Game Empowers Men (So It’s Suspect)

A multitude of questions and concerns in a comment on “If She Doesn’t Want You, Others Will“.  It’s long so question and answer as we go. I don’t mean to drag this out, but it is important that MMSL is able to be defensible.
Reader: Is this what we can expect from men? To have a gaming technique used on us until we are bedded and left? Just another notch on the bedpost and hopefully without a disease from their frequent conquests? I hope I am not single again anytime soon,it makes me shudder. Is this what you want for your daughters and sisters?
Athol:  Game is sort of a Jedi Mind Trick in that it works, but only on the weak minded. For women who know what Game is and can consciously recognize it, it’s less effective. Not ineffective, just less effective.
The dating marketplace for age 40+ women is pretty brutal as there is a fairly blunt expectation of sex quite soon in the dating process compared to days gone by. I’m not advising that… just saying how it is.
Your daughters and sisters are only going out into the dating market as lambs to the slaughter if you fail to educate them. There’s no requirement to be pump and dumped by players. I don’t buy into the notion that women are incapable of learning or being required to passively accept their fate. I would hope that you expect more from your daughters and sisters than simply being clueless lost sheep in need of rescue. 
Reader: Gaming may “work” but isn’t there a cost for women here that is rather sad and possibly for healthy relationships of trust between men and women?
Athol:  There’s probably not a single man reading this blog who hasn’t had his heart ripped out by a woman rejecting him for his lack of Game at some point in his life. Many of the male readers of this blog are in sexless marriages too. So learning Game is pure and simple a requirement for the average guy dealing with women. We’re learning it to simply be able to have a relationship with women.
MMSL also has a very high percentage of female readers, many of whom read because their own relationships have become happier for their husband reading here. Women quite enjoy being Gamed provided the guy isn’t going to pump and dump them. Typically my reader husbands aren’t looking to divorce their wife, they are looking to avert divorce and/or make the marriage better. MMSL is like “Husband Finishing School” and churns out men better able to be attractive husbands.
One of my more frequent complaints is that I’m a closet feminist catering to women’s wants by telling husbands how to actually give the wives what they want!
Reader:  There is still an implied “should” or “must” list here for wives. The man follows the MAP and the woman should or must respond with increased interest.
Athol:  That’s nearly right. The implied “should” or “must” is what the woman promised to the man when she married him… i.e. a sex life. If she fails to hold up her end of the marriage agreement, and frankly never intends to do so, yet demands the man hold up his, that’s an exploitative arrangement. The MAP simply empowers men to leave the relationship if she continues to refuse to act like his wife. Once a husband is in that position, it’s surprisingly frequent how often she suddenly becomes interested in him again. Though as I state often, she may simply not be interested in him after all that effort and he’s better able to move on to a woman that does want him.
Reader:  All you have with the men writing in is their word for it (no one to blame for that circumstance) that they did the MAP and it didn’t work. Does this mean the wife was very wrong to still be uninterested in this man? Do not be so quick to judge.
Athol:  When both men and women write in, I’m aware that I’m only getting one side of the story. That being said, we try and help the one that is writing in, and answer questions in their best interest. However seeing we’re outside of the relationship, we’re typically not enmeshed in the emotions of the relationship and can typically be more objective about what is going on. I’ve quite frequently told husbands they are wrong about something and in fact need to apologize for whatever they messed up.
I do judge. I’m pretty damn good at it. That’s why people read me and ask for my help.
Reader:  A man can work out, add some income and flirt ,etc. but have some core issues as a man and husband still present. Marriage is complex and it is unknown if men following this blog do not succeed because they did not follow the MAP thoroughly or for long enough a time period. Or maybe they have other unaddressed issues as husbands and fathers that cannot be improved with the MAP.
Athol:  I agree. MMSL is essentially a coaching experience getting regular guys to be more successful with women,and if men are wandering around messed up from childhood abuse or whatever, I direct them to find counseling. In much the same vein if people ask me about a medical issue or medications I end up directing them to their doctor. I don’t give legal advice either. I certainly shouldn’t be trusted to give plumbing advice.
That being said, Married Game advice is a fairly new field and I’m just going to keep plowing along and doing it. People are clearly being helped.
Reader:  Do you see some of the comments from women stating how they tried over and over to get through to their husbands? Were they all just a bunch of cold,nagging females unaware of how great they have it? Really, ALL??
Athol:  You’re confusing things here. Both my male AND female readers are more typically coming from the side of the relationship that was doing all the work and carrying the marriage. The female readers did try over and over and over to get through to their lughead husbands… just the same way the male readers tried over and over and over to get through to their coldfish wives. Both male and female readers are here looking for help. Only a tiny percentage of readers comment, so there’s really not a gender war going on.
 MMSL is mostly directed at a male reader because women have hundreds of female focused advice sources while men have very few places for advice that are positive in tone about relationships and women. We aren’t excluding women simply because we are focusing on teaching men, women are always welcome to read and ask questions and often come seeking the male perspective.
Also MMSL has covered many Girl Game posts where I teach women the same set of skills for women as I do for the men. It’s helpful to both men and women to see the other side of the coin to understand their own side better. So it’s win-win. To be explicitly blunt, the basic principles of the MAP work pretty damn well for wives dealing with difficult husbands too.
Though in summary…  your essential complaint is that MMSL works. So I concede your point.
Jennifer:  About 1/3 of Athol’s emails are from women seeking advice/help.  Men and women both come here looking to fix what has gone wrong and gain some insight.  And yes, it is amazing how many advice sites are out there for women, but for men looking for self-improvement and better marriages…not so much.
If Athol was a woman and was writing Married Woman Sex Life with the same content aimed at women, it would be “empowering” wouldn’t it?

No related posts.

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    Game sounds suspect because it involves manipulating women's emotions not because it empowers men. Women do it to men as well but we don't really have a name for it. Well maybe the Rules book that was popular in the late 90's. That was basically the same thing as game/Mmsl.

  2. stg58 says:

    Game exists because it is necessary. If all we had to do was be our normal selves to meet, marry and preserve a sexual relationship with our wives, this site and others would not exist. It is precisely because women are solipsistic, and want the opposite of what they say they want that Game is necessary.

    You say you want the nice guy, then run off with the bad boy. If you really wanted what you say you wanted, you would stick with the nice guy. Game is necessary. Sorry.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Game (a system of behaviors and beliefs that keep women[including your wife] attracted to you) IS necessary

  4. Jaz71 says:

    I think that both men and women wish things would stay as they were while dating: fun, romantic, passionate sex, happy, with both people trying to impress each other.

    Marriage (with its boring chores & bills) kills romance for many as they get lazy about impressing their spouse. Sweats? No makeup?

    Children just kill sex. Everything gets put on hold in the interest of the kids — women's bodies even turn off the libido so that mom can heal and nurse.

    I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion, but everytime I open up Redbook Magazine there's an article about how to find 5 minutes of time for yourself. Sheesh. No wonder husbands are pissed.

    There's no reason why he should stop giving her flowers, and no reason why she should wear oversized Tshirts to bed. Bring back the (gaming)dating days.

  5. Anonymous says:

    stg58 nailed it. I certainly wasn't a fake or unloving person in my marriage but that didn't save me. Many recovering betas could share the same story i'm sure.

    Having wholly swallowed the red pill now, it's quite easy to see through all the feminist BS and mainstream garbage that leads betas into thinking they're doing everything right. Take heed of a woman's actions, not her words, and the truth will be revealed.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I'm not a huge fan of some of the more engative parts of the manosphere, but somewhere out there is the contention that women dislike the theory of Game because, on a primal level, it makes it more difficult to identify natural alphas. In person they love it, the same way a guy likes fake tits – they're there. But in theory? Something doesn't sit right about with a lot of women, for entirely unconscious and selfish reasons. Later explanatiosn about it are the hamster at work.

    Game is power, and power can be used for good or evil. If women pick the right husbands and treat them right, they will see the power used for good. Simple, if not easy.

  7. Suz says:

    Athol: Excellent post.

    Reader: Run, hamster, run! Lady, you will never outrun the truth. You can cover your eyes and hope that if you can't see it, it can't see you, or you can face it and become content in it's embrace. When what you are fighting is not the enemy, surrender is victory, not defeat.

  8. flipper says:

    As a recovering beta, I see game as a way to truly cut all the bs that my wife puts in front of me. Shit tests are taken at face value for blue pillers. Can you do "x" for me? No, do it yourself.

    The problem I run into is that I come off as an ass sometimes when simply trying to be alpha. And I think some of that is me not having a properly calibrated bullshit meter, so I overcorrect. And some of it is resentment at society for having force fed me all this crap. Some of it is just honesty. No, I don't want to talk about your work day. I'm watching Ultimate Fighter.

  9. crazyivan498 says:

    "If Athol was a woman and was writing Married Woman Sex Life with the same content aimed at women, it would be "empowering" wouldn't it?"

    sounds like a good idea to me. here honey read this, while i am off camping with some buddies. when i come back be ready for me

  10. Anonymous says:

    Giving flowers can mean different things. For a desparate husband they are a bad thing to do–supplication. If you wife is feeling unloved they are a good thing.

  11. Ian Ironwood says:

    Wrong. Game manages a woman's emotions, which is in itself empowering to a man who has been held hostage by his wife's emotional landscape for the entire marriage. And you women DO have a name for it: Boobs. Think of Married Game as "Boobs for Men". It might not get us out of a speeding ticket, but when we make a big deal out of it, we tend to get results.

  12. Ian Ironwood says:

    Quit worrying about how you come off looking like. If you have to be an ass to get the job done, then assure her it's a temporary thing until the job gets done. Worrying about how other people might be scared or fear you if you're assertive is a Beta remnant. Toss it.

    And I allot Mrs. Ironwood 20 minutes every evening to tell me every little detail about her day. And then I demand that she say no more about it unless prompted.

  13. Ian Ironwood says:

    The OP was obviously confusing Married Game with Single Game (hard to pump-and-dump a wife of 20 years), but this was the most telling part:

    "Is this what we can expect from men? To have a gaming technique used on us until we are bedded and left?"

    Basically . . . yes, yes it is exactly what you can expect from men, now. Game helps balance the very unequal advantages women have enjoyed over men for the last 30-40 years. And you should be grateful it's here. Because there are plenty of men who are just walking away from dating and marriage in disgust over what modern American women have to offer, and are seeking foreign brides or staying single forever instead.

