Signal to Noise Ratio

I.

Today’s short post is a response to a compound question asked by April (otherwise known as peacefulwife) over at Peaceful Single Girl:

What is it that women can do to signal interest, and what is it that women are doing to prevent signaling interest?

The question, asked in comment thread of this post, was in response to the following comment by myself:

It really isn’t true that men initiate first, or are supposed to initiate first. Women do through signalling a willingness to be approached by a man, or men. And this is where a lot of women, Christian women especially, fail. They send out the wrong signals, and instead of demonstrating that they are willing to be approached, indicate that they want nothing to do with the Christian men around them.

I will probably expand on what I raised in my comment at some later point, but today I will focus on the two questions which April asks. Fortunately, they lend themselves well to easy organization.

II.

The key thing for a woman to understand is that she needs to maintain a positive signal-to-noise ratio. Life is full of distractions, or noise, that will interfere with a man’s ability to detect a woman’s interest in him. The more distractions, the more powerful her signal will have to be. Which translates into her needing to be more overt in making her feelings clear.

Additionally, women face several problems when it comes to signaling interest. The first is that it can be difficult to determine how much noise there is. What may be distracting to a man may not phase a woman. Another problem is that some men don’t like it when a woman is too overt. Myself, I don’t have a problem with this, but for some guys this seems to be a real bother or turn-off. Lastly, men and women communicate in very different ways, so a man may completely miss what a woman thinks is obvious.

Given all of this, I suggest a strategy of slowly ratcheting up signaling interest to a man. So, what ways can a woman signal her interest? Here are a few that I have thought of:

1) Smile. Smile a lot. This may seem simple, and it is. But smiling is a good way of showing a man that you don’t mind his presence.

2) Compliment him. Find something you like about him and let him know.

3) Ask him what his favorite color is, or if he likes a particular color pattern. Then, wear a dress or outfit with those colors or that pattern to an event that you know he will be present at.

4) Serve him. When you are at a dinner or other event where food will be served, ask him if if you can bring him anything.

5) Flirt. That’s right, flirt. There is nothing wrong with some light-flirting and teasing with a man. It is one of the surest ways to express interest.

III.

Now to address the second question. What things should a woman avoid which interfere with her signaling interest to a man? Some thoughts:

A) A cold demeanor. A woman who isn’t pleasant and shows no warmth will come across as uninterested in a man. Smile and have a welcoming expression on your face. Make it clear that talking with you won’t be a painful experience for a man.

B) Rigid body language. A lot of our communication isn’t in what we say, but how we say it. If your body language is closed and rigid, you are sending a message that you don’t want to be approached. Relax and let your motions flow. Don’t give the appearance of not wanting to be there.

C) Nuclear rejections. If you are approached by a man who doesn’t interest you, don’t blow up on him. Reject him politely and quietly. Don’t make a scene. And don’t gossip or talk about it. Your goal is to make it so that men don’t see approaching you as a costly endeavor. This way, any man you are signalling will think to himself that even if he is wrong about your feelings, he won’t regret approaching you.

IV.

Those are a few ideas that I have to answer the peacefulwife’s question. As I think of more I will update the post. In the meantime, I invite my readers to offer their own thoughts on what women should and shouldn’t do to help signal their interest.

Advertisements

50 Comments

Filed under Attraction, Christianity, Churchianity, Courtship, Desire, Femininity, Fitness Test, Men, Women

50 responses to “Signal to Noise Ratio

  1. John

    This might be a decent start, but it doesn’t serve the bigger problem in my opinion.

    Western society does not have a big problem in signaling men (except perhaps the church demographic). The problem is that the men women choose to signal to aren’t the type of men to stick around or be in church.

    If you look at pretty much the entire Old Testament, the parents arranged the marriages or sent their children to marry within the community.

    God, the father of Adam, gave him Eve. Abraham the father of Isaac gave him Rebekah. Isaac and Rebekah didn’t like Esau’s choice in wives so they told Jacob to get a wife from Laban, a kinsman. Naomi sets up Ruth with Boaz, another kinsman.

    Now how about Judah, who after his sons died, promised to provide his daughter in law Tamar, a husband (his son)? He failed to do so, so she dressed as prostitute and fvcked her father-in-law and she was seen as more righteous than him.

    Look at India where they have arranged marriages and community matters immensely. In both their Christian (very small) and non-Christian population (Hindus, Muslim) the divorce rate for a long time has been around 1%. Compare that with America’s divorce rate (touted between 40-50%) and perhaps 5-10% less in the religious communities.

