitterness on both sides.

          b. Police comments section vigorously to root out all non-moderate opinions (women who resent men, men who resent women).

          c. Do what I do now and delete (most) comments that are direct attacks on me or my readers but let the debate rage on without my input.

          I think it’s obvious why I go with the third option.

          Fact is: people are always looking for confirmation of what they already believe – not advice. Virgin comes here and tells me he’s saving himself for marriage and women are fleeing from him. I tell him to put out or accept the fact that most women will not stick around. Virgins around the world attack me. Insecure women think it’s okay to tell a man who he’s allowed to be friends with, what he’s allowed to watch in his spare time, and that he should never, ever find another woman attractive. I tell them that this is unrealistic. Women around the world attack me. But I don’t really care. They’re not my clients. They’re frustrated people, reaching out to a dating coach for validation and failing to get it. They don’t want advice. They want a hug and to be told they’re right.

          Long story short: this blog is short on validation and long on practical, balanced advice. I would think that any sensible reader would read my original post, then read the comments and gravitate to the reasonable and thoughtful moderates like you. The way I see it, any reader who grabs onto the “men suck/women suck” commenters because it confirms what they already want to believe is already lost, and I can’t do much to save them.

        2. Marika

          Adrian

          I empathize. I’ve raised this before, though, and the comments got even nastier, accusing me of trying to police the blog and telling me to just ignore the comments & move on. So I’m not sure how far you’ll get with this. Worth trying though!

          I just put it down to the high value placed by Americans on freedom of speech. I get that, but I personally think that nasty personal attacks or endless debates where no one concedes anything, aren’t okay, and maybe you raising this will make a difference. At the very least it would be great if comments were written as opinions, rather than facts, and that people of the opposite gender didn’t write as though they can understand what it’s like to be a man/woman. That may lessen the vitriol.

        3. GoWiththeFlow

          Hi Adrian,

          I hope you will be back to join us more very soon.  I miss your comments and questions!

          I think Tom10 was right about the concept of “blog jadedness.”  I’ve also seen it referred to as blog burnout.  I am a comments reader on most sites I visit, whether they are blogs, news sites, or other social media platforms.  But I only leave comments on or participate in discussions on a few.  There is one popular blog that I routinely visited for awhile, but where the comment sections were horribly nasty–way worse than anything here–and eventually that turned me off to the whole blog.

          For myself, as a woman, no I don’t like reading in the comments that there are men out there who think my usefulness ended on my 30th birthday, and American women are so horrible that men should travel to impoverished developing nations to find complaint wives.  But the reality is those men ARE out there, and it’s good for me to know this so I know what to look for so I can avoid them.

          You have to know both what you want and what you don’t want to be effective in dating.  So in a way these men are doing me a favor because now I know what language they use and what hints they display about their underlying attitudes early on and I can cut bait and move on.  As Evan says, don’t worry about those men, you don’t want them anyway.

          So yes Adrian, I hate to say it, but there are some women who are uncomfortable with and judgmental about male sexuality.  There are some who find very few men attractive and/or who won’t settle for less than a 10+ fireworks going off chemistry level.  Some will not trust you are a good man upfront.  Know these women are out there.  It’s the first step in being able to steer clear of them because you shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to establish you are a baseline decent human being.  Just like the Red Pill guys, these women are coming from a deep place of pain and hurt.  But that doesn’t mean you are obligated to try and pull them out of the holes they are in.  Learn the early signs and language of of the underlying attitudes and you will be able to spot them early and move on.  In general watch behavior.  Make sure it matches the words.

          Also look around you for some perspective.  At work I certainly have days where all I can think is, Seriously???  What the heck am I supposed to do with these unrealistic expectations?  Just what do you want from me?  I think when we run into these problems in the dating and relationship sphere they feel so much worse and are so much more disheartening than in other areas of our lives.  Take a step back and take a break if you need to.

          You had a beautiful relationship with a lovely woman before she passed.  So there’s proof for you that it’s possible, and you do have the knowledge and skills to get there.

          (((((BIG HUGS)))))

        4. Evan Marc Katz

          And THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is why I keep the comments section. Thank you, GWTF!

    3. 10.3
      John

      KK

      I appreciate your ability to empathize with a man’s insane sex drive.

      I  saw a pastor on television who was being interviewed by a female reporter. She really didn’t like him  and was trying to hit him with a “gotcha question.” She asked him, “Do you ever want to have sex with other women than your wife?” The pastor said, ” I want to have sex with most women I see every day, but I don’t because I love my wife.”

      I think it’s bizarre that the media gave Vice-President Pence such a hard time about not wanting to attend dinners or be alone with women when his wife wasn’t there.

      He knows his weaknesses as a man  and he set up a firewall to protect himself and his wife.  Now that is honoring your wife.

      1. 10.3.1
        Emily, the original

        “I want to have sex with most women I see every day, but I don’t because I love my wife.”

        Well women want to have sex with some men. Very specific men. But by no means most.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Again, therein lies the difference. It’s on the page, right in front of you, in black and white. Men and women are different. In general, they have different views based in real, biological, hormonal, gender-based differences. This is what the article was about. Men are telling you that we see the world through a different lens than women – and women repeatedly telling men that their worldview is shocking, appalling, or wrong. It’s not. It’s just different than you.

          I’m attracted to many different women (not most women, but many of them). I don’t think for a second I’d be more happily married to another woman, so I avoid temptation by not befriending, flirting, or developing crushes on other women. These facts – which remain upsetting to some – are actually what make me a really good husband. Apparently, my crime is a thought-crime – the fact that I’m admitting publicly that I’m attracted to other women. So to anyone who thinks I’m an anomaly, go ask your nicest, happily married male friend for an honest answer: “Are you attracted to other women besides your wife?”

          Prepare for him to answer exactly like I did, presuming he’s not afraid of the backlash of telling the truth.

        2. Emily, the original

          Evan,

          Apparently, my crime is a thought-crime – the fact that I’m admitting publicly that I’m attracted to other women. So to anyone who thinks I’m an anomaly, go ask your nicest, happily married male friend for an honest answer: “Are you attracted to other women besides your wife?”

          I did just that when I got to work this morning. A man who is in his mid-50s and married to his high school sweetheart. Yes, he finds other women attractive, but he said being faithful to his wife has not been difficult for him.

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          I NEVER SAID IT WAS DIFFICULT TO REMAIN FAITHFUL. KK said that (falsely) about me.

          I’m going to pull my f-ing hair out at being misquoted on my own blog. Back to observing and not wading into the mix for a few more weeks.

        4. KK

          Pulling my hair out too! I apologize for not being a wordsmith. Maybe I should have used GWTF’s verbiage in her response re. Mike Pence.

      2. 10.3.2
        GoWiththeFlow

        John,

        I think the thing with Pence is that because of what he must do for himself, his actions will limit women who work with him in the government.  How can a women be a department head and report to Pence about top secret info if he can’t meet with her behind a closed door of 20 minutes?

        People who hate kids probably shouldn’t become school bus drivers.  If a man doesn’t trust himself around a woman, such that it means the woman/women he works with are affected, maybe he needs to find another job or learn better coping mechanisms.  Because he’s making his problem someone else’s problem.

        1. John

          Hi GWTF

          If you refer to KK’s comment #10, she has an “a-ha” moment about male biology. That is the reality and it is quite inconvenient. If VP Pence chooses to not be alone with women it is a wise choice for him for two reasons. First reason is the one I previously mentioned about not wanting the temptation that can go with being alone with women in general or women colleagues.

          Second reason is that a female colleague could accuse you of sexual harassment or some type of sexual misconduct.

          It may not be fair to women but that is the reality especially that the VP of the US is a target for false accusations.

          My male friends who are counselor and therapists that meet with women clients leave the door open when they are in session. My friends do not want to be accused of inappropriate behavior and the open door to the office so their staff could hear everything. It  compromises their privacy, but that is the reality when you are a man in a position of power or helping field.

          To say that men should work somewhere else or get better coping skills is not fair to men who have positions in which they are targets for false harassment lawsuits.

          Where should these men work? In a male-only business?  Well, there aren’t any.

          A guy I used to work with years ago was slapped with a false harassment lawsuit that ruined his career, and it was all a lie. It is real for guys, but it will never be your problem.

        2. KK

          John,

          A friend of mine is the CFO at her company. Recently, one of the secretaries accused someone in management of sexual harassment. Lawyers were involved. Depositions were taken. Computer forensics specialists were hired. Ultimately, they discovered her claims were false. Lawsuit was dropped.

          However, both the man and his accuser were fired. As a woman, I take steps to protect myself from sexual harassment. Men should protect themselves from false allegations.

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          “Protect themselves from false allegations?” Do tell how one can accomplish this. I can’t even imagine your answer.

        4. KK

          Why is it so hard to imagine, Evan? John already gave examples… The idea is not all that radical, actually. Ask anyone who has had a high conflict divorce. One of the first things their attorney will tell them is not to meet up with their estranged / former spouse alone by always taking a witness. Some people are actually even instructed to do drop off / pick up of kids at a police station. They have parking lot cameras.

          At the workplace, have a policy of no one on one meetings with the opposite sex. Or like John’s friend, always leave the door open. Nothing is foolproof but it never hurts to be more proactive, does it?

        5. Evan Marc Katz

          Nothing you said can prevent a “false allegation,” KK. Go start a blog. Write a post called “Evan Marc Katz is a pedophile.” Tell me what I could have done to prevent that. By your description, I should have been more conciliatory to you on my blog to prevent you from telling a big whopping lie about me. Truth is: men can’t stop false allegations because they are, by nature, false.

          What you’re trying to say is that men should not put themselves in the position where an allegation is possible. Stop talking to women and never flirt with women and you should be all set.

        6. GoWiththeFlow

          John,

          I had that same “aha” moment about male biology when I listened to an interview Andrew Sullivan did with a male to female transsexual, who described the huge changes in sex drive and sexual/arousing thoughts that happened when he began undergoing testosterone therapy.  I also know that functional brain scans show that certain areas of men’s brains light up when they view an image of an attractive woman, where the same response is not seen in women.

          However, one other thing that I also do know is that the huge majority of men manage to work with women and can do a business meeting with a female colleague without lunging across the table in a lust filled frenzy.  Because the cerebral cortexes of their brains have developed over the past 200,000 years to very efficiently control the impulses of the lower brain to accommodate for appropriateness of person and setting.

          Most men don’t have a choice as to who they work with or the ability to reshuffle people and assignments so they never have to work with female colleagues.  (In that respect VP Pence is quite privileged)  And overwhelmingly, men handle it just fine.  So VP Pence seems to be having way more difficulty with being in the mere presence of women than the average man.  And for Christ’s sake, his viewpoint suggests that he sees all women as wanton sirens just waiting for a moment to come on to him.  The vast majority of women just want to do their job and then go home to their families.

          As for throwing in, or muddying the waters, with the whole false sexual harassment claim issue, you have one friend who was falsely accused.  How many men have you known in your lifetime that have NEVER been accused?  Because this says that some men out there are holding the whole of womankind responsible for the actions of a few.   It’s ironic that this viewpoint gets expressed here when Evan and other men point out to women how unfair and infuriating it is when women don’t trust men and act like all of them are potential rapists.

  11. 11
    Rollo Tomassi

    It’s often said that men and women are both hypergamous.  This isn’t true.  Both men and women optimize.  But only women are hypergamous.
    Hypergamy has become a term of art in the manosphere.  It has a very specific meaning which differs from the meaning social scientists ascribe to it.  In social science it refers specifically and only to marriage relationships.   The term is used to refer to women marrying men who are perceived to be wealthier or of a higher social/economic standing or caste, usually observed in Hindu cultures on the Indian subcontinent but also observed in early American society.  In the United States it’s often referred to as women “marrying up”.
     F. Roger Devlin, himself having a social science background, appropriated the term in his essay entitled Sexual Utopia in Power when referring to his observation that young single women always seemed to be looking for the best man they can get at any one time, seeking the most attractive man or men for sex.  Devlin observed modern Western women’s propensity to discard one man in favor of a better man, in serial fashion, always doing their best to “move up” and get  a more attractive, better man with each successive discard and pairing.
    Expanding on this, manosphere writers and bloggers noticed that hypergamy operates at a low hum, like a background operating system, in every woman.   It is “satisfied” while she’s with a man of sufficiently high value. But if a man of perceived higher value or greater attractiveness  shows interest, and/or her current man’s value is faltering, that low hum becomes a loud alarm. This can cause her, at the very least, to have feelings of attraction for the new man and feelings of dis-attraction for the current man. This can in many cases cause her to leave the current man for the new higher value, more attractive man. This doesn’t always happen, but it can happen. Hypergamy can operate in any combination – more attractive man showing interest; current man’s attractiveness waning or falling, and anywhere in between. Thus, the manosphere’s use of the term “hypergamy” came into being, to refer to a core aspect of female sexual nature which is unique to women.
    False Equivalencies
    People confuse “optimization” with “hypergamy“. Both men and women optimize; meaning they want the best they can get, of anything and everything. Men and women optimize everything:  jobs, cars, houses, furniture, friends, even churches. Men and women optimize with each other. But men and women optimize with the opposite sex in different ways, and that’s where the confusion comes in because you’ve been conditioned to believe in a baseline egalitarian equalism between the sexes.
    Hypergamy in its current iteration in the manosphere means essentially “is attracted only to people who are more attractive than I am”.  Women will be sexually attracted to men who they perceive as “above” them in attractiveness.  They will be somewhat attracted to men who are at their rough sexual market value (SMV) level, but that man must bring other things to the table, usually provisioning and commitment, before she will have sex with him. And women are never ever sexually attracted to men who are perceived to be beneath their own SMV level.
    Example:   A woman with SMV = 7 will be sexually attracted to males with SMV of 8 and up.   She will pair with a male 7, if and only if he brings “other things” to the table. She will never be sexually attracted to male 6s on down.  And she will be able to easily get sex with men above her in SMV.  She can occasionally get relationships with male 8s.  She can easily get relationships and sex with male 7s.  Male 6s on down are her orbiters, with whom she’ll never have sex.
    Men do not operate like this at all.  And that’s the difference.   Men are not attracted only to women who are above them in SMV. A man can be, and often is, attracted to women above him in SMV, and to women at his SMV level and also to women below him in SMV. What is also different is the level of women he can get and how well his relationships will work out, based on his and her SMV.
    A man will be unable to continue a relationship with a woman above his SMV. He is very sexually attracted to them, and occasionally lucks out and gets sex with one or two; but he can’t sustain a relationship with them. He can get sex from women at his SMV level but only if he goes all in and offers commitment. He can most easily get sex with women below him in SMV, many times no strings attached sex.
    Example: A male 6 will rarely get sex with a 7 but can’t keep anything with her going. He’s not even on the radar of female 8s on up. He can get sex with a female 6 only if he offers commitment and provisioning. He can most easily get sex with female 5s on down.
    And here’s the grand difference: A man is OK with having sex with women at and below his own SMV. In fact, he’ll be happiest in his relationships with women beneath his own SMV – a woman is “meh” about sex with men at her SMV, and she is positively repulsed and sickened at having sex with men below her own SMV. She’ll be happiest in a relationship with a man above her own SMV and she can tolerate a man at her SMV. And she’ll be miserable at best with a man beneath her SMV and will tend to blow up those relationships.
    Men and women both have attraction floors. Men’s attraction floor is below their own SMV.  Women’s attraction floor is either above her own SMV and sometimes at her own SMV, but never beneath it.
    The other, minor difference is that men are polygamous, not hypergamous. A man’s imperative is not (necessarily) to get the best woman. It’s to get as many women as possible with as little investment and commitment as possible. If he can do it, he would love to get as many women as possible at and a little below his own SMV, and have sex with as many of them as possible for as long as possible, without committing to or investing in any of them.   That’s spinning plates. Most men don’t do this, because they can’t, because they’re not attractive enough, but that’s a different post.  
    A woman’s imperative is to get the best one man she can get for sex and for provisioning.     That’s why you don’t see many women “dating” (i.e. having sex with) several different men at the same time. Women don’t spin plates; they pick the best plate they can and take care of it as best they can. Instead of trying to collect plates, they just change out the plates, one for another, when a bigger, better one comes along.  
    This is why the best long term relationship is one in which the man outranks his woman in SMV. He should be at least +1 and preferably +2 in SMV.  This makes both of them happiest in the long run.

    1. 11.1
      Tom10

      @ Rollo Tomassi #11
      I agree with everything you wrote until your last sentence:
       
      “This is why the best long term relationship is one in which the man outranks his woman in SMV. He should be at least +1 and preferably +2 in SMV.  This makes both of them happiest in the long run”
       
      These relationships are unsatisfactory, in my opinion, as the dynamic often/usually results in:
       
      –          Years of a “quasi-committed” relationship where the girl really wants to get married but the guy isn’t pushed enough to commit. So he strings her along indefinitely, thus potentially costing the woman her prime years, or even worse, motherhood.
      –         The guy cheats occasionally or repeatedly because he doesn’t value his partner enough to override his desire for variety and he knows she’s more likely to accept his cheating than a higher SMV woman would (think the Clintons).
       
      My belief is that the best long term relationships are those in which both parties have an equal SMV or where the man is -1 in SMV.
       
      -1 SMV relationships can work well if the higher SMV party has the intellectual awareness to understand the inherent compromises and rewards such a decision (i.e. a man who marries -1 is marrying lower quality woman, but the reciprocal benefit is that she will be much more devoted to him and less likely to divorce. A woman who marries -1 is marrying a lower quality guy, but the reciprocal benefit is that he is much more likely to want to commit and much less likely to cheat).

      1. 11.1.1
        KK

        Tom10,

        And I agreed with you up until: “A woman who marries -1 is marrying a lower quality guy, but the reciprocal benefit is that he is much more likely to want to commit and much less likely to cheat).”

        The cheating part. I believe cheating is a symptom of flawed character. Bill Clinton cheated and Hillary put up with it, but if he had had a more attractive wife he would’ve done the same exact thing. Yes, it’s more likely that a more attractive woman would’ve ditched him for cheating, but it doesn’t change the likelihood of his willingness to cheat.

        Just off the top of my head, attractive, female celebrities whose husbands were unfaithful: Christie Brinkley and Jenny Garth. They are both much more attractive than their cheating, ex husbands. I realize it’s difficult for many reasons to compare to celebrities, but I’ve found the same to be true (in my albeit anecdotal experience) in real life as well.

        1. Tom10

          @ KK #11.1.1
          “The cheating part. I believe cheating is a symptom of flawed character.”
           
          Actually on second thoughts yes you are correct; cheating is function of character rather than a difference in SMV level.
           
          That said, the rules change when dealing with 8+ guys (i.e. celebrities and the most beautiful/successful “regular” guys) because 8-and-above-guys have endless options; even if they cheat they know they can easily find an equal replacement. I believe regular guys who have limited options (i.e 1-7 guys) might be less likely to cheat as their odds of finding an equal replacement are much lower.

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Tom & KK,

          Not sure if you know but RT is a Red Pill bigwig.

          Sorry Evan!!!

          I think he promotes this man should be 2 SMV levels above a wife because there will be a power imbalance and the woman will knock herself out to keep the man happy while the man does what he wants.  Like you said Tom, if she doesn’t like it and walks, he can easily get another -2 woman.

        3. Chance

          Hi Tom10,

           

          While cheating does involve character flaws on the part of the cheating partner, there is more to it (I believe).  With cheating men, it involves character flaws coupled with the ability for the man to attract many women.  With cheating women, it involves character flaws coupled with the instance of another man who is pursuing the woman, and whom she considers to have a higher SMV than her partner.

    2. 11.2
      Stacy

      @Rollo Tamassi

      Well, if going by your theory, if a woman gets with a man who has a higher SMV, the man will most likely cheat since he is innately polygamous and can attract more options (and maybe better physically) than what he has at home. Also, I totally disagree that men are happy with women below their SMV. He will certainly sleep with a woman below his SMV but he won’t wife her. Men are driven visually and while they don’t have many standards for other factors like women do (such as income, height, etc.), they have higher standards for physical beauty than women do. C’mon, you see it all the time. If Whoopi Goldberg was a man, women would be pounding down her door. Whoopi is rich but men aren’t lining up to have sex with her because she isn’t the most physically appealing. If a man thinks his woman isn’t one that turns heads and he can do much better physically, it will only be a matter of time before he cheats (even if he isn’t inherently a cheater most times). When men feel they have a catch physically, it’s a higher motivation to stay faithful.

      Also, women bond through sex much more than men. So, when women are in love, trading up is the last thing on our minds. When kids coming into play, even more so. Men don’t have those restrictions.

      1. 11.2.1
        Stacy

        Oh, and to add to my own post based on what I read – yes, a man’s cheating habits is flawed character. BUT, I think a poor strategy for a woman would be to get with a man with a higher SMV value because it is an added incentive. Even Evan said he wants to have sex with women but he chooses not to. Part of him doing that is trying to stay away from temptation in the first place. But, the desire is there. It will be there for men. If a man is either mildly turned on by you or feels that he can do much, much, better physically than you, then that’s a recipe for disaster since your looks are one of the key components that drives a man to want you sexually. With women, we are a bit more flexible.

      2. 11.2.2
        DeeGee

        “Women bond through sex”

        Then where does that leave women who have had a good number of sexual partners. For example more than five or ten. Red pill states that women who have high numbers of sexual partners can no longer bond. And in today’s world, women having high numbers is very common.

        1. Stacy

          @DeeGee

          1. Some women love sex JUST for sex and don’t necessarily bond through it and have lots of sexual partners at not much emotional cost. I guarantee you this is a minority.