    If Game (Single or Married) is threatening to women, it's because it works, and because it removes the sexual control from their pretty little hands. It denies that what a woman says is what she really wants, which is an intellectual affront to feminism, despite feminism's utter inability to form a cogent argument to the contrary. Game empowers men to look beyond the superficial Sex Rank buffs like enhancing bras and make-up and high heels and stare unblinkingly into the naked face of femininity, warts and all, and judge it as it has traditionally judged us. THAT'S why women find it threatening.

    When you call a woman on a shit-test and make her face the fact that it was, indeed, a shit-test, her only two potential responses are to attack you verbally with shame and ad hominem attacks (what the OP was implying by her voiced disgust) or to admit that yes, it was a shit-test, you didn't deserve it, and I'm very sorry. Here's a hint: boys, think very carefully before even considering marrying the first one.

    Game is essentially the Manosphere calling out women on their collective shit-test. It's us getting tired of being the bad guys in every female-crafted narrative, and its us re-embracing our big, sweaty, hairy masculinity without shame, remorse, or regret. It's us going our own way from feminism without apologies. And its us preparing the next generation for the rugged sexual marketplace of the future. I'm teaching my 12 year old son Game — I'm not going to let him get emotionally smacked around and abused by someone's little entitlement princess. And if he's accused of misogyny . . . he'll know it's working.

  14. Red says:

    Game as an act feels manipulative because it isn't who you are. Game as character development changes you: how you look, how you feel about yourself, they way you interact with people in general and your wife specifically. Game is an improvement when done this way.

    Not all women want a “nice” beta guy. Some of us desperately want our men to run game and incorporate alpha traits into his personality and help change the dynamic of our relationships but are married to men who find it too much trouble. Sometimes it isn’t we don’t know what we want but he isn’t willing. Game is hard and takes time and dedication. Not all men are willing to invest. They want women who put out often and want beta traits because it requires less effort on their part. It’s so much easier to bring her a cup of coffee each morning than make hard decisions or go to the gym 4 times a week.

    The only thing I can figure about women not liking the thought of game is maybe the way it’s presented. The tag line of MMSL is “How to have the marriage you thought you were going to have. By which I mean doing it like rabbits.” Perhaps they are offended because it sounds like a site that helps men get more sex from their wives. And it is a site like that. But Athol is teaching men how to do things in a way that will make their wife feel more attracted and want to have more sex. He isn’t teaching them how to pretend to be something they aren’t so their wife will be fooled into having more sex. He is trying to help people create a win-win situation.

    Women have been forced fed the feminist propaganda too. Try being a woman who wants a male led relationship or is turned by alpha traits. What others see as bossy you find sexy. I don’t talk about it to my girlfriends because they think there is something wrong with me and can’t even understand.

    If you don’t like the material present here or if you don’t find the ideas and suggestions helpful, then don’t read.

  15. Ian Ironwood says:

    "Perhaps they are offended because it sounds like a site that helps men get more sex from their wives. "

    Yes. That's it, exactly.

    Try this experiment: go up to a group of women and ask them, theoretically, if they'd like a more fulfilling sex life. 9 out of 10 will say yes, while #10 is in the bathroom masturbating. You ask any group of women that and there will be a profound chorus of YES! YES! YES!

    With me so far?

    Now ask that same group of women if they would consider a pill that allows their husbands to have sex with them pretty much on demand. Watch the horror and shock at such an idea. They'll call it misogynistic bullshit, sexist crap, mind-control and sexual slavery, yadda yadda yadda. Even though they just admitted — demanded — better sex lives!

    What's the difference? It's a matter of control. Women want to have better sex. Women want more sex. But they (say they) want to control it. The problem is, when women control the sex life, the marriage or relationship falls apart, they're miserable with their menfolk, and it's going to be splitsville.

    Women giving up control of their sex lives sounds (to them) like sex slavery, something that goes against the entire idea of female empowerment. Their husbands having sex with them whenever they want? Without DOING something for it? That's . . . that's . . . that's archaic! That's a human rights violation! Someone call Oprah!

    But that's what Game does: it strikes at the core of female entitlement, the part that says that a woman can control everything around her to her satisfaction, that she deserves far more than she earns on the basis of possessing a vagina alone, and that any attempt by a man to get control over her is an attack on all women.

    And it does empower men. It empowers men by demonstrating that there are 3 billion vaginas in the world and the one who is giving you grief is utterly replaceable — or uneeded at all. It empowers men by demonstrating that what a woman says isn't nearly as important as what she does (which feminists just. can't. stand.). It empowers men by encouraging them to assume the leadership role in their own lives regardless of what their wives and girlfriends say. It empowers men because it tells them that they don't have to listen to "what women want" as the end-all, be-all standard of male behavior.

    And finally, it empowers men because it speaks to a profoundly basic and universal male interest: sex. Unapologetically. Proudly. Without guilt and shame. It tells men that it's OK to want sex even if their wives don't, that it's OK to look at other women with lust in their hearts, and that it's OK to tell your woman "NO" if you want to.

    Pretty much the same stuff that feminists were fighting for in the 1960s and 1970s, actually.

  16. Red says:

    Their husbands having sex with them whenever they want? Without DOING something for it?

    You're right Ian, and I find it so confusing and irritating. The husbands ARE doing something for it!

    They say they want beta guys but then bitch and moan when their man is too beta. In some ways I'm glad I'm not a men dealing with the average woman.

  17. Anonymous says:

    I'd be a bit weary of limiting TALKING with your wife. It really is how we feel conected and emotionally vested in any relationship. It's not to say that you cant limit the WHEN a little bit ("lets talk over dinner after this is over"), but i'd be careful about limiting TALKING…because she might find someone else to talk about her stresses with…

  18. jane says:

    "Now ask that same group of women if they would consider a pill that allows their husbands to have sex with them pretty much on demand. Watch the horror and shock at such an idea."

    This comes right back to the idea that we women don't want MORE sex the way it is, we want BETER sex! We want to want it! And that's what game is about, husbands learning to make your wife WANT you again. The fact of the mater is that a lot guys are piss poor at being MEN and we women have gotten really tired of being the woman and the man in a relationship.

    Women have this tendancy to be stressed and overworked and to "fix" that problem, she strives for more CONTROL – bossing her husband around ect. In her mind, if she can control things then she can get a handle on the stress. Except that the control is what creates the stress. Life is a lot less stressful if you're following someone. But there aren't a lot of men that are easy to follow. In order to be comfortable following someone, you have to actually believe that he's gonna get to where you're going safely and quite honestly a lot of guys come of as completely incompitent of running even thier own lives. There are of course plenty of exceptions to this, but this is a pervasive problem in a lot of relationships: Cutting off a guy's balls and then complaining that he's not a man. Both people need to put in some work for that to change.

  19. Ian Ironwood says:

    No, I encourage her to talk ABOUT WORK for twenty minutes. I don't want to know more about it than that, and anything important — that is, something that could affect the household — is granted an indefinite extension. She knows she has 20 minutes, so she arranges her discussion in order of priority. Unless the police showed up at work that day, it's unreasonable to ask a man to listen to a narrative of the lives of people he doesn't know for longer than a commercial-free episode of The Big Bang Theory. Sorry, but her work isn't her life, and if she feels overly-stressed by that limitation, then clearly she is in the wrong profession.

  20. Ian Ironwood says:

    "The fact of the mater is that a lot guys are piss poor at being MEN and we women have gotten really tired of being the woman and the man in a relationship."

    Actually, I'd say that for the last forty years men have been punished by society for being MEN, and they have gotten really tired of being given the responsibilities but getting denied the respect. You might think of this in terms of how it plays out in a relationship, but the fact of the matter is that this tendency to withdraw from participation cuts across our entire lives. It results from being shamed away from our masculinity, and then being shamed that we don't have it anymore.

    What Game does is allow men to reclaim at least part of their masculinity. It's great that it makes you want to have sex with us more, but it's a means to an end. For men, sex is about the last way we can express our masculine tendencies anymore without the military or the Ultimate Fighting Championships getting involved. So it doesn't really matter to us, in some ways, why you want to have sex with us — if Game does it, great, but if being a total Beta did it, we'd likely be total Betas (like collective womenhood said they wanted). For us, sex is the last realm where we can express our masculinity unambiguously. We aren't the breadwinners anymore, we're held to unfair standards and unequal levels of responsibility, and our chances of happiness with a woman are statistically remote.

    So yeah, the sex. We wants it. Game gets it for us. Which contributes to us re-defining and revalorizing the entire concept of masculinity for the 21st century. Sex and self-realization? Give me more o' that!

  21. Anonymous says:

    ^^^ Jane is my hero.

  22. Jaz71 says:

    Interesting, Anon. I've received flowers from boyfriends/exhusband at work "just because." Some cards just said "Had a great time last night" and some were "Just thinking about you."

    In other words, they were a demonstration of appreciation.

    And if a guy is desperate, he SHOULD send her flowers at work (where all her coworkers will see and coo over them): they will soften her heart and raise him to the status of Romantic Man. He should at the very minimum get a 10 second kiss out of it.

  23. flipper says:

    I was thinking about something. In single game you have the DHV (display of high value) where it may or may not be an illusion.

    In married game a DHV is a demonstration of high value. You can't fake it. You have to attain the high value and them demonstrate it to the wife. It's more about becoming what those single gamers work so hard to create the illusion of being.

  24. Jane says:

    EXACTLY!!! Spot on!

  25. Jaz71 says:

    "Women giving up control of their sex lives sounds (to them) like sex slavery, something that goes against the entire idea of female empowerment. Their husbands having sex with them whenever they want? Without DOING something for it? That's . . . that's . . . that's archaic!"

    Ian, you're over-thinking it. Women do not physically get turned on the same way as men do. And we require foreplay. Somewhere I read a long time ago that Women's libido is 20% physical and 80% mental. Men are the opposite.

    It has nothing to do with feminism. We still want to be impressed by men by compliments and romantic gestures. You just can't fall back on the 1950's method of money & education, because that doesn't impress the average woman anymore (she can get her own). And as Jane pointed out, no one wants to hand a man the reins if he's an incompetent buffoon — at work or at home.

