Exploring Ideas and Questioning Myself- Episode 1

This is going to be a rather uneven and disjointed post, as I intend to seek out the opinions of fellow bloggers and readers about some subjects which I’ve been thinking about lately. Mostly they concern ideas/theories which I have long held to be true, but now want second opinions about.

A Seller’s Market

Ever since I became acquainted with the Red Pill, I have believed that there were far more men who could be considered marriageable than women. Especially when it came to Christians; it has been my contention for a while that the number of chaste (even purposefully chaste) Christian men is greater by far than the number of chaste Christian women.  I’ve always just assumed this, and never really gave it a whole lot of thought until recently. Given what I (think I) know about the current SMP/MMP, plus male/female attraction filters and the like, it would stand to reason that my belief is accurate.

If so, then it would appear to me that we are currently in a sellers market to a significant degree. A marriageable woman should be able to pick and choose amongst a variety of potential suitors. Furthermore, most such women should be able to easily satisfy their hypergamous instincts by “marrying up” to a man whose SMV is higher than their own. Given the dearth of women worthy to be wives, men would have to look down in SMV for mates, because the men above them have likely already taken their SMV equals for themselves. All of which means that a chaste Christian woman, to be specific, is sitting in the catbird’s seat when it comes to the MMP. [Of course, that ignores search and time costs inherent with any kind effort for her to find a husband.]

So the question is, am I off with my assessment? Or do my readers agree?

Male and Female Commitment

It is generally agreed upon that women are much more selective when it comes to attraction filters than men. I’ve written on the subject of female attraction before to explain how. Numbers often thrown around, although without anything more than anecdote as backing, state that men find roughly 50% of women attractive and women find only about 20% of men attractive. I don’t know if that is true or not. What I do know is that while men may find more women attractive than vice versa, that doesn’t mean that men are inclined to commit to those women. Just because a man wants to have sex with a woman doesn’t mean that he wants to commit to her. As part of this,  I believe that men filter for commitment fare more stringently that women do for attraction. A simple graphic I created a while back illustrates this:

Male relationship table

Speaking for myself, I will admit that when it comes to commitment I am rather wary. While my religious beliefs play a role in this, and no doubt the legal climate does as well, I suspect that men are hard-wired to be wary of commitment. Just as eggs are expensive for a woman, and so she must be careful whom she sleeps with, commitment is also expensive for men, and so they must be careful whom they invest in.

What I am curious about is if women also filter for men commitment from men in a similar way. Will women accept commitment from any man that they find attractive, or do they have a further set of requirements past the LAMPS categories. I assume that they do, and yet the argument from many quarters seems to be that “tingles uber alles”, or attraction is king. But clearly some women have certain desirable or comfort traits they look for in men, in addition to being attractive. I guess the question is whether those filters are as important for women as they are for men. My suspicion is that they aren’t; women are often willing to trade them away under the right circumstances.

What are my reader’s thoughts on the matter?

Tone Over Bulk

This topic isn’t nearly as deep, but do most men prefer tone over bulk when it comes to women and muscle? Stingray has re-posted an old post of hers called Hitting the Gym over at the new group blog Girls Being Girls, and it covers female exercise. While full of tips, she ends the post with this caveat:

One last thing, you can take lifting weights as far as your body will allow it.  However, you should be aware of what your husband finds attractive.  Some men do not like overt muscles on a woman.  If this is the case, use lower weights with higher repetitions.  You will gain tone without bulk or striations.  Some men do find it very attractive and they admire the discipline behind what it takes to achieve.  It’s really up to you (and your genetics) how far you wish to take it.

Count me in the category of men who prefer tone over bulk. Some overt muscles are alright in my book, but when it comes to the upper body I definitely prefer tone. For the legs I can make an exception, muscled legs don’t bother me, and might even be a plus in my book. The stomach/abs might be another area where some (but not a lot) of overt muscles are fine. But I happen to find too much muscle on women in the upper body area unfeminine, and think it detracts from the woman’s attractiveness. This is how I figured most men thought, so I’m curious to see if there is a general consensus on the matter.