    Look at the Christian minority groups in the United States. Even though they don’t have a strict arranged marriage system, they all marry in the community (and if you marry outside, you automatically leave the community). Take the Amish or Mennonites. Less than .5% divorce rate. (It helps that divorced people are shamed).

    So I remember some guy in the manosphere wanted to make some sort of program to match Christian couples’ daughters and sons. I forget who he was though. But it is clear that type of system works. As fathers and mothers, before teaching your girl how to flirt (which is like giving her a stick in a world full of wolves) you have to teach them (sons too) to marry, stay in the community.

    Look at how many church women date men outside of the church. Their problem is not knowing how to signal, it is not being limited or shown WHO they should signal to. And if left to their own devices they will whore themselves to Babylon and Egypt.

  2. John, your comment is a response to an entirely different post. While I don’t really disagree with much or anything you say, the point of the post was to help women in church with signaling to guys in church. If you want to talk about what you mentioned, then by all means start your own blog.

  3. theshadowedknight

    Ahhh, I think John has a point here, Donal. What good does it do to teach women how to signal an interest in a man if that man is not the sort of man you want around women? The fact is that we know how badly they tend to choose, when given choices. Do you think it wise to teach them to be more forward with their attention when they are going to be approaching the opportunistic cads? A better solution would be telling her father, and discussing it with him, then he can make the overtures to the parents of the man in question. Which is what John is saying; get parents involved, because that works.

    The Shadowed Knight

  4. John

    I didn’t mean to take up your blog but I do think it is relevant to the topic you proposed.

    What I am saying is the signal is not so much important as the person who it is used on. The signals you list would work on a guy in church, but it would also work with every other guy. Signals without discretion on who they are used on can harm the person using signals. (A young girl has no life experience to tell cad from not (and even she did know sometimes she would still signal him)). So we cannot say they should or shouldn’t do a certain signal because it would depend entirely on factors outside of her control. I am making the argument that parents shouldn’t only give the tools to their daughters (the signals you mention), but the parents themselves are the tools and the signalers to who their daughter(or even son) should marry.

    I apologize for slathering the wall of text on your blog, but I do think it was relevant.

  5. jack

    John is right.

    What good is teaching signalling unless the women are directing it to the right men?

    For lots of Churchian girls, the “why won’t Christian men approach” can be more correctly translated “why can’t I get the popular guys to notice me?”

  6. ballista74

    Thirded on John and Jack’s opinion. The bigger problem is that so-called “Christian women” are going for the worst of the world, and prove themselves worse than the world. Teaching them proper IOIs will only be enabling most of them to sin at this point.

  7. I was talking to my oldest son (24 YO) last week–a nice, long man-to-man. He’s a committed Christian, handsome, has a solid job, and is in excellent shape. In the past I made him aware that the sexes are different–and explained the “blue-pill” mistakes I made when married to his Mom. He followed my suggestion that he date all of the single girls (18 and up) in our very traditional Christian fellowship. All of them; pretty, plain, skinny, and “curvy.”

    I knew things were bad, but not this bad.

    He reports that all of the girls are seriously infected with feminism, and completely unaware of it. They’re self-absorbed and flaky. Out of the (about) twenty girls he rates only one as possible wife material, and she’s older than he is.

    Maybe the guys, consciously or unconsciously, have figured out that the girls aren’t worth approaching.

  8. Based on everyone’s comments, it seems that I wrote the wrong post. Instead of asking what kind of signals women should be taught to use (or not use), I should have asked if women should be taught about signalling.

  9. @Donal
    Your post was perfect. It got a good discussion going. What more can you ask for?

  10. I’m already failing my no blogging/commenting resolution, but wanted to say that the Gospel is for everyone, not just those who were raised in church with God-fearing parents. Look at the Gospels and the New Testament church, particularly among the Gentiles. People came from all types of backgrounds. My point? That writing about what should happen in an *ideal* scenario might well serve a good purpose in advising Christian parents how to provide spouses for their children. But it doesn’t help those who have come to Christ from a non-ideal scenario, or who even if they have Christian parents, do not have parents interested in being involved in such a way.

    So, in sum, I think this post is very relevant and helpful for a good portion of Christian women. The question of how to discern good character in a man is a separate question.

  11. Donalgraeme, I thought this post was helpful.

  12. mdavid444444

    This is tricky. Some men like to chase, but others like to be chased. And some men don’t like to be pursued. Or, if they are, they immediately think the woman has something wrong with her.

