Are Women Like Exotic Pets?

Reader:   The Manosphere paints women in a pretty ugly light (by my standards), and I can’t help but think if it is really that bad, why bother at all?  If my SO’s true nature is like that, what is the purpose of being with her?  I already have children from my previous marriage.  At this point I simply want a friend and companion to be with, but what I’m being told is that no woman will ever understand me, understand my concerns or issues, and doesn’t really want to know what makes me tick.  The impression I get from them is that women are like kids at Disneyland:  They love the rides, but don’t want to know how they work, and would be disappointed to find out.

In your experience, is this true?  Do you find that you do not tell Jennifer some things because she doesn’t want to know?  Is being the captain really about being alone with another person right beside you?  I know that there is no truly equal relationship, and that’s fine.  But it is a far different thing to say that my SO simply wants to ride along wherever I go, and that as long as *I* am firm in my direction she will happily tag along.  I really am not looking for a passenger, I’d like a participant.  But at this point I don’t know if that is possible or practical.

I get the feeling that what is described is much more like owning an exotic pet than having a mate.  I am being told that it is my “job” and “duty” to “guide” her, which comes across to me an awful lot like “daddy” her. (not that being called daddy at appropriate times isn’t a good thing…)  I don’t want to be responsible for her moods or actions.  I’d like her to take control of that and come to me so that we can combine ideas and efforts to build something better.

Am I wishing for a pipe dream?  Is the secret to relationship success really about taking the brunt of the work and letting my mate pick what she wants to do from the list of responsibilities?  If so, then I feel very much like I will forever being doing far more “work” than she ever will.  No, not like washing dishes or folding laundry, I mean the interpersonal inner/spiritual/soul kinda work.  The stuff that builds an emotional bond.  How can I emotionally bond with someone if I can’t tell her how I really think and feel?  How can we support each other if we don’t understand each other?  Can I ever expect her to understand on any level the dedication and work I’m putting in?  How can I keep her from taking me for granted if she has NO idea what I’m doing to make things work?

Sorry, I know that’s a lot of crap in a short burst, but I know you are busy and I don’t want to take up too much of your time.  As far as it goes, everything you’ve told me and written has been spot on, I just don’t like what I’ve found behind the curtain at Disneyland.

Athol:  The Manosphere can be a black hole sucking in all your happiness and positive thoughts can’t escape it.

Most of the Game websites view women exactly as you say, as “exotic pets” and they give advice as such. Frankly though if women really are exotic pets, you shouldn’t mess with one at all. Eventually every animal has a bad day, and a 400 pound tiger having a bad day isn’t the same as a 10 pound cat having a bad day. Likewise if women are essentially dangerous wild animals, divorce and cheating are essentially assured unless you relentlessly manage their behavior. If that were truly the case, my advice would be to buy a Fleshlight, a ten-foot-pole and the highest quality streaming porn money can buy.

Rather than debate what they say, let me restate my thoughts.

Both men and women have biological drives toward a primary pair bond and opportunistic sex. Both men and women have modern socialization, education and intellect. Both men and women have access to technology that can gain some degree of control over sexual outcomes. Both men and women have rationalization hamsters.

Most importantly, both men and women can have either an unconscious relationship, or a conscious relationship. By unconscious relationship, I mean they simply go along through life believing that all their feelings and thoughts are something that they have no control over or ever hope to understand. If they are horny, it’s because they are horny. If they are in love, it’s because they are in love. If they are happy, it’s because they are happy.

The conscious relationship however acknowledges that we have a ton of hormones and neurotransmitters following ancient programming telling us how to think and feel. If we are horny, it’s because of testosterone surging through our veins. If we are in love, it’s because of dopamine. If we are happy, it’s because our needs are being meet and we are enjoying things. Because we are conscious of these things, we can also exert some conscious control over them by our actions. We can actually adapt and outwit our own biology to some extent. We can understand that we’re designed for a primary pair bond and also opportunistic sex, and be able to pull off monogamy by having regular sex together, and also some highly irregular high intensity sex together. One hits the oxytocin response, the other hits the dopamine one. Thus fooled, our bodies relax and tell us we’re happy.

What most of the Manosphere advises assumes that the male is conscious (“Takes the Red Pill”) and the female is unconscious. What I generally seem to find happening with MMSL is both men and women become conscious. My hunch is about 25-35% of my readership are couples. Sometimes the husband finds MMSL first, sometimes the wife does.

