Since folks seem rather intent on going off-topic, I figured a post devoted to that purpose seems appropriate. Please continue any discussions from the old threads that weren’t relevant to those topics here. This will be a lightly moderated but I would ask folks to show at least some restraint.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Christian Blogs
Christian Masculinity Blogs
Edifying Reading
Feminine Blogs
Inactive/Archived/Private
Parenting/Families
Red Pill Christian Blogs
Red Pill Women
Secular Red Pill Blogs
Top Posts
Categories
- Alpha
- Alpha Widow
- APE
- Attraction
- Beta
- Blue Pill
- Christianity
- Churchianity
- Civilization
- Courtship
- Desire
- Fatherhood
- Femininity
- Feminism
- Fitness Test
- God
- Hypergamy
- LAMPS
- Marriage
- Marriage Market Place
- Masculinity
- Men
- Moral Agency
- Neo-Reaction
- Pair Bonding
- Parenting
- Polygamy
- Red Pill
- Reference
- Saturday Saints
- Selected Sunday Scriptures
- Serial Monogamy
- Sex
- Sexual Market Place
- Sexual Strategies
- Sin
- State of Nature
- Sunshine Mary
- Temptation
- The Church
- Tradition
- Uncategorized
- Women
Archives
- April 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
Meta
Donal Graeme · Wisdom cries out in the street… who shall listen?
Donal Graeme 
For me just loyalty, don’t get fat, and good hygiene in a wife would be just fine. And also sincerely smile at me, respect me and love me.
“I’ve become so bored with femininity advice because all you have to do is find out what your man likes and do that, not what every other woman does for her man.”
This is true. So much femininity advice is about superficial stuff that to actually put it into practice means an alteration in your personality and appearance that is almost like playing a caricature of a 50’s housewife, a Stepford wife or a mousy, wispy waif. I think Elspeth said she once went all Stepford in trying to figure out what being a submissive wife meant and her husband wanted his real wife back.
In my mind, if you are female you are feminine (well, except for a small minority but that’s another topic) and your femininity will come through whether you like to wear dresses and bake bread barefoot in the kitchen or whether you join your man and shoot a few rounds at the gun range. It’s not so much about sticking to strictly feminine activities and styles of dress to prove you are feminine it’s that if you are going to shoot a gun you don’t get all over-competitive in trying to show up your guy or try to look or act tougher than you are. You shoot the best you can and if your guy shoots better, you take notice and admire his ability. You also don’t fake your own ability. If you are a better shot than him, you don’t gloat or get all bossy in giving instructions (unless he asks). Be humble. In other words, you aren’t in competition with your man. By the way, I’ve never touched a gun in my life. I’m just using a more extreme example to make a point.
Femininity is more about an honest portrayal of who you are not trying to be something you aren’t. Different men will like different things. If you hate to wear make-up, don’t think you have to start wearing it to be more feminine. If you love getting all dolled up and doing the girly-girl thing with make-up and nails, then do it. Just don’t go against your personality and style to attract someone because if you are acting a part, you are not going to be able to keep that up for life. It will be something you come to resent. It’s better that whoever you manage to attract is attracted to you rather than someone you’re trying to be by fitting into a preconceived mold.
Mrs. C,
Spot on.
When I saw this site, its overkill and borders on creepy….
http://www.stepfordwives.org/index.html
I mean if that is really what your man wants, do it, but I find that to be a rare case and that it can be more damaging and lead women into following the herd rather than their man. An example of where women try to femdom and usurp a husband’s authority by leading his wife away from what he wants and into what the sisterhood wants, be it a feminist or traditional sisterhood. This is part of my criticism of the red pill women and I am sure they are all convinced I am not really feminine cause I don’t follow their herd.
And I do believe, although more controversial, that it is your man that makes you feel feminine, not make-up, dresses, and frills. It is only against the masculine does the feminine really come out. And to be more risqué–what really makes you feel feminine, again the make up and dresses or the weight of your man on top of you during sex that exudes power and makes you surrender.
lgrobins, That is such a hoot that you linked to that site. I was going to to link to it in my previous comment but cut it short because my dd needed me at the moment.