    But: to me, #1 is eye contact. Make and hold eye contact. A lot.
    #2 is smile. A lot. But you already got that one.

  13. John

    Donal you can delete my posts I should have brought up my point in a smaller side note. It was not my intention to infringe on your blog even if I thought my topic was relevant.

    Denise makes a good point, we aren’t living im an ideal world. Between broken families and parents working all the time then I can see a point to teach daughters signals. For signals they shouldn’t do, is that a lot of college age girls show as much skim as possible or wear thin clothing like yogapants in public. They will get attention but sexual attention only and cads will be drawn to them. As for signals they should, you already have it right. But I still think it is dangerous, most Christian girls are not as discerning as they think (or don’t want to be). You wrote the right post but I think you can make it even better by expanding on the possible repercussions and alternatives. Questions always lead to more discussion as we go along to look at problems. My thoughts arose from the question you gave your readers. It wasn’t meant to prove your post wrong by any means. I read your blog and posts on other blogs not because you are always right or wrong, but because you make me think.

  14. theshadowedknight

    The problem I see with this is a simple one. She is signaling in order to get attention, and we all know what kind of man a woman wants. This is basically saying, “Chase your Alpha, and be forward until he responds.” For the women reading this that have their eye on the husband material that is not getting the hints, this is great. As a general rule for widespread use, it is just going to fuel the Sunday Morning Nightclub Scene.

    That is why parental involvement is needed. Let her father evaluate the boys she likes, and see if they match up. Then let her make her moves on him, but in a supervised setting. One of our goals as the Christian Androsphere should be to increase the amount of input parents have into such a vital decision as spouse selection. I will be in my thirties before marriage becomes a possibility, and I will still be getting my parents’ opinions.

    The Shadowed Knight

  15. deti

    Women should be taught about signaling to men. It’s simply the kind of men they’re signaling to.

    IN the past I’ve written a few things at ballista’s about what women can do to signal to men. Go up to a man and say “Hi. My name’s _________________. How are you today?” Or don’t act like being in church is torture. Or don’t put out that “f*** you” vibe (which I see more and more these days). Or don’t recoil in shock and horror when some average guy talks to you.

    But after considering what John and jack have put here, it seems to me that most women are pretty good at signaling to the men they’re attracted to.

    Now I understand much better why I see women at my church being stuck up and cold, acting as if they don’t want to talk to any men. These women are not being completely honest when they say they want good men — churchgoing, God fearing men. They don’t want the men they go to church with. They aren’t attracted to the men they attend church with. They don’t want devout or reverent or God-fearing men. To most women now, those characteristics are not desirable; they’re unattractive.

    The men they attend church with are seen as either father figures (well-meaning but dunderheaded half-wits), younger brothers (oversexed, obnoxious pests) and most commonly, as weird, goofy classmates (creepy, dangerous, hideous, shunned as not worth the time of day).

    I never thought I’d really say this, but… Men, if you want to attract a churchgoing woman – don’t go to church. Or at least don’t attend the churches in which you date. Don’t get active in your church; don’t take on prominent leadership roles. If you’re devout or are seen as devout, you’ll be seen as unattractive.

  16. The Farmer's Daughter

    Thank you! This post was extremely helpful to me. I am a freshman at a very small Bible college in a two-year major (yes, I have been accused of going for my MRS degree). There is an upperclassman *who my father pointed out to me as a good marital candidate* which I am interested in. However, I have no idea how to express my attraction. Learning how to “flirt” without becoming an obnoxious flirt is probably the hardest thing I have tried to learn this entire first semester. Any other posts on approaching men (particularly the quiet, only-hangs-out-with-other-males type) would be much appreciated.

  17. theshadowedknight

    I think that you are going a little far with that, Deti. It is not that women actively dislike devout men, more that most devout men are–or at least appear–weak. They want Hayley’s Earl of Piety, and all the unattractive men are not him. If that kind of man was devout, they would not have a problem. Women rationalize away all sorts of defects in a man if he us attractive. Even if a woman actively avoids religious men, a suitable man will have her changing her tune. “Oh, he is different, not like the rest. he is so spiritual, and it is really comforting. Some people take God so seriously, but he just has something about him when he is praying.”

    The Shadowed Knight

  18. I wrote this like three times a few nights ago but my phone kept crashing and finally I just gave up and fell asleep. And I know I’ve said something like it before, but I think it’s important and subtle (i.e. easily missed).