The Captain and First Officer model of marriage is ideally a “both conscious” model of functioning. It acknowledges both the biological drives of male dominance and female hypergamy and harnesses them for their erotic potential within the marriage. But at the same time it acknowledges that this is a free will choice to create a hierarchical dyad, and while inside the relationship is male dominance and female submission, outside the relationship is an open playing field. Within the marriage I lead Jennifer, outside of the relationship I am a male nurse and when a female doctor writes an order… I follow it. Outside the relationship Jennifer complies with males that are in positions of social dominance over her, but she doesn’t have sex with them.

Jennifer is my best friend. I’ve told her things about myself that no one else knows. I’m her lover and I consciously choose to attract her. She’s also my lover and I’ve consciously told her things to do that attract me. Also because this is the way sexuality works, I’ve told her quite firmly that she will do X Y and Z to attract me or she will face undesired outcomes.

If your SO is conscious and self-aware, I think there’s plenty of hope for a genuinely deep friendship along with the nuts and bolts of having to keep up the basic opposite sex attractiveness. Wife selection is absolutely critical though. Some women believe they are exotic animals, and they should be avoided. You can’t make a tiger into a house cat. Personally I find Jennifer to be a wonderful pet, after all, who doesn’t love an affectionate pussy that likes jumping into your lap.

Related posts:

  1. Why Doesn’t God Answer Prayers To Make Christian Men Attracted To Overweight Christian Women? Hi, Athol– I recently discovered your Married Man blog and...
  2. Women As Enemy Vs Prize And The Doublethink Of Game I’ve mentioned in passing either that seeing women as the...
  3. Women That Aren’t Wife Material Waste Your Dating Time Pair-bonding is real and won’t be disappearing anytime within our...
  4. Most Women Are Bad In Bed I’ve read a few blogs recently that have stated little...
  5. Are Women Are Evil Crazy Bitches Out To Get Us? There was a comment on ”When Her Anger Is Just A...

Comments

  1. Codeazure says:

    This is a really superb post – one of your best.

    It underlies that there is a dramatic difference between the tactics and strategies of gaming for short term sex or in a LTR.

    I do like the analogy of the Red Pill to consciousness. It’s true it does very much apply to both partners in a relationship.

    I wonder if some women who have extreme emotional outbursts during the pre-menstrual phase are “unconscious” and blindly reacting to the hormone shit storm going on in their bodies. Where those who are aware and understand what is going on are better able to manage their emotions. Just a thought…

  2. Suz says:

    Well said, Athol. Women (and men) aren’t designed to be mindless bimbos, we become mindless bimbos because life rarely punishes us very severely for not being mindful. Not having to consider real consequences, is a luxury born of surplus survival resources. If women were innately mindless (worthless, amoral, narcissistic, etc…), we’d have gone extinct a long time ago.

  3. Liz says:

    “…I’ve told her quite firmly that she will do X Y and Z to attract me or she will face undesired outcomes.”

    That sounds horrible.

    I do get other women interested in me you know. If Jennifer consistently failed to attract me, there would eventually be undesired outcomes. I’ve been explicitly clear about what does and doesn’t attract me and it’s absolutely not a mystery to her what works to pull my attention. Plus it’s not all that hard to do. This is no different than for my male readers who come here because they are faced with the undesired outcomes of wives that have no interest in having sex with them, are about to divorce them, or are in affairs. If you fail to attract your partner, you will always experience undesired outcomes. I tell her “firmly” because she responds positively to my dominance over her.

  4. ExtremeBalance says:

    “The Manosphere can be a black hole sucking in all your happiness and positive thoughts can’t escape it.”

    I am glad I found the Manosphere but the above is the very reason that MMSL and a couple others are my only regular readings. Keep up the good work.

  5. AnonJohn says:

    well liz, you sound to me like you think you dont have any responsibilities to your spouse. that sounds horrible to me too.

    why do women believe that once they are in a relationship and have secured a commitment from a male, that they then don’t have any sexual responsibilities?

  6. Odds says:

    @ Liz

    So, if there’s something you want in a marriage, you don’t tell your husband, and you don’t hold it against him when you never get what you want? Or do you tell him, and then continue to feel the same about him when he ignores you?

    I’m assuming that if he doesn’t do anything that attracts you, or if he does the bare minimum, that you are perfectly content with the situation, and will be for the rest of your life?

    Or do you just lie and frame all your needs as just passing thoughts he shouldn’t bother with?

  7. mmaier2112 says:

    What the hell do you do with the 10 foot pole?

    Use it to fend off women at a safe distance.

  8. x says:

    @mmaier2112: it’s to keep women away. “Wouldn’t touch one with a ten foot pole!”