    So you can marry beneath you (1950's) to keep her desperately clinging on because she only has a high school diploma and a minimum wage job, OR you can marry your equal (2010's)and keep her willingly with you because you take her out on dates, cook her favorite dishes, dance with her in the kitchen, and give 10 second kisses.

    1950's: Insecure guy with fearful wife
    2010's: Don Juan with wife who has a Victoria Secret credit card

  26. Poke says:

    Thank you for the great comments Ian. Yours are the most insightful of the many good comments on the blogs I read. I am an avid reader of your Red Pill Room blog also, which I recommend to all here.

  27. Jane says:

    "Actually, I'd say that for the last forty years men have been punished by society for being MEN"

    How? I don't deny that this could be happening, but I want to know what you see as the punishment? and what actions get punished?

    "We aren't the breadwinners anymore, we're held to unfair standards and unequal levels of responsibility, and our chances of happiness with a woman are statistically remote."

    With regard to being a breadwinner – if you want that, you'd better go get it! Not by knocking women down but by being BETTER. You want to make more money than me, you'd better to have something to offer that I don't. I have no problem with my husband making more money than me, great if he does! We could use more money! I just dont want that achieved by ME making LESS thna what I do now.

    Women ask for equality in earning (which hasn't actually been achieved), but that doesnt mean you guys cant compete. If you're a better doctor, then you'll make more money, simple as that. The thing is, if you look at high earning degrees, women are graduating at a rate much higher than men. On AVERAGE we're starting to really just achieve more than the men and thus men are no longer the "breadwinners." We didn't put you in that roll, you guys just haven't been keeping up.

    High income fields have become increasingly intelectual as opposed to physically based and thus the playing field has been equalized for men and women in a lot of those areas. If you want to earn more, you're actually going to have to either be smarter or harder working or have some other skill that the other applicant's dont have. And the fact of the mater is that I really would LOVE to be with a guy who works hard and is smart!

    Your other option is just to be good enough that you have the option of your wife not working as much. A lot of women would like that; some wouldnt though.

    Women entering the workforce has just increased the competition. You now have to be that much better because there are twice as many employees to choose from.

    What are these unfair standards and responsibilites you feel you're held to in society? I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I actually want to know.

  28. Jane says:

    I'll second that Ian; I really do look forward to your comments, they're always thought provoking, insightful, and well written.

  29. Poke says:

    Jaz you are consistently wrong on the psychology component of game. One of the initial things that clued me into this was seeing how badly days where I bought flowers went. Sure there was the initial appreciative kiss; that night there was much more likely a random argument than sex. In fact there was never ever any sex on a day that I bought flowers in 10yrs of marriage. I might do flowers again someday but now it would be from a completely different frame. "Hey my penis bought you these." :)

  30. jane says:

    excelent point!

  31. Jane says:

    "You just can't fall back on the 1950's method of money & education, because that doesn't impress the average woman anymore (she can get her own)"

    I think this is a key part of understanding where you can create attraction. You have to do the things that she cant/wont do on her own – generally this involves anything that requires you to be STRONG. We like it when you're lifting stuff and you get all sweaty! We generally like your hairy chest and grease on your fingers and your knack at fixing things. We like your deep voice and your passion (kissing, dancing- which btw women totally relate with your rythem in the bedroom).

    I'm personally impressed when a guy is really generous, also when he has great social skills (or really any skill I don't have) or when he's athletic – all areas that I stive to improve in myself.

    Most likely there are lots of things you can do to impress your wife, you just have to DO them!

  32. Jane says:

    I totally think this can go either way. I happen to go nuts when my guy brings me flowers home for no reason. i LOVE flowers and before him, i bought them for myself any time I was at the store. When he gets them for me, i feel that he was thinking about me and thinking about coming home when he was out. I also feel that he has been paying attention to what makes me happy. Also – being surprised makes like fun. Even when it's just the little day to day surprises like flowers. Whenever you get that interjection that he's unpredictable (but in a good way, not a bi polar way…) then it makes like fun and interesting. Part of that I think is that there's no rhyme or reason to WHEN he does it for me. If he brought flowers daily, i actually think they'd loose thier impact as it would become part of the routine. I'm a fairly disaplined person and I'm very productive and I achieve that by really having a fairly routine life. When my guy shakes that up a little, that absolutely triggers attraction for me. It's FUN!

  33. Jaz71 says:

    "We aren't the breadwinners anymore, we're held to unfair standards and unequal levels of responsibility, and our chances of happiness with a woman are statistically remote."

    @Ian: I never met a single man in college that held this viewpoint. In fact, I've only come across this by uneducated men who were intimidated by ANYONE who possessed a degree, male or female.

    (College men want college women so as to produce intelligent and motivated offspring.)

  34. Anonymous says:

    Jane,

    You don't understand the politcal/economic dynamic that is in play. Women are earning more than men on average because of MASSIVE government interference into the economy. The welfare state, public education, semi-socialized health care, subsidies to the universities, anti-discrimination laws (anti-white heterosexual male laws really); all of these serve to facilitate a massive WEALTH TRANSFER from men to women (again really from white men to everyone else).

    If there were no welfare state, no regulatory state (ie preventative law agencies), no central bank, no public schools, no quasi-socialist health system, etc; if there were none of this then men would FAR outearn women. What is destroying the sexual market is in large part the massive degree of government interventionism, welfare statism, central banking, etc. It is the lack of true economic liberty that is fucking everything up; even more so than feminism.

    UNDERSTAND, our society is dominated by the LEFT; ie egalitarian collectivists. Even when Republicans get elected, all they do is administer a Leftist welfare state. Egalitarianism is the RULING PARADIGM of our society; feminism is but one manifestation (multi-culturalism is another as is environmentalism, etc, etc, etc.).

    But it is uncertain if modern civilization is sustainable under egalitarian, leftist rule. I don't think it is which means we may be headed for a fall. I'm talking Road Warrior stuff. Say good bye to hypergamy and the female g-spot in that type of world.

    JR

  35. Jet Tibet says:

    "The Rules" is a lot like Game because it's really the result of women projecting what they look for (mystery, confidence, options) onto the male psyche.

  36. Jaz71 says:

    "You don't understand the politcal/economic dynamic that is in play. Women are earning more than men on average because of MASSIVE government interference into the economy."

    @JR: Perhaps you could cite this study you are referring to. I have provided quoted statistics as follows:

    "…U.S. women still earned only 77 cents on the male dollar in 2008, according to the latest census statistics. (That number drops to 68% for African-American women and 58% for Latinas.)"

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html#ixzz1qRrmNxZJ

  37. Jet Tibet says:

    Jane that sounds believable, but men have found that women are often not aware of what really triggers their emotions.

    My experience suggests that if a woman feels that a man truly admires her and thinks about her all the time, then she will lose interest in him.

    If he is strong and aloof and she pines for his attention – then an unexpected show of consideration can be appreciated.

  38. Jane says:

    Settle down Rush cause it's hard to follow you that far into crazytown. I am bored at work today stuck at my desk, so I shall engage here.

    1. Ummm what kind of governement interference are you talking about that creates a wealth transfer?? When I applied to college they looked at SAT scores and grades. Sex isn't even on that inital cut form. As far as I know, there are no "quota's" for gender in California, maybe that's different elsewhere? And explain to me how this plays in to attraction???

    2) If If If, except that it's not. In your Mad Max style world where "men would FAR outearn women" that may be accurate simply because in that TYPE of society physical strength becomes a much higher comodity. In the society we ACTUALLY live in, jobs that require higher education tend to be the higher earners and that seems to be an even playing field with regard to sex. You can wish all you want that we lived in a different society, but your choices are really either to try and change society (pretty tough undertaking, but it's been done) or to learn how to win in the current game. As a woman, i'm not a fan of the idea that we nix the whole safety of our society just so that i'm attracted to more men. Doesn't seem like a good trade. And anyway I don't actually want to be attracted to MORE men. I'm here to keep the attraction that i have to ONE man and I think that makes up the bulk of the readership here.

    3. The left dominating our society. I think that kinda depends where you live. Regardless I'm not sure how this applies to the topic at hand….

    4. If our society goes all Road Warrior, i'm sure the least of my problems will be maintaining attraction to my husband. HOWEVER, I actually think I've go a guy who's got enough Alpha and Beta to take care of me in either type of society which is likely why the strong attraction and bond. Even though I doubt we'll be battling road pirates in my lifetime…

  39. Jane says:

    I also want to add to all these comments that you dont actually have to outearn your wife in order to be attractive, that's just ONE prong on the fork, if it's not your forte or you happen to be with a wife who's extremely high earning, then you're probably better off strengthening the other prongs…

  40. Anonymous says:

    "THAT'S why women find it threatening."

    "I'm not going to let him get emotionally smacked around and abused by someone's little entitlement princess.
    ***********************************************

    Not to start a culture war, but WOMEN are not threatened by game. It's for the most part American and to a lesser extent Western European/Australian, women that are seem offended by it (those that are). To get even more specific having read some blogs in the Manosphere this reinvented war of the sexes seems to be a Caucasian thing for the most part.

    Entitlement princess term is one I apply 98% to white women when men in the sphere use it.

    I'm saying this a a woman who was raised in both Western African and American cultures.

    NG

  41. Jane says:

    That's completely valid Jet, but i think this jumps back to the idea of needing BOTH alpha and beta in a long term relationship. And bringing flowers is a win in the beta department for sure. I think it's the spontinety/unpredictability of it is what's fun/exciting. And fun and excitement really do trigger attraction. If you're bringing flowers because you're sucking up, that's not gonna be hot. But I think most women will tell you that getting flowers makes them feel HAPPY. It makes them smile and generally positive feelings translate into a receptiveness when you touch her or talk to her. There's a degree here of just circumstance and the overall temperature of the relationship I think…

  42. Anonymous says:

    Which is due primarily to their own personal and professional choices and not institutional sexism. Men died in the workplace more often than women at a 13 to 1 ratio according to those same BLS numbers. I don't hear many women asking for parity on that.