    Fathers, fathers, fathers.

    Reddit got into a bit of a tizzy lately about /r/theredpill.

    One young man related his story about how he started to browse /r/theredpill, and what followed. I’ll quote directly here because, well, he tells it better.

    “I am, however, a 23-year-old virgin and pretty new to the whole sexual strategy game. I tried out my first RedPill[sic] move at a New Years party; I was talking to a cute and intelligent girl there and after some banter, she strongly hinted she didn’t want to do anything physical with a guy.
    Most of my feminist friends would have encouraged me to back off at that point because no means no, women’s agency, etc. However, I decided to take a chance anyway and made my move later. At some point, I was sitting on a couch and pulled her into my lap without asking. She didn’t resist and seemed okay with it, even after I let go. We were flirty for a while after that and I felt good. (This may seem silly to some of you since there was no physical escalation, but it’s a big fucking deal to me since I’ve barely had any female contact).”

    So, good for him, right? You can’t help but pull for the guy(Future planned immorality aside).

    One woman responded with an honest, but (I think) myopic post. But she made a good point that I think needs to be addressed:

    “If a guy pulls me into his lap even after I’ve “strongly hinted” that I don’t want to be touched (and really, is that so much to ask? Is the bar that low?), my immediate reaction is probably going to be surprise and a bit of panic over the incredibly awkward situation I’m now in. Then my brain is finally going to calm down enough to run through the following options:

    Option #1: I can try to remove myself: What if he pulls me back? He’s stronger than I am and can do this easily. What if he interprets it as playing hard to get and we get into what he sees a playful wrestling match?

    Option #2: I quietly say I don’t appreciate being touched: Well, the night’s shot now. You’ll trash me to your friends in order to salvage your ego and probably say that I was leading you on. How far is this gossip going to spread and who’s going to believe it? I don’t know. Great, I get to worry about that now.

    Option #3: I can cause a scene: Now I look like a bitch to everyone who wasn’t paying attention and get to feel bad about that. Your friends think all you wanted was to talk to a girl and the crazy bitch called you a creeper. And then I seethe inside; I didn’t want to be fucking touched at all and said it!

    Option #4: Or I can just sit there and deal with it: Many, if not most, young women will select this option, and I have to admit it might happen to me too. I would have been too surprised at first to react, and then I would have run through my list of extremely unappealing options, and very unhappily settled on #4. That’s not because I actually like #4, but it won’t pit me physically against someone who can overcome me easily, and it’s the most drama-free option I can take, but I would have resolved inwardly NEVER to be around you again.

    Why?

    Because I said “No” to you and it meant nothing.

    Let me repeat that in a form more relevant to what happened at this party:
    She said no and you didn’t feel obligated to respect that.”

    Now, one can argue (as I would) that the guy at the party had his game up that night and the girl probably enjoyed it. But who knows? Maybe she didn’t and her experience was more like this woman describes. And I don’t think we want stuff like that to happen frequently.

    On the other hand…escalation is crucial. Game 101, right?

    So young Christian R. Edpill (this is the new mascot of this part of the manosphere, I have just called him into imaginary being, you are all in on the ground floor) is in a tight spot. Escalate too far and 1)he’s inciting lust 2)he runs the risk of scaring the crap of some poor young woman. But don’t go far enough and you risk losing the whole thing altogether.

    But why does he risk losing her altogether if he doesn’t escalate? That didn’t seem to be a problem around the time of, say, Mary and Joseph. Quite the opposite, in fact.

    It’s because that’s the norm. To attract her he must act alpha; to act alpha he must behave like alpha cads act; and alpha cads escalate (because they want to, not because they’re scared of losing her). She needs him to act like her (non-Christian) girlfriends’ (non-Christian) boyfriends act. What is he, some kind of wimp? (Note that she doesn’t even have to think this way, he may just be under the impression that she does, because most girls do. All I am saying is: he thinks she is like most girls, who want guys to act like what they think of as “normal”)

    Tune to your level of prudery. This applies to everything from holding hands to intercourse.

    Why has it gotten so bad? I’m convinced it’s because this all takes place away from the girl’s father.

    Here is the problem: under the guise of “letting young people be young people,” we have trapped young women in social situations where the rules are set by young alphas with perverse incentives. Immorality follows, as anyone could have guessed. And so the bar for escalation has risen.