I came across that site awhile ago and when I showed it to my husband and asked him if this is what men really wanted, he looked at me like I was crazy and said the same thing you did. Weird and creepy. I mean, kneeling before him and taking off his shoes and putting slippers on his feet after work is so not who we are personality wise and not anywhere near how we interact together.
I wouldn’t even say do it if it’s what your husband wants if it’s not your personality either. Hopefully, these things would have been discussed before marriage and if it suits both of you then fine. However, if my husband came home after 16 years of marriage and asked me to be this type of female, as much as I love him, I couldn’t do it. It’s not who I am.
Another thing is that when you have a houseful of kids and just normal everyday life, this “lifestyle’ is highly unrealistic. I’m not a fan of Red Pill women either. You can’t playact your way through life.
Femininity is all in the attitude you have toward your husband. Be kind. Be respectful. Don’t try to be a man to prove you’re as good as him at traditionally masculine things. He probably doesn’t care or expect you to be anyway. Speak your mind but don’t insist on having it all your own way. Really listen when he’s talking to you and consider his point of view. Make him look forward to coming home rather having a feeling of dread when his hand touches the doorknob. Be thoughtful of his preferences as far as meals, cleaning the house etc. You don’t have to be a slave to this. Sometimes taking care of children means you won’t always be able to have everything perfect everyday but make a good effort and he will notice. Be generous with your affection and receptive to his.
Oh yes, and you last point. How feminine you feel shouldn’t come from how you compare to the next woman but how you contrast with your husband’s masculinity.
Mrs. C,
Great comment, especially this–
“Another thing is that when you have a houseful of kids and just normal everyday life, this “lifestyle’ is highly unrealistic. I’m not a fan of Red Pill women either. You can’t playact your way through life.”
Exactly that.
Yes to the attitude. Femininity and masculinity is an attitude not outside trappings. A dorky guy can be masculine with his attitude and a plain or manly looking woman can be feminine with her attitude. A lot of what is dispensed online causes people to reject possible partners because they don’t look the part.
No, Donal, we’re going to talk about attraction right here.
Women should wear foundation and some blush. Men should be at least tone, meaning they should lifts weights a few times a week, run on the treadmill, and eat well. Other, you’re not attractive, unless you have perfect skin. Men who never work-out are not attractive. That’s your honest answer.
Looks are a big part of it. Don’t be ugly. If you’re cute, that helps a lot. If you’re smart, that’s a HUGE bonus. I’m probably “sapiosexual”, albeit not gay. Make sure your hair looks good, your clothes aren’t weird, you’re in moderately good shape, and you smell nice. That’s most of it, if I’m honest. I’m not interested in the Quaker Oatmeal guy. Then, you could really argue that it’s better to be single…
My generation doesn’t see status as materialism. We’re all about “living out your dreams,” so everyone wants their very own, custom-designed dream-spouse. Everybody wants to travel the world and have a cooler life than everyone else. It’s more about popularity hypergamy than it is about pretending to be British aristocracy. The subdivision will die with my generation.
Personally, I think there’s a female version of game that the men don’t like to talk about on here. I see hot guys marrying homely women all the time.
@fringed: Rollo strikes me as someone who sees people through a very demographic lens. Maybe it works for him, I don’t know.
I was just making a joke about alpha frame. But who can tell with you?
@Mrs. C: Yeah, I don’t know if jack is who he says he is ever, but I enjoy talking to him. What he says would make sense, but he’s said other contradictory things before too, soo…
I guess I mostly don’t appreciate deception. When you’re upset, you don’t really think about, “Hm, what am I accomplishing?” There’s less risk involved in the world of online, so things are different than irl. Irl, you have more accountability, so there’d be less of a likelihood of the scenario ever happening. Had it happened IRL, the individual would have received a very animated phone call, that would have lead to blocking each other on Facebook. But that’s just me. I’d probably talk about it to my best friends, who don’t interact with other people that I know. And it would probably end there, unless the person got sore that I addressed it, which people usually do. People think confrontation is of the devil.
Online, I don’t know. Yeah, the whole thing wasn’t the best way to handle it. I’ll admit that. But I’m fine with claiming actual things that happened. I prefer that to the intensive speculation that you see. Like me being essentially labeled an EAP. No. I don’t interact with women who are like that. Most of my friends are not Evangelicals. I don’t even know if I have any Evangelical friends. I hated Christian music growing-up. I was always a reader, and went to a historic liberal arts school. I read my first history book when I was nine. If I fit any demographic, it’s the hipster demographic. I’m a hipster, but conservative. And I don’t attend a hipster congregation, so that means that I’m one of many people out there who do not fit the “Christian/Churchian Princess” demo. That’s a certain kind of girl, who uses phrases like “capture every moment” and “daughter of the King” and “every day’s a miracle” and “my girls are a blessing #blessed.”
@Mrs.C (again): well, I’m glad that you’re straight with what you’re saying. I find it difficult to practice what I preach as well. I think knowing what to do is half of it, though. I can tell that you’re trying. As far as cursing goes, it’s very manosphere standard. I tend to think that my label as a “cusser” was dubbed by someone who thought I’d be an easy target for “cusser.” Most people here do. DS, DG, MDavid, jack, Haley, probably Dalrock, the secular manosphere… I just seem like a better *target* for the title “cusser,” because my personality seems mooore… “cusser.”
Hank: Um, yeah, you know who I am. jack and I got married. 😛
lg, I think men want you to show-up for the honeymoon phase. Then they want you to be the Proverbs 31 wife.
Speaking of Proverbs 31 wife, my little sister wanted to watch Rachel Ray today, and I was appalled and disturbed that they showed sensationalist news about a man beating his wife with a spoon for not calling him “sir.” My poor sister. I even left the room. I thought of this, because the manosphere now needs an image make-over, thanks to Rachel Ray’s attempt at making herself look better by comparison out of context.
Mrs. C, LG: There’s kind of an image of “the perfect woman” on here, as well as in the Feminist universe that gets perpetuated. So, a lot of men think this is normal: apex fallacy stuff. So, if you actually find someone you think is “decent” for you, it’s too good to be true. There’s not a mom out there who can look great, run a multimillion dollar business, have a kid or two, and have an organic meal on the table. There’s also not a mom out there who can look great, take of thirteen kids, teach them how to knit, teach them 8 dead languages, have an organic meal on the table. But I think looking good is important sometimes, especially during the courtship and honeymoon phases. I personally like wearing makeup. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.
“As far as cursing goes, it’s very manosphere standard. I tend to think that my label as a “cusser” was dubbed by someone who thought I’d be an easy target for “cusser.” Most people here do. DS, DG, MDavid, jack, Haley, probably Dalrock, the secular manosphere… I just seem like a better *target* for the title “cusser,” because my personality seems mooore… “cusser.”
Don’t ya know you are doing It all wrong! To do it like a “lady” you have to say @$$ or Sh*t. That makes it all proper and acceptable. Being funny of course, but I’ve noticed this with women online. They get a pass for cussing with asterisks like that make them more genteel, but they are still thinking it. If you are bold enough to think it, then say it too in its full glory.
<Um, yeah, you know who I am. jack and I got married.
Uh-huh…you probably noted my skepticism at the announcement of your alleged engagement. Some people did seem to take you seriously on that, though. As someone else (YOU) said:
<I guess I mostly don’t appreciate deception.
Mrs. C,
Forgot to mention—the women who idolize the 50s…something else recently came across and was a bit shocked by how popular processed food cooking was back then. Cooking by using ingredients by can. It was cool and trendy. So, we all tend to think of that era as every meal being from scratch and perfectly presented, but not necessarily so.
Look at this:
http://pzrservices.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451ccbc69e201a73df572ec970d-pi
Is that what those 1950s stepford wives are making? Is that what makes them better than the rest of us.
Yes Mrs C. I jumped on the submissive Biblical womanhood uber modest bandwagon and my husband wanted his spunky, jeans wearing wife back. The one who wasn’t too holy to dance with him. I wanted her back too, frankly. She’s so much fun.
And as a average Jane married to a seriously handsome guy, I have to agree with Tru. I have chalked that up to some guys having nothing to prove. No one they need to impress by choosing the hottest chick they can get and can choose an wife to be a wife.
But there is a little pressure there sometimes to be honest.
@Tru “I’m not interested in the Quaker Oatmeal guy. Then, you could really argue that it’s better to be single…”
That is too funny. I don’t know where you come up with some of this stuff.
@Tru “I guess I mostly don’t appreciate deception. When you’re upset, you don’t really think about, “Hm, what am I accomplishing?”…… Had it happened IRL, the individual would have received a very animated phone call, that would have lead to blocking each other on Facebook. ”
I can see how it being all online would give it almost an unreal quality that would be more over-the-top than IRL. There’s also the frustration that the person you have a grievance against can also avoid contact by blocking you out and not being willing to have a conversation. That right there would escalate frustration as well. I’m glad you tried to make right what you needed to and sorry that you probably won’t ever have it fully resolved.
@Tru “People think confrontation is of the devil.”
True. It’s always uncomfortable and people avoid it for many different reasons. As difficult as it is when we’re “in the moment” with our anger and frustration, we have to try to at least give it some thought as to how to handle the confrontation. If we handle it poorly, we won’t get nearly the outcome we’re going for than if we put some consideration into it.
@Tru “I’m one of many people out there who do not fit the “Christian/Churchian Princess” demo. That’s a certain kind of girl, who uses phrases like “capture every moment” and “daughter of the King” and “every day’s a miracle” and “my girls are a blessing #blessed.”
I’m with you on that. That whole mindset makes me cringe and I always thought it was because, being Catholic, we don’t really see it that much at church. At least not in the rural, conservative area I live in. It’s fake and unrealistic. I also think it ill prepares these girls for real life tough situations when they come.
@Tru “As far as cursing goes, it’s very manosphere standard. I tend to think that my label as a “cusser” was dubbed by someone who thought I’d be an easy target for “cusser.” Most people here do. DS, DG, MDavid, jack, Haley, probably Dalrock, the secular manosphere… I just seem like a better *target* for the title “cusser,” because my personality seems mooore… “cusser.”
Well, as I’ve said many times, I’m not a manosphere traveler. I’ve read things here and there and a lot of it seems very poisonous to the Christian mind. If someone doesn’t really know their faith in and out, they can be lead astray. Anyway, most of what you’re saying I’m not fully understanding what you mean. I’m not so much a prude that cussing bothers me in a “Oh my dear, my ears are going to bleed with that awful language.” kind of way. I’ve been known to utter a few unseemly words when I get mad enough. But I will say this. The cruder and more vulgar the language the harder it is for some people to get past that to the point you’re trying to make and it also can lower your credibility in a sense.
@ Tru
Many of us do talk about it. In fact, I believe I have written at least one post on the subject before. Frankly, I’m surprised Deti has shown up to say that its proof that most any woman can get a guy, including a “hot” one, if she just acts right.
Also, keep in mind that a man’s external appearance is only a small part of his actual attractiveness. Plenty of men who can be considered handsome have trouble with women because of this. Thus, “homely women” might be the best that they can keep.
With all due respect Elspeth, you are way off base with this.
Perhaps it is the case for some men, but I don’t think for most men that they marry a “hot chick” just because they want to prove they can to the other men around them. Men want to marry a good-looking woman because we like the company of a good-looking woman, especially company of the intimate variety. That is our primary motivation. The rest is, if we even consider it, just gravy.
Good looking men who “marry down” do so for a number of reasons, including:
1) They are aiming for traits which they value more than beauty.
2) They have been burned by good-looking women in the past, and so hope to avoid that by marrying a less attractive woman
3) These men aren’t as attractive as they appear at first glance, and such women are the best that they can marry in terms of looks.
@ Tru
No. Just no. This is a classic bait and switch that women pull, but it will not lead to a happy marriage. Looking good is always important throughout the marriage, and less important things (like teaching 8 dead languages to the kids) should take a backseat to it if needed.
@ Donal, Elspeth
Yes, it’s pure projection to think men who prefer hot women do so because they want to impress people and not simply because they find hot women more physically attractive.
lgrobins- That meal is revolting. So are tv dinners.
My husband also said that living with the ’50s housewife caricature type woman would be like being “mothered” to death with the constant pampering and service. He thinks men who would require this as their version of a submissive wife have serious mommy issues.
E-“my husband wanted his spunky, jeans wearing wife back. ”
I’m a jeans-wearing wife myself and much different than my than prissy looking gravatar pic attached to my name. My Dh is not real fond of the Little House on the Prairie look. He’s a flannel and t-shirts guy when he’s not at work.
lgrobins- Have you seen this “experiment” where this girl tried to live the ’50’s lifestyle IRL. She basically makes fun of it but wanted to see if living that way made any difference in her relationship or health or finances etc. Interestingly, she’s divorced now but was married at the time of the experiment.. Some of her posts are hilarious
http://www.jenbutneverjenn.com/2010/05/welcome-to-50s-housewife-experiment.html
@ Mrs C and Igrobins
I don’t get the impression that manosphere men are looking for the stereotype of a 1950’s woman, or that so called “red pill women” are advocating that. I could be missing something though.
“What he says would make sense, but he’s said other contradictory things before too, soo…”
Wow! “contradictions”. Pot calling kettle back to the MAXXX
I wish you well Trug……
I sense Donal that my commented may have been slightly offensive to you. It wasn’t my intent, but I’ve seen normally rational men marry women with red flags waving from a mile away based mostly on hotness.One in particular is quite miserable and regrets his dumping of a perfectly pleasant looking girl for his wife. My husband hears his lament frequently.
Men are on the main, just as foolish as women when choosing mates. You are an exception, not the rule. I think I’ll believe my lying eyes on this one. I think pretty women are a gift, and I can certainly understand why any man would want to marry one. Provided she’s wife material and our culture has all but bred that out of all women regardless of looks.
There are pictures of me scattered throughout my blog. It’s not as if my husband married an ugly woman, and I’m certainly not advocating that anyone do that even though it seems as if that’s how you took it. A man should certainly be attracted to his wife
In my case I am fully cognizant that it was a combination of that biological attraction that has been mentioned here, and the fact that my personality in many ways reminded him of his mother whom he’d lost just as we were getting acquainted. It certainly wasn’t option 3, LOL.
Elspeth,
I don’t have any disagreements with your most recent comment. Besides the logic behind, my lack of disagreement owes much to the fact that it has nothing in common with your previous comment.
To restate what you had said earlier:
My objection to this statement was the fact that you seemed to be implying that men married the “hottest chick” they could because they wanted to prove something. Once again, this is not so. We do not want to marry an attractive woman just because we want to show her off. I suppose it could be a reason for some men, but it is very low down in the list. The reason we want to marry a “hot chick” is because we want to be married to a “hot chick.”
Or, as lgrobins said earlier, to be somewhat risque… when I see an attractive woman, I don’t want to bang her because I want to prove something to the other guys… I want to bang her because I want to bang an attractive woman. My subconscious directs me to this, not some desire to show off to other men that I can do it.
[Update: To make it even more risque, my subconscious is telling me that the more attractive the woman, the more I would enjoy banging her. That is the primary motivation for men, not some desire to “prove” something. I believe that at least one study has born out that subconscious belief, too.]
Mrs. C,
Very interesting link indeed. Will be going through that.
“My husband also said that living with the ’50s housewife caricature type woman would be like being “mothered” to death with the constant pampering and service. He thinks men who would require this as their version of a submissive wife have serious mommy issues.”
Yes funny that “mothered” is close to “smothered”. Same thing. To pick up on what FBNF said, I do think a lot of the men in the sphere want the 50s housewife or want to be mommyed a bit by the way some of them orbit an cling to every word of some women.
Mommy issues and a Madonna/whore thing if you ask me. Pontificating about modest Christian virginal women while getting off on pretentious glamor whores. Typical religious hypocrisy.
@FBNF “I don’t get the impression that manosphere men are looking for the stereotype of a 1950’s woman, or that so called “red pill women” are advocating that. ”
I can only speak for myself but it’s not so much the men calling for it although there is the occasional man hinting at some things he would expect of a wife that seems a little too Stepford to me. But hey, if he finds a woman whose personality fits that and they’re happy together, that’s great.
It’s more some women, who in an attempt to be more submissive in their marriage, describe some of the changes they make and although not terrible on the surface seem a little robotic and unnecessary. Here are some quotes that are typical of some of these ideas….(these are all from one blog but are representative of things that I’ve seen on many of these sites)
“Initially it felt as though we were both play-acting – sort of a ‘fake it til you make it’ approach. We spent a lot of time reading established blogs and trying to digest the information. Looking back, I did several things that significantly contributed to establishing my new identity.”
“I also started asking Henry’s permission to do things that I would NOT need his permission to do. This is a way of giving him power over my daily decisions and reminding me that his wishes should be considered. That may sound extreme, but it was and is necessary to keep me in the correct frame of mind and it is a way to establish and remind myself to keep him in charge.”
“One of our early rules was for me to meet him at the door and give him a welcome home kiss; sounds easy, but it was hard to do with those seven sets of eyes watching my every move.”
” So we are finally at the place where HE is comfortable taking responsibility for OUR household and that includes MY spending. Actually, “yes, I do” – because the security of knowing Henry is actively running our household is very comforting. It was not too long ago that he barely paid attention to the running of our household because he knew I would over ride/bicker/challenge even the simplest suggestion. ”
I think it’s creepy to describe trying to be a better wife to your husband as “establishing my new identity.” or to suddenly ask permission for things you don’t need his permission to do. What the heck is that? My husband would think I’ve lost my mind if I did that and probably wonder why I’m wasting his time standing around like a two year old asking him questions all day.
Making it a rule to meet your husband at the door when he walks in is also robotic. I would hope I would greet him at least the first 5 minutes after he’s come home because I want to see him but he would think it crazy for me to run up from the laundry room and leave the unfolded laundry just to be right at the door as he’s walking in because it’s “a rule.” I’m sure he would find it stifling.
The last two are the craziest of all. I’d be ashamed if my DH, after working all day would have to babysit my spending, take over the household paperwork and actively run the household. Especially if it was because I can’t do it without bickering and challenging him.
Granted she does have other things she’s done that are better in keeping with trying to be a better wife but I’m not a fan of an adult woman infantalizing (is that a word?) herself in the name of submisson or red pill so her husband will be more in-charge. Who says he wanted all this extra babysitting and household responsibility anyway?
DG, …my subconscious is telling me that the more attractive the woman, the more I would enjoy banging her. That is the primary motivation for men, not some desire to “prove” something.
Biology rules. Attractive and well-disposed women can crank out more children over a lifetime, so men have evolved to like “attractive”. It’s really that simple. The world belongs to those who show up for it, and since the average woman in America today is not replacing herself/mate with 2.1 children, her assessment on attraction is not relevant since she’s headed for extinction.
Of course, a woman’s ability to provide (cook/clean/nurture) is an attraction consideration as well, since this also helps fertility. But it remains a secondary one, since you have to have kids before you can raise them.
@ Tru
Question… Do you really want to resolve whatever it is that you are upset with DS over? Do you really want our help? If you do, then I have an idea…
@ Mrs C
You said to Tru: There’s also the frustration that the person you have a grievance against can also avoid contact by blocking you out and not being willing to have a conversation.
In this case, the person she has a grievance against IS willing to have a conversation. He plainly said so on his blog by telling her repeatedly that she could email him with any problems.
FBNF- Thanks for correcting that. I must have missed it. There were so many comments that were appearing and disappearing that of the ones I saw, it seemed she was shut out. Like I said, it’s a matter of trying to fit together bits and pieces of info.
Good looking men who “marry down” do so for a number of reasons, including:
1) They are aiming for traits which they value more than beauty.
2) They have been burned by good-looking women in the past, and so hope to avoid that by marrying a less attractive woman
3) These men aren’t as attractive as they appear at first glance, and such women are the best that they can marry in terms of looks.
Which is sensible, although I think the cases of “1” and “2” are more common than “3”.
It’s also important to remember that because men are not hypergamous in attraction, they are still capable of being attracted, viscerally, to women who are “below” them in SMV (even if they may be more *viscerally* attracted to women who are higher in SMV). That’s the difference, again, between hypergamy and optimization, and why some men will make that trade-off, because even though the woman is less optimal on pure visceral attraction, she is still over his attraction floor, meaning he is still attracted to her, and so it’s a trade-off of some visceral attraction for other qualities that are important to him in a wife. Women, by contrast, are simply not attracted to men at all who are “below” them in SMV, due to hypergamy. So we would expect, given that difference between the sexes, that there would be a significant number of relationships that are not strictly assortative, but where the man is “higher” than the woman is, because this satisfies the woman’s hypergamy while the woman is still above the man’s attraction floor. It’s also why the reverse situation is very uncommon — I don’t mean seeing guys women think are “ugly” being with attractive women: those men are all attractive in other ways when you see that situation (i.e., other PSALM factors). But the situation where a woman is with a man of lower SMV in terms of PSALMS are extremely uncommon because hypergamy is violated — the man would be fine with that, but the woman is not, so it generally doesn’t happen.
@ mdavid
Attractive and well-disposed women can crank out more children over a lifetime
Being attractive doesn’t guarantee that in the slightest. Having a job where I work with the public, I’ve seen more than my share of unattractive women with a slew of their own children, and I’ve also known some attractive women who wanted more kids than they got but just couldn’t get pregnant more often (or keep the pregnancies that they did get), sometimes even at younger ages.
If a man is claiming that he is choosing an attractive woman because she will be able have more babies than an unattractive woman, he’s either delusional or doesn’t want to admit his real reasons for wanting her for her attractiveness (not that wanting someone who is attractive is a bad thing because it’s not, assuming he also takes her character into as much account).
@ Mrs C
You’re welcome. I got all of those comments in my email since I had opted in to them after my first comment on that post, which is how I spotted that. Plus I know him well enough to know that he doesn’t like to leave things unresolved, if he’s aware that there is a problem.
@ FBNF
Right, no correlation is 100%. There are obviously exceptions to both sides of the rule.
I don’t know about others but I certainly wouldn’t claim that. I would choose an attractive woman primarily for the more pleasurable sex. Now the reason the sex would be more pleasurable is because my mind has been evolutionarily programmed to seek out women who’re likely to be fertile.
In terms of actual effects on fertility though, I’m actually curious how well attractiveness is an indicator of fertility. Something to research. I certainly would be taking family history into account on this, and would also take attractiveness into account if it is a significant predictor of infertility.
There are no guarantees, but since I expect to only have one shot at this (unless surrogacy becomes a more feasible option), I’m going to make sure maximize the odds of success.
I highly doubt there are many men who truly desire the caricature of the 1950’s housewife. Y’all know that’s all she is right? And not based on aanything real. See Mrs. Crabtree, LOL.
A pleasant, attractive, submissive from the Biblical sense and competent in the first officer sense is probably more than enough for most men if they can find her.
@ Nova:
I agree with your comment and stand corrected with regard to my first cimment.
I am not Fringed.
There is one blog where I still comment, and it is not remotely associated with the manosphere, MRAs, or game.
As I predicted a couple years ago, the manosphere is fading. It will be replaced – eventually – with blogs such as DS, Freenortherner, and even more so, the female bloggers – and commenters. Despite the calls for caution from certain ‘spheric writers, the rise of the “female manosphere” is inevitable. And necessary.
At great risk of exposing myself to an estrogenic onslaught of shaming language, I think the time has come for the men to defensively entrench against the soon-coming asymptotic aspirations of our feminist overlords, and let them have the dismal experience of getting precisely what one has wished for.
Women have their own unique – and quite effective – method of solving conflict among themselves. And just as a woman should never intervene between two men who have taken to fisticuffs, so too should men remain sidelined when the women have decided it is time for a catfight.
The final return to sanity will be the result, ironically, of a vicious catfight between red pill women and the lunatic fringe of feminism (is there any other kind?).
To paraphrase the immortal Roissy…
“Let’s you and her fight!”
In a display of Irony of Biblical proportions, the women will end up defending our honor.
-jack
(“I’m with the banned”)
Tru, trudie, Tru G, Somebody, Anybody, No one etc.
This is coming from a place of pure curiosity and it’s not meant to offend. Why do you keep changing your name all the time? Is there a reason?
I’m not saying you can’t if you want to but I’m just really curious. You can also say it’s none of my business.
@ Jack:
Do you know why trug called me Jack? If memory serves me correctly, I think I read on this thread that a Jack and her were engaged?? Would that be you? I wasn’t going to comment further on this thread as it has gone so man-hating with the men want mommy jargon.
It’s jack, not Jack.
I have never been Jack. I lower-case to self-efface.
You are free to consider the comparison a compliment or insult, as fits your preference.However, since I consider myself to be quite clever (biased, yes), I lean towards the “compliment” column. YMMV.
I’m not “Trudie”, and it’s a pun for “tru die.” So, please no one think that’s me.
It’s just you again Trug. I won’t restate in front of others what I stated on your blog under the handle, Tom Hagen. I do believe it is very good advice for you. In your pain be cognizant of pain you may cause others.
I didn’t actually continue emailing him, because there was sort of a vicious cycle of emailing when it should have ended. It had been resolved, and I didn’t want to continue.
jack, I hope you’re okay.
I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings. I didn’t realize what was going on at the time. I’m also not the best communicator, which I told you beforehand.
I was able to go out today after trying for three days. I bought myself a few things with gift money. My mom got mad at me and listed things that I always do wrong. I couldn’t get out to buy people things this year. I realize that I make other people upset, but I don’t know where to draw the line. At some point, I have to stop thinking about it. I’ve been very confused recently. I feel like everything’s my fault, even if I don’t think that’s the case. I need to clear my head a bit. Please stop.
The Apostle Paul talked about Satan’s thorn in the flesh. The hardest thing to learn is for us to learn to love ourselves – and each other – as much as the Lord loves us.
And to see the best in ourselves (and others) instead of looking for the worst. If you look for the worst, you will always find it, even if it is not there in the first place.
FBNF, If a man is claiming that he is choosing an attractive woman because she will be able have more babies than an unattractive woman, he’s either delusional or doesn’t want to admit his real reasons
I don’t care what men “claim”. I merely point out the biological fact that “attractive” women are the most statistically biologically fruitful. There are countless studies that prove this. I’ve even read of tribes who rate women based upon estimated potential family size. This is biology 101.
Being attractive doesn’t guarantee that in the slightest. Having a job where I work with the public, I’ve seen more than my share of unattractive women with a slew of their own children
Sigh. We are talking about statistics; there are always freaks and exceptions. Hell, there are gay guys and asexual people too. They are the exception, not the rule.
And today, we can control fertility, so hotness doesn’t equal children anymore. However, for 5 million years of evolution people had as many children as they could, and this is simply how men evolved. Just like men love to hunt and fish and hike and play sports even thought it doesn’t make them a cent today. Thus, men have the hots for women who can breed best. This is also why “the wall” correlates with the loss of fertility; men find the loss of fertility sexually unattractive.
jack, As I predicted a couple years ago, the manosphere is fading. It will be replaced – eventually – with blogs such as DS, Freenortherner, and even more so, the female bloggers – and commenters.
I need some definitions here. I consider DS, FN, Dalrock, and Rollo to be “manosphere”, and I don’t think they are fading, quite the contrary. I think most people would agree with me. What say you?
DS and FN are – in my opinion – very tangential to the ‘sphere.
This is not an insult, just analysis.
Even so, I think the women will be the largest players here.
Despite my belief in the “image of God” aspect of mankind, I am enough of a biological realist to know that the “eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap” dynamic will never be reversed until mankind is free of this mortal coil. The female imperative will shift from the promiscuous to the virtuous – but driven by pragmatism, not virtue.
Sin never works over the long term, and even the unsaved will figure that out, though they will find alternate ways to describe morality.
All it is is the MP shifting from socialism back to capitalism.