  43. Anonymous says:

    AK, excellent point after point. Hell, you’ve helped assuage some of my reservations about “gaming” my wife. Well done. I’m going to go and buy another copy of the primer. Jennifer can thank you later, LOL. Carry on with your bad self. Regards, Seething Lurker

  44. Jane says:

    sadly I'd be willing to bet that the jobs with high death rates aren't the one's that are top earners, but there's probably a number on that list that fall in the "sexy as hell" catigory

  45. Jane says:

    Flipper, having read your earlier banter with your wife. I think the asshole thing is something that's really gonna disappear with more practice. It seems like because you're trying so hard, maybe you come off a little bit harsh. I think with more practice you'll really quickly develop the ability to put up boundries that are assertive without being mean and that was already really clear when you posted about 2 text conversations over the course of the the day: try one, needed work; try 2 totally spot on. So I'd definately agree with Ian, that you neednt worry to much about it. Just keep trying things. You seem really open to making it work and imporving your sex life, so I'm willing to bet that that you'll be able to figure out very quickly what works and what doesnt with your wife. The advantage to married game is that you can really perfect your technique….

  46. alphaguy says:

    I do want to point out that there are some people (both sexes) that no matter what you do you'll never get through to them. I've heard it described as the 80/20 rule. For about 80% of relationships if you pull X lever, Y will happen (for the good usually). But, in about 20% of relationships no matter what you do, nothing will work because the other is not conscious, doesn't want to engage, or is bat shit crazy (ie borderline, etc).

  47. Anna Beers says:

    Or, if a woman's primary love language is Gifts, flowers can be very effective. If it isn't, the glow lasts as long as it takes to put them in a vase.

    I agree wholeheartedly with Jane, but that's because I'm a Gifts girl myself.

    I can count on one hand the number of times in my 6.5 year marriage my husband has surprised me with flowers or something I really wanted, but those occasions still stick out in my mind, even though it's been a while.

  48. Anonymous says:

    good point…I haven't met a lot of black guys that were too beta though…maybe the whole thing is just a white problem…

    Where in africa? would there be a different approach to game there?

  49. Jaz71 says:

    More men take risky jobs like military service, firefighting, and police work.

  50. Anonymous says:

    @Jaz71 and anyone else stuck on the party line of the wage gap myth:

    The wage gap myth has been disproven, although feminism does manage to keep recycling it, just as happened here. Anon 2:54 is correct in that it has been shown to be caused by choices made by women and by not comparing equal jobs and effort i.e. women (on average)aren't willing to work the same number of hours for a given job etc.

    From an article in the Wall Street Journal:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

    "Recent studies have shown that the wage gap shrinks—or even reverses—when relevant factors are taken into account and comparisons are made between men and women in similar circumstances. In a 2010 study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30, the research firm Reach Advisors found that women earned an average of 8% more than their male counterparts."

    For more proof including citations try here:

    http://www.swifteconomics.com/2009/09/21/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-the-wage-gap/

    This is the type of society that men are up against, where the mainstream media feeds us the feminist sound bites and people quote them without actually doing some critical thinking of their own. Game/charisma/inner growth are necessary for men to take back control of their personal power and to have the confidence to question what they are being taught.

  51. Jane says:

    so if circumstances are similar, women are out earning men. Why? Because there's some law out there telling employers to pay women more? How about because women are out performing men? Which is exactly my point: you guys who complain about the fact that you're not the breadwinner anymore want the women to step out of the game so that you're more neccessary. I suggest that you need to step UP your game to compete. And if you're not willing to compete, then find other avenues of making yourself needed. Do you really just want to be a wallet to a woman who says "oh there's no way I could wake up at 8 everyday and work for 8 whole hours!!" anyway? Wouldn't it say more about your worth if a woman who had it all together, STILL was impressed by you?

  52. Stargate Girl says:

    I can count on one hand how many times I have received flowers. I love flowers. I would be thrilled to receive flowers. It's just not hubby's thing. :( i wish he would bring me flowers. they are a simple, relatively inexpensive thing that bring a smile to my face and my my heart feel light and happy.

  53. Jaz71 says:

    "Jaz you are consistently wrong on the psychology component of game."

    Well, Poke, you just read a bunch of posts from women who love receiving flowers. The only way we'll know why your situation didn't work is if your wife lets us in on it.

    P.S. "I'm Sorry" flowers don't work the same way as roses for "Thinking of you, Georgeous!"

  54. Jaz71 says:

    @Anon 6:04: You gave me a statistic with only an 8 year snippet of single and childless and urban women. Really? That's hardly comparable to the mass study provided by the US Census, where the general population works from 18-64, most of whom are married and/or with children.

  55. Anonymous says:

    @Jane: Jaz71's claim was that men were out-earning women and while she did not claim anything, it is usually presented as a bad thing that needs to be change. However, that whole premise has been refuted

    Now that it is shown that women are out-earning men you are stating that it must be because women are out-performing men on their own merits?

    It seems the argument has changed to the diametrically opposite stance and we now get to argue the opposing feminist point that, although women are always victims, they are more capable.

    If women are outperforming men it is with the help of government and its use of tax dollars and policy.

    Affirmative action does cause employers to pay women more through supply and demand. Engineering firms pay new hire female engineers more money than males in order to bump up their numbers of women on staff in a pre-emptive bid to avoid discrimination lawsuits. Since there are fewer women engineering grads, firms have to compete for them, not based on their merit, but on their gender.

    Employment quotas in construction also cause companies to hire people based on gender rather than ability. Companies that wish to bid on lucrative government contracts must meet female and visible minority quotas to do so.

    Men are more than capable of competing, but when the competition is rigged by a government quota, it isn't really an actual competition is it?

    If feminists actually thought women could compete on a level playing field, they would be advocating for that. They could inpose "blind" hiring or third party testing for competence etc. Instead they push for reduced fitness requirements (military, fire department) and special accommodations (extra training for female firefighter recruits) as a couple of specific examples.

    I guess I may as well throw alimony into the mix too. I know you have heard of that transfer of wealth tax on a man's earnings to help out a supposedly equally capable person.

    The reason that all of this is an issue in relationship arena is that this society and the women most of us deal with still require men to be the breadwinner to command respect in the marriage. Now that it is harder for men to earn a breadwinner's wage and women have more access to things like mother's allowance and other services, women don't have the easy access to respect that they once did and are actually being taught that they don't need men, other than to fund child support and alimony payments.

    Some men are starting to take them at their word. Some men don't know what is happening to them and carry on blindly earning and paying. Other men are starting to study and learn inner game to make up for the loss of respect that being the security provider to the relationship gave.

    As an aside, Athol's original post went into why men need game. The last two posts I made will show anyone that I need to work on my inner game so that I have the strength to resist engaging you. I knew I should just let it go but I rationalized it by hoping that it might help open someone's else's eyes. I'm working on it though…

  56. Anonymous says:

    Alphaguy: Yes, and if you can figure that out sooner rather than later, it is a good thing. Saves lots of brain damage. But, the great thing about this site is if you follow the mantra you are preparing yourself either way for a better relationship.

  57. Anonymous says:

    @Jaz71

    "@Anon 6:04: You gave me a statistic with only an 8 year snippet of single and childless and urban women. Really? That's hardly comparable to the mass study provided by the US Census, where the general population works from 18-64, most of whom are married and/or with children."

    Trying to invoke the US Census to claim my citation is any less valuable than yours is disingenuous. I am only comparing it to the article you pointed to which also states:

    "Nearly half a century after it became illegal to pay women less on the basis of their sex, why do American women still earn less than men?

    The answer depends on whom you ask — and so does the size of the gap. Some say 77% is overly grim. One reason: it doesn't account for individual differences between workers. Once you control for factors like education and experience, notes Francine Blau — who, along with fellow Cornell economist Lawrence Kahn, published a study on the 1998 wage gap — women's earnings rise to 81% of men's. Factor in occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and they jump to 91%.

    Why didn't you pull that quote out of the article?

    In the end, a study controlling for mitigating factors in order to compare male apples to female apples is much more valuable than lumping all census data together. I believe the citations in the second link I added will also help anyone who wants to learn a bit more about the issue.

    You claimed that women earn less than men. I have shown where that is not true. Your claim is disproven. You may now add clauses to change the target.

    As a closing thought, what business do you know that would hire men if women worked for 75% less and did equal work?

  58. Kort says:

    I'll be honest, I don't like getting flowers. I'm allergic to them and most perfumes/colognes. So, when my husband wears cologne daily and brings home flowers, it just shows me he's not paying attention.

  59. Anonymous says:

    @Jaz71 7:20pm

    Not really. I am actually citing something slightly more scienticially rigorous. The statistic I quoted is from a study that controlled for wage mitigating factors like presence of children so that female "apples" are compared to male "apples". You forgot to mention that the "8 year snippet of single and childless and urban women" also included data about men. With that in mind, single and childless men and women do count as people and as representatives of their genders and are a significant portion of the population.

    You previously choose to highlight that "U.S. women still earned only 77 cents on the male dollar in 2008". The links I supplied prove that to be incorrect for at least part of the population. Therefore your premise has been proven wrong. You may now add clauses to change your argument.

    As additional proof, I will now add an excerpt from the link YOU provided, which is at odds with the quote you highlighted above.

    "Nearly half a century after it became illegal to pay women less on the basis of their sex, why do American women still earn less than men?

    The answer depends on whom you ask — and so does the size of the gap. Some say 77% is overly grim. One reason: it doesn't account for individual differences between workers. Once you control for factors like education and experience, notes Francine Blau — who, along with fellow Cornell economist Lawrence Kahn, published a study on the 1998 wage gap — women's earnings rise to 81% of men's. Factor in occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and they jump to 91%."

    The second link I presented previously will help educate people on the wage gap myth much more than I ever could. I suggest people willing to learn a bit more go there.

    As a closing thought, what business would ever hire any man if women worked for 75% less and did equal work? It would be fiscally irresponsible.

  60. Odds says:

    "How? I don't deny that this could be happening, but I want to know what you see as the punishment? and what actions get punished?"

    I'm going to try to order these in increasing sophistication, from caveman to knight in shining armor. This list is by no means exclusive.