    The problem for young women, as far as I see it, is not so much how to signal, but what to signal. They have not thought through what they actually want to happen**.

    What they want to happen, as far as I can gauge, is “whatever I feel comfortable with, and I’m attracted to.” But this is a bad compass for two reasons: firstly because it has nothing to say about sin, and secondly because what she’s attracted to has been warped. Christina Christian’s friend Susie and Susie’s boyfriend made out for two hours, and he’s so hot! Now any guy going after Christina has to figure out how to get her alone for two hours. But he doesn’t know that. For all he knows, he has to push for sex. Or maybe she blushes at holding hands, and any guy trying for a peck on the cheek will be regarded as a fornicator-in-waiting. Who knows? Christian R. certainly doesn’t. Poor guy.

    The reason fathers are great is because they bring the baseline way, way, down. What’s the most a father will allow in his presence? A bit of flirting and a few discreet glances. And everyone knows it. No girl will think less of a guy for not trying to have sex with her in front of her father.*** Score one for Christian R.

    So I’ve typed a lot, explaining the point I’m trying to make, and offering fathers as a way of achieving it. But I haven’t made the actual point.

    Young women must signal:

    a) I’m (possibly) interested in you

    b) I respect (and can be attracted to) guys who don’t escalate.

    c) I want to marry one of those guys, and have lots of wild, crazy sex with one of them.

    d) other stuff that may be important or not but isn’t the main point of this list (wife, mother, no diseases, can count to 10, submission, has three Ph D.’s, etc.)

    I suspect signaling a, b, and c all at the same time is hard, or at least different from society’s default. It is easy to come off as unattainable (b and c, but not a), a boring prude (b and maybe a, but not c), a slut (just c).

    **This is perfectly excusable, as most young men haven’t either. Both sexes are operating from what they’ve osmosed from the society around them. Unfortunately, they’re marinating in poison.

    ***The other benefit of fathers that I’ve mentioned before: Women fitness-testing men is not optimal, because a)It’s freaking annoying and b)they’re not actually that good at gauging anything but attraction. Stern fathers, however, are very good at spotting irresponsibility.

    [Ed: Great comment here dropit. Thanks for contributing it.]

  19. ballista74

    @deti
    I’d say your last three paragraphs are gold in describing the situation. Especially the last. Unfortunately from what I’m finding, it doesn’t take much to be seen as devout or be devout with the “Christian” women these days. Literally, when I became a Christian it became “abandon ye all hope for a Godly marriage with a truly good Christian woman”. Then I got consequences in my life for not following that, so I’m doubly cautious.

    @theshadowedknight

    One of our goals as the Christian Androsphere should be to increase the amount of input parents have into such a vital decision as spouse selection. I will be in my thirties before marriage becomes a possibility, and I will still be getting my parents’ opinions.

    Good policy, though, one of those many thorny issues for someone like me. It seems to me the older you get, the more of those come along. Besides, it can be a double-edged sword, too. Depends on whether you trust your parents opinions (or anyones). Like with mine, I’m not sure any woman would have been good enough.

  20. “Men, if you want to attract a churchgoing woman – don’t go to church.”

    Not going to take that advice…I like the Catholic church and it is more important to me than any woman.

    Why is it a man has to give up everything he holds dear just to get a vagina? We are the prize.

  21. theshadowedknight

    Ballista, with age should come the knowledge of what you should be demanding from women. For women and young men, they are in thrall to hormonal urging and they are bereft of the experience that will help to guide them. That is why it is so important for their fathers to give their guidance. I will not be looking to get my mother’s input nearly as much as I will my father. If and when I bring a woman home to my mother, she is going to want grandchildren so bad that anyone will do.

    Earl, I think he is referring to not fouling one’s nest. You could try dating at another parish or another place where you find Catholics, but the church should not be one of them. Sad, but it is what it is, and we make the best of what we can. This, too, shall pass, but faith endures.

    The Shadowed Knight

  22. @Deti: That is not good advice. As a Christian woman, I would never consider a man for a husband who is not a Christian and who does not actively attend church. Also, woman are attracted to leadership. Men should take leadership roles in the church.

  23. deti

    , Yeah, TSK has it about right. I don’t mean a Christian man should never attend a church; but he should never pursue or date women at his own church.

    Lovely, women aren’t attracted to church leaders, unless they hold prominent, visible positions like pastor, assistant pastor, or (especially) worship leader. Men should not be deceived that taking on a church leadership position will increase their attractiveness; it will likely have the opposite effect. You’re simply wrong about this.