Does this jive with my male readers? Do you prefer tone over bulk, or have certain areas where one might be more acceptable than the other?

Advertisements

74 Comments

Filed under Femininity, LAMPS, Marriage, Men, Red Pill, Sex, Women

74 responses to “Exploring Ideas and Questioning Myself- Episode 1

  1. Which is why I suggested you hang around some of the Red Pill Christian women. They are better company for you in my opinion. If you want some suggestions, I can send them to you.

    You are right that a lot of the manosphere sites are not Christian. And even those that are do tend to attract a lot of non-Christians. I differentiate between Red Pill truths and advice. A lot of the advice is not Godly, but the truths tend to be universal.

  2. deti

    “The visceral attraction has to be there from the beginning – and in many marriages it isn’t because, as we know, the number of men for whom any given woman is capable of having that kind of irresistable, feral, animal lust for is quite small. Only the lucky few women can be married to a guy like that, even if not all women lust after exactly the same guys. So most settle and marry a guy they like and love emotionally, but not are super hot for sexually, because they recognize that the latter isn’t attainable”

    And in the final analysis there is really nothing that can be done about this. The “settling” women, which is the vast, vast majority of them, deep down know they’re settling but they’re not really happy about it. Today’s culture of no fault divorce gives them an easy out, which, is one of the major goals feminism wanted to accomplish – thje legal sanctioning of serial monogamy.

  3. Actually Deti, feminists opposed NFD in the beginning. They worried that it would lead successful men to ditch their older wives for a newer model. But it certainly has proven to be a boon to them. Also, don’t forget that the notion that women prefer serial monogamy is not exactly something the feminists knew.

  4. I am hesitant to share my experience because I am unusual. But since you ask, I’ll give you what I’ve got. It’s purely out-of-character:

    Seller’s Market: I do not feel that was the case. I was not highly sought-after, and I would accept any dates I was asked on (unless I got the impression the guy was up to no good, like a blatant player or a homeless guy, the extremes of the spectrum). I was so desperate I had given up on the dream of sexual attraction and was prepared to grit my teeth and content myself with chummy affection, because I didn’t believe I was attractive. Something a little more physical than a companionate marriage, you know, just enough to call it a real marriage and not a sham. I didn’t believe I had to be happy to be in a righteous marriage.

    I actually was leery of men I found attractive, to the point of probably being unfair to them. It didn’t help that they usually tried to leverage their higher SMV to “sample the goods” before even considering an option to buy. And these were allegedly Christians!

    The market was harsh to me, probably because I am not pretty. It did teach me that men don’t want virtuous girls, they’ll take hotness over virtue, and plain girls are as invisible to men as average men are to women. Chaste girls take an added hit.

    Commitment filters: Absolutely. Faith was and is not a “comfort” trait to me; if I could not submit in good conscience, there was nothing more to discuss. On other points, as I mentioned above, I was willing to forgo any and all “comfort” traits and attraction traits. But I am a freak so you can’t go by me.

    Your heart breaking yet? Don’t sweat it. I’m living happily ever after with a better man than I dared to dream of.

  5. You should never feel hesitant to add your thoughts and experiences Sigyn. Especially for a post like this, which I wrote hoping to have my ideas and beliefs challenged. SSM’s recent comments about the “hollowness” of certain manosphere “truths” gave me an impetus to examine my own. Without other people expressing themselves, that can’t happen.

    Based on everyone’s comments, it seems to me that the market sucks for everyone, men and women both.

  6. Deep Strength

    Sigyn,

    Which is why it is important to tell females to be as physically attractive as possible — not get fat, lift weights, eat correctly, apply tasteful makeup, wear dresses and skirts and other feminine clothing, etc.

    I honestly don’t understand why so many women are adverse to this. Men need to do the same thing as well, although it’s not just in physical appearance that they have to be attractive.

    All interactions are basically “job interviews” especially between single Christian males and females. Be the most attractive person you can be if you are attempting to attract a mate.

    I’m happy that you found a godly husband though. 🙂

  7. @Donalgraeme: Yes, please. I would appreciate some suggestions very much. Thank you.