    - Physically defend wife's honor: Go directly to jail, do not pass go
    - Check out a hot girl's ass: sexual harassment, and no sex for you tonight if wifey sees it
    - Want sex, or a particular kind of sex, that she does not: you're a pig and a possible sexual abuser, even if you don't act on it
    - Publicly declare that looks matter and you want an attractive wife/girlfriend: get slammed by the fat-acceptance and ugly-feminist crowd
    - Want an all-guy's club to get away from estrogen for a bit: no fair, discrimination, what if the men make business deals or smoke cigars and talk about their prostates? Get sued to force inclusion of women
    - Speak bluntly about politics/religion in the presence of a woman: hurt her feelings, you're a pig, lose the argument by default
    - Point out that being unable to emotionally detach from an argument does not mean you are correct: insensitive prick, logic is male oppression (not kidding, google that)
    - Publicly express the opinion that in an environment of equal opportunity, there will always be more male Senators and CEOs: Hate speech, and no sex for you if wifey hears it
    - Unambiguously declare leadership of the family: sexist, chauvinist pig, no sex for you tonight (regardless of whether you're the better choice, or she wants it deep down, can't contradict the feminist narrative)
    - Want traditional wedding vows: "obey" sure as hell isn't going in there, or being honored if it does
    - Do basically anything traditionally chivalrous: congratulations, you are now a beta orbiter
    - Apply for job or college in order to be great breadwinner: get less preferential treatment than women. If it's a problem that fewer and fewer men are in college, it's only a problem because it means girls have no one to date or marry.
    - Make more money than a woman: doesn't matter why, you're now part of the patriarchy, get your company sued.
    - Try to work with kids, be a role model: potential sexual abuser (seriously, tons of companies have rules about allowing men to be alone with women or kids; I worked at a school with such a rule for several years – no similar rule applies to female staff – I don't know of any successful complaints or lawsuits about it)

    (continued below)

  61. Odds says:

    These are all one with positive punishment – that is, the application of negative consequences to behavior. Doesn't begin to list the things like negative punishment (taking away sources of pride and happiness), such as the fact that men have done such a good job, y'know, creating civilization from the ground up that here in the western world, physical protection is largely unnecessary and providing a living is relatively simple. So, protection and provision just don't have the "oomph" they used to. That's a big part of being a man, protecting and providing. Conquering is reduced to the company softball league if you're a middle-class American, and all those birth control pills screwing around with women's preferences mean that the new hot look is pretty scrawny and hairless, rather than a more traditionally masculine and rugged appearance. Low testosterone is more common than ever. Husbands openly being head of the family are the frowned-upon exception ("wow, his wife must be weak, and he must be a pig") rather than the rule – whether you think that's a good thing or not, it is a lost part of the masculine identity.

    The only way to really escape any of those changes is in your private life – which won't include your marriage unless you can out-alpha your wife's shit tests, which doesn't come naturally to most men (and that's why Athol is a saint). Publicly, you have to be a Senator, CEO, or drug dealing thug to get away with being as traditionally masculine as you want.

    So, yeah, modern men, especially those in their 20's like me, don't have a big chunk of the masculine identity our forefathers had. So, we're at a bit of a loss. Just from my own experience, I've had to learn to parrot the left-liberal-feminist party line now that I'm back in school, because even questioning it (not opposing it or denouncing it, just questioning) is a good way to get five screeching girls in my face and a major blow to my reputation.

    Again, the takeaway here should be that, whether or not you think any of those changes are good or bad, that's NOT the point – the point is that they are lost parts of what it used to mean to be a man. I would argue that comparatively little has been offered to fill the void, particularly for beta men.

  62. airnspace says:

    Jane has made some insightful comments and actually seems like an introspective women, so I will take a crack at responding to her questions above.

    @ Ian "Actually, I'd say that for the last forty years men have been punished by society for being MEN"

    @ Jane How? I don't deny that this could be happening, but I want to know what you see as the punishment? and what actions get punished?

    Ian is right, men have been punished for exhibiting the traditional masculine traits. Extremes are always useful in elucidating the point, so lets begin with feminism's "all sex is rape". Clearly this is extreme, but it is the logical end point of attacking men's innate sexual drive. Men and womens sexual drives are fundamentally different. The "punishment" in this case are the laws regarding sexual harassment and rape. Simply asking a girl out on a date in the workplace can be grounds for a sexual harassment lawsuit (see: Cases and Kinds of Sexual Harassment) & False Rape is a well discussed topic in MRA circles. Think of the now bygone tradition of pinups and nose art from WWII era aircraft. Try to do that today and you will see how quickly Men are punished for being Men!

    To really understand the depth of this problem, imagine an all boys school or college or picture Tom Sawyer just being himself, and then think of how many of those activities are just gone, shunned or no longer allowed.

    Competition is probably the biggest arena where men are constantly chided. Competition is at the core of men's souls, and society tries to discourage it at every step starting in the schools where "everybody wins". Actively rebuking boys for competing is not a punishment per se, but all of the little things society does to discourage and shame men for being men and the lack of rewards for masculine behavior add up to effectively punish said behavior.

    … To be continued

  63. Vino says:

    I suggest Readers of the Primer or individual who follow this blog or any Manosphere blog read Iron John: A Book About Men; by Robert Bly. A real eye opener.

    @ Ironwood – You have a fantastic last name and more importantly an impeccable and insightful perceptive of TRUE maleness. Thank you for contributing to Mr. Kay's already insightful and effective wealth of knowledge.

  64. The MacNut says:

    Jaz, I think you're missing one other common statement from the women gushing about receiving flowers…they all say their husband RARELY brings them! Both Anna Biers and Stargate Girl say they can "count on one hand" how often their husbands bought them flowers. Even Jane essentially said bringing flowers more often, more regularly would make them less special! And I think Anna and SG would agree if they really thought about it.

    This has also been my experience in my marriage; I only bring flowers a handful of times a year, the only regularity about it being I always get her some on Valentines Day-and I may shake that up next year by bringing some on her birthday instead (they're less than a month apart). Whenever I bring them my wife eats it up! She loves getting them and appreciates every time I do. However, I'm not going to let myself fall into the trap of giving them more often.

    Part of what makes getting flowers special for many women is they don't know WHEN they'll be getting them, and your experiences reflect this as well, Jaz. The flowers you got were a surprise, and would have been less so if you could count on getting them weekly, for example.

    Men should "ration" giving flowers to their wives IMO. One special set for her birthday and/or Valentine's Day, and a couple other random times throughout the year, generally as a thank you gesture for something special they did or as an occasional "thinking of you" gesture, emphasis on OCCASIONAL. Anything more than that and she'll most likely start taking them for granted and each flower-giving occasion would become less memorable.

    And gents, NEVER give flowers as a apology, you do NOT want her associating flowers with BAD FEELINGS from something you may have said or done! If a sincere apology isn't enough, flowers won't help anyway.

  65. Jaz71 says:

    "The flowers you got were a surprise, and would have been less so if you could count on getting them weekly, for example."

    Wrong. My ex would send them 1-2x/month, intentionally not on holidays, and he got rewarded quite handsomely.

    Think of flowers as the gourmet version of dirty text messages.

  66. Jaz71 says:

    @Anon 9:48: "The links I supplied prove that to be incorrect for at least part of the population."

    I read your links, and the second one even begins by admitting a 25% wage difference. Again, your study is a minority of the population: to focus only on educated singles in big cities is ignoring the rest of the country.

    That said, educated women unburdened by children are driven go-getters. If this trend is enticing to employers, then it's Darwin Time: step it up, guys, or just join the military.

  67. Jane says:

    I also get them a few times a month. I absolutely love it, but MacNut is correct in that, i never know when they're coming. They are always a surprise and the surpise aspect of it is why it's so much fun.

    I don't think that flowers are the gourmet version of a dirty text, I think they're the gourmet version of the "I love you" text. The message is beta and that's a GOOD THING! But the surprise part of it is kinda the alpha frame. It associates HIM with EXCITEMENT and UNPREDICTABILITY.

  68. Jane says:

    Thank you for the reply Odd! Looking at that list, there's a very legitimate loss in the roll of men. The bulk of those things are completely valid (particularly the working with kids, what is up with that….).

    The definition btwn male and female has definately become less distinct, however I certainly don't believe that giving women less rights or tossing them out of the workforce is the appropriate solution, so what is?? How does your role become defined? Where do we go from here as a society?

    When it comes to the roll of attraction, I think a lot of the things you talk about are still attractive to women even if some don't want to admit that.

    Defending a woman's honor physically – part of you goes "i dont want him ending up in jail or getting hurt, fighting is stupid etc" but on the otherhand, as a woman who is moderately confrontational, it kinda makes me disgusted when a man is unwilling to stand up for his wife even if it means that he'll get his ass kicked! And I know you smaller guys are gonna be hurt and pissed at that comment because it's messed up to want that or whatever, but it's just the truth…At minimum, I want my man to be TOUGHER than me' that's the key. I don't need to date a gorilla, but I need to be with a guy who makes ME feel like a woman. In most of my life, i'm treated as an equal with men and when it comes to my sex life, i want to be reminded that I'm a woman.

  69. Anonymous says:

    Ill give you a couple more just for a time line as well.

    Boys in school that act like boys are drugged with ritalin, not for the benefit of the boys, but because the 96% female teachers cant handle the boys masculine energy.

    Girls who act like boys in school are rewarded with praise from teachers and peers. "You go grrrl!"

    Boys learn to supress masculinity and male energy or be singled out for abuse by teachers.

    School removes competitive sports and activities. Thats "unsafe" you know. Boys have no outlet for energy, act out, get more drugs.

    School is designed to teach quiet, introspective, social butterflies who will sit quietly and not ask any difficult questions. IE Girls. Boys who do not act this way are given drugs that make them sit quietly and not think or speak or really be capable of much at all.

    Many western universities are now starting to implement a special fee for courses that tend to be male dominated, in order to help "support" the female dominated fields. Specifically math and science courses(Male) are assesed for extra fees in order to pay for grievance studies and liberal arts courses(Female).

    Now adulthood. Social justice means that a woman has to be picked over an equally or even superiorly qualified man because the law says there have to be an equal number of women as men in the workplace.

    In a female dominated field, ie education, women will congregate, resulting in the above stats that show elementary education to be almost 96% (strange how the law says that there have to be at LEAST 50% women in a field, but the law doesnt care when there is less than 50% men) and men will be actively ostracized from their co-workers and often leave the field.

    In a male dominated field, ie Engineering, where less than 10% of students are female, EVERY D- barely passing female student is guaranteed a high paying job because of her gender. Not to mention that male professors in any field that fail female students tend to get reprimanded and risk losing thier jobs so females skew the curve. While some female professors tend to mark down male students just because they have to "even the score against the patriarchy" and never get called on it.