  24. ballista74

    “Why is it a man has to give up everything he holds dear just to get a vagina? We are the prize.” +1. And Jesus is more important to me than any woman.

  25. John

    “The problem I see with this is a simple one. She is signaling in order to get attention, and we all know what kind of man a woman wants. This is basically saying, “Chase your Alpha, and be forward until he responds.” For the women reading this that have their eye on the husband material that is not getting the hints, this is great. As a general rule for widespread use, it is just going to fuel the Sunday Morning Nightclub Scene.”

    Exactly!

    And you do know several manosphere blogs have advocated going to church, even if not Christian, to have sex with the women there. And some of them were (reportedly) successful. Apostle Paul always said there would be wolves in the church, we have to be wary of them and protect the lambs.

  26. I do hope that some younger men are not forgoing brides who don’t appear perfect at the outset – you truly do not know who is ‘teachable’ in the area of submission without a good and solid courtship. And honestly, biblical and devout men are indeed attractive to Christian women – my sweet husband is a testimony to this. The points about women being open, flirting lightly, and signaling interest are all spot on. But as a woman who did this to a Christian man, but was rough around the edges at that point in time, I have to give testimony to the fact that remembering women sin as much as men and a seemingly blue-pill woman may be easily swayed to the wisdom of Biblical Manhood and proper submission, if only someone would teach her.

    I, for one, am grateful my husband didn’t dismiss me out of hand but courted me and discovered I had a heart for these things, despite having no familial or congregational training in them and very wrongheaded views on the subject due to ignorance.

  27. @Deti

    I do believe men should pursue leadership in the church, even behind the scenes. I am but one woman, however my husband working on the church’s website and (quietly) leading the College/Young Adult bible study was a massive draw to me. Deal sealing, really.

    I concur that it is no guarantee of success but it can’t hurt either, if the man has a desire to lead in that way. Even quietly and behind the scenes – which arguably says more about his character as a sober minded, wise man than a veritable peacock at the microphone of every event and service.

  28. deti

    “And honestly, biblical and devout men are indeed attractive to Christian women – my sweet husband is a testimony to this.”

    I don’t think so. I think you found his devotion to God desirable. But there were other things you found attractive about him. I very much doubt that your husband’s Godliness or his leading a bible study were “attractive”, but rather were desirable. Those things might have made you feel comfortable with him; but I do not think you found them attractive.

  29. deti

    It continues to amaze me how women confuse “attraction” with “desirability”. Taryl’s and Lovely’s comments remind me just how important it is that men avoid taking relationship advice from women.

    Attractive: Confident, dominant, displays of power, athleticism, looks, status, money.

    Desirable: Steadfast, stable, devout, reverent, brave, faithful, loyal, industrious, patient, kind, attentive.

  30. @seriouslypleasedropit | I think that woman on reddit explained the dilemma very well. I wouldn’t say it’s myopic at all, but rather an example of the calculations that a woman has to make if a man chooses not to respect her. And many parts of the manosphere are emboldening men to disrespect women–not for any good purpose, but rather to increase the likelihood that they can get into their pants. Do they *have* to escalate sexually beyond her stated boundaries to maintain her attraction? Of course not. They do have to escalate if they want to sleep with her, which is the main purpose of Game. So Mr. Christian R. Edpill needs to find more godly counselors.

  31. @Deti: This thread is about Christian woman. A serious devout Christian woman will look towards marriage and not casual dating, therefore, desirability is a must. When I see a guy that JUST has attractive traits, I stay away from him and assume he is a player/cad to avoid temptation.
    A Christian woman (or man) will look for a spouse that is both attractive and desirable. I would not marry a man based on attraction alone.

  32. Random Angeleno

    @lovely: good for you. Sadly, you are the exception, not the rule. Your own church may be okay, but too many are not.

    As a man of a certain age, I date outside of my parish and have done so ever since I returned to the Church. Because the women within my parishes never looked at me, let alone signaled their interest. Okay, I won’t beat my head against that wall.

    So I’ll reiterate the first commenters’ point that it’s important who the Christian women are signaling as well as the question Donal asks, how should they signal.

  33. Lyn87

    There’s another avenue, but it too has pitfalls (more on those later).

    Think of the Jewish community over the centuries. They needed to preserve their bloodlines during two millenia of the diaspora, so they developed a social construct that included match-makers.