  8. Ok, I will e-mail you later today.

  9. an observer

    On sellers market. Hypergamy knows no limits. Faced with favourable conditions, women are simply encouraged to embrace careerism, defer marriage and raise their standards, negating any advantages they have of youth, fertility and attractiveness.

    Hypergamy has influenced men to believe that women just want to have fun (h/t, cyndi lauper). Sellers advantage? Negated. The buyers arent convinced theyre actually available to the market before age 28.

    On commitment, tingles uber alles concurs with alpha fucks and beta bucks. Usual nawalt caveats apply.

    On tone over bulk, it is a nonissue for most people, men and women alike. Real bulk is actually time and money intensive to acquire. Working out can increase size, but real bulk is actually quite difficult, unless one is a true mesomorph, of course. Tone is, by comparison, much easier, and more fun to attain.

    Most women will not bulk up. Its a non issue. Toning is easier, as i said, particularly if teamed with interval training, weights, intermittent fasting, and a ketogenic diet.

  10. The visceral attraction has to be there from the beginning – and in many marriages it isn’t because, as we know, the number of men for whom any given woman is capable of having that kind of irresistable, feral, animal lust for is quite small. Only the lucky few women can be married to a guy like that, even if not all women lust after exactly the same guys. So most settle and marry a guy they like and love emotionally, but not are super hot for sexually, because they recognize that the latter isn’t attainable. If you’re coming from there, and you take the red pill and realize you’re married to a loser beta who will never get you wet, you’re probably going to get divorced at some stage – maybe you wait until the kids are grown, or something, but it’s going to happen in many cases.

    Nova, did you just argue that Christian marriages are weaker than secular (i.e. based only on sexual attraction) marriages?

    If that is the case, than, um, what is the point of Christian marriage? My question is a serious one. If Christianity produces weak marriages, than why should single young adults be advised to follow it? They’re better off sleeping around ’till they find the individual they are most sexually compatible with. (Did I dodge a bullet by marrying as a virgin and still having sexual compatibility with my husband?) Christians couples should just focus on maintaining sexual attraction.

    If sex is the only thing responsible for my marital happiness, than why am I expected to dress it up in Christian-appropriate terminology? ’cause it sounds classier? …I don’t want to mislead young Christians into thinking Jesus is responsible for something he plays no part in!

    As a happily married woman, I’ll be honest – Jesus plays a very small role, if any role at all, in my marriage. Sure, I admire my husband’s Christian morals. But Christianity? It seems less relevant each and every day. Christianity never provided my husband and I much support (opposed our engagement, blamed our illnesses on sins, my miscarriages are a part-of “God’s Plan”) I’ve pretty much given up on interacting with Christians outside of the blogosphere (although I’ve losing my patience here as well).

  11. Butterfly, I think we should re-read what Novaseeker said, then re-read what you said. You completely missed his point, and as a result your conclusions are way off.

  12. Butterfly, I think we should re-read what Novaseeker said, then re-read what you said. You completely missed his point, and as a result your conclusions are way off.

    I apologize, my English reading comprehension isn’t perfect so I do sometimes make mistakes.

    However I reread his comment multiple times and he never once said anything in support of Christian marriage. All he said was (paraphrasing) ‘Red Pill women married men for secular reasons, hence, why they have strong marriages. Women only submit to men they are sexually attracted to’. If I missed something please point it out. I do find it disappointing to think that sex may be the only important aspect of marriage 😦 Or is that the red pill…?

  13. I re-read the comment left by Novaseeker, and I don’t think he was talking about Christian vs. Secular. Rather, he was talking about how women who are married to a man they are attracted to have an easier time with the Red Pill than women who are married to a man they are not attracted to.

    A Christian woman who holds to her beliefs and vows can still submit to her husband, even if she isn’t attracted to him. She just may not want to with the same “Zeal” that you would find in a woman who is attracted to her husband. They both have a choice. The problem is that many people who claim to be Christians don’t actually practice what they preach.

    As for sex and its importance to marriage… it isn’t the only important thing in marriage. But it might well be the most important thing in marriage. Especially for Christians, because sex (and procreation resulting from sex) is something unique to marriage among Christians.