    (there are of course exceptional female engineers, my point is about the skewed laws and incentives, not achievement nor ability)

    Men will be sorted based on what they can achieve despite any handicapping, women will be sorted based on a gender quota.

    If a man wants to be a breadwinner, then he better not be competing for that job with a woman, no matter how qualified he may be.

    If a man gets married he is required to support that woman no matter what, and in many cases of divorce, long after the relationship ends, he is STILL required to support that woman, no matter what.

    If a woman gets married she is required to do what exactly? No fault divorce means she doesnt have to stay if she doesnt want to. Spousal rape laws mean she doesnt have to have sex with him. Presumed paternity means He has to pay for any kids she has, many times both former and with a "boyfriend". And since divorce means he has to support her no matter what, shes not even required to be particularly NICE to him either, since his filing for divorce still screws him over no matter the cause.

    In the workplace, a woman that complains about a man, for anything, will be believed and that man will likely be fired. A man who complains about any behaviour from a woman will be told to "suck it up, be a man" and sent back to work with a warning on his file that says "has diffuculty working with others"

    Does that qualify as some of the penalties men are burdened with for expressing masculinity?

  70. Jane says:

    Where's the continue??!!!

    Pinup art at work: Honestly, I think a lot of woman now a days, LOVE that old pinup art, simply because it really does embrase an attanable femininity. And if I walked in and saw a bunch of doctors going "look at the gams on that dame!" it probably wouldn't bother me because in the real world it would be (first name??) Fox draped over a car and guys would be saing "look at those DSLs (dick sucking lips, for you older fellas), I'd like to blow a load on her face" . Today's "pinup" is agregiously sexualized in a way that makes women go "eww" even if we'd be fine with that sex act in our own bedrooms with a guy we actually liked. And there is a price to that for both sexes. If sexuality is everywhere and at such an extreme, things that USED to cause sexual arousal is now considered mundane.

    As an example- go to the beach, in fact, go to SOUTH BEACH. It's a HUGE skin market of perfect bodies. Look around, what are men doing? Taking a nap, playing frizby wiht thier kids, reading, working on their laptops. They're in the presance of HUNDREDS of beautiful women wearing next to nothing and they're not really turned on, because well it's the beach, and what's the big deal. The body has lost it's errotic appeal because EVERYWHERE.

    Now the errotic appeal has to come from the taboo. On the more "vanilla" side of things, lets say you were walking home and by chance you saw a woman getting undressed in her bedroom through a partially open window. She's undressing and only wearing a bra and panties (which in fact is much more fabric than most women wear at the beach) it suddenly becomes a little more arrousing because you weren't supposed to se it. But now men need to see things that are even MORE private. They want to see women masturbating, or engaging in sex acts. This is what it takes because sex is EVERYWHERE to the point where it's just gotten kind of boring!

    And for the record, it makes women insecure when there's these women who are unattainably hot EVERYWHERE on TV and that really does seem to be the number one area of attraction for men, so how do we compete?? You guys get a whole nubmer of things that combine to make up your sex rank, we get like TWO! If your girl was constanly saying, "I really wanna get fucked by a guy a guy with a 10 inch dick, my friend suzie showed me a pic of her bf's cock and you would not believe how big it was!! You know what gets me wet? 6pack abs, I LOVE guys who are like 6'4" " eventually, that's gonna get old to you guys too. The not having that stuff at work is just about being respectful. As is, not eyeballing another woman's ass when you're on a date with your wife… Those rules at work, although they might make you feel like you've lost part of your manhood, if you flip the script you guys dont want to hear us gushing about every place you fall physically short either….

  71. Anonymous says:

    Have you had kids Jane?

    In the 50s business managers were taught not to hire women because they would take time off from work to have children. At the time, less than 10% of women returned to the workforce after having kids. That meant every dollar spent on training a woman to do any job was wasted if she got married and had kids. What was the rate then, 80-90 marriage rates? Thats a poor investment.

    Today, women still take time off work, and MOST would prefer to stay off work, many often only returning part time to thier previous jobs. FOr the most part the economy dictates this, as most couples with kids simply cannot live on a single salary. The same cost to business is there in hiring a woman now, but they hire women regard less of that cost.

    Affirmative action laws means you will get sued and lose money if you dont hire woman.

    Discrimination laws say you will be sued and lose money if you try to replace a woman who leaves work to have kids.

    Businesses do the math and it works out cheaper to hire the women. For now. But if the economy continues to peter out, or those laws go up in smoke, mens natural advantages come back. Not brute strength, just the ability to not have to suspend our jobs and careers to have and raise kids. To not cost our employers money for our personal choices.

  72. Anonymous says:

    I dont know about sexy as hell jane.

    1)commerical fisherman and followed by ( cut and pasted )

    2. Loggers and related: 91.9/100,000 — Same place rank as 2008.

    3. Aircraft Pilots and Flight Engineers: 70.6 — Up from #6 in 2008.

    4. Farmers and Ranchers: 41.4 — Same place rank as 2008.

    5. Mining Machine Operators: 38.7 — Up from #8 in 2008.

    6. Roofers: 32.4 — Up from #7 in 2008, becoming more deadly.

    7. Refuse and Recyclable Materials Collectors: 29.8 — Down from #5 in 2008

    8. Driver/Sales Workers and Truck Drivers: 21.8 — Up from #17 in 2008.

    9. Industrial Machinery Installation, Repair and Maintenance Workers: 20.3

    10. Police and Sheriff's Officers: 18.0 — Up from #12 in 2008.

  73. Anonymous says:

    Almost all marketing and advertising is targetted at women. The so called 80% of consumer spending controlled by women.

    Why do you assume that all this marketing, and advertising, and television programming, which is trying to reach WOMAN's consumer dollars, is all sex appeal, all the time, for men?

    That YOU might walk into a doctors office and not be bothered by racy talk about pin up girls is nice, it says something about your personality. But since all it takes is ONE womans complaint about it to pretty much shut down that office, and take away the licences to practice medicine of those doctors ( YOUR doctor in this case, which you are now without). Well that insures that it can never happen again in a male workplace.

    Women however, are free to put up any 6pack abs, giant dicked model playgirl/firefighter calendar they want and men cant say boo about it. Cause the men have to "man up, deal with it, and dont make a fuss over nothing"

  74. Ted D says:

    I love when women who mostly have the force of government backing them tell men to "step it up."

    No thanks.

  75. R. says:
  76. R. says:

    "Ian, you're over-thinking it. Women do not physically get turned on the same way as men do. And we require foreplay. Somewhere I read a long time ago that Women's libido is 20% physical and 80% mental. Men are the opposite."

    That is exactly what Athol is trying to teach people — how to make your wife turned on. And it requires game. So what is the issue with it?

    And keep in mind that while it's true that male libido is almost completely physical when hooking up and in early stages of commitment, it is about 50%/50% after some years with the same wife.

  77. Jane says:

    WHAT?! I'd like the other women to chime in here but um, i'd say most of those are sexy jobs. Check out a calendar of hot men geared toward women and see what those guys are wearing.

    Farmers/Ranchers – OMG, this has got to be one one the TOP sexiest jobs – dirty jeans, sexy white T, muscles glistening as he's riding a tractor…mmmmm….oh yeah, where was i…Cops are also hot in the hero/fantisy sence although i'll admit that actual cops i've known have kinda ruined that one for me (no firefighters on the list?! boo.)…Loggers, fisherman, miners, roofers, repair workers..these are all physical jobs that most women would enjoy watching thier men do. Pilots do seem to have some sex appeal – the uniform, the travel… and ok garbage men and drivers get the short end of the stick in that i guess that's dangerous work that's not hot…

  78. Jane says:

    I didn't say I wouldnt be bothered, I'm saying there's a LINE and because the line differs from person to person, obviously it's better for employers to draw a hard line. While I'm fine wiht a simple "nice gams" I really don't want ot hear…well really anything about your cum…and add in, that i dont really want to see you air thrusting or taking about giving it to her in the ass…there's just a LINE between rolling your eyes and outright disgust, that's all.

    I actually think the double standard here comes a little more from threat level. When a man is learing at a woman and shouting sexual remarks, women feel AFRAID and this is because you guys ARE bigger and stronger and are responsible for something like 98% of all violent crime. And historically men have used sexual violence as a way to punish women.

    If a woman whistles at you, have you ever felt afraid?? If you're like my guy, you probably blush and start flexing…but pretending you're not…suck in your stomach maybe wave or smile. (And for the record, where I work, there'd be no way you could have a fireman calendar up at work…I got in trouble about a farside cartoon I had on my desk…i mean that's in the newspaper, c'mon!)

    I dont neccessarily think that men are the only ones that are marketed to with sex appeal, that goes for women too. Unfortuately, I think a lot of the marketing to women focus on what we are "failing" at and making us feel bad about ourselves. If you WANT men to look at you, you'd better get X product. And if you don't get the laundry done, you're a total failure as a mother…That stuff is totally there, but I just don't really want to get into a martyr debate about who has it worse.

  79. Jane says:

    Ted – I think the reason you get a fairly heated response on this issue from women is because from our point of view, men who are …lets say low ranking…bitch and moan about how it's everyone's fault but their own and fail to actually DO anything about it. There's a tendancy for these types of guys to play the martyr card complaining that "oh boo hoo, life's not fair" and "the reason i didn't get the promotion is because they gave it some bitch/black guy/kiss ass/whatever" and they fail to even CONSIDER that they might, just MIGHT suck at their job or be irritating as hell to work with because of their piss poor attitude!

    I fully realize that this is a minority of men, but good god, they seem make the most noise…

    Men claim (on this thread even) that they love and need competition….except when it's women they're competing with…can you see how this doesn't sit right?

  80. Ian Ironwood says:

    Actually, living in the South as I do, I have met PLENTY of African American Entitlement Princesses. While they don't believe they deserve the hunky billionaire like their white friends do, they do believe that they deserve a wealthy sports or entertainment figure for no particular reason other than their ladyparts.

    And there is a far more destructive "war of the sexes" in African American culture. Where the white man got knocked around a little by divorce culture, the black man got run over and then backed over.