  9. deti says:

    Suz: “Women (and men) aren’t designed to be mindless bimbos, we become mindless bimbos because life rarely punishes us very severely for not being mindful. Not having to consider real consequences, is a luxury born of surplus survival resources.”

    So brief and yet brilliant.

    So many women act sexually as if there are no consequences, simply because they never have to face any (short term) consequences.

  10. Harkat says:

    Yup, the manosphere has been a real downer. Not because I’m unconfident in my ability to learn game, but because, in the end, I don’t want a fucking pet. Not in an LTR. If women are JUST hypergamous machines that I have to learn how to manipulate, life is pretty fucking empty.

  11. Candice says:

    Codeazure – I think consciousness of mood changes due to hormones, tiredness etc and a desire to limit collateral damage contribute to control and reduced impact on people around one. I used to put off decisions and compliants until after the PMS time and when I suffered dreadfully from menopause I hid myself away (except when Awesome provided relaxing dinners out and cuddles). However, there is a limit to how much someone with a reduced frustration threshold can cope with – hence the fight or flight reaction can kick in. If someone cannot cope, don’t goad and push them, give them space to get back to normal or help them out. This applies to PMS and menopausal hormone issues.

    Liz – “…I’ve told her quite firmly that she will do X Y and Z to attract me or she will face undesired outcomes.” Perhaps Athol has used an unfortunate turn of phrase. But, I am with you – I see threats as the last failing resort to rescue a failing relationship. I tell Awesome what I would like and he me, but we would never threaten each other. We live in a much gentler world where there is a lot of communication, many rewards and no mention of punishments. Sometimes we are not ready to do something the other requests, so we remember and do it later. I respect his boundaries, but if he started to lay down the law like that he’d not longer be the treasured partner he is.

    Billy says one should be very blatant and clear when telling a man something because men don’t get hints like women do. However, I don’t think any man would react well if his wife said – “you do X and Y or face the undesirable consequences!” Far better to say, “it is very important to me that you …. ” and outline the benefits. Cuddles also are a wonderful way to frame a request! That said, people are different – perhaps one has to threaten some people?

    :-) C

  12. Doe says:

    @Harkat
    If you don’t want a pet, don’t pick a woman whose greatest value to you is ornamental. Pick someone who shares a hobby or interest or is a good conversationalist. The Game part is relationship maintenance–it’s what keeps an otherwise good match from running off the rails after 5+ years, or what gets your foot in the door and keeps it open until she discovers you’re an interesting person worth following.

    There’s an awful lot of selection bias from the PUAs out there. PUAs want women to be machines they can manipulate, because it reduces seduction to a series of functions and means they can fulfill their desire for constant, available sex without ever having to settle down.

  13. jr says:

    “The Manosphere can be a black hole sucking in all your happiness and positive thoughts can’t escape it.”

    This is the way I feel every time I read Roissy. That one is a pure nihilist.

  14. Suz says:

    Really, Liz? A frank, honest discussion about needs and desires, and about the NATURAL (not arbitrarily assigned) effects (“consequences”) of having one’s needs neglected, sounds horrible to you? Perhaps it might be “horrible” to have such expectations of a casual GF, but a wife? A committed wife has EVERYTHING to gain by having a satisfied husband. It’s in her own interests to know what her husband wants, and if she actually loves him, she CARES about what he wants!

    I’ll eat my shirt if you think that a husband shouldn’t be made to feel beholden to his wife’s needs, so why do you object to this concept being mutual? Don’t you want “equality?” Or do you see the ideal marriage as one in which the husband enslaves himself to his wife’s whims, and the wife pleases her husband if and when she feels like it? One-sided accountability, both culturally and legally, is precisely why the institution of marriage (and hence the family itself) is in tatters.

  15. VH says:

    So women _are_ as generally described in the manosphere–it’s just that their inclinations can be controlled. So the question is, should a man count on a woman to control these inclinations, or should a man take an active role in controlling a woman’s impulses? If the latter, you’ve got yourself an exotic pet–one that may not tear your face off, but one that will very likely cheat on you–just as you’ll likely cheat on her. You’re better off hoping for the best but gaming her for the worst. Above all else, get game.

  16. horseman says:

    @suz
    I think you nailed a major reason for unhappy marriages. the spouse in control either male or female has alltheir survival needs met by their overly beta partner. As long as they are out hunting, earning, providing sex then the human survival instinct to achieve goes to sleep. Really for most people achieving for its own sake is too much work. . So most need a reward. status, adrenaline, dopamine, etc. and put in just wnough effort to get those wants met. So when the beta takes the red pill changes and puts those survival resources in jeapordy then the dominant wakes up. its what triggers the unconditional love response after marriage. you love me so i dont have to contribute. if marriage was time definite and therefore a removal of resources was on the horizon many men and women would treat marriage a lot differently.