          2. Some women have high sexual partners because they are damaged in some way (bad sexual past, low self esteem, etc.)

          3. Some women have high sexual partners because they are looking for love through the process and trust me, bonding happens even after heart break after heart break.

          Overall, women still have a capacity to bond even after having many sexual partners (unless the sex is bad and some women are still able to look past this because of other qualities).

          Regardless, doesn’t take away the fact that women tend to form a bond to men and desire relationships more.

           

           

        2. DeeGee

          Stacy – I disagree with your assessment.  Every person that I know, male and female, who has been promiscuous and slept with many people, is a train-wreck in relationships.

        3. GoWiththeFlow

          DeeGee,

          “Red pill states that women who have high numbers of sexual partners can no longer bond.”

          This is not supported by research studies.  I wrote a little more in-depth about in another comment under 1.2.2.  My brief summation:

          Just for the record, the research in this area is mixed.  Some studies show a link, some don’t.  Some show a correlation between increasing #s of pre-marital sexual partners and subsequent marital dissatisfaction for both men and women.

          I find it ironic that Red Pill sites push this women are worthless if they’ve had sex with more than a few men while concurrently trying to come up with ways to “spin” them like “plates” and game them into bed.  Their motto should be “How to get a woman to give you what you want so you can hold it against her.”

    3. 11.3
      Jeremy

      Ugh, this nonsense again? ” Instead of trying to collect plates, women just change out the plates, one for another, when a bigger, better one comes along.”

       

      Yeah, this reminds me of why I stopped reading articles on the manosphere.  The myopia and confirmation bias, the citing of articles that confirm those biases (many self-written by those same authors), and the theories that are just not borne out in real life in general experience.

       

      We fabricate our beliefs based on a combination of what we want to believe and what we fear might be true.  We then look for evidence to rationalize these beliefs and ignore evidence that dis-confirms them.  I stopped believing in manospherian dogma when I stopped fearing it might be true.

  12. 12
    Shannon

    I agree with most of what you say.  You are opening up a very interesting philosophic debate about reality and human knowledge.  I would argue that “climate change” does not belong with the others.   Climate change is not a simple hypothesis that is true or false but an entire series of assertions, some scientifically valid, some false.  The assertion that the earth has been warming over the past couple of decades, that carbon dioxide has risen are true, carbon dioxide does contribute to warming the atmosphere but that does not mean that mankind, by burning fossil fuels, is heating up the atmosphere at such a past and dangerous pace that the earth is going to blow up in a huge ball of fire or that seas will rise and flood everything unless we americans pay huge amounts of money to developing countries to bribe them to not develop.  Im embedding a very interesting and reasonable discussion to anyone that has an open mind and is interested in learning.

     

    1. 12.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      No one said the Earth is going to blow up in a huge ball of fire. But seas rising and flooding low level coastline in Florida and New York? Absolutely.

      Here, read:

      Pull quote from NASA: “Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century.”

      1. 12.1.1
        Stacy2

        I may be wrong but i always assumed the point of contention in this debate was not whether the global warming is “real” (it is something that can be measured) but whether Co2 emissions from our activities is what’s in fact causing it, which is a much more complex issue.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Not so sure it’s that complex, Stacy, but I’ll leave the topic alone and get back to my real job now.

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Stacy2,

          That’s one of the tactics climate change deniers use to deflect.

          “Okay we concede that CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere and that leads to glacial ice melt, leading to more of earth’s total water being in liquid form in the ocean and not bound up in ice.  Which leads to sea level rise and more liquid water being available to be sucked up into hurricanes and other storms, which now do more damage to land because some of them are now at or below sea level.”

          “But we don’t know humans are causing it.”

           

        3. Stacy2

          GWT:

          i think you are missing my point. Throughout history, scientisys have been wron many times. And a lot of theories have been disproved. So, is there even a shred of possibility that its not actually is burning fossil fuels thay causes it, that there’s a factor that is not apparent or thay scientists fail to account for now, but may in the future? Isn’t continuous exploration of this topic better than dogmatically accepting the existing consensus?

          And no, my clients absolutely should and do question my recommendations. In fact it would be illegal for me to promise any outcome as a “sure thing” and “past performance does not guarantee future return” is a known legal disclaimer (that and 10 pages of other disclaimers that keep lawyers employed and us not sure). And I am not even legally allowed to communicate with non-professional investors who lack capacity to question me. So yeah, I think questionig the consensus is not necessarily a bad thing until “proven beyond reasonable doubt” (like thay the earth is not flat lol)

        4. GoWiththeFlow

          John,

          Regarding your comments on the biology of male sexual drive, you said “That is the reality and it is quite inconvenient.  If VP Pence chooses to not be alone with women it is a wise choice for him. . . [for] not wanting the temptation that can go with being alone with women in general or women colleagues.”

          Oh I get it that the male sex drive can be strong.  I’ve listened to the interview (that I think Evan has posted somewhere around here) Andrew Sullivan did with a female to male transsexual where he discussed what it was like to deal with the huge increase in the frequency of sexual thoughts and his sex drive after he started testosterone treatment.  But you also have have higher brain centers that keep you from acting out in inappropriate settings with inappropriate people.  If a man can’t be in a business meeting with a woman without lunging across the table in a lust filled frenzy, how the heck does he mange to go on dates, with women he likes (!) and not jump them?  Men really only insult themselves and their whole gender when they claim they can’t be in a room with any adult woman because they can’t control themselves.

          Regarding false sexual harassment charges, you said “It is real for guys, but it will never be your problem.”

          Actually if men are limiting their contact with women in the workplace they have let their fear become the problem of innocent women who are just trying to do their jobs.

          Very depressing that so many men view women as either temptresses or liars who are out to get them.

      2. 12.1.2
        GoWiththeFlow

        Thanks Evan,

        To Shannon,

        Just two examples I can pull off the top of my head:  Both The Netherlands and the city of New Orleans are below sea level.  They have to have proactively pump water out and try to keep in out with levees and dikes.  Areas of Miami-Dade county so routinely flood, it’s not even news anymore.  So we can either try to do something to slow the process down or stop it, by limiting carbon emission or we can plan to relocate masses of people and figure out new areas where we can grow food.  The U.S. Military is planning for the former.  In light of that I’ll believe the near unanimous consensus of climate scientists, since the military obviously does, and not the few scientists who don’t.

        1. Stacy2

           Both The Netherlands and the city of New Orleans are below sea level. 

          But they have always been that way, they were built on land that was below sea level to begin with. There’re more places like that on earth and wiki has a good list. What does that prove?

          I am not nearly smart enough do debate co2 link intelligently, but i understand that there are valid arguments from real scientists on each side of it. Considering that science frequently proves itself wrong over a span of several years, I just completely fail to side with either version…

          I think this is generally the problem here. It’s been like – scientists’ yo-yoing on a bunch of topics doesn’t really instill confidence in general public, especially mere mortals like us who don’t understand the underlying science enough. It’s like one day fat is killing you, low-fat everything, etc. then ooops, fat is actually ok, its the sugar that is killing you and btw those no-fat products are loaded with it so switching back to full-fat. Okey then. Or hormonal contraception – one day nuvaring is the best thing since bacon, then it turns out perfectly healthy women are dying from blood clots it caused and its being sued for gazillion dollars. Etc… After a couple of decades of this playing out very publicly, is it any wonder an average person doesn’t blindly trust the next “absolutely proven” scientific thing?

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Stacy2,

          Since the turn of the century, the ocean around New Orleans has risen 8-12 inches.  More areas have to be actively cleared of water, and there are more areas that are just at sea level and are now vulnerable to flooding where they weren’t 125 years ago.

          “I think this is generally the problem here. It’s been like – scientists’ yo-yoing on a bunch of topics. . .”

          What topics?

          The only yo-yoing on climate change science has been in sub-areas like whether the sea has risen 8, 10, or 12 inches around New Orleans.  The overall consensus of thousands of scientists who study weather, climate, marine ecosystems, and environmental sciences is that ocean temperatures are warming, sea levels are rising, and this is due to increased CO2 production from man made sources.  There are a handful of scientists who disagree.

          Yet a lot of modern society wants to believe the handful because of fear.  They fear the collapse of the fossil fuel industry, fear of lost jobs and worthless stock portfolios.  They fear the cost and hardship of switching over to alternative fuel sources.  These are very real things that we need to have a conversation about as a society, but were stuck on “we don’t believe the science” because we apparently don’t want to have difficult conversations and make difficult choices.

          There are a handful of physicians out there who think HIV doesn’t cause AIDS.  They think HIV is a benign virus and AIDS is caused by poor diet, unhealthy lifestyles, or environmental poisoning.  In this case society at large pays them little heed and people as a whole believe the virologists, medical researchers, and public health officials who have studied HIV/AIDS and the public discussion and policy centers around what the science shows.

          “It’s like one day fat is killing you, low-fat everything, etc. then ooops, fat is actually ok, its the sugar that is killing you and btw those no-fat products are loaded with it so switching back to full-fat. “

          That’s a did the sea level rise 8 or 12 inches around NO issue.  Overall the science shows maintaining a normal body weight leads to better health outcomes and a lower incidence of disease and resultant disability.  A proven way to do this is to eat plenty of fresh fruits and vegetables and avoiding processed foods.  That has backed up 100% by science over many years.

          “Or hormonal contraception – one day nuvaring is the best thing since bacon, then it turns out perfectly healthy women are dying from blood clots it caused and its being sued for gazillion dollars”

          Actually we have known since the early 1970s that hormonal contraception, or any pro-estrogen state, promotes blood clotting. Again another 8 or 12 inches in New Orleans issue.  In larger populations, the risk of the known clotting complications was higher than in the smaller drug studies.  What remains is the larger science known since the 1960s that ovulation can be controlled by hormonal manipulation so as to effectively precent conception.

          If people who denied climate change science treated the fat-sugar issue or the hormonal birth control-blood clotting issue like they do climate science they would give up eating fruits and vegetables because “All the nutrition science is bad!” and they would claim “There’s no proof that birth control pills even prevent conception!”

          “I am not nearly smart enough do debate co2 link intelligently,. . .” 

          So the answer to that is to disbelieve thousands of scientists who have studied and worked in the field for decades?

          Should a client NOT believe your analysis of investments that shows how previous clients have made money, and is in line with the recommendations of thousands of other financial professionals  because, “I don’t understand it myself and there’s a handful of other financial planners who disagree so I’ll just blow off the data and the advice that is derived from it?”

           

      3. 12.1.3
        Shannon

        There are in fact alot of apocolyptic predictions being made and alot of scare mongering by global warming activists.  I read your link – I have one factor to point out – water vapor.  They mention greenhouse gases, but are not explicit about which greenhouse gas.  Water vapor is by far the dominant greenhouse gas.  CO2 exists in the atmosphere at levels of ppm (parts per million).  There are between 20 – 30 CO2 atoms per million other gaseos atoms – O2, NO2, H2O and other trace gases.  How is it that CO2 is the dominant driver of increasing global temperatures?  Not even this article proves that.

        The argument is not that I dont think that increasing temperatures wont cause sea levels to rise.  The argument is that noone can predict future climate and noone can predict catastrophic flooding and that those that do so, aren’t engaging in “science”, they are just guessing.  There are warming and cooling patterns that span millions of years and smaller patterns within the larger patterns that span thousands and even smaller cycles that span decades.  I think that the broader pattern, spanning millions, is towards warming but within that we have had mini ice ages and mini warming periods.  Its a complex, open, dynamic system with infinite variables.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          And we should do everything in our power to ensure that if, in fact, as virtually all scientists point out, this appears to be man-made and coincide with the technology and growth in the past 100 years, that we invest every ounce of our resources in preventing a catastrophe instead of doing nothing. It’s like finding out you PROBABLY have cancer, but will do nothing about it until it kills you.

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          “The argument is that noone can predict future climate and noone can predict catastrophic flooding and that those that do so, aren’t engaging in “science”, they are just guessing.”

          So. . . . . don’t do anything?  Using that logic, New Orleans shouldn’t set up sump pups or build sea walls to protect land that is at sea level.  Because we don’t know when the next Katrina will happen.

          “There are between 20 – 30 CO2 atoms per million other gaseos atoms – O2, NO2, H2O and other trace gases.  How is it that CO2 is the dominant driver of increasing global temperatures? ”

          Arsenic poisoning kills people at tissue levels that are measured in ppm.  A synthetic opiod drug I work with every day can kill people in doses that are measured in micrograms.  CO2 in the atmosphere can have a big effect even in small amounts.”

          “Water vapor is by far the dominant greenhouse gas.”

          Really?  Water vapor is WATER–H2O There’s more of it that’s picked up into the atmosphere in gaseous form because there is more free liquid water in the oceans.  Because warming temps have led to glaciers melting.  If CO2 is responsible for the rising temps in ocean water, then controlling CO2 levels will reduce or prevent further increases in water vapor levels by preventing more glaciers from melting.

          “. . .aren’t engaging in “science”, they are just guessing.”

          But it’s a highly calibrated and educated guess based on known science.  Back in the 1980s when young, previously healthy gay men in NY and SFO began to suffer from opportunistic infections and cancers, researchers examined their immune systems because what we know about the human body meant that something was affecting their immune response.  When researchers did establish these patients’ immune systems were shot, specific immune cells were absent, they took what they knew about virology and determined that a virus was the most likely cause.  Then they worked on isolating and identifying the specific virus.

          THAT’S HOW SCIENCE WORKS!  Educated guesses based on what IS known point in the direction researchers need to go.

           

  13. 13
    Chance

    One additional point about hypergamy:  I do think that men are much more afraid of it than they should be.  If a man is generally doing what he’s supposed to be doing, he won’t have to worry about his partner trading up as she ages because her attractiveness to the opposite sex is more heavily dependent on her looks than men, and as a result, what she can fetch on the market is going to erode more quickly than it will for a man.  If a husband achieves a moderate amount of success and maintains his physique into his 40s, he is undoubtedly going to be the best she can do at that age.  I think that this makes for the healthiest relationships because the woman is secure in knowing that she has maximized her hypergamy.

    1. 13.1
      Tron Swanson

      That may be the best a fortysomething woman can do in reality…but she’s surrounded by voices that tell her how hot/awesome she is (or how hot/awesome women her age can be). Her girlfriends, the media, social media orbiters, male co-workers that flirt with her, etc. So she’ll most likely believe that she can do better.

      For what it’s worth, on the subject of fear…my main fear involves divorce. I don’t trust any human being, regardless of gender, with that much power over my life. If this MGTOW stuff is emotional, it’s more about self-preservation than anything else. Not just in terms of being afraid, but not wanting to waste–or lose–our time, effort, and money.

      1. 13.1.1
        GoWiththeFlow

        A lot of these theories hinge on the assumption that men’s SMV stays level or increases with age while women’s falls off a cliff when she hits 30.  Women’s SMV declines with age, yes, so does men’s.

        It’s interesting that so many men think that the media and society give women unrealistic expectations about how attractive they are.  Ask most women and they will tell you that they know they fall very short of the images in popular media that men consume and hold up as ideals; the SI Swimsuit models, Victoria’s Secret Angels, celebrities, and porn stars.  Many women put off trying to date until they lose weight or are more in-shape, because they fear judgement and being passed over by men.

        Absolutely some women overestimate their ability to attract the men they want.  But so do some men.  Some women hold out for Mr. Perfect too long and then find out that in the game of mating musical chairs, they’re the one left standing.  Some men do the exact same thing.

        Two of Evan’s most popular blog posts illustrate this perfectly.  As well as a from the field report on aging NYC bachelors.

        Why Do Women in Their 30s Not Want to Date Men in Their 40s?

        http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/how-come-older-men-cant-get-younger-women/

        1. Chance

          GWTF, I see early/mid 40s men with mid 30s women all the time.  Where it gets unrealistic is when men want women who are like 10/20/30 years younger.  No judgment, but obviously a long shot.  Every guy who has dated online is intimately aware, however, that many women prefer men who are a little older because women like to think of themselves as being more mature than men.  It’s common to consider messaging a woman who is your age only to realize that the low end of her age preference is right at your age or a few years older.

        2. Tron Swanson

          GWTF,

          I agree that both genders can overestimate their ability to get what they want. That said, men’s SMV is contingent on their status and success, and those are things that can increase as we get older. Women tend to care about men’s status and success; men don’t always (or even usually) care about women’s status and success. So, men’s SMV, in my opinion, is more “age-resistant” than women’s.

        3. GoWiththeFlow

          Tron,

          That’s where men fool themselves.  As Evan talks about in the post about the 50 something guy who want to find a 30 something woman to marry and have kids with, what this man is missing, and what other men miss, is that being married to an older man is not the life young women want for themselves.

          I was a pretty young thing in my 20s.  When I was approached by men in their 30s and above when out, I would literally have a flight or fight response.  And I would flee.  I’ve asked several other women about this reaction I had, and they all said when you, they experienced the same thing.  Women in their 20s who are figuring out their life and sexuality, tend to want to take the journey with young men their own age.  Men get offended when young women say they get “creeped out” by older men who approach them.  But something is happening here where many a young woman’s fear centers are being activated in this situation.

          Now Chance is right that you can find mid 30s women with men in their early to mid forties.  Their lifestyles and life stages are compatable.  Within 7-9 year age range isn’t unusual.  However once a man gets close to his 50s and beyond, his ability to get a woman in her 30s or below goes down exponentially.  And I would bet my house that the 40 plus guys who are dating mid 30s women have one big thing in common:  They are more fit and better looking than most of their peers.

          My brother is in his late 40s and his girlfriend of 4 years is mid 30s.  He is financially solid, has a really cool job, no entanglements (ex-wife and kids), and he is slim with 6 pack abs and has a very handsome face.  Good dresser too.  His girlfriend had previously lived with a man her age and would definitely be able to pull in a male peer, but she is not objectively better looking than my brother.  But she doesn’t want kids so that makes her life goals incompatible with many men her age.  She compromised on age with my brother, but she gets someone with compatible life goals who is also very attractive.

          Men’s SMV is more dependent upon appearance than most men want to believe.  The financial stability stuff only matters if the looks and attraction are there.

          Evan has a good post on this where he links to a blog post by Susan Walsh over at Hooking Up Smart.  Lifetime SMW between men and women is equal although men have a little bit of a longer curve, i.e. early-mid 40s guy with mid 30s woman.

          Chance,

          “Every guy who has dated online is intimately aware, however, that many women prefer men who are a little older because women like to think of themselves as being more mature than men

          Um no.  Women are working the age range where they have the most favorable odds.

          Male vs. Female Sexual Market Value

           

        4. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          Men’s SMV is more dependent upon appearance than most men want to believe.  The financial stability stuff only matters if the looks and attraction are there.

          Yes. Financial stability is similar to a man being nice. A woman will value his niceness AFTER she is attracted to him. The money, the niceness, don’t CAUSE attraction.

        5. Chance

          Hi GWTF,

           

          I largely agree with what you said above, but I do have a couple of points.  You’re right that men would like to believe that looks matter less than they actually do as it relates to overall male attractiveness, but female attractiveness is still more heavily weighted towards looks than it is for men (not necessarily for me, though, but in general).  Many men do find that dating becomes quite a bit easier somewhere in the 28-32 timeframe, while I noticed that a lot of women state that it gets harder during this timeframe.  That shift in power indicates that women are placing value on other attributes (in addition to looks) since both male and female attractiveness often declines during these years.

           

          “Um no.  Women are working the age range where they have the most favorable odds.”

           

          Fair enough, but I always used to hear girls complain about the immaturity of guys their own age.  Was this a defense mechanism for them?

           

           

        6. ScottH

          GWTF said:  “Men’s SMV is more dependent upon appearance than most men want to believe.  The financial stability stuff only matters if the looks and attraction are there.”

          ScottH’s many experiences do not agree with this.  Money comes first for a lot of women but I wouldn’t want those.  The more evolved women (fewer of these), character comes first and everything else comes second.  I experienced both sides of this last night in person at a meetup observing two women and it was very interesting.  Also, if a guy changes his income range upward on his profile, he suddenly gets a lot more interest.  I’ve done that.  I do tend to agree that, like a car, the exterior is what generates appeal but it’s what’s inside and how it performs that sometimes seals the deal.

        7. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          “Many men do find that dating becomes quite a bit easier somewhere in the 28-32 timeframe, while I noticed that a lot of women state that it gets harder during this timeframe.  That shift in power indicates that women are placing value on other attributes (in addition to looks) since both male and female attractiveness often declines during these years.”

          ” . . .I always used to hear girls complain about the immaturity of guys their own age.”

          It’s true, male or female, we are rarely purely physically more attractive then when we are in our twenties.  The late great Nora Ephron wrote a humor book on aging called “I Feel Bad About My Neck”. (It’s definitely chic lit, so I don’t expect many men will have read it.) In one chapter she talks about the phenomenon where we will never be better looking that we are in our 20s yet we don’t realize or appreciate it.  We are unsure of ourselves, self conscious, and overly concerned about potential criticism.  She said her advice to women in their 20s is to put a bikini on and don’t take it off until their 30th birthday.

          I think the reason why dating becomes harder for women who are 28-32 is because they are looking to settle down and get married while many of their male peers are on the “in another 5-6 years time frame.”  This is probably when they are most likely to complain about men their age being immature.

          At this point for women looks aren’t enough, and they usually know by this point that it takes more than chemistry to build an LTR.  But they aren’t necessarily prioritizing money and social position to a point where looks don’t matter at all because they still want to feel attraction for their hubby.  Priorities shift, but it would be bad advice to tell men that having money and a good job is all that they need to attract women.  Ironically, Red Pill philosophy emphasizes self improvement especially diet and exercise as a way of creating and maintaining attraction in women.