  81. Jane says:

    I am definately not up to speed on AA law so I can't really comment on that, but I do believe that they apply to the fact that if you hire the white guy he'd beter actually BE better than the woman for some reason? Again, I'm not up on my law as to if/where these things exist anymore and to what extent…

    Maternatity leave: I work for the state of california. Who is the largest employer of californians. So I don't know how other places do things, but here, the men get to take paternaty leave if they want it and up to a year of protected family bonding time, just as the women do. Granted they aren't eligable for physical disabilty (I believe women get 4 weeks of this) after childbirth because they didn't squeeze something the size of a watermellon out of a hole the size of a lemon. You men DO get time of if you have another surgery or physical injury.

    I'll also add to this argument the perception of women in the workforce vs men when it comes to child rearing. When a woman in a power position around here takes time off bc her kid has a baseball game or whatever people go "tisk tisk, that's why women shouldn't be in power, they always put their kids first…" when the men do it everyone's swooning "oh what a great dad he is! so involved!" So you actually see the flip of the time off thing as you go higher up the chain – women take a lot less time off than the men for childcare purposes.

    My personal feeling on this in both directions is that family ought to come first for both genders and that it's the best interest of SOCIETY to promote family bonding for men AND women and thier childeren.

    And no, I don't have kids, but I'm currently TTC and my boss is aware that I when I do, I'll be taking time off. I also selected this job over a few other higher paying offers at the time because the boss was willing to offer a flex work schedule after I had childeren. These were choices that were/are available to me because I'm very GOOD at my job and they are used as inticements. I don't feel sorry for including them in my negotiations 8 years ago when I started here and a flex schedule will likely mean that I will stay here probably until my childeren are out of school…that's a win for both sides…

  82. Ian Ironwood says:

    "With regard to being a breadwinner – if you want that, you'd better go get it! Not by knocking women down but by being BETTER. You want to make more money than me, you'd better to have something to offer that I don't. I have no problem with my husband making more money than me, great if he does! We could use more money! I just dont want that achieved by ME making LESS thna what I do now. "

    Fair enough. But the fact is, men don't want to compete with women, who use their sexuality as a weapon at work often enough to make any defense an opening to litigation. That doesn't mean we won't . . . but please understand that our reluctance isn't based on sexism as much as it is the perception that women get unfair advantages and unfair treatment at work while screaming that they are being constantly oppressed. My wife makes more than I do, and that's fine. But that doesn't take the sting out of it.

    What this did lead to was a whole generation of men essentially losing their ambitions to succeed, knowing that their "success" would be tainted. And the working conditions often suck. I've known dudes who quit good jobs because they got tired of the petty office politics of a room full of women. Why try that hard when you're only going to get pulled down?

    "The thing is, if you look at high earning degrees, women are graduating at a rate much higher than men. On AVERAGE we're starting to really just achieve more than the men and thus men are no longer the "breadwinners." We didn't put you in that roll, you guys just haven't been keeping up. "

    I take issue with that. Considering that admissions and retention policies at major universities have been steadily tilted towards admitting and promoting women over men for the last forty years, there are valid reasons for why men don't graduate at a higher rate. It's not that we haven't been keeping up, we've been kept from keeping up for forty years. I see it today in my 12 year old son's middle school: policies designed to reward girls and punish boys abound, and a girl is over twice as likely to receive assistance as a boy . . . unasked.

    "Women entering the workforce has just increased the competition. You now have to be that much better because there are twice as many employees to choose from."

    That's the point. Why bother? Men are trained from birth NOT to compete with women, and then we're punished when we do, even as the girls are trying to "encourage" us to make their "victories" look good. And then these "competitive" women languish in singlehood because the very men they've been competing against during the day have no interest in dealing with that same competition in a relationship. Yet the women feel like we're somehow mistreating them by punishing their career success with a lack of a social life.

    This is the new reality, life in the feminist utopia. But we don't have to like it. We don't. And we're not going to start, any time soon. We'd rather compete with other dudes on videogames than women in the workforce. It's just more fair.

  83. R. says:

    Again: Do Women Earn Less than Men?
    http://youtu.be/EwogDPh-Sow

  84. Jane says:

    BTW – just want to add that I really like this group and this thread simply for the ability to have such a well thought out discussion on a fairly heated topic without any of the ussual weird internet name calling and "I'll show you what a real man is…with my cock" or "9-11 was an inside job" that is generally SOOOO comon on these blogging sites….

  85. Ian Ironwood says:

    "So you can marry beneath you (1950's) to keep her desperately clinging on because she only has a high school diploma and a minimum wage job, OR you can marry your equal (2010's)and keep her willingly with you because you take her out on dates, cook her favorite dishes, dance with her in the kitchen, and give 10 second kisses."

    Sure. That's what I'm doing. I'm damn good at it.

    But those aren't the only two options. In fact, those are the MINORITY options, these days. Instead, a strong plurality of young men are eschewing American women altogether, or never marrying, because they don't want to have to put in that much work for that little reward. Because when you're talking about wining and dining and 10 second kisses, you're assuming that the woman in question is sufficient quality to be worth the effort.

    And the sad fact is, these days, they just ain't.

    Mrs. Ironwood and Jennifer and thousands of others are exceptions, of course. But when I see what prospects my sons have to look forward to, I'm going to recommend they learn Spanish or Korean.

    That's why Athol's Married Game is so important to me, and so many other men. Without it we'd be divorced now — not because we suck at being men, but because our wives don't know how to appreciate real masculinity in the current cultural matrix.

    And it has everything to do with feminism. Feminism has told our girls that "they can do anything and deserve everything!", including the absolute best man they can steal. Feminism has taught boys, on the other hand, that "If you do anything (we don't like) we will DESTROY YOUR SORRY MALE ASS." They've been undermining the very masculinity they decry in public and lust for in private. And even women who don't identify as feminist have bought into the over-all construct: that women were so oppressed for so long that they deserve whatever they can take from men, without apology.

    Game is the consolation prize. And its one feminist don't want us to have, because they fear the fact that it works, and their own sexuality can be used against them. But it's a poor consolation prize, considering what we've lost. Respect, most of all.

    And, sadly, we've lost a lot of respect for Women along the way, too.

  86. Ian Ironwood says:

    "I'd like the other women to chime in here but um, i'd say most of those are sexy jobs."

    Nothin' sexier than an above-the-knee amputation, I suppose.

  87. Ian Ironwood says:

    Thanks, but it's my porn name.

    And I'd also recommend "King, Warrior, Magician, Lover", dealing with masculine archetypes, published around the same time as IJ.

  88. Jane says:

    I suppose the point here (besides daydreaming until my 3day weekend starts) goes way back to another conversation where we talked about sex appeal. Being a good provider is ONE thing that CAN make you sexy. These jobs happen to be the most dangerous, lower earning, and dominated by men, and yet I don't think there's are a lot of women who'd say "oh I can't date a farmer…" These jobs get respect/sex appeal in part BECAUSE they're dangerous – it's sexy when you guys do things that women can't/won't or when you do something better than us…

    ..and i'd probably date an amputee…especially if he like lost his leg in combat or got shot taking down a perp …or got attacked by a shark while surfing…see, it's all in the details…

  89. Jane says:

    a guy who lost his leg to type 2 diabetes…not. daydream. material….I always have to ruin it…

  90. Anonymous says:

    I can't speak to African American men. Also, the alpha/beta terms seems to be used differently in the manosphere than what it traditionally use to mean.

    Men (in particular white men) in the Western nations are using game in response to issues unique to that group and culture.

    Men are not penalized for being men in my home country. While there are women right's movement happening, there is no sexual revolution attached to it. The common slogan is "EQUAL but DIFFERENT". There is none of this men and women are exactly the same and it's just social conditioning that forces them to be different.

    Knowledge of the differences btw male-female dynamics is just part of the course of growing up.

    NG

  91. Jane says:

    Ok, a lot of those responses, are the very reason that women (in general) are less attracted to men (in general) – cause they all involve "why bother" and quiting when work gets hard because there's drama…too much quiting with you men…that "poor me, life's so hard" attitude is really the anithesis of sexy….

    I don't argue that these conditions exist for men – there's a good list provided from other posters of examples that do ring true (and a handfull that sound like buzz words), but if we're talking about attraction, i think it comes down on a LOT of levels that it's hot if a man is about something, anything…lazy martyrs are just not hot. If you don't like it – change it (it's a big undertaking, but at least then you'd be DOING something).

  92. Jane says:

    "Equal but different" that kinda sounds like "separate but equal" used in segrigation here…I don't think a lot of black people would like it if we went back to that way of thinking…

    However, I do aknowlege that men and women are absolutely different when you look at averages, just as there is a huge amount of variablitiy within a sex – there's a reason "women" aren't a political demografic – there's more variation within than set them apart…

  93. Anonymous says:

    @ Ian,

    My understanding is that you're in the entertainment industry in some form or the other. Well in that type of surrounding I would guess the kinds of men and women attracted to those professions are usually more self absorbed and narcissistic than the average.

    As an immigrant/1st gen American, I'm no expert on AA culture, but I stand by my original sentiment.

    When I see the average black women given the same leeway to getaway with HALF of the crazy actions and behaviors I see their white counterparts excused off, then I would apply the Entitlement Complex label equally.

  94. Anonymous says:

    @ Jane,

    The Equal part has more to do with the kinds of rights women fought for during the 1st and part of the 2nd wave of the feminist movement.

    The Different is more like what you stated in your 2nd paragraph. Many western philosophies and ideologies don't translate the same even when some aspects are adopted by other cultural groups.

  95. Anonymous says:

    My point about the marking was this part here

    "I think a lot of the marketing to women focus on what we are "failing" at and making us feel bad about ourselves. If you WANT men to look at you, you'd better get X product. And if you don't get the laundry done, you're a total failure as a mother…That stuff is totally there"

    That "stuff" is totally written by women.

    And as ted pointed out below. The law backs the woman, in almost any situation. Men are not fearful of women, men are fearful of being thrown in jail at the whim of a woman. It is LITERALLY better to not interact with risky women ( and each man draws his own risk line) than to risk pretty much the end of your career, financial security, family, health, and freedom.

    You are afraid of a mans strength and power when walking down the street. I get that. Ive heard that from my own family members and I can see where you are coming from. A Man risks the end of his very life for offending a woman with the armed power of the law on her side. Do you dismiss that reality to men as easily as some men dismiss your fear of danger from other men?