  14. Nova, did you just argue that Christian marriages are weaker than secular (i.e. based only on sexual attraction) marriages?

    If that is the case, than, um, what is the point of Christian marriage? My question is a serious one. If Christianity produces weak marriages, than why should single young adults be advised to follow it? They’re better off sleeping around ’till they find the individual they are most sexually compatible with. (Did I dodge a bullet by marrying as a virgin and still having sexual compatibility with my husband?) Christians couples should just focus on maintaining sexual attraction.

    I actually wasn’t talking about Christian marriages in particular (I don’t think I said I was ….) but trying to answer donal’s question as to why we don’t see red pill women in the manosphere who are not very sexually attracted to their husbands.

    However, in response to your new question, I would say that Christian marriages are not weaker or stronger, in themselves, than secular marriages are. I have seen successes and failures among both. What seems to matter the most is a very strong sexual attraction that is maintained throughout, together with personalities that are more flexible than rigid, more accepting of change rather than not, and more optimistic towards life in general. It’s not that Christianity produces weak marriages, but rather that Christians don’t get to “opt out” of the very human and visceral stuff that makes marriages work in general just because they are Christian. That’s a common mistake people make, I think, both in entering Christian marriages and in living in them.

  15. The market was harsh to me, probably because I am not pretty. It did teach me that men don’t want virtuous girls, they’ll take hotness over virtue, and plain girls are as invisible to men as average men are to women. Chaste girls take an added hit.

    The market is indeed harsh to people who are not top performers in the market. Men who are average, women who are plain, will simply struggle a lot in the current market. This is also the case for Christians, because the market characteristics are more or less the same, just with a smaller pool.

  16. Deep Strength

    BF,

    This is somewhat off topic, but I don’t think you understand how strong the drive to have sex is with men.

    For the majority of men, the drive to have sex is one of the major motivating factors behind everything we do (have a job, workout, eat clean, etc.). It is the main reason we would want to be married in the first place. To have a constant supply of sex. Obviously, other reasons are to have a close companion (although I somewhat doubt this may even be the case unless you have a submissive wife) and to have children. But the main reason for almost all men is sex.

    This is not to say it’s the only thing in marriage, but it certainly is the most important thing to most men in marriage Christian or not. Aside from those men with low sex drives or who are asexual which are in the vast minority.

    This is why when the woman denies the man of sex it is seen as a sign of extreme disrespect, and the man will 100% of the time drift away from the woman because she is not meeting his needs. Why hang around someone who doesn’t respect you?

  17. I actually wasn’t talking about Christian marriages in particular (I don’t think I said I was ….)

    Novaseeker, I apologize. I did not mean for my comments to come across as antagonistic (my husband says I have trouble with Western rhetoric).
    I thought your previous comments were supporting this observation made by Donal “[…]perhaps the fact that they were out the Church actually helped them have a better marriage”.

    If getting married outside of the church makes marriages stronger, than its a bit irresponsible to advise young Christians to follow the stereotypical “chaste” Christian courtship. For example, Christians condemned me for making out with my husband before marriage. Despite being a virgin, my lust for my husband rendered my chastity irrelevant. I was in sin and needed to repent, yada yada yada. I felt guilty for finding my husband (well, he was just my boyfriend back than) sexually attractive.

    …Yet those very “sinful” emotions I felt back then, are one of the main reasons my marriage is strong today? It makes modern teachings seem a bit hypocritical. “Lust is dirty, erase it from your mind! But remember, lust is a vital aspect of marriage!”

    […] together with personalities that are more flexible than rigid, more accepting of change rather than not, and more optimistic towards life in general. […]

    So, Gaman…? 🙂

    I suspect modern Christian couples often struggle because they’ve been sold on the whole “God has a wonderful plan for you!” prosperity gospel nonsense, and fail to realize faith in Christ does not instantaneously render marriages perfect. Nothing worth having will ever come easily.

  18. To supplement what Deep Strength has just said, I will point out these lines from St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 7:

    Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is well for a man not to touch a woman.” 2 But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

    But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

    The human sex drive is a powerful force, especially for men. Marriage is an institution which seeks to harness that force for good, by creating an environment which is both beneficial to the initial participants (husband and wife), as well as to the offspring created by the act of intercourse.