          One thing I hear older men who desire to date younger women say is that their ace in the hole is that they are “established” and can give a woman “stability and security.”  This is a fallacy.  A very attractive 30 year old woman who is also friendly and kind isn’t going to choose a 50 year old established doctor over a 31 year old medical resident because the older guy is “established.”  Marriage is a long term plan and the guy her age will eventually be established in his career, and they will build their life together.  She won’t be inserted into someone’s pre-existing lifestyle and expected to just adjust.  She also gets the benefit of having a partner who is young and energetic when she is and will be around to be a dad to their children and a grandpa to their grandchildren.  Those are huge.  Women can’t get away from their biological clocks and that also makes them aware of the part of a man’s fathering capacity that is based on age.

          I think this whole dynamic is why we do see mid 30s women with early to mid 40’s men.  These men (especially if they’ve never been married) are more likely to be marriage minded than men in their early to mid 30s.  At the same time the men are still youthful and young enough that they aren’t going to drop dead of a heart attack when the kids are in junior high and make her a single mom.  They can do the life stages together at a team.

        8. Emily, the original

          ScottH,

          Money comes first for a lot of women but I wouldn’t want those.  The more evolved women (fewer of these), character comes first and everything else comes second.  I experienced both sides of this last night in person at a meetup observing two women and it was very interesting.

          I’d be curious what your experience at the meet up was. I have been to several different meet up groups in my area. Sometimes I go by myself and sometimes I go with a female friend. One I’ve been going to for a while and I feel quite comfortable with the group. However, I have been to a few in which the few men who were there got quite aggressive. As in … you are just arriving and introducing yourself and are chatting with people and within minutes they are right up on you. Were these women you mentioned shooting the men down?

        9. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          A very attractive 30 year old woman who is also friendly and kind isn’t going to choose a 50 year old established doctor over a 31 year old medical resident because the older guy is “established.”

          I agree with you. I just don’t think the average 30-year-old woman is going to be attracted to a man old enough to be her father. Even if she is, a man that much older will be retiring and dealing with age-related illnesses much sooner. If she retires at 65, her husband will be 85. She could have years left of being health. He may not. Why sign up for that?

        10. ScottH

          Emily-  I went to the meetup last night and there was a very beautiful woman who I recognized but wasn’t sure from where and she wasn’t in the meetup group.  I suspected it was someone from eHarmony I emailed who didn’t respond to my message.  She was engrossed in conversation with another guy in the meetup and then I heard him tell someone that he met her on eH and had told her he’d be at this restaurant and then I was sure it was the woman I was thinking of.  I would say that he appears to be much more accomplished financially than I but I think I have other attributes more in my favor, just my opinion.   She didn’t give me the time of day but I don’t think we would have been a match anyway.  I’m more of an earthy guy and she appears to be into the finer things.  Call it sour grapes, but whatever (it was a wine tasting event so that might be appropriate).

          Then there was another woman sitting right next to me who was also quite attractive and accomplished and I overheard her talking to someone else (I did a lot of listening last night) about how she didn’t care about a guys money- she wanted a good guy regardless of his money situation.  That was refreshing.  And she emailed me this morning.   We’ll see what happens.  Probably nothing but my crystal ball is out for maintenance so we’ll have to see how things play out in time.

        11. Emily, the originala

          ScottH,

          Then there was another woman sitting right next to me who was also quite attractive and accomplished and I overheard her talking to someone else (I did a lot of listening last night) about how she didn’t care about a guys money- she wanted a good guy regardless of his money situation. And she emailed me this morning. 

          That sounds promising. On Saturday, I’m going to a hiking group (I am not an outdoorsy person) but my friend talked me into it and I think it’s good to try new things. I’m not opposed to meeting someone at one of these meetups but I’m fine if I don’t because there usually at least a few nice people to talk to.

    2. 13.2
      Emily, the original

      Chance

      If a husband achieves a moderate amount of success and maintains his physique into his 40s, he is undoubtedly going to be the best she can do at that age.

      Or she could divorce him, receive half his money and then pay for a younger, hotter companion.

        1. Emily, the original

          If a man is generally doing what he’s supposed to be doing, he won’t have to worry about his partner trading up as she ages because her attractiveness to the opposite sex is more heavily dependent on her looks than men, and as a result, what she can fetch on the market is going to erode more quickly than it will for a man.  If a husband achieves a moderate amount of success and maintains his physique into his 40s, he is undoubtedly going to be the best she can do at that age.  I think that this makes for the healthiest relationships because the woman is secure in knowing that she has maximized her hypergamy.

          Well, this is ick, too. It’s not about the life they have built or the love they share. It’s that it’s the best she can do given that she’s eroding.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          I was responding to YOUR ick, not some random Red Pill guy. “The two wrongs make a right” look doesn’t suit you.

        3. KK

          Emily,

          Evan’s going to put us both in time out. Or… Maybe just me! 😨

        4. Emily, the original

          KK,

          Evan’s going to put us both in time out. 

          Sisters in solidarity! Don’t give up the fight!  🙂

      1. 13.2.2
        Chance

        Sure thing, Em.  This isn’t about the intrinsic qualities in a partner…. my partner is older than me, and I think there are a number of benefits to being w/someone who is older compared to a 20-something.  However, we are talking about the harsh realities of any marketplace.  40-something men who have kept their s*** together generally want 30-something women, and they can get them.

        1. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          my partner is older than me, and I think there are a number of benefits to being w/someone who is older compared to a 20-something.

          Why? Because she has a lower SMV and won’t leave?

          However, we are talking about the harsh realities of any marketplace.

          It’s never about a genuine connection between two people, is it?

        2. Chance

          Hi Emily,

           

          A woman does have a genuine connection with a man who represents her hypergamous ideal, and she dreams of building a life with such a man.  However, everything that they built together has the potential to become effectively worthless if she is presented with the attention of man who she perceives to be better.  This can happen with men, too, but the propensity is stronger with women.

           

          Again, consider how men and women cheat in different ways.  Men are more likely to have a side piece (or multiple side pieces), while women are more likely to leave their current partner for another.  The differences in how men and women cheat, IMO, is the most clear manifestation of a man’s relatively more polygamous nature and of a woman’s relatively more hypergamous nature.

        3. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          A woman does have a genuine connection with a man who represents her hypergamous ideal, and she dreams of building a life with such a man.  However, everything that they built together has the potential to become effectively worthless if she is presented with the attention of man who she perceives to be better.

          This reflects how you think, not how the average woman thinks.  Are you a Dave Chappelle fan? Have you seen the Rick James skit, where every time Rick James sees Charlie Murphy (Eddie Murphy’s brother), he screams, “Darkness!” That’s what I think of when I read posts like the one above. The average woman would be THRILLED to marry her ideal. I just don’t see her imploding her marriage and family (not to mention how inconvenient divorce is, and we are all creatures of comfort) simply because a man whose ass is resting on a higher plane or who has a slightly higher status gives her attention.

        4. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          In LTRs there’s also a positive sunk cost factor.  You know this person, they know you and you’ve managed to negotiate a satisfying life together.  Plus it’s not just about the hot attraction side, there is also a good deal of pair bonding that goes on.  They become one functional unit sometimes.

          It’s not unusual that with long term, elderly spouses that when one dies, the other will pass on within a few months.  That happened to both of my sets of grandparents.  The underlying physiology is that the profound grief of separation from the loved spouse causes heart arrhythmias in the surviving spouse.  They are completely pair bonded even though on the dating market their SMV is considered quite low if not nonexistent.

          So in your hypothetical 40 something couple, there has been years of negotiating a supportive and comfortable relationship and pair bonding has occurred and will continue to.  Another potential partner may have a higher SMV, but that pales in comparison to the unknown as to whether the relationship satisfaction and supportiveness would approach what exists with the current partner.

          It’s not only about SMV.

        5. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow

          In LTRs there’s also a positive sunk cost factor.  You know this person, they know you and you’ve managed to negotiate a satisfying life together.

          Exactly. On a purely practical level, you aren’t going to chuck all of that for a guy who may be hotter or richer but who is an unknown and who may take off 3 months later. Who would do that?

        6. KK

          Emily and GWTF,

          Great comments! I concur, ladies. 😉

        7. DeeGee

          Emily:

          “Exactly. On a purely practical level, you aren’t going to chuck all of that for a guy who may be hotter or richer but who is an unknown and who may take off 3 months later. Who would do that?”

          It happened to me. So there are some women out there who will do it. And she ended up not even marrying the guy she cheated on me with. She found another after him.

          So both sexes have the ability to do bad.

        8. Jeremy

          Regarding women leaving men whom they once thought of as ideal…..it happens.  Sometimes it happens because of the man’s behaviour.  But other times it happens because of a change in the woman’s priorities.  If her priorities change, the factors she respects change and the qualities she is attracted to change.  The man who was once ideal because of his “dad potential” is now no longer attractive because as the kids got older, the dad potential became less important to the woman than his spontenaity and romanticism (or lack thereof).  This HAPPENS.  And the guy often gets blindsided by it.  And the woman often doesn’t realize why it is happening because of a phenomenon described by Daniel Gilbert in the book “Stumbling on Happiness.”  Our memories of the past are heavily coloured by our present.  If we are not currently in love with a certain person, it is hard to remember how or why we ever loved them in the past.  So often a person who loses attraction not only falls out of love, but questions whether he/she EVER loved that person.

           

          The natural change in a woman’s priorities as she ages and matures can be a danger to marriages.  The solution is for both men and women to be aware of how attraction works, and to communicate and be open to change.  Men should understand their wife’s personality and know that as she goes from girlfriend to wife to mother of babies to mother of teens to empty nester, her priorities will change and she will expect different things from her husband.  And wives should understand that these changes will be difficult for their husbands, because men’s priorities tend not to change.  And that lack of change will be men’s challenge, because their wives and their world will change whether they want them to or not.

        9. Emily, the original

          DeeGee,It happened to me. So there are some women out there who will do it. And she ended up not even marrying the guy she cheated on me with. She found another after him.

          I’m sorry to hear that happened to you. Could it be what Jeremy described above  … that her priorities changed and she did not articulate that to you?

        10. GoWiththeFlow

          Dee Gee,

          I’m sorry you were put through such an emotional wringer.

          I was with a handsome, successful man for ~a year who’s ex-wife left him for a much younger man who barely had a job.  It did a number on him for sure.  A few years after the divorce she made moves to try and get back with him and lets’ just say he declined.

          There are some women who, as Buck would say about cheating men, have little integrity and poor character.  I have seen women leave long marriages to good men because they are frustrated either with the relationship or other areas of their lives and they want to change something, anything.

          But most women manage these rough spots and life transitions and ride them out by either working on themselves, getting involved in activities, or just trusting that the good times will come again.

          Good luck in healing and moving on into the future.

        11. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          I was with a handsome, successful man for ~a year who’s ex-wife left him for a much younger man who barely had a job.

          There are people who will blow up their marriages over “erotic love.” Have you ever read C.S. Lewis’ “The Four Loves”? “This act, done under the influence of a soaring and iridescent Eros which reduces the role of the senses to a minor consideration, may yet be plain adultery, may involve breaking a wife’s heart, deceiving a husband, betraying a friend, polluting hospitality and deserting your children …”   I would imagine that a few months or so after all of that wears off, the spouse who left regrets it, but couldn’t see it at the time.

           

        12. DeeGee

          Emily, the original – “I’m sorry to hear that happened to you. Could it be what Jeremy described above  … that her priorities changed and she did not articulate that to you?”

          Here is a bit more of the story: At that time I was average everything, height, looks, income, house.  She was a struggling widow with three kids 10 12 15.  She was a JW. She ran a small janitorial company of just herself, and worked long hours and nights.  We met through my working weekends and some nights at one of the same offices.
          At the beginning she was very humble and quiet, dressed down almost frumpy, glasses, a bit of extra weight, very overworked to the point of exhaustion.  Hair a mess figuratively.
          I came along and changed her life.  I am a very giving person in a relationship, and a hard but smart worker.  I gave a lot of my time to her, we talked a lot and had great sex (which she hadn’t had in 10 years).  With her I even worked my job and either helped her with hers or even took over many night shifts so that she could spend time with her kids etc.  MGTOWs would say I “white knighted”.  I thought I was simply being nice and helpful and caring, and I hoped that it would be noticed and reciprocated.
          With my treating her so well, her self-esteem improved dramatically.  She came out of her shy shell.  She also lost weight, bleached her teeth, got a boob job, wore contacts, got her hair and nails done.  And other men started noticing her, which she loved, with other men even flirting with her in front of me.  It was like she had not experienced that before and fell over the edge with it.
          After more than a year being together, one evening when I was looking after her work, unknown to me she decided to go on a date with some other man who was tall dark handsome and wealthier than me.  And cheated.
          When I found out I broke it off and didn’t speak to her.  I knew she felt very guilty over what she had done, but to me cheating is an instant deal breaker.  She moved away from the city within a couple of weeks.
          She ended up not dating or marrying the guy she cheated on me with, she ended up marrying some other guy within a few weeks of moving away, who was also tall dark and wealthy and owns property in Canada and Hawaii.
          Me, I just took it up the rear like I have with every relationship that I have had with women.  I am divorced and have had multiple STRs and LTRs.  Do I ever have stories to tell of my life.  :/

          Me, I’m now 55, 5’8″, redhead (I look like David Caruso in CSI:Miami), I make six figures, published author, professional composer and musician, amateur photographer and filmmaker, president of my own software company, (I can provide proof of all of these with links etc.), I also work out daily and eat well, have a gym in my home, live in a lower-middle class executive home, and for more than a decade now I have been single.
          Last month I finally left six dating sites out of frustration after 5+ years because all I get from women is “you are too short”, “I don’t like red heads”, “your house isn’t nice enough for me”, “you look too old for me” (this gets me, my site searches are women 50 to 65!!), and on and on.  And this is even from women who are overweight 2’s and 3’s.  I spent a lot of time and effort on good dating site profiles too. And the 50+ Skypes and first dates that I have had over the past 5 years were all a waste of my time with the attitude I get back, and in most cases they didn’t want second dates for the above reasons.  And any women I do chat with almost never continue to reciprocate, so I just walk away if their interest level is that low.
          So I have just gone my own way and will continue pursuing my own personal experience and interests.

          I don’t know… Evan must not be doing his job with teaching women right or fast enough…  😉

        13. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily,

          I think the concept of overwhelming “erotic love,” while a fabulous subject for literature, theater, and movies because of it’s inherent drama and tragedy, gives people too much of a excuse to explain away their poor choices.  “I was so overwhelmed with feelings, I couldn’t help it!”

          I’ve seen women in long happy marriages negotiate attraction to other men or even just a sense of restlessness, smartly and effectively.  When it comes down to it, they use a lot of mental techniques and inner talk like reminding themselves what they have, what’s good about their husband and their marriage, what’s not good about the person they are attracted to.  And they remind themselves that it’s like a dieter at a buffet–right NOW they’re craving the fattening stuff and desserts–but if you don’t eat them, the craving eventually passes all on it’s own.

        14. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          I think the concept of overwhelming “erotic love,” while a fabulous subject for literature, theater, and movies because of it’s inherent drama and tragedy, gives people too much of a excuse to explain away their poor choices.

          I’m not excusing poor choices (everyone has free will), but I’m certain this kind of thing happens, and not just in movies.

          I’ve seen women in long happy marriages negotiate attraction to other men or even just a sense of restlessness, smartly and effectively.

          It’s not an attraction. It’s a jump over the cliff lose all sense and reason reaction. Like Mark Sanford and the Appalachian Trail. The man blows up his marriage and political career for a woman, two years later, he breaks up with. But at the time … he had lost his mind.

        15. KK

          GWTF,

          “I’ve seen women in long happy marriages negotiate attraction to other men or even just a sense of restlessness, smartly and effectively.  When it comes down to it, they use a lot of mental techniques and inner talk like reminding themselves what they have, what’s good about their husband and their marriage, what’s not good about the person they are attracted to.  And they remind themselves that it’s like a dieter at a buffet–right NOW they’re craving the fattening stuff and desserts–but if you don’t eat them, the craving eventually passes all on it’s own”.

          Yes, I think this is rather commonplace. In your opinion, is the attraction to someone else or restlessness proof that hypergamy is inherent to women, and most women are able to fight against their basic biology? Or do you view it as proof of the opposite? That it’s natural for both genders to struggle with these issues? Just curious as to what your point of view is.

        16. Chance

          KK, I’m not GWTF, but I think that I have a better perspective of the other side since I’m a man.  Can’t speak for the other men, but I’ve never in my life had to talk myself out of attraction for another woman in the sense that GWTF is describing.  The thought of switching my current partner for another particular person whom I believe might be a better partner is very foreign to me.  I never really have those “is the grass greener on the other side” moments.  OTOH, I do have to shut my mind off from the desire for, and possibility of, quick NSA sexual encounters with a variety of women.

        17. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          I’m sure there are both men and women who fall in love with other people while they are married, who don’t care about offers of one-offs but become too attached/attracted/moved by one particular person.

          It happened to a friend of mine, and the man also fell in love with her. And this will shock you … the man she fell in love with was not taller, richer, higher status or better looking than her husband. Her husband was actually better looking. What? What? What?   🙂

        18. KK

          Chance,

          “The thought of switching my current partner for another particular person whom I believe might be a better partner is very foreign to me.  I never really have those “is the grass greener on the other side” moments”.

          It’s possible you might never have those thoughts. If you become unhappy in your current relationship, all you have to do is bail. It’s not quite that simple once you’re married, at least for people who take their marriage commitment seriously. Add kids to the mix and it gives you even more incentive to make it work. By the way, I’ve heard both men and women struggle with those feelings and the reasons are all over the board.

          On the topic of cheating, I wonder if you’ve considered that for every man who’s engaging in a NSA affair, there is a woman who is willfully engaging with him in that NSA affair. Likewise, for every woman who is having a full blown affair (contemplating leaving her spouse over) there is a man having that full blown affair with her. Granted, not all married people cheat with other married people. But many do. This is one of the reasons I have a hard time buying the polygamy / hypergamy theory.

        19. KK

          “It happened to a friend of mine, and the man also fell in love with her. And this will shock you … the man she fell in love with was not taller, richer, higher status or better looking than her husband. Her husband was actually better looking. What? What? What?”

          Emily, that may or may not shock anyone else but it doesn’t shock me at all. It happens a lot. I think there’s some validity to claiming temporary insanity in those cases. Like you said earlier, it’s only later, usually after everyone’s lives are blown up, that sincere regret sets in.

        20. Emily, the original

          KK,

          I think there’s some validity to claiming temporary insanity in those cases. Like you said earlier, it’s only later, usually after everyone’s lives are blown up, that sincere regret sets in.

          My friend regretted it almost immediately after she married the second guy but I do believe it was a real love affair.

        21. GoWiththeFlow

          KK,

          “In your opinion, is the attraction to someone else or restlessness proof that hypergamy is inherent to women, and most women are able to fight against their basic biology?” NO

          “Or do you view it as proof of the opposite? That it’s natural for both genders to struggle with these issues?” YES & NO.  I think attraction, cheating and divorce are complicated and multifactorial.  Saying it’s “hypergamy” is satisfying because it’s a common pathway simple explanation that wraps thing up n a tidy package.

          I’m sticking with the strict definition of hypergamy that is used by the researchers who study it:  The desire of women in the dating and mating sphere to be with and marry what she considers a high value man, aka “marrying up.”

          I think after women marry they go from actively seeking their high value men (because now they have him) into nesting mode.  Making a home (feathering the nest) with their partner and planning and having children if that is in the cards.  During this time pair bonding and integrating lives is continuously building.

          Evan has said before that several years and two kids into his marriage, he and his wife are so tightly connected that he can’t imagine life without her.  I have relatives and friends who have been married for 20-40 years.  They all say the same thing.  They are way more dependent, in a good way, upon their spouse now than they were in the high chemistry beginning years.

          With that being said,  I don’t think the process by which couples do their unique dance to maintain attraction and sexual interest is “hypergamy.”  It’s something else completely.  There are as many reasons women leave men and marriages as there are, well, women who leave men and marriages.  Even though there are some women who leave husbands for other men, I do not think that a woman being driven by her primal brain to search for a higher value mate is the common pathway that leads to woman initiated breakups and divorces.

          I have a friend who has been married between 25-30 years.  She was engaged to her husband in her early 20s when she had a recurrence of Hodgkin’s lymphoma.  Shortly after she started treatment, she broke up with her fiancé.  She said that at that time in her life, she felt an overwhelming need to change something, and breaking up with her fiancé was the easiest big thing to change.  A year after she recovered, they reconnected, got back together and eventually married and are together to this day.  Clearly some deep psychological stuff was going on there, but trying to trade-up her man wasn’t one of them.

          My best friend and her husband have been married for 30 years.  She and I were in med school and residency together.  During residency she developed a very strong attraction to a man we worked with.  Her husband was educated, had a high paying job, good looking, was a great father to their two kids, and a supportive spouse who, as she said, “knows all my bad parts but loves me anyway.”  She managed her attraction with smart choices.

          First she acknowledged that the attraction was just that, a chemical process in her brain she had no control over.  She knew it wasn’t based on merit–the guy was actually an arrogant jerk–and was not a sign that there was something wrong in her marriage.  She interacted with him cooperatively at work.  But no flirting or innuendo.  She told me about it and eventually, after the attraction cooled, told her husband about it.  She also gave herself permission to enjoy the feeling for what it was and not beat herself up for it.  After several months it waned.