  17. Höllenhund says:

    “Both men and women have rationalization hamsters.”

    Huh?

    “If I don’t have sex with this married woman, she’s just going to have sex with some other guy anyway. So it may as well be me she has sex with. It’s not my problem she isn’t interested in her husband. Not like it’s going to hurt anyone.”

  18. Ponyboy says:

    @Harkat

    If you look at “game” as manipulation then you have probably already lost.

    It’s about a different frame of reference. You still need to go through the same process in choosing a mate as she does with you, but you are doing it from a different frame of reference.

    If she doesn’t fit, she doesn’t fit; but if you are trying to manipulate her then regardless of what frame of reference you are working from you will never know who she truly is.

  19. Ian Ironwood says:

    “There’s an awful lot of selection bias from the PUAs out there. PUAs want women to be machines they can manipulate, because it reduces seduction to a series of functions and means they can fulfill their desire for constant, available sex without ever having to settle down.”

    I take issue with this. The PUAs are running Single Game, and as such they focus on the rather formulaic attraction-and-seduction aspect of Game. Most of the Single Gamers have either checked out of the LTR side of things or haven’t met the right woman. It’s not that they want “machines to manipulate”, they are just presented with a problem in aggregate, and a process-based approach is better than all of that “be yourself” crap that doesn’t lead to a satisfactory outcome. If fewer women were “manipulatable” then their techniques wouldn’t work. But the fact is, they do work, and they’re using them to pursue their mating strategy. Why is that a problem?

  20. Firepower says:

    It’s the first marriage that’s the most likely to stick. Divorce increases with each following marriage.

    Most of those I speak to say (even after the wife bulks up)
    “I’m just glad to be married, so I don’t have to date any more.”

    Staying married, to avoid dating, is not a terribly strong reason.

  21. Jane says:

    For the record, that data’s not exactly correct. If you remove statistical outliers from the data set (people like elizabeth taylor who get married quite a number of times…), then you’re actually left with about an 80% success rate for second marriages. The success rate isn’t a linier graph….which is some hope for those of us on number 2…

  22. Firepower says:

    Me Firepower
    YOU, jane:
    http://www.divorcestatistics.org/

    It’s all, sadly – in there. Remember: nuts like liz taylor DO count as divorces.

  23. Kat says:

    Liz,
    EVERYONE has a list of things their SO has to do to avoid consequences, unless you are one of those people that are unable to extricate yourself from abuse. Not talkin’ about those people. But everyone else has a list–no cheating, keep a job, no abuse, etc. I’ve told my husband that he would lose me if he cheated on me. That is a threat, yes, and I’m really not worried because I know his character. But should he ever be tempted, because he is a healthy human male and we all think things sometimes, he has to weigh in the balance losing this amazing life we have. And if I really want that to be a threat, I really stay on my game to make this life amazing, and it all works vice-versa, and it’s a win-win.

    About the women-as-exotic-pets thing–don’t give up hope, guys! There are a lot of girls out there who have a head on their shoulders, and who want to share dreams and goals and life with their husband someday, and amazingly, they also shave their legs and wear lipstick and heels… You have to consider where you are shopping. Don’t look in the salt water tank for a goldfish. If you are bar hopping, dating “hot chicks” or women obsessed with a corporate ladder, don’t be surprised if you can’t get any kind of emotional depth or traction with them. They just aren’t looking for that themselves. You will prob have better results joining a club or church or cause that means a lot to you, and looking there. I turned down a few guys that had the whole Wall Street career thing lined up, one was hoping to play pro ball…and I married a computer guy that earns solidly middle class salaries and was in the nerd group in high school. But he could talk to me in complete sentences about big and little stuff, he didn’t manipulate me (that I could tell at the time. LOL) or play the field while we were together, and we bonded and had lots of fun, and as I saw his character and kindness to people, his work ethic, and all that stuff, I didn’t care that he wasn’t going to make millions or be a GQ model. I wanted closeness and stability and love and a family, and that’s what I picked. Be the kind of guy that a good girl would want, and you will weed out the others. Just my .02. :0)

  24. Doe says:

    @Ian

    Apologies if that sounded like a moral judgement, it wasn’t meant to be. I was referring to people who have no intention of ever pursuing a partner for a LTR and just run Single Game. Since they select for women who respond to the formula without real regard for LTR fitness, they are seeing mostly the more shallow aspects of femininity. I don’t have a problem with it except when men who practice it use their experiences to generalize that all women are unfit for commitment/maneaters/subhuman.