  96. Odds says:

    Jane, you're doing well here, and your sympathy over the individual points is appreciated, but I don't think you're recognizing the core of the issue we're getting at.

    The game has been rigged against men in a lot of ways, our incentives have been reduced, our self-image reduced to a small, anachronistic remnant of it's former self (with no alternative apparent save thuggery and PUA)… and yet, women's attraction triggers remain unchanged. Sure, there are exceptions out there (you may even be one of them, for all I know), but for the most part, biology has done it's usual poor job keeping up with social change.

    When you say that men should overcome and succeed in these circumstances in order to be attractive, what really happening is our world is raising the bar for men, lowering the bar for women, and then telling us menfolk that the very women we are trying to impress will now be doing their best to beat us in the unfair playing field, and they will still only be attracted to the winners.

    There can only be so many winners. I'm not making any value judgments in this post about women working or whatever (I'm an engineer, and knew enough competent women at work and in undergrad, and now in grad school, that it's a non-issue to me). I'm just saying that when the game is rigged, and there can be fewer winners, and the prize (de-feminized women) is less than it used to be (or perhaps more importantly, what we perceive it used to be), being told "Just go out and do better and win!" is disingenuous. The bottom 80% of guys are going to see this, shake their heads, and go learn Game.

    Take, for instance, my last job. There was a corporate ladder to climb, but the company needed more women in middle and upper management, so they needed to produce more experienced female project leaders. So, around the time they started looking for people, us menfolk knew that no matter how good we were, we weren't getting the job. There are only X number of promotions per year. They promoted a very competent, very personable woman who was certainly qualified for the job, and I don't hold anything against her – but so what? There was never a competition. I could be the next Leonhard Euler and I still would have had no shot. If I had a wife, think of it from her perspective: not only did I not get the promotion, I did not even have a chance to get competitive, a chance for her to see me get passionate and gung-ho. Because there was never any competition.

    On the other hand, now that I've gone back to school, I get daily chances to spit Game at undergrads, and as I've gotten better, it's started working. Why bother with a rigged game trying to scrape for the heavily-rationed traditional markers of masculine success when a vague show of confidence is a much easier, quicker, and more effective DHV?

  97. Anonymous says:

    Jaz and Jane, you are spitting out what all of the women's magazines *say* women want, a nice guy that worships them. This nice guy stuff only works on a woman that the man has previously impressed with his alpha aura.

    Most male readers here have already tried the nice guy card many times and been slapped down by their women. These guys don't need help being nice. They need a bit more of the aloof, dominant technique. Fewer flowers, more confidence.

  98. Anonymous says:

    Ian Gets a standing O from me. Men are being persecuted and discriminated against. Male aggressiveness, the very essence of what makes a man a man has been declared socially unacceptable. I am not talking about physical violence. Rather, ambition, drive and yes anger when appropriate. These things are now taboo in the USA.

    Men are not afraid of strong women. Men are have been handcuffed with women's empowerment schemes that put us at a disadvantage. The competition is unfair.

    In any event, my wife has responded very well to my adoption of MMSL. I get more sex because she wants more sex w/ me. Not because I've used some vodoo on her.

  99. Anonymous says:

    Jane, most Californians are from another planet. Your posts are a breath of fresh air.

    Men do love competition and love competition from women. it just has to be fair competition. There are many women at work that I refuse to interact with because they make me afraid that i will be hauled down to HR and fired.

  100. The MacNut says:

    As Jaz71 will point out below, women are no longer impressed by career and educational achievement, not when they can get the same things themselves. Men need something extra these days to get a keep a woman, and Game, whether Married or Single, is it.

  101. Jaz71 says:

    I work in a very male dominated field, and yes, they do resent my presence. As a result, I have to do twice as much so that they can't find anything to fault. Even then some still resent me because I make them look bad comparatively from a quality and quantity standpoint. I'm finishing my MA this year, so change is coming.

    And Jane is right: the men who bitch the most are the laziest lumps. Their work ethic sucks, and they certainly aren't sexy or remotely datable.

  102. Anonymous says:

    Jane,
    You should start your own blog.

  103. Ted D says:

    "Men claim (on this thread even) that they love and need competition….except when it's women they're competing with…can you see how this doesn't sit right?"

    I can't speak for all men, but I do hate "competing" with women. Want to know why? Because I was taught as a child that I shouldn't compete with them. I wasn't allowed to hit them, rough house with them, beat them in sports, etc. In cases where I did beat them, I was told it wasn't fair because I was male, and men are stronger/faster/bigger/etc.

    I don't like competing with women, because I have yet to find such a competition that is fair. We had years of affirmative action, and I personally was involved in vetting processes for new hires where we were told that we needed more "variety" in the office so we should give preferential treatment to women, especially if they were minorities. And the worst part is that we actually did have a quota, and since our department (I work in IT) was almost all male, we NEEDED females to "balance out the disparity". We turned down dozens of fully qualified men over the course of a few years because we never reached our 'quota'.

    As to whether this "sits right" with women I really don't know or care. The truth is, WOMEN are the ones that wanted to "compete like men". I don't think there were many men thinking it was a good idea at the time, and it seems that maybe they were right. Well, women got what they wanted, and now they are upset that there are no "good men" to marry. You beat them all, and no one wants to be with a loser it seems…

  104. Anonymous says:

    Ok, a lot of those responses, are the very reason that women (in general) are less attracted to men (in general) – cause they all involve "why bother" and quiting when work gets hard because there's drama…too much quiting with you men…that "poor me, life's so hard" attitude is really the anithesis of sexy….

    I don't argue that these conditions exist for men – there's a good list provided from other posters of examples that do ring true (and a handfull that sound like buzz words), but if we're talking about attraction, i think it comes down on a LOT of levels that it's hot if a man is about something, anything…lazy martyrs are just not hot. If you don't like it – change it (it's a big undertaking, but at least then you'd be DOING something

    jane, you said some good stuff but this is a typical BS response. basically you are saying, men can not complain about anything, suck it up, your a man, work harder. Been there tried that, been called an insenstive workaholic. You see, there is always a way to spin your pretty words. That is why guys are fed up because we can't win. That is not a defeatist attitude just the facts. Add to that, women are now chasing low life bad boys with no job living in their moms basement because she thinks he is a bad boy or something and we are really confused. I think high promiscuity among the majority of women affect this as well. In the past men worked hard to compete for women because women found that attractive. Now we are expected to do all these things, don't complain or else you’re a loser as stated above, keep yourself in shape, be romantic, do manly stuff around the house, raise the kids, do your fair share around the house, oh and your wife has slept with twenty other guys before you, no thanks. Average men marry average women, well those average women slept with above average men, a lot of them, because guys will F$#@ down but not commit down. When those girls realize they are not getting commitment from these guys, they go for guys in there league, who have had far less sexual experience than their soon to be wives. What they bring to the marriage we don’t want; money, education, tattoos, cursing and promiscuity. That doesn't seem special to me, i mean you gave it up to everyone else but i got to put up with your crap? who won there, I would vote for the guy that got to do god knows what and moved on to the next one. Yes, it is all about sex get over it. So I guess women are not much of a prize anymore so why work hard for something that is not very valuable. I am supposed to treat you as some pure princess, when you gave it up to a holes in the past, why? Do you see guys competing for worthless trophies anywhere else, nope, always made of gold. you give me something special to work for or shut the &$#@ up. Women were the gatekeepers of sex, they have since destroyed the gate altogether, men are acting accordingly. So quit arguing to us and talk to your female friends. I used to be the nicest guy around and it got me nowhere, I am now an a$$hole, which I don’t even like to be, but I like the way people act towards me. When someone sees both sides from a big shift like that it is amazing. I would liken it to the girl who was always heavy but lost weight and now sees the world for what it is. She knows because she has seen both sides as have i. Working harder aint gonna cut it, it is deeper than that. It amazes me that the women have been getting more and more of what they supposedly wanted for years and they seem unhappier than ever. This is a generalization but when a majority is this way it effects the society as a whole even if you don’t fit in that generalization.

  105. Anonymous says:

    red is my hero

  106. Anonymous says:

    i will put that in the vows next time around so she isn't confused. give me a break.

  107. Anonymous says:

    i will fall back on actions not words. think back about all teh foreplay you had with your other lovers. i am a counselor and have seen thousdands of marriages broken up by women who claim this exact same thing all while they are cheating on their husbands. when asked what romance their boyfriends provide, almost all can come up with anything. I have heard, but that is because i am married, i know he will be romantic, it is the way he desire me, etc. this is all in their heads. Sometimes i lose faith in your sex after i see so many unbelievable stories and manipulaition.

  108. Anonymous says:

    ian for president

  109. Anonymous says:

    Weird story i remembered form this dialogue. When i was young there was a rap group that put out that hit, "women ain't nothing but b!tches and hoes" at the time i thought it was despicable and such low class to talk about let alone treat women like that. twenty years later and many dealings with women, there was something to that, they are not the specail creatures i once thought they were.

  110. Anonymous says:

    Jane – I think the reason you get a fairly heated response on this issue from men is because from our point of view, women who are …lets say low ranking…bitch and moan about how it's everyone's fault but their own and fail to actually DO anything about it. There's a tendancy for these types of girls to play the martyr card complaining that "oh boo hoo, life's not fair" and "the reason i didn't get the promotion is because they gave it some asshole/black guy/kiss ass/whatever" and they fail to even CONSIDER that they might, just MIGHT suck at their job or be irritating as hell to work with because of their piss poor attitude!

    I fully realize that this is a minority of women, but good god, they seem make the most noise…

    Women claim (on this thread even) that they love and need competition….except when it's men and they're competing without affirmative action…can you see how this doesn't sit right?

  111. John Robie says:

    "Women quite enjoy being Gamed provided the guy isn't going to pump and dump them."

    When a girl likes a guy right from the beginning, and he doesn't do anything weird/creepy/stupid to screw it up, she'll adore everything he does. Be Amazing,
    JR

Trackbacks

  1. [...] and the posthumous “there just wasn’t any spark” speech she gives to her friends. As Athol Kay put it: There’s probably not a single man reading this blog who hasn’t had his heart ripped out by a [...]

Speak Your Mind

*