          If she had acted on the attraction, she in no way wouldn’t have been trading up.  She didn’t even really like the guy!  Her husband was objectively better looking than the guy and had a better personality.  She would not have gained in income or social status.  She also puts a very high value on her family and her husband’s support and his role as a father to their kids.  So even acting on the attraction in any encouraging way was not going to happen.  She put the brakes on in her brain.

          I think the whole “erotic love” thing Emily is talking about happens when people don’t apply the brakes.  They decide a little flirting wouldn’t be harmful.  Well then kiss isn’t really cheating.  Okay, the spouse will never know I had sex with them.  Then it’s like OMG, I just couldn’t help myself, i.e. not my fault!

          You just don’t see many women “trading” up or trying to.  If hypergamy is so strong a drive in women, what explains the many women who divorce and then don’t date or don’t ever want to marry again.  They are content to not be in a relationship.  And then there are the women like the ex-wife of a man who I once dated who dumped her surgeon husband for a much younger man with a nearly minimum wage job.  If she was trying to trade up she deserves “F” for planning and execution.

          I would say that sometimes when a woman leaves it has nothing to do with the guy, like my friend with a cancer recurrence.  There are other life issues going on that lead people to do things that don’t always serve them well. And some women have a personality disorder or mental illness that makes a true relationship impossible.  These men aren’t doing anything wrong, they are terribly unlucky.

          Where women do leave husbands for other men, as Buck would say, this is a lack of integrity and self-discipline on the woman’s part.  In those situations and in cases where a woman leaves because she doesn’t feel love or respect for her husband anymore,  as hypergamy theory goes, maybe a man didn’t know the steps to take to help his wife maintain respect and attraction and that contributed to the marriage breaking down.  But a woman losing respect and love for her husband isn’t the same thing as her looking for a replacement or upgrade.

          I know some of the other commenters see the before and after marriage behavior as a continuum.  i don’t because I differentiate it based on whether the woman is engaged in a search for her particular HVM.  Deciding to end a relationship because a woman no longer considers her husband a HVM isn’t the same as dumping him for another man.

        22. Chance

          KK,

           

          “It’s possible you might never have those thoughts. If you become unhappy in your current relationship, all you have to do is bail.  It’s not quite that simple once you’re married, at least for people who take their marriage commitment seriously.”

           

          Not relevant.  One can still just as easily have those thoughts when in an LTR, but being married simply makes it a more difficult decision as it relates to actually acting on those thoughts.

           

          “On the topic of cheating, I wonder if you’ve considered that for every man who’s engaging in a NSA affair, there is a woman who is willfully engaging with him in that NSA affair. Likewise, for every woman who is having a full blown affair (contemplating leaving her spouse over) there is a man having that full blown affair with her.”

           

          This isn’t accurate.  One party can see an affair as NSA, while the other one sees it as a “full blown” affair or is secretly hoping that it turns into something more.  Happens all the time.

        23. DeeGee

          GWTF – I agree with your last long post above for the most part.
          I don’t believe it is a “one size fits all” scenario.  I feel that humans are more complex than that in most cases.
          Even if we look at divorce rates, a respectable number of couples stay together.  Many for their entire lifetime.
          Just like we have men and women who can never seem to stay in a relationship for any length of time, we have other men and women who stay in a relationship for their entire lifetime.  And they are faithful and respectable.  The issue becomes how does each person find one of those other people who has the commitment and honesty and longevity attributes.  That is probably where Evan comes in with pointers and commentary.
          Likewise, I don’t believe that all women are hypergamous and will trade up at a moment’s notice, that would be like saying all women are gold diggers.  Sure, there is a percentage of them who are, but that is a smaller number.  And the same can be said about various “negative to relationship” traits that a percentage of men have.
          Both men and women have a percentage who can exhibit problems that will make having a healthy relationship with them difficult.  Many of those problems are similar across the sexes, such as alcoholism or drugs for example.  Both sexes also have a percentage who are unfaithful.  The issue for people who are actively dating, will be trying to find and recognize those red flags within people who may be good at hiding them.

          For me personally, every woman I have had a relationship with has been terrible.  I was married from ’87 to ’95.  My wife was so bad that the marriage counselor I saw after we separated asked me why I stayed for so long, that any other man would have left her in two years or less.  Her and I had dated for two years before marriage, but she was a chameleon, when I confronted her over her personality change a few days after marriage, her exact words were “I acted that way otherwise you would not have married me”. Even none of her family or her girlfriends knew what she was really like in secret.
          The next LTR after her was the cheating hypergamous one I mentioned above.  The next LTR after her had a psycho ex that she didn’t tell me about, who tracked her to my house one night, then smashed all of the doors and windows out of my house and trashed my car, with a big steel rod.  I have had a couple of STR’s in between, but they never lasted for various reasons.  Unfortunately, I have no positive romantic relationships with any women.  I have dated a lot and been on every dating site, but the women either have big red flags, or they have a massive shopping list of male attributes that I don’t meet, such as height or income etc.
          I am 55 now.  For quite a few years I went through the typical stages of denial, anger, and depression, and now I am in the acceptance phase.  🙂

        24. KK

          “You just don’t see many women “trading” up or trying to.  If hypergamy is so strong a drive in women, what explains the many women who divorce and then don’t date or don’t ever want to marry again.  They are content to not be in a relationship.  And then there are the women like the ex-wife of a man who I once dated who dumped her surgeon husband for a much younger man with a nearly minimum wage job.  If she was trying to trade up she deserves “F” for planning and execution.”

          GWTF,

          Good point. I agree with this and everything else you stated. Thanks for the detailed explanation. 😊

        25. KK

          Chance,

          “Not relevant.  One can still just as easily have those thoughts when in an LTR, but being married simply makes it a more difficult decision as it relates to actually acting on those thoughts”.

          Actually, it is quite relevant. The dynamics of the relationship change after marriage. Without going into a multi paragraph explanation, I’ll just add that good (or healthy) LTRs become better (more solid) after marriage. Due to a number of factors, other LTRs can become unsustainable after marriage. Haven’t you heard of people that lived together for five, even ten years who finally tied the knot and ended up divorced rather quickly? What does that have to do with “thoughts”? If someone is in a satisfying relationship, they are much less likely to have thoughts of trading in or trading up.

          “This isn’t accurate.  One party can see an affair as NSA, while the other one sees it as a “full blown” affair or is secretly hoping that it turns into something more.  Happens all the time”.

          It is accurate. I’m puzzled as to why you don’t acknowledge this. I agree that your scenario probably happens just as often.

           

           

    3. 13.3
      KK

      “One additional point about hypergamy:  I do think that men are much more afraid of it than they should be”.

      No kidding.

      Because it’s a myth.

      Might want to be cautious next time you’re out in the woods, though. I’ve heard from very reputable sources about new Big Foot sightings.

      1. 13.3.1
        Chance

        I don’t believe that anything would convince you that hypergamy is real.  I noticed that you took no issue with my assertion that men are naturally polygamous….. except to shame them for their natural desires.

        1. KK

          ♤♡◇♧●MGTOW●♤♡◇♧ SECRET MEETING IN SESSION (we are very scientific) PS:  NO girlz ALOUD

          Bob: I went upstairs to eavesdrop on my mom and sister. They think men are polygamous.

          Steve: stupid bazitches

          Joe: well it’s kinda true, Bob

          Steve, Jeff, Dan, Bob : get the hell out you white knigt, mangina, yucky face!!!!

          Joe: later, bone heads (Joe leaves)

          Jeff: what can we say about wymenz that will really piss them all off?

          Dan: something like all the other good stuff we come up with. ya know, can’t really prove it, but ya can’t prove it wrong either

          Steve: genius. the back of my star wars magazine had an article about rhesus monkeys. those rhesus monkey bitches can’t be trusted

          Jeff: let’s say they’re hypergamous. that’ll teach ’em

          (SUPER SECRET HANDSHAKES)

           

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          KK, please take a deep breath. This isn’t a Red Pill blog or an MGTOW blog. It’s just a blog by a man who specializes in helping women understand men and make healthier relationship choices. I let their comments through just as I let yours through. Perhaps it’s time to be the bigger person and realize there will be people with whom you’ll never agree, but that doesn’t mean they’re all bad. You can literally flip the genders and turn this into a script about man-hating women, which would be equally negative and caricaturist. You can’t be a black and white thinker but that’s no way to function in an argument: straw man after straw man being set up and knocked down. See: not ALL Muslims are terrorists, not ALL feminists are man-haters. The fact that you are doubling down on the “men are the same as women” argument with Shaukat, despite the above article which explicitly says otherwise suggests that it wouldn’t be worth anyone’s time to continue discussing this with you, since you’re stating that your feelings (I don’t WANT men and women to be different biologically) are more important than the facts (they ARE different biologically). For that reason, I may have to stop engaging with you. It’s like talking to Trump supporters who are loathe to admit he’s stupid/insane/untruthful because to do so would be to admit their worldview is faulty.

        3. Chance

          I’m sorry, was there a counter-point in there, or just more childish shaming?

        4. KK

          Evan,

          “The fact that you are doubling down on the “men are the same as women” argument with Shaukat, despite the above article which explicitly says otherwise suggests that it wouldn’t be worth anyone’s time to continue discussing this with you, since you’re stating that your feelings (I don’t WANT men and women to be different biologically) are more important than the facts (they ARE different biologically)”. 

          Except I have never stated nor do I believe that men and women are the same.

          It is on this particular topic of hypergamy that I disagree. Chance explained the difference between hypergamy and optimization, but didn’t provide any explanation of how he has come to the conclusion that when each gender exhibits the same exact behavior, it can be attributed to different reasons, just because he says so.

        5. Tron Swanson

          Evan,

          As evidenced by the frantic posts of KK and several others, I think that women are starting to panic.

          Now, I’ve always believed that MGTOW is empowering, but only in a very specific context. I know that it’s associated with anger against women, but let me tell you–I was much angrier with women when I was really putting in a lot of effort and constantly getting rejected. Since making women less of a priority in my life, I feel much more at peace, and much more in control.

          But I also believe that there’s a more dishonest form of “empowerment” associated with MGTOW. Namely, the revenge-centric, “When enough guys go their own way, women will be sorry!” stuff. I don’t have any illusions about that. Women have more and better options than men, when it comes to sex and relationships. If an unattractive, entitled woman expects me to spend money on her–and you’d be shocked how much this happens–I can be principled and refuse. But I guarantee you, other guys will be lining up to give her time and money and attention. So, no, I don’t think that women are ever going to “be sorry” or learn any lessons. Too many women have treated me like trash, and when I stopped putting up with it, they immediately found another guy, or a string of other guys. Men get smacked in the face by consequences; women are protected from them.

          So, while women still have options, and can easily avoid the consequences of their actions, I do believe they’re starting to panic. Just the idea of men not defining themselves by their success with women is dangerous (to them). As we saw in KK’s post, they have a very cartoonish view of what “women-skeptical men” are like…and are shocked to find out that many “reasonable” guys also have doubts or concerns.

        6. Chance

          Technically, KK has been acknowledging on this thread that men and women are different, but only as it pertains to characteristics that are flattering to women and/or aren’t flattering to men.

           

          Also, KK, I did explain how I thought hypergamy is different than optimization.  I said that I believe the fact that women tend to be much more invested (in contrast to men) in ensuring that they have the best partner possible is an example of hypergamy at work.  You’re free to disagree, and I know that you do, but I did explain myself.

           

          Tron Swanson, people are most offended by what they fear is true.  This is why you are seeing the histrionics, IMO.

        7. KK

          Chance said, “Technically, KK has been acknowledging on this thread that men and women are different, but only as it pertains to characteristics that are flattering to women and/or aren’t flattering to men”.

          Point? I could easily make a list of differences between men and women that would be more flattering to men.

          “Also, KK, I did explain how I thought hypergamy is different than optimization”.

          Yes, I mentioned that:  “Chance explained the difference between hypergamy and optimization, but didn’t provide any explanation of how he has come to the conclusion that when each gender exhibits the same exact behavior, it can be attributed to different reasons, just because he says so”.

          “I said that I believe the fact that women tend to be much more invested (in contrast to men) in ensuring that they have the best partner possible is an example of hypergamy at work”.

          Okay. And??? Emily, myself, and others don’t believe there’s any evidence to suggest that women tend to be much more invested than men in ensuring they have the best partner. 

          people are most offended by what they fear is true.  This is why you are seeing the histrionics, IMO.”

          I haven’t witnessed any histrionics, but I do believe your opinion is once again a product of your biases. If anything, a couple of the male commenters have had seemingly much more emotional responses than the female commenters. It never ceases to amaze me that when a woman reiterates her point on here BECAUSE SHE IS ASKED REPEATEDLY and is kind enough to keep responding, that she is doubling down or is somehow emotional. When a guy does the same exact thing and in addition repetitively asks the same question, no problem. Just an observation.

          And the cherry on top of course, Chance, is accusing others of shaming tactics when many of your comments are an attempt to shame others.

           

           

        8. Chance

          KK,

           

          “Chance explained the difference between hypergamy and optimization, but didn’t provide any explanation of how he has come to the conclusion that when each gender exhibits the same exact behavior, it can be attributed to different reasons”

           

          Except I never came to that conclusion.  Hypergamy vs polygamy is not some binary concept where men are 100% polygamous and 0% hypergamous and women are 100% hypergamous and 0% polygamous.  I’ve been saying all along that they are relative tendencies.  That’s why it’s impossible to answer your question…. when someone has a side piece, he/she is acting on polygamous impulses.  When someone trades up, she/he is acting on hypergamous impulses.  Men are just more inclined to have a side piece and women are just more inclined to trade up, but most men and women do neither.

           

          As far as the shaming, nah, it’s pretty much just you.  If anyone else was being inappropriate around these parts, EMK would delete their posts or call them out just like he deletes your posts and calls you out.

        9. Tron Swanson

          Chance,

          I agree–the histrionics are definitely fear-based.

          I can’t even imagine what it must feel like to be a woman, right now. Losing the gains you’d thought you’d made, finding out that many men (and women) disagree with you on fundamental issues. Realizing how appearance-oriented men are while you get older every day. And watching as men slowly, slightly minimize their effort toward women.

          Oh, it may not be affecting them directly, yet. At this point, it’s just a weird lack of men that their less-attractive friends are dealing with, or a random guy who refused to play their games, or an article about how men no longer prioritize marriage as a life goal. But they can probably sense that something is in the air. The funny thing is, they still have a ton of systemic and cultural advantages, certainly far more than men. They’ll still get what they want in the end, because men will give it to them in exchange for sex. Maybe not the level of men they want, but close. Things are getting a little tougher, and they aren’t used to that.

      2. 13.3.2
        Shaukat

        kk, do you acknowledge any fundamental differences in male/female sexual/mating strategies at all? You must realize that men are far more indiscriminate than women when it comes to sexual partners. If this wasn’t the case, then there would be no need for illicit industries such as prostitution.

        I actually agree with you, Emily, GWTF, and ]eremy that the tendency toward hyper gamy becomes non-existent once a  woman enters into a committed relationship. But before that period, it absolutely is there. The fact that reality offends you doesn’t change it.

        1. KK

          “do you acknowledge any fundamental differences in male/female sexual/mating strategies at all? You must realize that men are far more indiscriminate than women when it comes to sexual partners. If this wasn’t the case, then there would be no need for illicit industries such as prostitution”.

          Yep. That pretty much sums it up.

          How, exactly am I offended and why would I be? If you’re color blind and you insist I’m wearing a red top, when in actuality it’s pink, does it automatically make me offended because I refuse to agree with you?

        2. Emily, the original

          Shakut,

          I actually agree with you, Emily, GWTF, and ]eremy that the tendency toward hyper gamy becomes non-existent once a  woman enters into a committed relationship. But before that period, it absolutely is there.

          Yes, this is probably true, but I think it’s true of both sexes.  Aren’t you trying to land a partner you are most attracted to and the most compatible with? Isn’t everyone?

        3. Jonathan Castle

          Negative ghost-rider.

          Women initiate ~70% of divorces, so hypergamy lives on in marriage.

          That’s why men are so fearful – yes, it’s an emotional and financial fear- of marriage.

          I’m 47, divorced for 5 years, and love the _thought_ of a happily-ever after 2nd marriage.  But I can’t shake the fear because it’s rooted in my actual experience.  ..and those of several friends and coworkers around me.

          Cohabitation?  That might be an option…

      3. 13.3.3
        Shaukat

        KK, it’s interesting that you lumped me into the MGTOW group because I referenced a study involving primates. It’s clear that you don’t even know what the term means, since you throw it around with reckless abandon against everyone who disagrees with you on a particular topic that you’re passionate about. You also repeatedly conflate MGTOWs with red pill, further demonstrating your confusion. To be clear, I am neither MGTOW nor red pill, though I acknowledge that the latter has some good ideas pertaining to dating strategies and self-improvement.

        Contrary to your claims, there is evidence to corroborate greater selectivity in females than men, a tendency which is indicative of the presence of hypergamy. To cite one example, Robert Trivers, a noted evolutionary biologist, wrote the following after reviewing field data pertaining to reproductive rates in primates and other animals, explained the observed difference in male/female sexual selection, and the stricter criteria employed by the former, by stating: “The male’s initial parental investment, that is, his investment at the moment of fertilization, is much smaller than the females’, even if later, through parental care, he invests as much or more” (Trivers 1972).

        In modern society, this greater investment in ensuring a woman can secure the best possible mate is manifested in specific ways, most notable in more stringent criteria demanded by women when on the dating market. Think about: most men would be content with a  sexually attractive woman who is easy going and fun to be around. That’s really it.

        1. Shaukat

          I meant caricatured arguments as they pertain to anything stated by the male posters here.

      4. 13.3.4
        Shaukat

        If anything, a couple of the male commenters have had seemingly much more emotional responses than the female commenters.

        I don’t believe the histrionics are divided by gender lines on this thread. Emily, GWTF, and Stacy are female commenters who have all offered some rational, well thought out responses to the argument of hypergamy. We can have an interesting debate while disagreeing. You’re the only one who posted some hysterical, slanderous, fictional dialogue scene of MGTOWs exchanging caricatured arguments in a basement somewhere.

        1. KK

          “You’re the only one who posted some hysterical, slanderous, fictional dialogue scene of MGTOWs exchanging caricatured arguments in a basement somewhere”.

          Seriously, Shaukat? Give me a break! After reading your comment, I did a quick Google search, pulled up the first MGTOW site, and read through a handful of comments.

          They clearly hate women. One guy pretends to be a fighter pilot that does recon in “enemy territory” (by spying on women). Another guy is obsessed with his disgust for vaginas. They all bash women terribly and my little illustration would be considered G rating compared to their XXX rating.

          Also, I noticed a warning which said MGTOW – only those who have taken the red pill are allowed.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          I will gently remind you, KK, that the original post had nothing to do with MGOTWs (whom I’ve written about extensively and largely negatively). The post had to do with “gender feminists ignoring science that doesn’t confirm their beliefs.” To which we’ve now spent 100 comments on, “But MEN…”

        3. AAORK

          Shaukat- in case you weren’t aware, this is a type of trolling and she’s certainly not alone here. Each firebomb dodged, each straw man knocked down, each ignorant response called out, each personal projection refutted. These matter not to trolls. Their only contribution is the next distraction in an attempt to reframe a topic to comfort their ignorance and validate their beliefs and biases. You gotta stop feeding the trolls.

      5. 13.3.5
        Persephone

        Yes, I agree with KK, at 13.3.  I believe this is a construct of our Western Culture. It if were true biologically, it would be true of all cultures.

        And no, Chance, 13.3.1, I don’t believe that a man in love is polygamous. A man merely looking for superficial attributes in a woman is.

    4. 13.4
      Stacy

      @Chance

      Men don’t have to fear hypergamy because women lose the desire to trade up when starting to have sex (oxytocin) or when she has kids with the guy. Women consistently stay with loser men even when there are possibilities to do better.I used to volunteer at a domestic violence center and I saw it all the time. Hypergamy only exists in a significant way before choosing a mate. And men are just as hypergamous but bqsed on different factors. Its just that they are less discriminating in who they have sex with.Most people end up with others who are similar anyway.

      1. 13.4.1
        Chance

        Stacy, are these women turning down interested potential suitors on the regular?

        1. Shaukat

          Hi Chance, cheers, I enjoy your posts as well, and I appreciate this type of rational debate and discussion. Let me see if I can clarify my position a bit.

          First, I don’t believe that the social custom of marriage is what causes hypergamy to diminish. However, I do believe that the act of falling in love and the emotional bonding process significantly decreases the probability that a woman will trade-up once in a monogamous relationship, mainly due to the risk/benefit ratio of engaging in this type of behavior. Emotional attachment and female sexual/physical bonding are often quite powerful forces in my experience, and so the likelihood that a woman will feel a strong tendency to trade up after a monogamous commitment significantly declines, though I should make it clear that I’m not saying that it completely disappears.  In other words, I think that emotional and sexual bonding create certain complications that would prevent a woman from acting on hypergamous impulses based a solely rational cost/benefit calculation.

          Interested to hear your thought on this.

        2. Chance

          Hey Shaukat, I can agree with that.

        3. Stacy

          @Chance,

          I am.