    I know that women who do have strong LTR fitness also respond to formulaic game at times, but I think a lot of men around here would disqualify a woman from becoming a partner if she behaved the way PUA’s conquests do. I also like to think that Married Game involves some tailoring of your actions to your partner’s responses.

  25. Ted D says:

    Kat – “About the women-as-exotic-pets thing–don’t give up hope, guys! There are a lot of girls out there who have a head on their shoulders, and who want to share dreams and goals and life with their husband someday, and amazingly, they also shave their legs and wear lipstick and heels…”

    IME there are indeed some of these women out there, but many have had “colorful” pasts to say the least. I’m not going to say that people cannot have a genuine change of heart and/or grow past some immature stage in life, but it doesn’t change the facts. Many of these “level headed” women were indeed exotic-pet-like at one time, and people just tend to be who they are.

    Doe – “I know that women who do have strong LTR fitness also respond to formulaic game at times, but I think a lot of men around here would disqualify a woman from becoming a partner if she behaved the way PUA’s conquests do.”

    If by this you mean: many men would disqualify a woman from becoming a partner if she FELL for PUA tactics? Then yes, I for one would find that disturbing. Here is the thing: to me falling for “bar game” is a lot like having an addiction. Someone that was once addicted to crack can obviously go to rehab and overcome it. They may even go on to lead terrific lives afterwards. But, they will ALWAYS carry with them a greater weakness for crack than the general populace. To me women that fall for “bar game” are very similar. Sure, it may very well be in their “nature” to fall for it, but as Athol pointed out we are not slaves to our “nature”. A woman that continually uses her head over her heart (or loins) shows a consistent and dependable frame of mind to any man looking for a wife. A woman that has in the past NOT shown that level of dependability, even if “reformed”, is an increased risk for future relapse. We can argue all day that past behavior is not a guaranty of future behavior, but to me that only works in “legal speak” for: we can’t promise you’ll make money if you do what I say. When it comes to people, IME past behavior is indeed a pretty good indicator of what you can expect in the future. Perhaps not to the same extreme, but people rarely have real, genuine change of heart experiences.

    If any woman wants to be taken seriously if/when she wants a husband, she should act seriously her entire adult life.

  26. drunicusveritas says:

    Much of what “the manosphere” says, though, is not just negative, but also true. A fair amount of young (and not so young( women, particularly the attractive, educated women that are the most in demand, HAVE in fact been told that they are somehow simultaneously superior to, and victimized by, men.
    All men. Not merely by wealthy, powerful, or “alpha” style men, but that all men are violent, dirty, and stupid – such is much oftge leftist, feminist narrative.
    And, as the guardians of sexual access, they’ve also been told that they’re entitled to the best of all worlds – all of the world’s male privileges, but few of our responsibilities.
    I certainly agree that not all women are tigresses or cobras. Many are decent. But they do not have our responsibilities, nor our moral center, nor even what I would consider dispassionate, factual honesty.
    I adore both my wife and my daughter – but I fear deeply for my little son, who must someday navigate this violent, superficial, sexualized world, where women are practically handed college scholarships and promotions, and men, no matter how smart, hard working, and w

  27. drunicusveritas says:

    That no matter how smart, hard working, and well adjusted we are, we’ll still be relegated to second class status in academia, mid-level promotions, grad schools, criminal and “family” law, and in nearly any arena where feminism, leftism, and our state run media holds sway.
    One of course will have very limited success, in life or in love, with a negative attitude or excessive anger towards women.
    But the anger is there (particularly amoung younger men, our age down to adolescence) for legitimate reasons.
    And we should NOT let a desire for a partner blind us to.injustice. We have been far too stupid about that for far too long.
    I love women, and I love my wife, daughter, sisters, etc – but I don’t at all believe we should accept the status quo – it I’d deeply unfair, and morally wrong.
    And it’s led to social disasters far worse than feminists ever dreamed – illegitimacy, broken homes, ruined lives, and lots of broken, lonely people of both genders.
    Training men to be fearful, ashamed, submissive, or obsequious did not make them (obviously) more attractive.
    But it did lead many men to be deeply, deeply wary, resentful, bitter, or (in the case of “PUA’s”) hideously cynical about much of what should be life’s most beautiful and precious things.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] in Relationship Strategies Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet Box WordPress PluginI said I’d be away until after May 1st, but I lied because Athol Kay has a post up that made my heart sing, and I wanted to share it with you. Are Women Like Exotic Pets? [...]

Speak Your Mind

*