    From a Christian perspective, sex is what makes a marriage a marriage. You can have other relationships, but only in marriage can you have sex. The sexual desire husband and wife (should) have for one another in the beginning of the marriage, the Eros, acts as the foundation for the rest of the marriage. Marriage is not just about sex. But sex is the starting point; after all, it is not really a marriage until the consummation.

  19. Perhaps my confusion stems from taking chastity doctrines too seriously (Although I suspect many modern teachings are in err). I’ve been married for over a year and I still feel somewhat uncomfortable addressing my lust for my husband – at least from a Christian perspective. It feel shameful.

  20. Lust is to be distinguished from desire. Desire for one’s spouse is not lust — it’s legitimate desire. It’s the same in courtship if one is minded for marriage — that is not lust, it is desire. Lust is sexual desire for someone outside the context of marriage and courtship. As a result, most people in the dating culture are engaging in lust because they are not seriously courting, but for Christians who are approaching dating as courting it isn’t lust, but desire which, provided boundaries are maintained regarding behavior, is not sinful.

    The traps Christians run into here tend to be of two kinds.

    The first is a kind of Victorian prudishness which sees sexual desire of any sort, even for one’s spouse, as sinful lust. That isn’t what the Church has ever taught, but it was a part of Christian culture in the 19th Century and has some overspill into today’s Christians as well, some of whom take that stance precisely because the broader culture is marinating in sexual license currently.

    The second is the opposite approach, which is to assume the stance that none of this is a big deal, everyone does it, it’s just normal, the church is out of step with the times and so on — which is what a lot of Christians do, as a practical matter. In other words, the rules are too hard, and I don’t want to follow them, and because I have lots of company, it’s all good.

    The key is steering a course between these extremes. Courtship tends to fit that bill, but it’s hard to pull off in a culture of dating where sex is assumed by date 3 (often by both, even if the woman doesn’t want to have sex, she often wants to be pushed to have sex so that she can gauge the man’s desire for her, whereas the guys generally all push for sex unless they are among the few truly chaste men left in the church).

  21. If getting married outside of the church makes marriages stronger, than its a bit irresponsible to advise young Christians to follow the stereotypical “chaste” Christian courtship. For example, Christians condemned me for making out with my husband before marriage. Despite being a virgin, my lust for my husband rendered my chastity irrelevant. I was in sin and needed to repent, yada yada yada. I felt guilty for finding my husband (well, he was just my boyfriend back than) sexually attractive.

    Actually, Christian teaching about chaste courtship helps makes marriages stronger. Or should help with that. Premarital sexual activity increases the odds of divorce, and probably also decreases the quality of marriages of those who don’t divorce.

    The problem is what you point out: hypocritical modern teaching about sexuality and attraction. I don’t call it Christian teaching because it isn’t Christian at all; the Bible is quite clear on the matter.

    Your attraction to your husband was not sinful. If you had acted on that attraction, then it would have been sinful.

  22. The traps Christians run into here tend to be of two kinds […]

    I’ve encountered both of those “traps”. Before I became disillusioned with Christianity, I used to question heretical teachings. But Sola Scriptura would just make people angry. In some instances I was labeled a sinner for choosing to beleive the gospel over dubious modern teachings.

    I don’t mean to generalize or badmouth Christianity, but I do think the majority of modern churches could care less about scripture. (Which explains why a study recently found over 60% of American Christians beleive televangelist Billy Graham delivered the Sermon on the Mount 😕 )

  23. Your attraction to your husband was not sinful. If you had acted on that attraction, then it would have been sinful.

    Donal, you’re like, one of only seven Christians who told me that. To the point where I used to regret waiting until marriage because I thought “well I was in sin anyway, so it was a waste of effort.”

    Meanwhile, if male sex drives are as you say, I can only imagine the turmoil young Christian men must feel when exposed to same false teachings. For guys, temptation is everywhere – internet porn, Skinemax, Playboy, etc. No wonder young men are leaving the church in droves!

  24. Pingback: 100th Post Blogapalooza | Donal Graeme

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s