           
          In the last year I have had major improvements done to my looks (although none of them cosmetic unless you consider teeth bleaching to be so). I get hit on anytime I go out for any extended period of time. And while this sounds like I am tooting my own horn, I say it simply because it is true – I know for a FACT that I can get richer and better looking than the man I am currently dating. He is also only 5’8″ in height. I get asked out by men in that category all the time (at least they appear that way, plus I am in the Finance industry so I meet a lot of them). The reason I don’t even consider leaving my boyfriend is because he treats me like a queen and I literally can’t imagine someone else treating me better. It’s called maturity. Why would I leave him for a cuter or richer man who may end up being an asshole? For me, the risk is way too great. I say all that to say: it is not a ‘woman’ thing but a ‘human’ thing. My current boyfriend was with someone a year before he met me but she never even got a ‘girlfriend’ title even though she desperately wanted it. I got that title within 6 weeks. Think about that for a minute.
           
          My ex husband had model like looks. Not only was he a cheater (found out that afterward), but he wanted to stay being married while doing so. Think about that as well. Men don’t seem as hypergamous (hopefully I spelled it correctly) because they don’t get approached by women as much. (unless you’re in that top 1% maybe)? Therefore, the option to trade up is not normally as available because they have to pursue and make the effort.
           
          I saw all that to say, everyone wants to maximize their potential while dating. Just depends on what you consider maximizing. For many men, it’s looks and for many women, it’s security. But, we all try to do it on some level. This is one of the reasons why most couples ‘match’ and imo, the woman tends to be more ‘attractive’ physically more often than not. However, the good news is that maturity teaches us how to be grounded in a decision when considering all the facts.
           

        4. Persephone

          At Chance, 13.4.1  yes some are. I turn down men frequently.  Yes, the bonding hormone causes polygamy for both genders.  After the effects wear off, the bond continues in many circumstances.

      2. 13.4.2
        Shaukat

        And men are just as hypergamous but based on different factors. Its just that they are less discriminating in who they have sex with.

        But I would argue that this is the fundamental difference that lays the foundational basis for hypergamy in women. While it’s true that a man will sleep with a woman he won’t commit to, in order to get his foot in the door, before which other factors such as income, status, etc, a man must meet a woman’s looks/chemistry threshold, which is usually set higher, and thus men must always strive to meet or exceed a woman’s SMV. This is how hypergamy asserts itself during courting phases, and is in fact predicted by Parental Investment Theory, which is rooted in Darwinian theories of sexual selection.

        I disagree with Chance and Jeremy that hypergamy continues to exist in any significant degree throughout a committed relationship. While it’s true that a woman might lose interest and trade up, it’s also possible that a man will lose complete sexual interest and stray as well, and I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that one happens more often than the other.

        Regarding the red pill sites, I agree that ROK and many others are completely toxic with little to offer. The only one I frequent these days in ‘Good Looking Loser’ GLL, which is based entirely on self-improvement.

         

        1. Chance

          Hi Shaukat,

           

          “I disagree with Chance and Jeremy that hypergamy continues to exist in any significant degree throughout a committed relationship. While it’s true that a woman might lose interest and trade up, it’s also possible that a man will lose complete sexual interest and stray as well, and I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that one happens more often than the other.”

           

          I value your opinions so I was wondering if you could please provide more clarification to support your stance that hypergamy isn’t existent to a significant degree within an LTR or marriage.  I’m wondering if I am missing something, but I’m having trouble understanding how biological impulses could subside due to a man-made custom.  I would think that the impulses are still there, but men and women just continue to fight it.  In the quote above, you even said that it is possible that the woman might trade up or that the man may sexually stray, which are clear manifestations of hypergamy and polygamy, respectively.  I couple that with the fact that infidelity rates are roughly equal between the sexes today, but men and women have a clear tendency to cheat in different ways because men are more likely to cheat in an “in addition to” fashion (i.e., stray), while women are more likely to cheat in an “instead of” fashion (i.e., trade up).  To me, that is about as clear of a manifestation of giving in to polygamous and hypergamous impulses as it can get.

  14. 14
    Shannon

    You are illustrating my exact point.  The argument is based on what other people say and on fear.  The people advancing the global warming argument are really playing heavily off of people’s fear.  All Im asking, is to slow down, look at all of the arguments, think it through before embarking on radical public policy.  It doesnt matter how many people assert something to be true, if its not true, then they are all wrong.  Look at other arguments.  The video I linked has a very reasonable discussion that disagrees with the “consensus”.  Its worth considering

    1. 14.1
      GoWiththeFlow

      Shannon,

      ” It doesnt matter how many people assert something to be true, if its not true, then they are all wrong”

      Yes and just like we shouldn’t believe doctors who think AIDS is cause by poor hygiene and environmental toxins, we should not believe climate science deniers–because the overwhelming volume of scientific evidence proves them wrong.

      “The argument is based on what other people say and on fear.”

      So anti-vaxxers fear that vaccines cause autism because they choose to believe a scientifically invalid study done by a man who was expecting to become enormously wealthy if he could discredit the MMR vaccine.

      Scientists, public health officials, doctors, nurses and others advocate for vaccines and universal vaccination policies because they fear that outbreaks of diseases like polio, measles, and rubella will kill and disable thousands and maybe millions just like what happened in real life before vaccines were created.

      The difference?  The vaccine advocates have volumes of scientific studies and sound data on their side to support their fears.  The anti-vaxxers do not.

      Same with climate change.  The overwhelming scientific evidence supports the fears of climate scientists and concerned citizens and public officials about species extinction, food shortages, and loss of livable land mass for humans.  The science does not support climate change deniers who’s fears are “radical changes in public policy.”

      We’re talking the life’s work of thousands of knowledgable respected scientists who work in climate science fields, versus a handful of scientists who’s work is in many cases funded by corporations and individuals who fear huge financial losses if the overwhelming scientific consensus is accepted by public official and enacted into policy.

       

  15. 15
    Marika

    Maybe if we dropped the word ‘hypergamy’, which is used in some pretty demeaning ways by the MGTOW community, this debate would be less intense with less nastiness. The general concept of women caring more about the man’s profession etc than men is certainly not new, has been the subject of sitcoms, stand up, many blog posts etc, without people getting too upset.

    I think where it becomes a point of contention is where women are painted either as a: evil or b. slaves to their biology. Neither is true.

    The number of psychopaths out there is minimal. Women are not out to hurt men, toy with their feelings, dump them, trade up, and steal their money. It may feel that way to some people (like the MGTOW crew and others), but it’s as generalised (and immature) a statement as ‘all men are sexed crazed ba&^/*’ (also untrue).

    Also, as Evan pointed out in his example, humans aren’t slaves to our baser instincts. A man may see a hotter women and think about having sex without acting on it. Just as women aren’t always acting on, or even thinking about, the desire to ‘trade up’, even if they meet a more ‘impressive’ man.

    Don’t let dating  (or blog jadedness – credit Tom10😀) steal your humanity.

  16. 16
    Buck25

    Just one question. How did we get from an article over whether some feminists like to deny  scientific evidence that indicates male and female brains (and thus the associated intellectual. personality traits) are different. The natural question  that follows from that, is not about MGTOW, red pill or the manosphere; it’s whether one set of  traits is necessarily superior to the other. Haven’t heard a peep about that, from either side. That might have been an interesting  discussion but the old red pill got mentioned, and right away, the usual choosing up of sides (pretty much according to gender) started yet again. Ok ladies, I know those words are lightening rods here, and I’m not  trying to start more ish here, but the reality is, Jezebel is as offensive to most of us men as say, ROK is to most of you. There are, however, some occasional worthwhile thoughts found in both (proof that even a blind squirrel can find an occasional nut, maybe?)

    1. 16.1
      GoWiththeFlow

      Hi Buck,

      I think it’s because Evan’s question was–Do you know anybody whose beliefs are anti-science and will not be changed by overwhelming evidence?–someone mentioned red pill ideology as not being based on science and off we went!

      I also think most early commenters conceded early that the school of Gender Feminism, who believe that boys and girls are born as neutral blank slates and that gender is a social construct, is not supported by science.

      As far as the website Jezebel goes, I’ve only read a few articles from there (2 of which were linked in Evan’s blog) and while my impression is that it’s a feminist leaning site, I have no idea what particular school of feminism they espouse or how far they go.  But ROK is a $#!t hole, so if Jezebel is the flip side of the coin, then I see no reason to start frequenting it.  I really have a hard time buying he argument that there’s such an extra-special pearl of wisdom buried at ROK and like minded sites that people just have to go there to get it.  When I was in college the feminist men loved to hate was Andrea Dworkin (don’t shoot!) who believed that all sex was rape.  Is it like that???

      1. 16.1.1
        Buck 25

        GWTF,

        I wouldn’t say it’s quite Andrea Dworkin (What is, really?), but lets just say Jezebel has a (to me anyway) distinctly anti-man tone to it. As for ROK everyone in a while, there’s actually some self-improvement concept to be found that’s worth reading about. Like I said, even a blind squirrel…. but I can’t imagine any woman wanting to see it; none of the vitriol is going to palatable to any sane woman, and the male self-improvement stuff is not going to be of much help to a woman, though it can be helpful to a man in suggesting ways to further his own development as a man (though for his own sake, not primarily for the purpose of attracting women).

        While I’m at it there are some places in the manosphere that are most definitely not misogynist. Most women are not going to find much there of interest to them, one way or the other, as most of the topics revolve around male self-development, style, confidence building and authenticity. I’m thinking here of the writings of David Deida, Dr. Robert Glover, Adam Gilad among others, These are men who clearly like women, and seek ways to help men interact with and better understand what women want and desire from us, and how to respond to that in ways which work to the benefit of both genders. I don’t think you’d find much offensive in what they have to say, though the vast majority of it is written for a male audience.

         

        1. Jeremy

          Yeah, ROK is a cesspit.  I never could read it, even in my darkest days.  Rollo’s site had some good pearls amid the narcissism and misogyny.  As did a now defunct site called Just Four Guys.  But eventually I had to leave because the tone of the sites was poisonous and I felt it negatively affecting my soul.  Or, to be less poetic, I found myself more irritable and prone to anger after reading those sites, in spite of my best efforts to filter out the hate.  And eventually I realized that I am as susceptible as anyone else to subconscious suggestion, and that these sites were affecting me in a way I didn’t like.  So I cut them off, took what useful things I could, and set off to create my own synthesis of what I believed to be true.  At this point, I would not recommend that any man should go on most of the manosphere sites.  But instead, they could try reading Athol Kay’s first book, “the married man sex primer.”  Good advice without hate, similar to what you might find here, except directed toward men.

        2. Tron Swanson

          Buck,

          On the notion of male self-improvement: there’s a real split in the manosphere between MGTOW and PUA/Red Pill. MGTOWs tend to be content the way they are, while PUAs/Red Pill people want to self-improve (primarily in order to impress women, though they also tout it as a good in itself). Despite being a MGTOW, I’m working to improve myself, but it’s in areas that women don’t care about–and that have little to do with materialism. I was quickly run off from PUA blogs, because I have zero ambition, zero desire to pursue women, and zero desire to improve myself in conventional ways.

          I looked at the people you mentioned, btw. The first one was too spiritual for me, and the second one…well, he just seemed to be pushing a more polished version of traditional masculinity, which I’m not interested in. But thanks for expanding my awareness of male-centric sites.

  17. 17
    Jeremy

    @GWTF and Emily, you both wrote that you agreed that women need to respect a man in order to be attracted, but you both claimed that there is a difference between respecting a man as a person versus respecting him as a “man.”  I agree completely.  That is what “hypergamy” (as I define it) is all about – a woman needing to respect a man in whatever qualities she determines to be attractive in a man (as opposed to qualities that are simply admirable as a human).  Those sexual qualities tend to be the qualities she most values in herself or wishes she had herself, and the qualities she values most in herself may change over time.

     

    For many women this is overt – needing a man who is taller, stronger, richer, smarter.  But for other women it is covert.  I’ve seen it in alpha female doctors married to beta male teachers – they will say things like, “Sure I’m book-smart, but he is street smart and that is ever so much more important!”  Or, “Sure I make more money, but he sacrificed his earning potential to do something really important.” Rationalizations for how the guy is better in the most important way, so as to allow the respect necessary to maintain attraction.  I’ve never observed a successful couple where the woman was not able to believe that the man was better in some significant way (and I’m positive this is important from the man’s perspective as well).

     

    So I disagree with one statement that Shaukat made where he included me in a list of people who claimed that hypergamy is less important in committed relationships.  My definition of hypergamy (aka the need for female.respect to maintain her attraction) remains throughout relationships.  If respect is lost (either due to a man’s actions or a woman’s change in priorities), the result can be divorce or a miserable, sexless marriage.  Therefore it behooves men to maintain respectability in the qualities their wives value (and they should do so in ways that allow themselves to still respect themselves).

    1. 17.1
      Marika

      Jeremy

      Completely agree about respect. No idea if that’s what the h-word is all about, and as I said, I think the use of that word is causing problems as it’s emotionally fraught, so I’ll avoid it. But for me, respect is an important part of attraction. I actually recall having arguments with my ex where I told him I was losing respect for him due to his behaviour. He looked very confused and then the argument detoured as we unpacked that. It just didn’t make sense to him.

      It’s certainly not enough. I respect my male friends and colleagues without being attracted to them. But I’m pretty sure I couldn’t make a relationship work with a fun, good looking guy who I didn’t respect. From what you’re saying, a man could? Or at least, it’s not so important perhaps, as long as she’s fun to be around, interesting, cool etc.

      On that note, I’m reminded of that scene from Seinfeld (the sponge episode) where Jerry almost broke up with a woman because he respected her too much! Hahaha

      Maybe this is related, but I find it much harder to break up with men I respect when I know it’s not working, than those I don’t. Not tied to how much they make, but their genuineness, charitable nature, they’re kind to others, introspective, self aware, want to make a difference in the world etc. Do men feel this way?

      Appreciate your insights, Jeremy. The boundaries thing now makes sense to me too. Again, my ex definitely didn’t get turned on by me having boundaries  (quite the opposite!), and I feel like your explanation helped me understand that better.

      Comments like yours are awesome as you really help me understand men. Thank you!

    2. 17.2
      Emily, the original

      Hi Jeremy,

       I’ve never observed a successful couple where the woman was not able to believe that the man was better in some significant way (and I’m positive this is important from the man’s perspective as well).

      I can only speak for myself, but I don’t need taller, richer, smarter. That’s not what I meant. I’ll give an example: I have a male friend who is kind, a very good father (a better parent than his ex-wife), intuitive (understands people). I respect him as a person and am very fond of him. But everybody — his ex-wife, his daughter, his ex-in-laws, the people at work — walk all over him. Therefore I cannot respect him as a man. He always jokes that I have enough balls for both of us. I don’t find that funny, and I certainly don’t find that sexy.

      Years ago, my grandmother told me she was home with my grandfather when a naked woman knocked on their front door. She was obviously in distress and running from someone. My grandfather went and got her a blanket, gave it to her, told her to stay on the front porch, locked the front door (who knew if the angry boyfriend would show up?) and called the police. I remembered that my grandmother was impressed with the way my grandfather handled that. She respected him as a man. He “TCBed” (“took care of business” and she trusted that he would). Does that make sense?

       

    3. 17.3
      GoWiththeFlow

      Hey Jeremy,

      I think my big stumbling point is that I use the strict definition of hypergamy, the one biologists, psychologists, and sociologists who study hypergamy use.  That when in the dating and mating game, women will try to lock down the highest value men that they can.  I don’t think this is a bad thing.  It has clearly served women well enough throughout the ages that it persisted as a strategy.  I would go further and say hypergamous behavior was even reinforced by families and communities.

      In the days of arranged marriages parents picked out the best possible matches they could for their children.  Later as women gained more freedom to pick from suitors, the parents still had a big “filtering” function.  Even in the 1980s and 90s my sister and I were told by our dad that we needed to marry someone who would be “a good provider” and we were encouraged not to “settle”.

      I know it’s aggravating or depressing for men to think about hypergamy in dating.  Probably because they are envisioning themselves on the losing end of the equation:  I’ll be passed up for someone deemed more worthy.  What they don’t see is that when a woman commits to him, he IS her top guy.  In this day and age if he’s not, she just keeps on looking.  Some men see this as women being “too picky” and want to go back to an imaginary time in the past where women were expected to get married and they did it at young ages and all was hunky-dory.  It’s as if they think this will ensure them they would have a loving and adoring wife because hypergamous behavior is a function of women having choices, like delaying marriage, or not marrying at all.

      But as Buck has said many times, pressure to marry back in the day led to some unhappy marriages with mismatched people where as he sees it, the wives didn’t respect their husbands.  Maybe this was so because some women’s hypergamous drives were short circuited by social pressure and fear of remaining unmarried which wasn’t seen as a viable option.  I would posit that it may have been better for everyone involved if these women had been allowed to be “picky” and move on until they found what they wanted in a man, and the men would have had more time to find the women who thought they were the cat’s meow and truly thought he was her life’s catch.

      Now I view what you are talking about, a wife needing to respect her husband as a man, and view him as superior to others, not as “hypergamy” (which is essentially a one-sided experience) but as an as yet unnamed relationship dynamic that is two sided.  Because as you mentioned, it’s not only important for her, but it’s important for him as well to know his wife values his unique strengths as a man.  The reciprocal of this is that it’s important for a man to continue to feel physically attracted to his wife, and for her to know he still sees her as such.  Because likewise, if a man doesn’t find his wife attractive and she knows it, that’s a relationship killer too.

      1. 17.3.1
        Jeremy

        I agree that what I describes is not the classic definition of “hypergamy.”  The reason I still use that word is because when the guys on the manosphere discuss their perception of hypergamy, I believe this is what is causing the phenomenon they are observing.  They are fearful that women won’t want them (or have left them) because of some quality they lack – and whatever quality that is, that is what makes women hypergamous.  I’m short, and women want someone tall.  I don’t earn enough money. Etc.  And it may well be that a particular woman DID leave them for those lacks, but other women may not have done so because other women may prioritize differently.  What I tried to get the men on the sphere to realize (before I left there entirely several years ago) was that their perception of “hypergamy” is all about a woman’s priorities.  She respects what she prioritizes.  Emily respects a man with “balls” who knows how to take care of business.  Another woman prioritizes a man who is sensitive and would be a good dad.  Another woman prioritize a man who is tall and rich.  It’s the respect that is the important thing, not the quality itself.

         

        Is it a 2-way street?  In the sense that the woman needs to respect the man for his masculine qualities and he needs to feel admired by her for those qualities, perhaps yes.  But that is different than the example of attraction that you gave – a woman needs to feel that a man is attracted to her but the man also needs to feel that the woman is attracted to him.  THAT is a real 2-way street.  Whereas respect is less so.  This is what leads to all the misunderstanding.

         

        And the misunderstanding IS a 2-way street.  Men misunderstand women’s need to respect them as being “hypergamy.”  Women misunderstand that just because they need a man to have boundaries, they believe men need the same thing.  GWTF, you know your comment above where you list all the amazing things that some women have done for their BF’s who ended up breaking up with them?  How you extrapolated that to mean that men need women who don’t do all those amazing things?  Forgive me, but THAT is the misunderstanding.  If a man breaks up with a woman, it’s NOT because she is too giving.  “She was hot, she made me feel great, and she was willing to do anything for me, but she had no boundaries so I had to break up with her”….said no man, ever.

        1. Buck 25

          Jeremy, that is pretty much right on target

      2. 17.3.2
        Jeremy

        Sorry for the 2nd post after an already long one, but this bears saying:  What I’ve been saying about boundaries applies to people in a relationship, not the initial stage of dating.  Men respect women who have boundaries with other men.  But when a man is first dating a woman, he is really just another man to her.  If she has no boundaries with him at that point, she won’t have any boundaries with any man.  Not attractive.  Boundaries should come down (from a male perspective) as the relationship matures.  So if a woman displays no boundaries at the beginning of a relationship, I could see a man’s attraction waning because of it, extrapolating that that is just how she is with everyone.

        1. Chance

          Hi Jeremy, I don’t think that your definition of hypergamy is much different than how the more reasonable parts of the manosphere sees it.  In short, their belief is that women generally prefer men of the highest status that they can attract, which is preferably higher status than themselves (we won’t get in to the stronger propensity to optimize here since I know that you disagree with that aspect of the definition).  Status, of course, means different things to different women, and often, different things to the same woman at different points in her life.  The woman has to respect the man that she is with, which often means that she wants to be able to look up to him as it relates to the trait that the equates to status…… which often means that wants him to be superior to her as it relates to that particular trait.  A man doesn’t have to respect his partner in this sense, which means that his partner doesn’t necessarily have to be superior to him as it relates to the traits that he values in a partner for him to be attracted to her.

           

          I think this is in line with what you are saying,  but I could be wrong.

        2. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          The woman has to respect the man that she is with, which often means that she wants to be able to look up to him as it relates to the trait that the equates to status…… which often means that wants him to be superior to her as it relates to that particular trait.

          You can call it being superior, but what it really boils down to is that women want a man to bring something to the table that they don’t have. They want to get from a man what they can’t get from their female friends, just like men want to get from women what they can’t get from their male friends.

        3. KK

          Emily, you are right on target.

          “You can call it being superior, but what it really boils down to is that women want a man to bring something to the table that they don’t have. They want to get from a man what they can’t get from their female friends, just like men want to get from women what they can’t get from their male friends”.

          I will add to this dynamic that secure men appreciate being appreciated for what they bring to the table. Men with a fragile ego have an almost obsessive NEED to be “superior” to their partner. Again, this is just my real life observation and is not directed to anyone here.

        4. Emily, the original

          KK,

          Men with a fragile ego have an almost obsessive NEED to be “superior” to their partner.

          Maybe he reasons that she’ll put up with more of his crap if he’s superior and she won’t leave.

        5. Chance

          “You can call it being superior, but what it really boils down to is that women want a man to bring something to the table that they don’t have.”