    We don’t do that anymore in the direct sense, but we do have the modern equivalent of match-makers: from dating websites (like Christian Mingle) to dating services (like the one where I met my wife), there are methods where single Christians can signal matrimonial intentions.

    Let’s say a single Christian woman is interested in marriage – she can employ these kinds of match-making services and make her desire for marriage clear, if that is her goal. It overcomes the signal-to-noise problem at the outset: she is signaling her readiness for a Christian husband. If she’s not looking for marriage she can make that known as well, and marriage-minded Christian men can avoid spending time and effort courting her.

    Of course the usual SMV/MMV rules apply. When I joined one of those I was bombarded with date requests from women who didn’t measure up for one reason or another (the most extreme example: one girl was a new covert with an infant, and was pregnant with her second child). So it’s not perfect (what is?), but systems like that can narrow the field down quite a bit, and a high percentage of the people one meets face-to-face are at least in the “acceptable” category.

    As always, caveat emptor, because most Christian women are churchian to some degree, but very few women who are not interested in marriage to a Christian man would specifically and deliberately send that signal “in the clear.” If every serious unmarried Christian would do this, it would be possible for the Christian community to replicate the cultural separateness that the Jewish community achieved for nearly 2000 years.

    But to reiterate: SMV/MMV still applies. The factors that constitute high MMV among Christians should differ than those that apply elsewhere, but Christian men and women are still men and women. If you want a unicorn, you’d better be a unicorn yourself. Fortunately, being a Christian unicorn largely consists of things that are under one’s control – unlike in the non-Christian world, where high SMV/MMV requires winning he genetic lottery and possibly doing things that are forbidden to Christians anyway.

    And you’d better have sophroneo rather than mania: just because the woman signaling marriage says “Lord, Lord” and makes you burn doesn’t mean she’s the best match.
    (DG asked me to write up a post on sophroneo, which is forthcoming.)

  34. Lyn87

    An additional thought (and there may be more later). Matchmaking worked in the diaspora because the main purpose of marriage was to preserve the Jewish bloodline – not ensure the happiness of individual members of the community. Everyone understood that, and a woman was expected to “do her duty” by marrying according to the needs of the bloodline rather than to satisfy her hypergamy. In the “Fiddler On The Roof” clip I posted above, the girls knew that they would have to marry and breed with whomever the Yenta chose for them, and their personal happiness was secondary, if not irrelevant. For Christian matchmaking to work, single Christians will have to be serious about the commandment to not be “unequally yoked” with an unbelieving spouse, and thus avoid romantic (and sexual) entanglements with non-Christians to avoid the risk of marrying outside the Christian fold.

    In the modern era the Yenta has disappeared, and westernized Jews routinely marry Gentiles. That’s because secularized Jews see little need to preserve the Jewish bloodline, and marry for personal reasons rather than to serve a collective purpose. If not for the end of the age, the Jewish race would all but disappear within a few generations due to widespread marriage to Gentiles.

  35. @ Everyone

    Sorry for not replying sooner. I needed to take a break yesterday to clear my head.

    @ John

    Sorry for the snippy reply earlier. I could have said what I said in a less hostile fashion, and apologize for it. Once others chimed in, I was able to appreciate the value of your comment. As I tried to explain before, I think I wrote the wrong post here. We should examine whether and when a woman should signal before discussing methods of signaling.

  36. @ deLaune

    Yeah, its bad out there. I am going to talk with my parents soon about just how bad it is, in the hopes of getting them to help with matchmaking. Not sure that will help me any, but at this point I don’t see much other choice.

    Your post was perfect. It got a good discussion going. What more can you ask for?

    You are right, of course.

  37. @ The Farmer’s Daughter

    I’m glad the post was helpful. Don’t worry about those accusing you of going for your MRS degree, you are on the right track in life. An education and career can always come later in life, but a family (especially a large one), not so much.

    If your father thinks this guy is good husband material, then by all means learn what you can. Unfortunately, I can’t think of any good posts to recommend at the moment.

  38. @ Arctic Mama

    I am open to teaching a young woman who might not be suitable at the onset, provided she meets a few key criteria. In fact, I sort of expect to have to do that at this point. While I would prefer not to, I realize that it is yet another tragic necessity compelled by living in times such as these.

  39. @ Denise

    Do they *have* to escalate sexually beyond her stated boundaries to maintain her attraction? Of course not. They do have to escalate if they want to sleep with her, which is the main purpose of Game. So Mr. Christian R. Edpill needs to find more godly counselors.

    I have heard from Christian men who were not seeking immediate sexual gratification that women will lose attraction if they don’t escalate at least somewhat. Its something worth pondering in the future. Perhaps its true, perhaps not. Part of me suspects that the problem, if it exists, is a result of prior negative conditioning.

  40. “Men should not be deceived that taking on a church leadership position will increase their attractiveness; it will likely have the opposite effect.”

    Is that a Protestant thing? I’ve never heard making yourself more attractive to the opposite sex as one of the reasons to take on a church leadership position.

    As far as not dating girls in the parish I go to…I still say no matter where you find them it’s probably a 2.7% chance of something happening. (http://laidnyc.wordpress.com/2014/01/06/why-you-shouldnt-give-a-shit-about-your-conversion-rate/) Whether she sees you at church or some place else…I’m not going to handicap myself like that.

  41. I suppose it depends, in part, on what “escalate” refers to. I tend to think that a man does need to convey his attraction. But there are various ways of doing that.

  42. Denise:

    I agree that the woman on reddit explained it well and clearly. The reason I referred to it as “myopic” was because it was incomplete, not wrong. The problem is not that he did something she said not to do, but that they were in a social context where an unmarried dude might have an unmarried chick on his lap. This shouldn’t be happening regardless of whether she wants it or not.

    As for the necessity (or lack thereof) of escalating…

    “Do they *have* to escalate sexually beyond her stated boundaries to maintain her attraction?”

    Not exactly, but they *do* have to escalate sexually to the furthest boundary she’s gotten to*. But he has no idea what that is. He’s just as confused about the exact meaning of “escalate” as you are. And that’s the problem. But since women generally underreport their sexual experience, a pretty good heuristic is to go a bit beyond her boundaries. So…yes, they do.

    Do not mistake me for advocating sin. If immoral behavior is the price of attraction, he should just forget the girl altogether. But we are in a sad state of affairs if that’s a common problem. And it is.

    *No one wants to be giving chaste cheek kisses to the girl who got railed last night.

  43. Random Angeleno

    @Donal

    I have heard from Christian men who were not seeking immediate sexual gratification that women will lose attraction if they don’t escalate at least somewhat. Its something worth pondering in the future. Perhaps its true, perhaps not. Part of me suspects that the problem, if it exists, is a result of prior negative conditioning.

    This has been my usual experience. If I’m not at least pushing for the kiss early on, the girl invariably loses interest. Just happened to me again last month.

    @Earl, agreed on refusing to handicap myself by dating only in the Church. Heck, I’ve already mentioned the available Church women in my age range aren’t interested in me. Don’t think they’re interested in Church guys in general. That’s on them, not on me.

  44. Good point there Dropit. If a woman requires serious escalation to keep her interest, then she is almost certainly unsuitable as a candidate.

  45. lauratheringmistress

    Donal, I realize this is a rather old thread, but may I just say that this is excellent advice for shy women? If it had not been for the intervention of a friend, I might still be unmarried today as I had old-fashioned notions about approaching (nice girls don’t) and I apparently signal quite badly, even after 13 years of marriage. There really is a set of girls out there who are the modest, quiet type who really could benefit from matchmakers or lessons in flirtation. I went to college with a lot of them.

  46. Thank you Laura. This kind of training, along with that of how to spot the good fruit from the bad, is sorely needed right now. I know some manospherians think it folly on my part, but I’ve run across some women who I think would “target” the right kind of guys, if they only only knew how.

  47. Pingback: Further Ruminations on Game | Donal Graeme

  48. Pingback: In The World, Not Of It « Calculated Bravery

  49. Pingback: Links and Comments #20 | The Society of Phineas

  50. seventiesjason

    Two Sundays ago….three young men walked into our church Sunday service. They were welcomed not just by me……but at least seven of the women in my church as well. I lived “in the world” most of my life and I saw what was up immediately……

    Not with theses three new men……but with the women 🙂

    You see, if a woman “deems” a guy “hot” and he walks into a church…he *must* be a real, upstanding, total repentant Christian. Why would he be coming to church? Especially if he is young and “hot”? He could vomit in her mouth and she would still see this as a sign of total affection on his part.

    It was a bit comical, because after the service, and the three men left a few of the women were already choosing china patterns…..and were talking about how much “in common” they had with these three strange men that they spoke with for a couple of seconds. This is Christian woman logic at its finest…and these were women in their twenties….

    This just reaffirms my Christian MGTOW stance

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