           

          Perhaps, Emily.  There are certain characteristics that some men may bring to the table, which some women don’t have, that most women will rarely appreciate.  For example, a man who desires to be a SAHD.  For a careerist woman, this would be an example of something that she does not bring to the table, but most (not all, mind you) career-oriented women would not see this as a desirable arrangement.

        6. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          but most (not all, mind you) career-oriented women would not see this as a desirable arrangement.

          That’s not what I meant. Women want men to bring a masculine energy to the table. As trite as it sounds, she can relax in her feminine energy if she respects him and trusts that he will take care of things. I have a friend at work who overheard his wife tell a friend, “Don’t worry. John will take control,” and he felt good about that. I don’t remember what the exact issue was, but he felt good that she trusted him to deal with it.

        7. John

          Jeremy said:

          Men respect women who have boundaries with other men.  But when a man is first dating a woman, he is really just another man to her.  If she has no boundaries with him at that point, she won’t have any boundaries with any man”.

          Well said. This is so true. I dated a woman last year who wanted to have unprotected sex on the second date. Of course, I was thinking how many other guys has she made this offer to. I declined and lost interest quickly.

          i’ve had some women I know give me a lot of crap about this when I told them about it. They were insinuating that I was looking down on her because she offered sex so quickly. So I asked the women I knew what they will think of a guy who said “I love you” on the second date.

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

        8. KK

          Emily,

          “Maybe he reasons that she’ll put up with more of his crap if he’s superior and she won’t leave”.

          Bingo!

        9. Chance

          Emily, it sounds like we are saying the same thing, but you don’t like how I originally articulated it.  With your last example, you want a man who has a superior ability and willingness to take charge and be in control (some would call that a masculine dominance).

        10. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          I just think that the example you used, the SAHD, would only fit a small percentage of women. Most women have some level of nurturing ability in terms of children. She doesn’t need a man to bring that to the table. It’s a quality she already has.

           

        11. Chance

          Emily,

           

          I understand,  but many career-oriented women still want a man to make more even though they have the ability to provide for themselves.  See what I mean?  (not being snarky… I’m just realizing that I might not be explaining myself well)

           

          This would be an example of something that many women still expect a man to be “superior”, while these women still have the capability do it for themselves.

        12. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          I understand,  but many career-oriented women still want a man to make more even though they have the ability to provide for themselves.  … This would be an example of something that many women still expect a man to be “superior”, while these women still have the capability do it for themselves.

          Yes, that is true for some women and I think it is ridiculous. Some women also want the man to have more education. Another dumb request. I mean, you want someone who can hold a conversation and is curious about the world, but why does he need a ma from Harvard?

          You want a man who has a superior ability and willingness to take charge and be in control (some would call that a masculine dominance).

          I just want a man who has a strong sense of self, who isn’t so focused on winning my approval or validation that he has the guts to tell me (if warranted), “Miss Emily (I live in the South), you are being a moron!”  🙂

    4. 17.4
      Emily, the original

      Jeremy asks a question and all the women rush to answer!  🙂

  18. 18
    KK

    “Men respect women who have boundaries with other men.  But when a man is first dating a woman, he is really just another man to her.  If she has no boundaries with him at that point, she won’t have any boundaries with any man”.

    I’m glad you said that, Jeremy. I don’t think you’ll catch any hell for making that statement. When I’ve stated almost the exact same thing, I was attacked by a couple of the male commenters. It’s refreshing to hear a man who is refreshingly normal speak his mind. Thank you. ☺

  19. 19
    KK

    The news article that Evan linked states: “Indeed, studies have shown sex differences across a wide variety of cognitive domains, including verbal fluency (the ability to generate many different words starting with a given letter) and mental rotation (the ability to rotate three-dimensional shapes in the mind). In one study using functional MRI, women outperformed men on the former, while men outperformed women on the latter.
    In my experience, proponents touting the “blank slate” view are willing to agree, in private conversations, that neurological sex differences do exist, but they fear that acknowledging as much publicly will justify female oppression. This is backward. As it stands, female-typical traits are seen as inferior and less worthy of respect. This is the real issue the movement fails to address: Nobody wants to be female-typical, not even women”.
    I think that last sentence is innacurate. Most women are perfectly happy with being female-typical. I don’t see why female-typical traits are seen as inferior or less worthy of respect.
    Also, I don’t see how the results of the MRI would be offensive. I thought it was common knowledge that women are more verbal and men are more visual.

  20. 20
    Allan

    Jeremy,

    post #17 and ~17.3.1

    You make some extremely insightful points in these two posts. You really articulated what we all sort of know but often have trouble grasping in a really coherent way. Especially your point about men and women misunderstanding – I’d just add what we tend to do is PROJECT our own psychology onto the opposite sex; men are forever confused at why women don’t like ‘nice guys’; women are baffled that their career and other achievements don’t seem to attract men. What we have to do to understand the opposite sex is first and foremost acknowledge that we are completely different; we have to (as men) be able to unpack the specifics of hypergamy without descending into a sexist shitstorm. We also need to think these things through without being shut up and told that to acknowledge any difference is misogyny. I’d love to find a slightly nicer PUA community that could fill this middle ground between the sexist stuff and politically corrent denial of difference.

    Just to add another little piece of language; ADMIRATION perhaps better encapsulates this female to male attraction that we’re trying to put our finger on. Admiration & Respect.

    Again, thanks for your posts jeremy, they really struck a chord for me.

     

  21. 21
    Jeremy

    Emily, what you are describing regarding the “erotic love” is classic dopamine.  And both GWTF and Evan have describe the best ways to fight a dopamine craving – create fences to avoid temptation (a la Evan) and talk yourself through the logic and consequences (a la GWTF).  That type of craving is equally common in both men and women and has nothing to do with anyone’s definition of hypergamy.  It is the same as the desire to do anything for a hit of crack.

     

    GWTF – you wrote “there are as many reasons women leave men as there are women who leave men.”  I think this is both true and untrue.  While the exact reasons may vary, I think there are common themes.  Here are some big ones: 1) The man’s behaviour or appearance changed and she no longer wanted to be with him.  2) Hedonic adaptation – she got what she wanted and the no longer wanted it.  She instead wanted something else that she did not currently have.   3). Her priorities changed along with her calculus of attraction, and her husband did not change. Almost every divorce I know of can fall into one of those 3 categories to some extent.  Male-initiated divorce happens commonly for the first 2 reasons, not so much for the third.

     

    Shaukat – I think I understand where you are coming from, and we are defining “hypergamy” differently, which is why we are disagreeing on whether it continues after marriage.  I agree that in the animal world, females often search for males who are of higher SMV prior to mating.  Yet Richard Dawkins, in his book The Selfish Gene, specifically mentions this and wonders aloud why in Homo sapiens the male is not the one who gets physically dressed up to attract the female.  He concludes that for whatever reason, we have reached an evolutionary stable system (ESS) which is unlike much of the animal kingdom.  And although I have observed a few couples where the man is of higher physical SMV than the woman, in general it is the opposite.  In the couples I know of, the most stable structure tends to be a slightly better looking wife with a higher-earning husband.  He gets the hot woman he fantasizes about, she gets the lifestyle she fantasizes about.  In the couples I know of where the husband had higher physical SMV, he almost always ended up cheating.  YMMV.

    1. 21.1
      Emily, the original

      Jeremy,

      what you are describing regarding the “erotic love” is classic dopamine.  And both GWTF and Evan have describe the best ways to fight a dopamine craving – create fences to avoid temptation (a la Evan) and talk yourself through the logic and consequences (a la GWTF).  That type of craving is equally common in both men and women and has nothing to do with anyone’s definition of hypergamy.

      It could have to do with hypergamy if a person suddenly feels that for someone but has never felt that way about the spouse. The person could think, “Ah, this is how it’s supposed to feel.” Some people won’t be able to talk themselves out if it (not everyone is master of their feelings) and will not understand the consequences until much later. Have you heard of Lionel Shriver? She’s an author who wrote a book about leaving the comfortable marriage for the passionate one and the trade offs in both.

      1. 21.1.1
        Tom 10

         
        @ Emily, the original #21.1
         
        “The person could think, “Ah, this is how it’s supposed to feel.” Some people won’t be able to talk themselves out if it (not everyone is master of their feelings)”
         
         
         
        And those people aren’t marriage material. I think there is an onus on every dater to use the dating process to analytically assess the ability of the person they’re dating to control their feelings (especially their propensity to confusing chemistry with love) and dump those who set off warning bells.
         
         
         
        Failing to do so is asking for trouble later:

        Why Controlling Your Emotions Is the Key to a Successful Marriage


         

        1. KK

          Tom10, “And those people aren’t marriage material”.

          Bingo!

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Tom10,

          Perhaps not surprisingly, my best friend’s tale of managing a very strong attraction to someone that I wrote about above happened while she and I were in residency training (specialty training after medical school in the U.S.).  Which is a four year long course in how to manage your emotions.  Because 1) The resident physician’s feelings don’t matter 2) Nobody cares 3) Disruptive displays of emotion are swiftly punished.

          Emily,

          “The person could think, “Ah, this is how it’s supposed to feel.” 

          Until it doesn’t feel like that anymore!  Statistically, not many people wind up marrying their partners in the affairs that end their marriages.  Of those that do, the divorce rates are sky high for those marriages.

          People who have a strong need for novelty and engage is risk taking behavior i.e. dopamine seekers or the slang term adrenaline junkies, are more likely to engage in affairs than people who are not.  These people may, biochemically, have a more exaggerated response to dopamine, norepinephrine, and other neurotransmitters in the pleasure and reward centers of the brain.  So they get a big reward for their risk taking behavior, and this may override the potential for pain from consequences of the behavior.

        3. Emily, the originala

          Tom10,

          I think there is an onus on every dater to use the dating process to analytically assess the ability of the person they’re dating to control their feelings (especially their propensity to confusing chemistry with love) and dump those who set off warning bells.

          I guess I just never looked at dating that analytically. So when you date a woman, do you look for potential partners with whom you don’t feel the dopamine high, even in the beginning? (Granted not everyone feels that. I have a male friend who has never really been ga ga infatuated with anyone. He’s just not wired that way.)

          GoWiththeFlow,

          I’ll ask you the same question: Do you look for partners with whom you don’t feel the dopamine high specifically because you worry this person could be a risk taker?

           

           

          People who have a strong need for novelty and engage is risk taking behavior i.e. dopamine seekers or the slang term adrenaline junkies, are more likely to engage in affairs than people who are not.

        4. Emily, the originala

          Sorry. I accidentally posted GoWiththeFlow’s comment:  People who have a strong need for novelty and engage is risk taking behavior i.e. dopamine seekers or the slang term adrenaline junkies, are more likely to engage in affairs than people who are not.

           

        5. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily,

          A big hint that a person is a relationship adrenaline junkie is that they will love bomb you at the very beginning.  Everyone is usually excited and hopeful when they meet someone and there is mutual attraction plus they are interesting and fun.  But someone who laser focuses on you as “the one” right from the beginning, shows up at your house unannounced, buys expensive gifts, invites you away on a trip for the 2nd weekend after you have met, etc.  Yeah, they’re getting their drug hit!  As soon as things start getting routine, or inconvenient, or a little rough, then the distancing behavior sets in.  Because the sense of novelty is wearing off and they are starting to get restless.

          Or if you two are fighting hard ALOT, and making up hard ALOT.  As a couple you are using conflict to generate the adrenaline, novelty and excitement.  Maybe because you just don’t have a lot to talk about and the companionate side is lacking.  I have known a few couples like this.  They are exhausting to be around.  Two of these couple work together.  They drag EVERYONE around them into their cyclone.  I told my scheduler at work that I would rather live in a cardboard box under a freeway overpass than work with these people.  This is my idea of relationship hell.

          I think everyone wants to feel some flames flicker when they meet.  However it’s up to us to keep our heads in the game and make sure words match behavior, and that the behavior is consistent and good.  Chemistry doesn’t = merit.  You need some of the first and a lot of the later.  If merit = 7 or less, walk away.  You’re gonads are trying to get you in trouble.  Like teenage boys are told, don’t let the lower head make the decisions, use your upper head.

          If an adrenaline junkie wants to go skydiving, they have to find a place nearby, book a date for their jump, show up, go through the training and checks, get on the plane and THEN they get to jump. You can choose to go skydiving with them, or you have several points before the jump where you can back out.  You just have to not get so swept up in the moment that you lose sight of what is good for you.

          So some dopamine induced heart fluttering is good.  Especially when the merit stuff combines with it to make your heart beat even faster.  But all dopamine rush and no merit?  Leads to one heck of a crash.

        6. Tom10

           
          @ GoWiththeFlow
           
          “happened while she and I were in residency training (specialty training after medical school in the U.S.).  Which is a four year long course in how to manage your emotions.”
           
           
           
          On that topic, I’ve always felt that there should be a subject in the education curriculum for young people on how to manage their emotions, as they have such a profound and long-lasting significant in all aspects of our lives.
           
           
           
          @ Emily, the Original
           
          “I guess I just never looked at dating that analytically. So when you date a woman, do you look for potential partners with whom you don’t feel the dopamine high, even in the beginning?”
           
           
           
          Well I think, ultimately, it comes down to what your specific dating goal is (it doesn’t really matter what the particular goal is per se) and then to tailor your dating behavior and analysis of those you date accordingly.
           
           
           
          So as sex was my primary (only) goal throughout my 20s I tailored my behavior (i.e. learned how to generate instant chemistry – no mean feat for men) and analysis of women (i.e. learned how to identify women responsive to instant chemistry) to achieve this goal. Once I gathered enough information to conclude that our goals were different I would end the situation (sometimes this process could be achieved in minutes).
           
           
           
          Now that as I’m in my 30s and my priorities are moving towards long-term dating, the importance of chemistry has reduced as it has no relevance to my ultimate goal. Therefore, whenever I meet those who have no goals, confused goals (i.e. those who just “see what happens” or “go with the flow” haha 😉 ) or those who conflate long-term and short-term dating behavior I swiftly move on.
           
           
          All that said, there are no guarantees in anyone’s dating journey; all we can do is play the odds in our favor. Failing to analyze someone’s ability to control their emotions or succumb to chemistry is a game of poor odds.
           

        7. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          So as sex was my primary (only) goal throughout my 20s I tailored my behavior (i.e. learned how to generate instant chemistry – no mean feat for men) and analysis of women (i.e. learned how to identify women responsive to instant chemistry) to achieve this goal.

          I’m curious … how do you create instant chemistry? (No snark intended.)  As we’ve discussed on this post, it’s a dopamine surge. It’s physiological. I’ve certainly felt it (though it is rare), but there was nothing the guy could have done to create it from nothing. All he could do was increase or decrease it depending on how he interacted with me.

        8. Shaukat

          So as sex was my primary (only) goal throughout my 20s I tailored my behavior (i.e. learned how to generate instant chemistry – no mean feat for men)

          Hi Tom, I’d also be interested in having you elaborate on this point.  In my experience, chemistry is generated through banter, confidence and sex appeal (not necessarily in that order), but if you’re referring to a specific strategy you utilize, I’m interested in hearing more about it.

        9. Tom10

          @ Emily, the original
          “I’m curious … how do you create instant chemistry?
           
          Well it depends on the woman and what turns her on.
           
          “it’s a dopamine surge. It’s physiological.”
           
          Agreed.
           
          But what is it about a particular guy that causes this dopamine surge? My personal theory is that it’s her body interpreting his genes as being of high quality (and to some – albeit limited – extent, his ability to provide).
           
          So the guy has to assess what her attraction triggers are, demonstrate – via proxy – that his genes are high quality, and then tailor his efforts to specifically target her attraction triggers.
           
          Some women are primarily visual (shock horror – some women are as visual as men!). So if you can meet her threshold of attractiveness she should feel chemistry – even if the guy doesn’t do anything else at all. So by simply maximizing his appearance a guy can create instant chemistry with a certain percentage of women (visually motivated women who are at his physical attractiveness level or lower). Her appearance will give cues as to where she stands on this issue.
           
          Some women consider themselves intellectual, so they’ll only feel chemistry if the guy she’s talking to is her intellectual equal or – even better – superior. Simply demonstrating your smarts through witty conversation should create chemistry. Female doctors and lawyers are typically like this in my experience. Whereas other women, who have no intellectual aspirations, recoil against smart guys (fearing he might look down on her) so for those women he should hide all pretensions. Her college course and/or job should give cues as to where she stands on the issue.
           
          Other women are turned on by creativity; so implying your creativity somehow – ideally through demonstration – should create chemistry. Case in point; I’m a pianist in my spare time so a short performance, circumstances permitting (i.e. if there was a handy piano available) proved very effective in this regard (I know that’s corny, but hey, a guy’s gotta play to his strengths!). I literally saw a girl’s pupils dilate during one performance – I swear to God that happened. Cues for where she stands on this issue can be difficult to establish, but the location you’re in (i.e. a music venue perhaps) might give clues or failing that, through general conversation.
           
          Some women are turned on by status or upper-middle class lifestyles (I think this is her provisioning instincts at play). So by playing up his credentials in this regard he’ll make progress; i.e. carefully referencing the parts of his background which will fit in with her ideal narrative. Other women are the opposite and reject materialism; so again, the guy has to carefully select the information he decides to share with her on this matter. Where she’s from should give cues as to where she stands on the issue.
           
          Do you see where I’m going with this? The principles outlined above apply to all aspects of the particular woman in question. It’s kinda a whole package thing – you gotta hit as many triggers as quickly and as subtly as possible, all through seemingly entirely normal banter.
           
          Does any of that make sense or am I talking nonsense?
           
          @ Shaukat
          “In my experience, chemistry is generated through banter, confidence and sex appeal (not necessarily in that order)”
           
          Agreed.
           
          “but if you’re referring to a specific strategy you utilize, I’m interested in hearing more about it.”
           
          Well it’s not so much a specific strategy, rather forensically analyzing the particular woman in question, and then focusing your energy to demonstrating how you’re the guy who best fulfills her particular desires.
           
          Your thoughts?

        10. KK

          “I’ve certainly felt it (though it is rare), but there was nothing the guy could have done to create it from nothing. All he could do was increase or decrease it depending on how he interacted with me”.

          My experience has been the same, Emily. What’s interesting is that I’ve always had a certain “type” I’m physically attracted to. Tall, medium to large build, medium to dark hair, and light eyes. However, each time I’ve experienced intense chemistry, which has only been a handful of times, those men were not even close to my “type”.

          Not long ago, I had contacted someone about a personal business matter and we were having trouble meeting due to locations and schedules, so he suggested we meet for lunch. Our conversations had been pretty brief, but I distinctly remembered him mentioning something about his fiancé.

          Anyway, he texted me to let me know he had made it to the restaurant early and told me where he was sitting. As I walked in, I saw him from a distance and I was thinking, “holy moly, he looks intimidating”. By intimidating, I mean kinda scary. We spoke briefly about the business matter and then the conversation turned personal. He was extremely kind and had a softness about him. I felt extreme chemistry for this guy and I could not make sense of it at all. As a matter of fact, I remember thinking, “what is going on here??!!”, as we spoke.

          I got the impression he felt the same, but I remembered him saying something about a fianceé on the phone. Funny enough, he said they had broken up the night before (I know, I know…) and asked me out.

          He was probably 5’9″ or so, olive complexion, dark hair and eyes. Nothing at all wrong with any of that but that’s not typically my “type”. He wasn’t conventionally handsome either, though. To this day, I have no idea WHY he had that effect on me.

           

        11. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          Wow, you have really given this a lot of thought!  🙂

          Some women are primarily visual (shock horror – some women are as visual as men!). So if you can meet her threshold of attractiveness she should feel chemistry – even if the guy doesn’t do anything else at all. So by simply maximizing his appearance a guy can create instant chemistry with a certain percentage of women (visually motivated women who are at his physical attractiveness level or lower).

          Yes

          I’m a pianist in my spare time so a short performance, circumstances permitting (i.e. if there was a handy piano available) proved very effective in this regard (I know that’s corny, but hey, a guy’s gotta play to his strengths!).

          Very smooth!   🙂

          It’s kinda a whole package thing – you gotta hit as many triggers as quickly and as subtly as possible, all through seemingly entirely normal banter.

          Yes, I see where you are going with this and I’m sure it works well in certain instances but in a quick interaction with someone it may be difficult to access her what her triggers are. For me, I feel the instant attraction either by looking at the man and being around him (he doesn’t have to speak or try to work it; it’s instantaneous) or … in rare instances, he does or says something that gets my attention. For example, I passed a guy at work one day and he rather loudly shouted, “Hey! You don’t even say hello?!” I hadn’t acknowledged him (we’d chatted briefly before) because he was talking to someone and I didn’t want to interrupt. But I thought that was bold and kind of primal and it got my attention. How he would have known to do that I don’t know.

        12. Emily, the original

          KK,

          I felt extreme chemistry for this guy and I could not make sense of it at all. As a matter of fact, I remember thinking, “what is going on here??!!”, as we spoke.

          He was probably 5’9″ or so, olive complexion, dark hair and eyes. Nothing at all wrong with any of that but that’s not typically my “type”. He wasn’t conventionally handsome either, though. To this day, I have no idea WHY he had that effect on me.

          That’s exactly what I was talking about and have tried to explain before. That kind of attraction has little to do with what the person looks like.

        13. Shaukat

          Hi Tom,

          Your impromptu piano performance is a great story! I’ve always been a bit of an agnostic on the issue of whether infusing dates with that kind of creativity makes much of a difference in the early stages, but maybe it’s worth trying.

          I agree that it’s important to analyze your date and calibrate accordingly, but I’ve always felt that a large component of chemistry is established within the first 15-20 minutes by the factors I mentioned earlier, so not sure how much room there is for that type of analysis and calibration on the first date.

          @KK,

          Just wanted to let you know that I’m pretty much in full agreement with your response to DeeGee regarding his ex. See, we can reach some common ground after all:)

      2. 21.1.2
        Jeremy

         

        I see where you are coming from, Emily, but I still think that this is just a yearning for dopamine.  An inability to recognize that the intense emotion that one feels in the present simply will not continue far into the future.  That dopamine is an excellent reason to get into a short-term relationship but a lousy reason to enter a marriage.

         

        Compare and contrast this with an actual change in rational, long-term priorities: The woman who valued stability and dad-potential in a man in her early 30s (because she wanted to start a family), who later comes to value romanticism and spontaneity once the kids get older.  She wonders what she ever saw in her stodgy, predictable husband.  And because she doesn’t intend to have any more kids, she is unlikely to ever again prioritize his stability and dependability as she once did.  Instead, she finds a man who is romantic and spontaneous, and will continue to value those traits until and unless her priorities change again.  It isn’t about dopamine and it isn’t short-term.  That’s a different situation than the one you describe, IMHO.

        1. Emily, the originala

          Jeremy,

          It isn’t about dopamine and it isn’t short-term.  That’s a different situation than the one you describe, IMHO.

          But wouldn’t she feel at least some of the dopamine high in the beginning if she is a woman looking for romance and spontaneity?  Or are you saying the dopamine high is different than chemistry?

      3. 21.1.3
        Emily, the original

        GoWiththeFlow,

        A big hint that a person is a relationship adrenaline junkie is that they will love bomb you at the very beginning. 

        Or they are really anxious and are trying to create an instant relationship. Someone who comes at me like a freight train turns me off. It always feels like their ardor has much less to do with me than with them. It doesn’t feel genuine.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          If you are attracted to them and they are CONFIDENT and love bomb, it’s a completely different experience that an anxious person who is love bombing in an attempt to convince you to be attracted to them.

        2. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          If you are attracted to them and they are CONFIDENT and love bomb, it’s a completely different experience that an anxious person who is love bombing in an attempt to convince you to be attracted to them.

          I’ve only stuck around for love bombing once. In the very beginning, he didn’t do it but once things got more serious, I was barraged with calls, gifts, cards. He was mounting a campaign to win me over. The relationship lasted six months only because he lived about 8 hours away (I had met him initially when he lived near me) and I saw him only once a month. Had we lived in the same town, I wouldn’t have made it past a couple of dates. I’m not sure his lovebombing derived from confidence or anxiety, but it was, at least to me, not appealing.

      4. 21.1.4
        Jeremy

        Emily, I won’t/can’t answer for Tom, but the fact that the reaction is chemically-mediated does not mean that it doesn’t depend on an external stimulus.  Adrenaline, for example, is released physiologically due to external stimuli.  Once the stimulus happens, the pathway is activated predictably.  Dopamine is similar.  The pathway is the pathway, but the trigger varies.  Curious as to Tom’s methods, though.

        1. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          I won’t/can’t answer for Tom, but the fact that the reaction is chemically-mediated does not mean that it doesn’t depend on an external stimulus

          Yes, of course, there are external stimulus but why one person triggers it in you and another doesn’t is impossible to understand. I guess this depends, too, on how define attraction. How do you know if you are attracted to a woman? Do you feel it or do you just know it by sight? When I say that it’s physiologically based, I mean that the person has a physical affect on you — they make you nervous or giddy or you get charged in a way it takes you a while to come down off of the feeling after they leave. Of course, there are levels and degrees of this. That type of feeling I don’t believe you can create.

    2. 21.2
      Chance

      “I think I understand where you are coming from, and we are defining “hypergamy” differently, which is why we are disagreeing on whether it continues after marriage.”

       

      Agree that different views of the same term can make these types of discussions onerous.  SMV has a different meaning among different people, too.  Some view the term as being solely appearance-based, while others view it as relating to the overall attractiveness of a partner.

      1. 21.2.1
        Jeremy

        I agree, Chance, and that’s what is leading to the confusion IMHO.  Each woman will rate a given man’s SMV differently based on the calculus of her priorities at the time.  Unlike men, whose perception of SMV is largely appearance-based, women’s perception of SMV is influenced by whichever other factors she prioritizes as being sexually important to her.

         

        BTW, what did you think of Thinking Fast and Slow?  🙂

  22. 22
    Stacy2

    @Chance:

    “but men and women have a clear tendency to cheat in different ways because men are more likely to cheat in an “in addition to” fashion (i.e., stray), while women are more likely to cheat in an “instead of” fashion (i.e., trade up).  To me, that is about as clear of a manifestation of giving in to polygamous and hypergamous impulses as it can get.”

    I don’t think you really understand how women operate with respect to this whole “trading up” situation. We’ve heard from Evan above on this thread that it is “difficult” (sorry can’t find another word!) for him to stay faithful in a committed relationship, to the point where he actually limits his contacts with other women to remove the temptation. Frankly this was quite shocking for me to hear (I never realized that the drive to fuck everything that moves is so strong in men. I mean as a woman you kinda know this, but still). On the other hand, when I was married, I had zero desire to go and fuck some guy because he’s a CEO of a multi-billion dollar company while my ex is not. None, zero, zilch. And I actually interact with c-level executives in my industry daily, so this isn’t a thought experiment. At no point was I like “oh, this guy is single and runs the 2nd largest company in the sector, i may not contain myself if I go to dinner with him, jeez i better not go if my husband isn’t there” or something. So what I am saying is – no, as women we do NOT have those impulses to cheat or trade up if we’re otherwise satisfied in a relationship. Did I ultimately “trade up”? Hell yeah. Three months after my separation i started dating a vastly more successful individual, but the reason i left my husband was because he sucked, and our marriage was horrible, and I didn’t want to be with him anymore. I wasn’t thinking at the time “geez let me go find myself someone with higher status”. I was thinking “you suck and I am done here”.

    1. 22.1
      Stacy

      @Stacy2

      Exactly! And I don’t personally know any other woman who thinks otherwise – just waiting to trade up, and especially while married – totally ridiculous. And every woman who I know who has gotten a divorce – it was because of some pretty unforgivable and/or totally justifiable shit that occurred. Like you, I have never desired to fuck a more ‘viable’ candidate than my now ex husband simply because he was richer or better looking.

    2. 22.2
      Marika

      Exactly my experience, Stacy2.

      In my experience, women will put up with a lot before they finally pull the plug. This idea that we’re constantly assessing and reassessing our husband’s or partners strengths and weaknesses and comparing with other guys and if they put one foot out of line, or someone better comes along, we’re out the door – sorry, it just doesn’t ring true to me.

      At all.

      I put up with cheating, my ex buying big ticket items without even discussing them with me, gambling, him staying out all night etc etc and on it goes. Commitment, marriage, my vows, stability, love etc. were all far more important to me than ‘is this guy impressive enough for me’ or ‘are there better guys out there?’ (of course there were!). I also didn’t pull away in terms of intimacy, as Jeremy suggests.

      In fact, women who are in love and trying to make things work often feel more of a need to want to connect & be intimate with their partners.

      As I’ve said before, the problem with hypergamy, even if it’s real, is that some groups (and individuals) seem to see it as this overwhelming biological urge that we just can’t overcome, because we’re all either selfish, evil creatures, or slaves to our biology. That’s not the case. At least for me and every woman I’ve ever known.

      Women really aren’t that bad. And if it’s your experience that all women are that bad, it might be time to rethink your choice of partners.

  23. 23
    Jeremy

    Several female posters have written arguments against the notion that women are constantly looking to “trade-up.”  I 100% agree with them, and think that only the most myopic people actually believe that this happens in the majority, or that a woman’s “hypergamy” is constantly operating on a low-hum in her mind, ready to trade-up  in case her husband should suddenly stop satisfying her hypergamic desires.  Nonsense.

     

    This is different from a woman needing to respect the man she is with, and losing attraction to him if she loses respect for him.  This loss of respect does not necessarily drive her to trade-up – far more often it simply results in a decline in her sex drive and her willingness to put up with him, and may result in her seeing him as a burden or a child.  At that point, she will make a decision according to her personality – whether to leave him for another man, to leave him and not seek another man, or to continue putting up with him for the sake of the kids or the sunk-costs factor.  Women are not feral, reptilian-brain-driven creatures – they make rational choices.  But they need to respect their men to maintain attraction to them – and respect them specifically for the qualities that women view as important.  There it is, un-boxed, without the shit-storm of misogyny (thanks for the term, Allan).

    1. 23.1
      Tron Swanson

      With all due respect, Jeremy, that sounds like hypergamy by any other name. You’re basically admitting that women are hypergamous, but saying that the blame lies with men (for not measuring up), as opposed to women. I honestly wonder if women would support this concept if the name were changed and men were the ones that got blamed for it. “Look, you made me cheat on you! If you would’ve been a man, I wouldn’t have to have done that!”

      One of the things that scared me off from PUA/dread game stuff is how men are expected to be “on point” for their entire lives. Basically, if you show too much weakness or lose your edge, women will trade up. Now, that fits with what I’ve seen, but it doesn’t sound like any way to live. That sort of existence just sounds stressful and grueling.

      1. 23.1.1
        Stacy2

        Basically, if you show too much weakness or lose your edge, women will trade up

        Welcome to adulthood. Yes, in real life you’re expected to perform. If you don’t people will discard you. If you don’t perform you’ll get fired from your job, if you don’t pay rent you’ll be evicted and if you don’t act like a good partner your girlfriend will dump you. This is called being an adult, not being a man, and this is not a gender specific issue.

      2. 23.1.2
        Jeremy

        Ultimately, who CARES where the blame lies, Tron?  If a woman ages poorly and her husband loses attraction to her, is it her fault for aging or his fault for being shallow?  Or is it really neither, and just a pair of adults who should try to make the best of what they have?

         

        If a woman loses respect for a man because of his poor behavior, she should communicate her needs with him.  But ultimately, following her directives may not jive with HIS needs.  Whose fault is that?  Does it matter?

         

        The point of what I’ve written thus far is not to lay blame.  It is to improve understanding.  So that if a man notices his wife losing attraction he can get a sense of what he can DO!  And if a woman finds herself losing respect (and hence attraction), she can identify the forces at play and determine whether her expectations are fair and reasonable, and if not then she can utilize some of the self-discipline that GWTF mentioned in her post.  The problem is that without at least the understanding of the forces at play here, people think they are dealing with nebulous factors, they may mis-appropriate blame, and focus on the wrong thing to make it better.  A woman who loses attraction to her husband because he spends no quality time with her will not be impressed by his going to the gym more.

        1. Kenley

          I have been reading all the posts so far and other than what you have said about knowing the reason for wanting to leave might give men and women some insight on how to work through their issues, I don’t really know why hypergamy matters.   I also am not so certain why women are taking offense if it is true.   If we are leaving someone, aren’t we all trying to find someone who does a better job of meeting our needs?  Where is that shame in that?  I guess I’m just not getting what all the fuss is about.

          In regards to your comment about men feeling blindsided by women leaving then, my experience has been that the men haven’t really been blindsided, they just haven’t absorbed how unhappy their women have been.    I have been in 3 long term relationships.  Each time I was unhappy, I told my boyfriends at the time that I was unhappy and I talked to them about what I needed and if they would be willing to give me what I needed.   I did not request anything unreasonable or crazy.   Two of the three guys tried to meet my needs for about a week or two.  The third didn’t try at all.  So, I broke up with them.  And in all three instances, the guys were shocked and stunned that I left.  And, I would respond, how can you be shocked, I told you how unhappy I have been and I told you what I needed.  And, in all three instances, their responses were essentially, “I’m happy so you should be happy.”   They just could not understand that if they were feeling so happy in the relationship,  how was it possible that I wasn’t.

          By the way, when I left all my relationships, there was never another man in the wings.  Indeed, the only way that my first boyfriend would leave me alone was for me to tell him that I found someone else even though I hadn’t.   He just couldn’t accept the idea that I would rather be alone than with him.

        2. Tron Swanson

          Jeremy,

          I care, thanks for asking.

          Stacy2,

          Yeah, life is like that…at work. I’d rather not have to deal with “you’re only good because you’re useful” in my personal life. Sounds like a pretty miserable existence.

  24. 24
    Allan

    Just on the hypergamy issue and the idea that women aren’t ‘en masse’ trading in their men for a better model, and therefore it doesn’t exist – consider this: the commonest theme in divorce is male redundancy. Now I’m sure we can confabulate some scenario wherein a recently redundant man loses his sense of self worth and confidence and pushes his wife away and he’s to blame for everything – but lets be honest; when a man loses his job and his woman leaves him, this is hypergamy distilled and squared; she will take the risk of middle aged singledom over an unemployed man.

    1. 24.1
      DeeGee

      Allan – Agreed.  I believe the fact that the majority of those filing for divorce are women confirms it.  Because the reasons those women use for divorce is also when distilled down and cut through the BS legal terms is hypergamy.

      1. 24.1.1
        GoWiththeFlow

        Oh yeah, total hypergamy when the wife is the one who files the papers because her soon to be ex is too busy with his mistress, is in jail, too drunk or strung out on drugs, or has simply disappeared and cannot be bothered with such legalities.  There are all kinds of reasons couples divorce.  Who files the papers doesn’t necessarily correlate with who physically or emotionally left the marriage.

        1. Chance

          Hi GWTF,

           

          I strongly disagree with the implications of this comment.  While it may not have been your intent, the comment implies that women initiate divorces the majority of the time because men are just bigger screw-ups, which is far more sexist than anything that the guys have said about hypergamy here IMHO.  While I don’t think this fact is due to hypergamy, I believe there has been a study performed that showed divorce initiation rates are around 50/50 in states where women are not automatically assumed to be granted primary physical custody of the children.  This makes some sense when I think of the common occurrence of men who remain in an unhappy marriage until their younger child turns 18 because they don’t want to be shut out of their child’s lives to any extent.

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Chance,

          The first sentence was an intentionally ridiculously exaggerated statement in response to DeeGee’s ridiculous exaggeration that since women file a majority of divorces, this proves hypergamy.

    2. 24.2
      Stacy

      @Allan

      Huh? Again, I swear I think these scenarios exist only in men’s heads. Most people aka women who divorce cite domestic violence or abuse or infidelity. I personally haven’t even run into any women who will just up and leave their husband because he is unemployed. Now if he just never wants to get a job or decides to mooch off of her forever, then that is another story. But I think simply saying that a women would try to trade up for these reasons simply trivializes the real reasons MOST people divorce. Where is this data? In fact, according to statistics, 55% of divorces is because of infidelity and 73% because of lack of commitment. 25% is because of abuse, etc. So who are these women that exists in droves that divorce simply because their husbands got in a tight spot with a job? And because men are willing to stay in bad marriages (yeah, even when they cheat on a regular, they don’t mind staying married and being fine with it) proves nothing.

        1. Callie

          Allan – Nowhere in that article does it state that this is commonest theme in divorce, it just says that it does up the chances. One would assume many things up such chances as well, such as infidelity and abuse. Further it doesn’t actually state that this is just the decision of women. In fact the article goes so far as to state: “In addition to upping the chances their wives would leave them, unemployed men themselves were more likely to initiate divorce – even if they reported being happy in their marriage – than guys with jobs.”
          So yeah. Definitely no evidence this is the leading cause of divorce, nor that women are the ones driving this particular cause. All that we know is when a man loses a job it is more likely than when a woman loses a job that divorce might happen. Not that it is the most likely reason for divorce, nor that it is women who make the decision to initiate divorce when it does happen.
           
           

  25. 25
    Jeremy

    Kenley, you wrote, “I’m not sure why hypergamy matters.”  I’ll try to explain, because from a male perspective, it is VERY important.  It is what drives men to the manosphere by the thousands.

     

    Imagine if women everywhere sought out relationship advice from men about what men really want.  And imagine if the prevailing advice from men was this: “if you are in relationship trouble, if he seems unsatisfied, just make him a bowl of Jello.”  That’s it.  Simple, really, make him Jello.  So women try this out – their husband gets stressed, gets upset, loses interest in them, so they make a great big bowl of Jello.  Husband eats the Jello, says thanks, but it definitely doesn’t make him horny.  Or perhaps he agrees to have sex with her to say thanks, but isn’t really into it.  So the woman tells her male advisors – “I tried the Jello idea, but it didn’t work.”  So the advice given is “make him more Jello, but this time put some floating strawberries in it.  That’ll work.”  And eventually, in spite of all the Jello, the guy leaves her.  And all the advisors say, “Well, he obviously wasn’t a normal or quality guy but don’t worry, the next guy you find will appreciate you for your Jello making skills.”

     

    I know this sounds ridiculous and truth be told, I’m being a bit facetious with the Jello idea, but it illustrates a point – a point I really wish more women would understand.  Men around the world have asked women for relationship advice about what women really want, and most of the time the advice women give them is WRONG.  Wrong, even when given by the woman herself about what she herself wants and needs!  Because so many women don’t understand that although they definitely need comfort qualities from a man (to respect her, to listen to her, to value and prioritize her), they also need to RESPECT him as a man.  And many women refuse to admit to themselves and to others what they actually perceive those qualities to be!  And because they won’t admit them, they tell men to focus on comfort qualities, which don’t make them feel aroused.

     

    When the men on this site are telling the women that some Red Pill advice is helpful, this is what they are talking about.  I was shocked that everything I thought I was doing right was actually causing my wife to be LESS attracted to me, not more, because my bending over backward to satisfy her was causing her to lose respect for me.  What she needed was for me to tell her “no” a few times, but she didn’t know that.  She couldn’t acknowledge it.  But it worked.  That’s why it matters.

    1. 25.1
      Callie

      I guess the thing is though . . . that’s not hypergamy. And it’s not unique to women. While men might not find the same things to respect in women that women do in men, they still need to respect their partners as well.

      I think the idea that we all (men and women both) don’t necessarily know what we want really, and sometimes can’t articulate it is very important. But this idea that it’s only women who can’t, and that in essence women are the only ones looking for a partner they respect etc becomes dangerous. As we see here even, so many men assume that women are extra shallow and horrible and honestly some of the most disgusting things evidently and most of such men cite hypergamy as the reason (this isn’t to say there aren’t women here too who also have horrible and shallow and disgusting opinions about men for their own unique reasons). I think the constant focus on hypergamy is unhelpful and quite honestly untrue. There isn’t actually scientific evidence to back it up.

      So by all means let us discuss this concept of respect, of what that even means, how much of it is influenced by a systemically sexist society (that does also influence women), how much of it might be genetic, how much of it varies from human to human (I for one give no fucks about how much money a guy is earning, but I do need him to be pursuing something he’s passionate about and being pragmatic about his every day needs as well). But I honestly don’t believe framing this as a conversation about hypergamy is helpful or productive.

      And further, considering how many women have been hurt by men who believe that concept makes women horrible people, and the horrifically nasty stuff that is generally said by the kinds of men who use that term on the internet, even if it turns out to be scientifically supported, I still don’t think, if one is attempting to communicate effectively with women, that one ought to use the word. It is too loaded, and too often used in really nasty contexts. And many women will get defensive about the word itself and not move past it to the larger point you are trying to make. It’s a bit like the words patriarchy and privilege for some men. Those words might describe something helpful, but ultimately it makes so many men defensive because of how they have been used by some as an attack, that I find it best, when talking with men, to put those words aside in order to effectively communicate.

      1. 25.1.1
        Jeremy

        Callie, your points about wording are well-founded.  I hear you on this and I will continue to call out those who twist reality into misogynistic fantasies.

        But your point that, While men might not find the same things to respect in women that women do in men, they still need to respect their partners as well” is where I think the misunderstanding lies.  Men would be WISE to respect their partners, men SHOULD respect their partners for love to develop and for a relationship to blossom….but men do NOT need to respect their partners in order to be attracted to them.  That IS unique to women.  And whether or not we call it a certain name, it is a fact that men need to be aware of.  Regardless of its etiology (genetic vs environmental), men need to know that women need to respect them to be attracted to them – and to respect them specifically for certain traits that vary from woman to woman, but have some consistent groupings within the population.  This seems obvious to most women but it is not obvious to men.  The “nice guy” who tries to attract women by bending over backwards for her is not necessarily a manipulative asshole, contrary to current popular thinking.  He is a man who is mistakenly trying to woo a woman using a strategy that he has been taught “should” be effective.  That strategy is wrong.

        1. Callie

          It’s tough because I’ve known guys who’ve broken up with their female partners because they didn’t respect them. So I mean . . . I think my point about there being a different reason as to why men respect women could still stand. It might not be respect for the same things, but if a man is disgusted by his partner (even as he finds her physically attractive) I have seen time and time again him end the relationship over it.

          Also I should add, the nice guy thing? That’s something of men’s invention. Women say they want nice guys and they mean it. But their definition for nice is very different how the men who call themselves such define it. Women want kind, considerate, respectful. They don’t want a doormat, a man with no opinion, someone who sucks up to them all the time. And the latter is how many men of a certain group have decided to define nice despite the desires of women.

          So I totally agree with you that such dudes need to change up their strategy, but I don’t wholly support the notion that it is women saying they want one thing but actually needing another. I think it’s a communication breakdown between what women mean and what men think women mean.

          (this basically comes down to bad communication ultimately. And is why the idea that the problem is women don’t know what they want is flawed for me. Women know what they want, they just don’t realise that men think they mean they want something else. A little more specificity beyond “nice” would be most helpful for them I think 🙂 ).

           

          (as to your “he’s not necessarily a manipulative asshole contrary to current popular thinking” – that’s not the issue with Nice Guys (very different from nice guys). That issue is with a specific subset of men who aren’t actually very nice, trying to put on the costume of nice to get what they want and then getting angry with women when it doesn’t work. Actual nice guys who are too much of a pushover etc, that’s a whole different group of people. Flawed as well, but not malicious, just misguided. I think it would be wise to separate out those two groups from each other.)

        2. Jeremy

          One note on “respect” – I think you were bang-on, Callie, when you wrote that part of the problem is communication.  When I discuss respect, I am referring specifically to respecting a person for having “boundaries”, for saying no to their partner rather than acquiescing to all of their partner’s requests.  I am not referring to respect for a values-system or life choices or that kind of thing.  I agree that men can and do break up with women they don’t find worthy of some kind of respect (she has disgusting habits, she has incompatible lifestyle goals, etc).  I am talking about respecting boundaries, specifically.  And you are right, that is why the word “nice” is so unclear.  Women believe that niceness involves being kind by acting within boundaries.  Men believe being nice involves not having boundaries.

        3. Stacy2

          .but men do NOT need to respect their partners in order to be attracted to them

          If by attracted you mean – wanting to fuck them, I believe it is true. It appears men in general need very little for that. If she has a pulse they’re good (and for some perverts even that isn’t a total deal breaker). However, look around and see if you can find a single decent man who chose to marry and have a family with a woman he doesn’t respect.

        4. Jeremy

          That isn’t the point, Stacy, of course decent men will respect the women they choose to marry.  The point isn’t that men don’t or shouldn’t respect women, it’s that men don’t understand that women need to respect THEM.

        5. KK

          Jeremy,

          “The point isn’t that men don’t or shouldn’t respect women, it’s that men don’t understand that women need to respect THEM”.

          I think you’re getting to the heart of the matter. That’s one area where there seems to be major misunderstandings between the sexes.

          I think if you were to ask women if they thought men KNEW that women need to respect / admire men, most women would give you a resounding “YES”. You’re saying men don’t know this. I know I thought men already knew this. More proof that assumptions cause so much misundertanding.

           

        6. Jeremy

          And not just that they don’t know it, KK, but they don’t know what the respect should be FOR.  I thought my wife would respect me because I gave her what she asked for.  Had no clue that she would respect me more if I didn’t.  Occasionally, and depending on what it was.

        7. Marika

          Jeremy

          Thank you for explaining this so eloquently. Much of it certainly rings true for me. I can never make it work with the unsure, timid guys who can’t make a decision or stand up for themselves. I would caution you to tread lightly in thinking all women operate this way, though, as my sister and a few of my friends are married to guys with no boundaries who never say no to anything. I’ve often wondered why it doesn’t bother them, but it doesn’t at all. Their husbands make less money than them, share childraring or do the bulk of it – have none of this discernable ‘masculinity’ – and their partners are happy.

          Which brings me to your question, Kenley. The reason I find this discussion to be problematic, is that it leads to this idea, as is rampant in MGTOW circles, that ‘all women are like that’. Virgin, prostitute, Buddhist nun, straight women, lesbians, married women, widows, single women, billions of people, we all are driven by this exact same urge and operate the exact same way with men because we have a vagina.

          If you believe that, I have some snake oil to sell you..

        8. Stacy2

          @ Jeremy:

          of course decent men will respect the women they choose to marry

          Eh, no i think there’s a quite significant distinction here, not only will they respect the women they chose to marry, they will chose to marry them because the respect them (and are of course also sexually attracted to them). You have been trying to argue that men have no use for respect for their partners and I think it is far from the truth (for long term relationships of course)

        9. Jeremy

          Stacy, you wrote, You have been trying to argue that men have no use for respect for their partners and I think it is far from the truth (for long term relationships of course)”.  That is most definitely NOT what I have been arguing.  I wrote (clearly, I think) that men’s ATTRACTION to women does not depend on respect.  I also wrote that love is quite another matter, as is a desire to build a family and raise children together. It is the difference between System 1 thinking and System 2 thinking (if you’ve ever read Thinking Fast and Slow) – intuitive attraction versus thoughtful, deliberate relationship-building.  Both of these depend on respect from a female perspective.  Only one does from the male.  

        10. Callie

          Jeremy – ah I see. By your definition of respect then I think we are very much on the same page.

          I honestly don’t have much more to say except that I’ve been heartily agreeing with your further posts to others in this thread 🙂 .

    2. 25.2
      Chance

      Hi Jeremy,

       

      I agree with your comment.  I think that women do understand, on some level of consciousness (if they aren’t already fully aware), that they want a man who is masculine, dominant, and independent.  However, I think that women can’t tell men (especially their partners) that this is what they want because it defeats the purpose.  Women want a man to be truly masculine, dominant, and independent without having to be told or it being explained to him.  If these traits and behaviors have to be explained to a man, then he isn’t the man for them because he is essentially just acting the part.  So, women wait and hope that men just “get it”.  Even our mothers and sisters are in on this.

       

      As it relates to the Kahneman book, it’s in my stack.  I’ve been reading some baseball sabermetrics books that I bought at the same time as of late since it’s the season.  However, I think I’ll pick it up tonight.  My time would be much better spent reading that than spending any more time hanging around these parts.

      1. 25.2.1
        Emily, the original

        Chance,

        Women want a man to be truly masculine, dominant, and independent without having to be told or it being explained to him.

        Agreed. It’s like having to tell someone he is calling too much or coming on too strong. Once you have to do that, the whole thing is kind of dead in the water.

    3. 25.3
      Adam

      Jeremy, this is another really good post. From some of the responses though it still seems like some posters aren’t quite on the same page in the use of the word respect. Allow me to attempt to clarify a little further?:)

      Women need to respect their man in a different way to how men need to respect their partners.

      When Jeremy says men don’t need to respect their partners in the way women do, he doesn’t mean they can actively disrespect their partners and be happy. A poster said women don’t want a man who is a ‘doormat’. Bingo! Most, if not all women would agree that doormat is a pejorative term for a man. Now, here’s the difference: no man would ever call a woman a doormat. No man would ever lose attraction for his wife because she didn’t vociferously or aggressively enough stand up for herself in a domestic squabble. Now, this is not the same as men being actively attracted to a female ‘doormat’, they simply do not negatively judge overly accomodating behavior in the same way.

      Callie said: “And it’s not unique to women. While men might not find the same things to respect in women that women do in men, they still need to respect their partners as well.”

      This concept we are getting at IS unique to women. Men respect their partners in the way we should all respect everybody, ie just treating people nicely and with dignity and not being disrespectful – every woman here would surely agree that she wants to feel a more powerful respect than that for her man. Jeremy’s point about couples therapy really hit home for me as well. The info they are providing is in good faith; I’m sure when they ask women what they want they say ‘a man who listens’, so thats what they tell men to do. But as many of us have found out, it just doesn’t work; the harder we try to do what we’re told women want from us the less they respect us. Its no wonder these confusions arise though – look at the semantic juggling we’ve gotten into over the word ‘respect’ lol.

       

      1. 25.3.1
        Jeremy

        Thank you, Adam, you get it.  I think you clarified it better than I did.  Hopefully people will understand now.

      2. 25.3.2
        Jeremy

        And, as an addendum regarding couples’ counselling…Sometimes a woman who loses attraction to her husband knows exactly what the problem is (as opposed to other situations I’ve described where she really doesn’t understand herself).  And she may communicate her needs to her husband, only to find that his fulfilling them does not bring back her desire.  This will often lead her to seek out more reasons, create a list of more needs for him to fulfill, and create a cycle of her own dissatisfaction and his confusion.  Neither will realize that the problem is a lack of respect.  If she sees him as trying to fulfill her needs, he will activate her comfort center….but if she sees him as following her instructions and supplicating to her, she will lose respect for him and hence attraction for him (ie. de-activate her arousal center).  And she won’t know why, because after all, here he is doing everything she told him to, and both people may mistakenly believe their relationship is doomed.   But it may not be…he just needs to learn what she wants without being told.  As Chance and Emily wrote, if she has to tell him what to do, he has already lost the respect she needs to have.

  26. 26
    Persephone

    FYI about The Red Pill, since everyone is so keen on discussing it.  In case you did not know.

    It is an actual community–and a very dark one at that. I was a Matrix fan for years, but this philosophy ruined it for me.   It started on Reddit.  It is steered by the Alt Right followers, and it was started to promote the spread of misogyny.  It also seeks to take the values of our Western Society which are marginally used ion modern times and put them on steroids.  (Those values being, in my opinion, 1. Colonialism, or the idea that our culture is better so we have to strong arm everyone else until they become like us, even if by bombs and guns;  2.  Patriarchy, or male dominance;  3.  Might means right;  4.  Rich means more intelligence; Misogyny, or that women are stupid, all think alike, and men cannot reason with them; 5. Western Europeans are superior genetically, and only by accepting this can those without Western European DNA ever advance.)

    Red Pillers can never be real friends with women, and still adhere to Red Pilldom. It is emasculating to them. It is the entire effort to remake Western Society, and kill off non-Western society. It is gross.  One reason I rarely find men from a Western society I want to date.  Since my divorce, I only know One (1) white man I would date.  The rest are indigenous people from other countries.  They re well, well, well worth it.  It opened my eyes to many more truths than the Red Pillers can ever manufacture.  One of those is how manufactured many of the concepts on gender are.

    Even, Please do not be upset with me for saying this, but your dating advice is not universal. It only fits within the concept of the mainstream Westernized American culture.  And you do that quite well. I am a great fan of yours and refer people to you constantly.  Those who can understand other cultures do not need red or blue pills.  The Red Pillers are merely being deceived by their own drug.  The ones who step off the Western Culture merry-go-round are merely enlightened and rise above all that.

    You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember…all Im offering is the truth, nothing more. ~ Morpheus~

    1. 26.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      I’m not red pill, nor do I think my dating advice is universal. I’d like to think I’m a good resource for women who want to understand men and find love and while dating practices aren’t always valid across continents, much of the masculine/feminine dynamic IS valid.

  27. 27
    John

    Chance said:

    Women want a man to be truly masculine, dominant, and independent without having to be told or it being explained to him. 

    Exactly. If she has to tell you to be those things, you haven’t become a man and are still a boy or even more accurately you are an “unfinished man.”

    It is the same reason women can’t stand a man who still lives at home beyond a socially acceptable timeframe. It proves he is not a grown man and that he is still dependent on his parents and how he can’t  take care of himself, her and their offspring.

    Our society does not encourage men to grow up. Also older men are not mentoring young men because a lot of older guys are teenagers in adult bodies.

    The old tribal societies initiated their men. We have lost that in our modern civilization. The initiation of young men ultimately broke there bond with their mothers that they carried from infancy that no longer served the boys.

    When the bond with their mother was severed, the boys could become men and really be with their wives as men and not want to go back to mommy.

    There is a lot more to male initiation, but one of the ultimate goals is to break the bond between mother and son so he can become a man and not make his wife his mother.

    If you are interested in a more in depth explanation check out “Iron John” by Robert Bly.

    1. 27.1
      Tron Swanson

      John,

      Personally, I don’t care about society’s definition of genders. Women are no longer limited by their old gender roles, and I don’t see any reason why men shouldn’t join them. Once upon a time, “real women” didn’t work or stand up to men or have children outside of marriage. Women got tired of that and changed it. Now, some women are modern, some are traditional, and most are somewhere in-between. But they’re still women. The truth is, gender is a biological issue, not a cultural one. I’m a man because of that magic Y chromosome. If I don’t fit your personal definition of a man, well, that’s more than fine with me. I spent too much of my life trying to be a traditionally-masculine person, and it made me absolutely miserable, because that’s not who I am at all. Straight, yes, but traditional, no.

      1. 27.1.1
        Stacy2

        Tron, you’re a definition of a cliche of a man-child. You want to get what you want (get laid, have intimacy) but you don’t want to give anything in return. You want to be loved unconditionally even when you act shitty. These are all the hallmarks of a mother-child relationship. Functioning adults understand that they need to “work” for everything, including affection.

        1. Tron Swanson

          Actually, I’m willing to give an equal amount in return…but I’ve found that women require much more, so I don’t bother.

          As for unconditional love…yeah, there’s a gender that expects love despite drama, but it ain’t mine. Forget love, I’d settle for sane, equitable behavior.

  28. 28
    John

    Hi Tron

    Your magical Y chromosome makes you a male, not a man.

    From reading your past posts, I’ve gathered that your really not interested in being a man. You seem interested in only getting laid. That is your prerogative, but it ain’t manly.

     

    1. 28.1
      Tron Swanson

      You’re quite correct, John. I’m interested in being me–I’m not interested in fitting into any society or culture’s definition of my gender. And thank you for calling me “not manly,” as that’s the highest compliment that I can think of.

      1. 28.1.1
        Buck25

        Tron,

        That’s all well and good, if you think that’s “the highest compliment I can think of “(to you).  In that case, I have to wonder why,  both when I made a similar observation and now, when John made the one you responded to, you seem upset, somehow.

        1. Tron Swanson

          I’m just sick of dealing with it, Buck. I simply don’t get along with my own gender, as I’m not like 99% of you, apparently. Granted, I’d rather focus on the gender that I’m sexually attracted to, anyway. If you think I’m low-effort when it comes to women, well, let me tell you that I’ve had one male friendship in my life, and I haven’t seen him in about fifteen years.

  29. 29
    Marika

    Yet Another Guy

    Your comments about male/female education levels & dating may be a bit outdated, I think.

    Every man I’ve dated since starting my online dating journey a few years ago has had a lower educational level than me. Most of those dating experiences happened because the man contacted me first.

    I have a Master degree. 90% of men who contact me online have lower educational levels than me (which is just a product of the fact that the majority of the population don’t have MAs). Around 70% of the men who contact me have high school as their highest qualification. The difference in education levels doesn’t stop them from ‘hitting on me’, as you put it, at all. Similar situation with my friends who are dating online, all of whom are tertiary educated.

    I used to want to date men who had completed tertiary studies(a diploma or undergrad degree) as I thought we’d have more in common. I never, ever expected them to have a postgraduate degree or higher. I’m not willing to limit my search to the relatively low number of people with higher degrees. So I’ve always taken it as given that I’d probably end up dating someone with a lower education level. Which doesn’t bother me at all.

    Since following Evan I’ve taken it further than that. As Evan has repeatedly said, things like education level aren’t a good predictor of how good a partner someone is going to be. So I’ve opened myself up to considering all levels of education, including high school.

    Perhaps the friends you are referring to got together years ago when things were different. Otherwise, I’m not sure where you get the idea that men are only contacting women with lower or the same qualifications as them.

    Probably because you can’t know what it’s like to be a woman on a dating site.

    1. 29.1
      Yet Another Guy

      @Marika

      I never claimed the reverse pairing did not exist.  I claimed that men generally do not seek women who have greater educational attainment levels.   That is a demonstrable fact.  Does a female graduate (a.k.a. post-graduate) degree holder have to date a mn with a lower educational attainment level from time to time? Absolutely!  A higher percentage of women hold graduate degrees in the United States than men, and men routinely engage in social hypogamy in order to get laid or date up an SMV level or two looks-wise.

      1. 29.1.1
        Marika

        YAG,

        I was replying to this comment:

        Heck, men who hold an undergraduate degree generally know better than to attempt to hit on a woman who holds a graduate degree

        As a woman who holds a graduate degree, I can absolutely assure you that’s not the case. Men from all education levels routinely ‘hit on’ me on dating sites. And my friends.

        And why shouldn’t they? You don’t need a degree to be a good boyfriend.

  30. 30
    Adrian

    Hi Jeremy,

    I would like for you to explain some of the things you have mentioned on this post so that I may gain a better understanding .

     

    Jeremy said, “Men around the world have asked women for relationship advice about what women really want, and most of the time the advice women give them is WRONG.  Wrong, even when given by the woman herself about what she herself wants and needs!” (post #25)

    1). In your opinion Jeremy what are some examples of wrong advice men receive from women about dating and attraction?

     

    Jeremy said, ” And whether or not we call it a certain name, it is a fact that men need to be aware of…men need to know that women need to respect them to be attracted to them(post #25.1.1)

    2). In your opinion Jeremy what are the top things men need to know about creating attraction in women that they don’t know… besides she has to respect him?

    1. 30.1
      Jeremy

      Hi Adrian.  I’ll answer your first question, though please remember that my advice is better suited for relationships/marriages than dating.  I haven’t dated in years, and I don’t miss it.

      The majority of relationship advice for men involves providing what women perceive as comfort qualities.  Listen to her, prioritize her, romance her, communicate with her.  The problem with this advice is that it does not address what the man in question wants.  Does he want to make the woman feel comfortable, or does he want to make her feel aroused (ie. increase passion).  If the former, the advice is good.  If the latter, the advice is not good.  It is as though the women providing this advice ignore the question “how can I make her feel passion?” and replace it with the question “what would I like my BF, to whom I’m already attracted, to do to make me feel super-happy in my relationship with him?”  Very different question!  It’s not that men shouldn’t strive to make their women feel comfortable (forget the manosphere advice to “kill the beta”), but they should evoke certain qualities based on the desired response ratio, if that makes sense to you.

      The other bit of bad advice involves communication.  The advice is that if a relationship is in trouble, you need to ask the woman what she wants and do what she says.  This advice hits near the mark, yet somehow misses it completely.  Best to know your wife/GF very well and give her what she wants without her having to ask.  If she asks for it, it immediately loses half its value (eg. if she asks you to buy her flowers and you do it, how happy with the flowers do you think she’ll be?).  And if you must ask her what she wants (because you just don’t know), listen respectfully, use language and body language to show her that you love her……and only do what she wants if you think it is reasonable.  If you don’t think it is reasonable, refuse her gently, firmly and with an explanation.  And she will desire you more for your refusal than your capitulation.  And she will respect you more now that she knows what you want than she would if she imposed her desire on you.  And she may be pissed off at you temporarily because she didn’t get what she asked for, but she’ll be extra passionate with you later as long as you remained kind while maintaining your boundaries.

      And every woman reading that last part will think “isn’t that obvious?”  And every man reading it will silently reply “no”.

    2. 30.2
      Jeremy

      And as for your second question, Adrian, I’m hardly an expert.  Read what Tom10 wrote above.  But IME, there are 4 qualities that lead to arousal much of the time:

      1) Passion – talk about something you are passionate about and let your passion shine through.  She will take that as a heuristic for how passionate you can be about her

      2) Confidence – pick a restaurant and go there confidently.  And even if the food sucks, don’t snivel or apologize for picking it.  Be secure in the choices you made for the date.  Look in her eyes (but don’t stare creepily).  Smile and don’t be self-conscious.  She will take your confidence as a heuristic for your proficiency at providing her whatever it is she wants – whether excitement, a secure relationship, or being good in bed.  If you are confident she will believe you can give her these things until you prove otherwise.

      3) Humor – be funny, if you can.  Women want to see that you are a happy person, not a miserable person, and that you can make them happy too.  Being funny is also a heuristic for status.

      4) (and this one may be debatable) – leave a little something imperfect in yourself to give her the idea that she can help you become the amazing man she sees you could be with her feminine help.  Leave your shirt partially un-tucked, or one area of your hair slightly messy.  Others may disagree with this, but I’ve found that if a woman thinks you have amazing quality, she often is even more attracted to you if she thinks she can make you even better.

      YMMV, and all of these assume you are fit, well-dressed, and have taken care of your grooming and hygiene needs.

      1. 30.2.1
        Marika

        One to three are spot on for me, Jeremy.

        This may be a cultural thing, but coming from a culture where men love their t-shirts and shorts, I would steer clear of number 4, and replace it with being emotionally ‘imperfect’/vulnerable.

        Not as in confessing your previous drug addiction on date 1, but share something that makes you emotionally vulnerable and that will draw on her nurturing side. For instance, I went on a lovely date last night with a man who confessed that his divorce blindsided him and that for a year afterwards he was a mess. May sound like a downer, but it was actually very attractive (to me, anyway). Especially given that it was three years down the track, so it’s not like he was still a mess and trying to date.

        He also shared a funny story about helping his 8 year old daughter do her hair when she stays at his place (and having no idea what to do!). A woman picturing a man trying to braid his daughter’s hair who may just need a little help…awww!!

        Jeremy, oh wise one (you’re becoming the new Karl R), I know you haven’t dated in a while, but what would be the top four things you’d advise women to do on dates (given how spot on you were in reverse)?

        1. Stacy2

          I agree with Marika on the #4. Not all women like a fixer upper.

        2. KK

          Stacy2,

          Agreed. I’d say MOST women don’t want a “fixer upper”. But I think Marika and Jeremy are both on to something which is a little bit different (or more subtle) than that. Marika made an excellent point about vulnerability (vs physicality) and Jeremy’s original comment… “give her the idea that she can help you become the amazing man she sees you could be with her feminine help”… has quite a bit of merit to it, I believe. 

          I think the idea that a man has it all together and has this great fulfilling life when you first meet him is great, in theory. But if he isn’t missing anything, what would make you any more valuable to him than any other woman?

          I’ll give an example from one relationship. When we first met, he certainly seemed like he had it all together, but it wasn’t until he trusted me enough to open up to me about certain aspects of his life that were less than perfect, that my feelings for him deepened.

          In one of those conversations he said he had never felt truly loved and accepted by any woman in his life. Ever. That one conversation changed how I saw him, and therefore, how I related to him. I already respected and admired him, but now I felt COMPELLED to be that woman that would love and accept him totally. I guess you could say that he presented me with a role (consciously or subconsciously) and I had the option to either fulfill that role or not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *