Women have sex to influence men

A confirmation from a PUA’s perspective.

Readership: Men; Christian Men;
Theme: Agency
Length: 4,000 words
Reading Time: 15 minutes

Introduction

In a previous post, Why is Premarital Sex a Sin? (2020 August 14), we learned how women use sex to assert control over men.

In this post, we’ll look at how Pick Up Artistry plays into the woman’s frame to give her the illusion of superiority that she seeks. As we will see, it is much more complex and nuanced than merely a game for control. In fact, it will be seen that both the man and the woman fail to accurately assess the interaction as one of asserting sexual authority — the cognizant idea of power never even enters the picture! Instead, her desire for preeminence and his cooperation through humility is instead regarded by both as her “influence” on the man, which is then interpreted by her as an affirmation of her ego.

Let’s review the relevant text of an article appearing on Girls Chase: Women Resist Sex When They Feel They Have No Influence (2020 May 13), by Cody Lyans. (Please go to Girls Chase to read the entire piece.) Upon first reading, I got the impression that women have sex because they want to be valued and loved, and they want to make themselves relevant to the man’s life. But after picking this essay apart, I found that this article contains a lot of coded language that glosses over the messiness and transforms the PUAs ethical paradigm into a beautiful piece of work.

First and foremost, I’ll point out that the woman’s “influence” is a code word for a mutual faith-based assertion of her sexual authority over the man. Also a woman’s “motivation” refers to her intrinsic wants and desires. I’ll translate others as we go along.

Women Read Men much better than Men Read Women

In the first half of the article, the author explains three tips about how to draw a woman in and not screw up the escalation.

  • Choose location
  • Control pacing
  • Keep her Heart Trust engaged by posing witty questions and showing humor.

Following these instructions, Lyans explains how to interpret different reactions and offers this insight about how to respond.

DIFFERENT REACTIONS

Remember, not all women are the same. There’s a spectrum: some women will kick back a lot, others very little, and with both, it is a point of pride, whichever way they swing. To one girl, it may be good to be “less of a hassle,” and to another girl, it is an accomplishment to “be a hassle.”

Both come from the same idea: women want to have influence on a man AND be pursued by him.

Translation: Women are versatile in that they will find different ways to attract sexual attention, establish prominence over a man’s life, and exert leverage, depending on the individual man’s particular weaknesses. Some women do this through feminine wiles, while others find it more effective to use anger and more direct confrontation. Furthermore, women love to lull in the throes of egotistical self-esteem in doing so.

The reason why “women want to have influence on a man AND be pursued by him” is because this is the condition of full engagement for the woman. She wants to feel overwhelmed by her passions, while at the same time not be left completely without volition. IOW, it puts her on the juxtaposed cusp of faith and flesh, and this is what makes her feel loved and wanted — not the man himself. The man is merely an object of her affections, and only has to do what is necessary to maintain this condition of full engagement for the woman. Many women want to see men as fungible in this regard, and chase after the hormonal thrills of the metaphysical connection, but we know this is not done without a cost to the vitality of her soul.

If we think about what kind of man could keep a woman on her toes with this kind of interaction, we’ll realize why many women say they want conflicting traits in a man — sensitive, receptive, tractable, understanding, and yet confident, firm, proactive, and steadfast. If he is thirsty as ħә11, he’ll keep up the pursuit and maintain the connection, but he must also be monogamously faithful so that she can retain faith herself. So women want an obedient sex beggar with a millisecond response to the whiff of Chanel who also has a zenith SMV and can obtain sex at the drop of a thong. As we know, only a tiny fraction of a percentage of men can match all these requirements. The PUA industry is built on the art of faking it (or getting sufficiently close enough through training, experience, and self-development), but systematically avoids following through to its completion in marriage.

And yet, women are clueless about what men truly want…

Women don’t know how to inject influence into a situation and allow a man to pursue them.

Yes, women are persnickety afficionadas about the conflicting traits in men that are attractive to them, but are rather clueless about what is attractive to men – other than the obvious – coquettish threads wrapped tightly around a bounteous display of smooth hide, and of course, sexual favors. Modest, demure approaches in courtship seems to be a lost art of the intersexual dance.

So when they influence a guy who is escalating, there’s a chance that he’ll suddenly stop his pursuit. And if they don’t influence a guy who is pursuing her, then she has no responsibility for what happens and is worthless in her own eyes.

Translation: Men tend to prioritize reaching for the fruit that is most delectable and within easy reach. Logically, women should try to make themselves more delicious and more easily accessible, but this would require her to (1) swallow her pride and make an effort, and (2) relinquish her grasping for control over the interaction. So instead, proud lazy women who want to make themselves relevant to a man have to quickly assess each man’s weakness and find a method to consolidate preeminent sexual authority over his desire (or some other weakness) early in the game. This is why unsuccessful women (who take either approach) are described as “not being able to keep a man”.

Translation: Her sense of “responsibility” is linked to whether she is getting what she wants, not whether she is exercising personal agency nor being obedient to his wishes.

Illicit sex often comes into the Game at this point, because this is the easiest, most direct, and most enjoyable way to attain knowledge of the other person’s innermost soul. Men want to know what she’s made of and whether she would be a good fit for him. Women seek to obtain that knowledge of his heart which would allow her to consolidate power and control over him. OTOH, too much knowledge can kill the passion and desire necessary to draw one in. So this is the delicate dance that women think they have to perform in order to “keep a man”. You would think that marriage would be the optimal solution for women at this point, and therefore should be prioritized early in the game. Yet because of hypergamy, copious options of men, and feminist cultural norms including the widespread acceptance of promiscuity, many women have the notion that marriage only disturbs the Game and “traps” them in a state of soul sucking irrelevancy.

Women use Ego Reward Feedback Mechanisms better than Men do

In short, girls are playing a game of self-worth IN BETWEEN the moments we are pursuing. They OFTEN fail at this balance; otherwise, they would never feel a reward when they “get it right.” It is THIS reward that is more important to them than sex, and even a good relationship with YOU.

Translation: Within this paradigm, a woman’s “self-worth” is dependent on her ego-feedback mechanism and whether she is getting what she wants out of the interaction. The reason women fail at this endeavor is because they are adopting an external locus of control, which they have no control over. Instead, a mature woman should be focusing on conforming to the Biblical archetype of femininity and prioritizing her relationship with the man (e.g. by being respectful and obedient), which is an internal locus of control.

Translation: The “reward” is limbic, not relational as a man would assume. It’s about getting what she wants – attention, validation, Tingles, and perhaps sex if the man is exceedingly high SMV. The problem is that men are not “reward” vending machines, and women cannot treat them as such.

It’s the thundering truth, and something to fully recognize. I think it happens because all humanity is forever running around in life, and it’s only through these small windows where we have perceivable power (in our own eyes) that we can let go of our worries and believe we have EARNED our reward. Or less philosophically, our body will only allow us to reward ourselves if we have done something “just right” and pull off a new level of efficiency or compromise.

See translation of “reward” above. It also applies to the man but with a boulder-heavy emphasis on sex. This paragraph reveals that both PUAs and the women involved are running on feral autopilot, seeking after limbic hind-brain “rewards”. However, and reading between the lines, Lyans is suggesting that a modicum of success in this endeavor can bring a psychological liberation that allows one to transcend the limitations of the flesh.

This goes back to our hunter-gatherer days when a person could run after a deer with a spear but might burn precious energy in the attempt, and fail. So the body shuts down reward centers to stop him chasing, rather than have them on full blast at all times and have him hunt until he dies of exhaustion. In the same vein, girls are playing a game of “catching a provider/protector.”

Just as I wrote earlier, men grasp for easy-squeezy juicy fruit, not Miss Princess Invicta Perfecta. More biological evolutionary psychology offers confirmation of the intelligent caveman mentality.

To be recognized as a provider/protector, a guy needs to get sex from her AND be influenced by her. Her lizard brain tells her that if she has no influence in a relationship, she may not be able to protect her children and they’ll die, thus rendering her procreation efforts useless. If she has influence but receives no sexual excitement, SHE will be apathetic and won’t have sex. So to enjoy sex, she has to command influence and be excited, which to her is a hard task; and to guys, it’s not so easy either.

Translation: A man does not need to get sex to be a provider/protector (e.g. fathers). The reason Lyans is inserting sex into the equation is because sex is the feedback confirmation of his stud status being accepted by her hypergamous filters.

In claiming that he must be “influenced” by her, the PUA is essentially saying that a man must allow the woman some measure of ascendancy, at least long enough to be chosen by her for the perpetuation of his seed (or so it is assumed sans birth control). He’s also suggesting that men are untrustworthy and irresponsible (which is only true for immature and uncommitted men), and so it is only right that the woman should be in control (a wrong conclusion due to the selective premise). He’s also pointing out that the man must remain high SMV and perform well sexually, in order to retain her interest.

Maintaining this balance is a hard task to both men and women because this is not how God intended men and women to interact. The real question is about how men and women can reach the level of maturity that is necessary to be sufficiently obedient to God’s order. How can one become mature without forfeiting one’s soul through trial and error?

In the next section, the author outlines what he perceives to be a solution to his conundrum.

Ego Primacy and the Motivating Power of Desire

ALLOW HER TO JUSTIFY HERSELF AND BE MOTIVATED

So if you’ve ever wondered where this comes from, now you know. It’s simple: pay attention to her NEED to justify herself and her WANT to stay clear of apathy in life. Help her be MOTIVATED. Support her attempts to JUSTIFY herself, but do neither without a price for her to pay.

Translation: “Pay attention to her…” means to recognize her sexual authority in a way that is “rewarding” to her, whether that might be giving her social affirmation, control, pats on her ego, validation, or Tingles if possible. (It’s up to the man to figure that mess out.)

Translation: Recognizing “her NEED to justify herself” means that men should accept, for the most part, whatever she feels like dishing out, and still maintain their devotion and sexual enthusiasm.

Translation: “Her WANT to stay clear of apathy in life” means that the man must never allow her to feel any disappointment or loss of ego satisfaction at any moment. (Wow! Is this even possible?)

Translation: “Supporting” all this means to egg her ego on in a fun, playful manner, and to not behave in any way that would erode her sense of ego-security.

Translation: The “price for her to pay” sounds transactional, but a man with a highly refined game (i.e. a PUA) interprets this as making demands for her to invest in him, and drawing her into his frame. The man’s Attitude of Detachment and Displaying High Value will keep her hypergamous interests in splay. All Game techniques serve to “motivate” her to keep coming back to him for successive steady stroking.

Because without any effort, all motivation and justification are untested, so it isn’t real. So you have to provide realistic feedback and be somewhat genuine as you react to her attempts to inject her influence, or restart your pursuit by getting out of the way.

Translation: “Testing” her “motivation” means to figure out what she wants and needs, and what “works” towards satisfying her desires.

Translation: “Testing” her “justification” means to understand the limits of what she can and cannot accept.

Translation: Her “motivation” and “justification” being “unreal” means that the man has not established any sort of trust in the relationship, and so he cannot be certain about how he can successfully let the woman feel like she has any self-satisficing significance without violating her wants, needs, and expectations.

Overcoming the Chasm between the Ideal and the Real

Women wish you were like a shower faucet, and they could adjust how much hot and cold are in your mix to get the right temperature.

Yes, this is what women wish. But men cannot be easily nor reliably manipulated by a woman over the long haul, especially in marriage. Lyans is suggesting that men should adjust themselves to the woman’s preferred “temperature”. Of course, this requires a vitally functioning feedback loop.

But their wish isn’t always what ought to exist, because without the struggle, there’s no sweetness in the reward. And THIS is at the heart of all transitions from hot and heavy to the bedroom.

In this paragraph, Lyans is lightly touching on a very profound truth that Christian men would do well to recognize – how desire and sexual passion can draw two people into a crucible of suffering leading to refinement and eternal bonding. Establishing Heart-felt Trust is the ticket of admission and must be diligently maintained.

Christian men must move past the common churchian misconceptions of complementarianism and the “servant leader” whitewash, and to engage in the mystical pursuit of Heart Trust with both Christ and the woman in their lives.

Lyans is correct in saying that she must “pay a price”, because this is the only way for her to attain a vested interest in the relationship and establish authentic pair bonding. Christian men who are married (or hope to be) must also recognize the role of fleshly desire in sanctification, and of suffering, her suffering in particular, towards yielding eternally beneficial results in their marriages.

Jesus also spoke of “counting the cost” in Luke 14:28. This passage is often interpreted as forsaking worldly interests, but if we look at this through the Christ:Church::Husband:Wife parallel, the “cost” or the “price” for the woman goes beyond forsaking other men, according to Lyans’ view. It extends to her continual obedience and service to the man. I would have to agree.

I see parallels with scripture at this point, so I’m willing to listen to Lyans’ advice for men.

Girls will reject you not because YOU didn’t do the right thing, but because SHE doesn’t feel SHE did.

Here, Lyans makes a sharp departure from his original assumption that women have an external locus of control. I can only guess he means that a woman’s Feeelz always trumps her external locus of control, and that in spite of having an external locus of control, women insist on carrying the notion that they are in control. I think Lyans is suggesting that men should allow women to retain this sense of control and relationship primacy for the sake of the woman’s own confidence and faith in the relationship, even though the woman’s sense of control is a puerile illusion. And more importantly, if a man happens to break this illusion, then he also breaks her faith in the relationship.

So how do you get her to feel she is doing things right?

Translation: How do you preserve her illusions of autonomy and make her feel like she is in a self-controlled state of ascendancy towards preeminence?

  • Provide honest feedback.
  • Apply a degree of pressure (not toward sex, but behind WHY you are in pursuit).
  • Playfully bridge her mistakes (don’t harp on her mess-ups).
  • Encourage her to keep trying to get the balance right rather than quit.
  • Be playful and happy underneath it all, no matter what happens.
  • And no matter the result, just feel relieved when it is over.

Overall, this list of advice is surprising precisely because it is different from the “dancing monkey” approach we often hear from PUAs. Instead, it is rather similar to what is suggested in 1st Peter 3:7 – living with her in an honorable, patient, and understanding way, except it adds the elements of detachment and teasing/tantalization which serve to amplify the sexual tension. It also emphasizes the importance of maintaining Heart Trust, and it can be adapted to how Women rely on a Man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection (2021-06-28).

Putting this all together and adding my own speculative theory to it, engaging with a woman patiently and playfully, and maintaining a heart led connection, is the way to let a woman feel like she is comfortably in control. She may be allowed to relish the idea that she is preeminently in control of the relationship, and this sufflates her own enthusiasm, encourages her investment, and contributes to her own satisfaction. But from the man’s perspective, the idea is to maintain a balance between her level of challenge and her level of skill, which allows her to attain a state of Flow* in the interaction. Flow is important for building confidence, faith, and skill. When all this is firmly established, and her faith in the relationship is growing, then the man can begin to exercise more direct demands over her behavior in the relationship. In the best case scenario, feelings of love, humility, and pair bonding would also develop.

* Lyans never mentions Flow, but I can imagine that it is present, and that it may be sufficient to maintain her interest and “motivation”.

Concluding Statements

All in all, this article confirms everything I wrote in a previous post, Why does Game work? (2019-12-09) – namely that Game is a dynamic interplay of stoking and stroking a steady desire, all while maintaining mutual humility and trust.

Women are well aware of men’s desire, and revel in hedonic joy in the game of leading him around by the nose. But here, Lyans recognizes that men are not very well attuned to the aspect of desire, and he is suggesting that men should be more aware of women’s desire, and feed it just enough to be chosen by her and thus taken in for a ride.

Many of us in the Christian Manosphere have long assumed that Pick Up Artistry is largely a game of behaving like both an enthusiastically obedient “servant leader” and a male sex object in women’s eyes. The obsequious “servant leader” archetype promulgated in churchian circles is similar to the PUA approach, but the male sex object aspect is rejected as being too carnal – which is a complete and utter fail by both worldly and Christian standards. In contrast, Lyans’ article brings out a deeper nuance to the male-female interaction that can be described as the man and the woman having independent spheres of influence which are interrelated by faith and are correlated by maintaining an idealized sense of illusion concerning the respective gender roles. Doing the work of maintaining this illusion insincerely or without a sense of a grander vision of the ideal is what constitutes a “dancing monkey”.

The strength of Lyans’ approach is that it encourages an authentic interaction with the intention of building up Heart Trust, as opposed to a transactional Head Trust type of interaction. This approach is also good in the sense that it recognizes the woman as the weaker vessel and does what is necessary to placate her weaknesses and bolster her faith to continue in the relationship. Achieving a state of Flow, if possible, may be vitally conducive to this end.

The biggest problem with this approach is the degenerate marketplace. For the top 15% of men who are naturally gifted with extremely good genetics and natural charisma, Lyans advice is applicable solely by the fact that the man can easily maintain his appeal to her desire/“motivation”. Lyans’ list of advice is most applicable to these men. For the intermediate 15%, it requires the man to be a sincere “dancing monkey” at all times just to retain her interest but maybe not her “motivation” (i.e. Tingles and sexual interest). Without that grander sense of vision, this can be gruesomely tiresome, and with meager and passionless “motivating” “rewards” for the man (i.e. sex). But if the man’s charisma, confidence, and faith are rather mature, such that he can motivate himself through a vision of the ideal, then the dancing monkey act comes more easily and sincerely, and with better results. For all other men, most of Lyans’ advice (except the last part) utterly fails for the mere fact that they cannot appeal to the woman’s desire/”motivation” (especially in our day and age).

Another problem with this approach is one of immaturity. Men don’t know how to create the magic of indulging a woman’s fantasies, and are also clueless about how to exercise Headship. Women honestly think they should be in full control of both the relationship and the man, as well as their entire lives, and are not content with a man’s artful magic to this end. However, given the opportunity combined with due diligence, there’s always a chance that a man and woman could learn to adjust and grow into a healthier relational structure. The vitality of the connection is the key that will determine whether he and she will be willing to endure the process of refinement and growth.

For men who have an excessively immature woman, and they have a vested interest in preserving the relationship (e.g. shared assets, children, etc.), then perhaps engaging with her on the level of gamemanship and fantasy remains a necessary concession. Previously, I wrote a post On the Spiritual Significance and Social Value of Game (2019-11-03) which explores situations in which this kind of Game may be justifiable or needed as a stopgap to ease through a rough patch.

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Attitude, Attraction, Boundaries, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Communications, Courtship and Marriage, Desire, Discerning Lies and Deception, Discernment, Wisdom, Fantasy and Illusion, Female Power, Feminism, Fundamental Frame, Headship and Patriarchy, Holding Frame, Hypergamy, Influence, Inner Game, Introspection, Love, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Personal Presentation, Persuasion, Power, Psychology, Purpose, Relationships, Reviews, Running the Gauntlet, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Sexual Authority, Strategy, The Power of God, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

98 Responses to Women have sex to influence men

  1. anonymous_ng says:

    I should be studying my verbs, but here I am commenting.

    IMO, the source article is wrong, and thus Jack’s article is built on a false premise.

    Women aren’t trying to establish control or authority over men. Instead, they’re trying to get laid by a guy who is attractive and exciting, who is socially calibrated and part of the secret society, and a guy who won’t turn into a stage five clinger if she sleeps with him.

    Tests are to see if the guy in question is the real deal or a poseur.

    “You are getting physically intimate with a girl in a club, things are escalating rapidly, and suddenly you realize you can’t keep going or you’ll have to take off your clothes and go at it in the club.”

    By this description, the buddy PUA has done everything right. She’s already decided to sleep with him, or as one instructor put it, she’s thinking “Apparently, I’m getting some dick tonight.”

    However, the guy still has to lead things to the bedroom, to manage the logistics and social appearances etc. She’s not going to do it. Yes, there is a small subset of women who will drag a guy out of the bar, who don’t care if their friends know they’re sexual, but most women are looking for that guy who knows about the secret society, that is, the guy who know and understand that women are sexual just like men, that women have socially unacceptable kinks and desires, just like men, and who won’t judge them for their sexual life.

    So, in this situation, what’s our budding young PUA to do?

    He needs to move her to a new location, from the bar to the dance floor, or from the dance floor to outside, and let the emotional pitch come down a bit and spend some time building trust and establishing rapport, but most importantly without losing the attraction and sexual vibe, and without getting boring and while still showing that things are leading to the bedroom.

    Most women need some combination of attraction, trust, and appearance to sleep with a guy they just met and it of course varies by woman. Some women will sleep with a hot enough guy in the bathroom, or the alley, but most women will never do that not even for a famous Hollywood star.

    If the guy in question takes too long, or things don’t seem to be moving forward and he lets the emotional pitch drop to low, then she may think, “Oh, I thought I was getting the dick tonight, but I guess not.” and then, she’ll bail.

    Some men will say that this sounds like a lot of work, and having to manipulate things and put in all this work for some sloppy drunk sex isn’t worth the effort, and I can’t disagree. Pulling from the bar isn’t necessarily something to be proud of.

    At the same time, it’s like driving. When you start driving, you have to consciously pay attention to the controls of the vehicle, the other cars around you, and the road conditions etc. As you gain experience as a driver those things require less conscious mental effort, and guys that are good at pickup do these things effortlessly.

    It’s said that the best pickup looks like a couple of old friends randomly bumped into one another at the bar, and after some conversation and drinks, they leave together.

    At least this is how I see things.

    Now, back to studying for my test.

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      “Women aren’t trying to establish control or authority over men. Instead, they’re trying to get laid by a guy who is attractive and exciting, who is socially calibrated and part of the secret society, and a guy who won’t turn into a stage five clinger if she sleeps with him.”

      Do you think women use sex (including the promise — honest or not — of sexual access) to manipulate men into doing what they want?

      Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        The promise – honest or not – of sexual access is still using sex. Just pointing that out for the kids in the back.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Even if she didn’t actually have sex with a man, dangling the possibility of sex or using sexual allure is still “using sex to manipulate men into doing what they want”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • anonymous_ng says:

        Perhaps I’m the one who’s missing the point today.

        But, in the context of the mad scribblings of someone writing about pickup and taking a woman home from the club for sex, how is using sex to get sex anything other than some kind of tortuous circular argument?

        In our modern parlance, manipulation has a negative connotation that IMO at times clouds and inhibits communication. It’s also manipulation to ask someone to pass the salt. My desire is to get the salt without having to get it myself. I am manipulating other people in asking them to pass the salt. Implicit in my request is a quid pro quo that if they need something of similar effort, I will allow myself to be manipulated.

        Thus, the idea that womens’ offer of sex both explicit and implicit is a form of manipulation is like saying water is wet, the sky is blue, and the sun comes up in the east.

        OK. What if anything does that assertion contribute to anything? Are we really trying to pretend that there are people who don’t understand that women manipulate men with the power of sex?

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ anonymous_ng

        You’re rambling. Can you please just answer the question honestly and directly? Do you think women use sex (including the promise – honest or not – of sexual access) to manipulate men into doing what they want? Yes, or no?

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        I’ll answer it. Yes. They absolutely do. Women use the promise of sex even if they have no intention of following through. Women use sex and sexual favors as bargaining chips for the specific purpose of getting men to do or not do things, be or not be things, or to give them things they want.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I absolutely think women use sex to get things from men. Sometimes, even often, it can be things like commitment (getting or maintaining his commitment) and, yes, love.

        So I don’t know if that qualifies as “manipulation.” Yes, I do thing some women use sex to manipulate men for other things not mentioned in the above sentence.

        Men are more likely to have sex just based on mere sex drive/instinct although I think desire to be loved/wanted plays a role some men too.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Deti, Cameron & anonymous_ng

        Yes, women use sex to manipulate men. It’s literally a story as old as time. Every ancient mythology from every culture has stories of women using their sex appeal to manipulate men, even gods.

        And, by the way, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, the Bible gives us stories of women using their sexual power over men for evil, and for good.

        Think about it. Who defeated Samson? Delilah did. Where the “hard power” of thousands of Philistine warriors failed over, and over again, the “soft power” of one woman left the strongest man on earth weak, defeated, enslaved, chained, and blind. There are big lessons there for our boys.

        Contrast Delilah with Esther. The literal beauty queen absolutely used the power of her sex appeal to persuade the most powerful man on earth – the original god-emperor – to save her people from extermination. There are big lessons there for our girls.

        Delilah is the archetype of feral, unbridled, destructive female sexual power.

        Esther is the archetype of female sexual power harnessed, and disciplined by godliness, in the context of marriage.

        But, let’s be honest. Both manipulated men.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Jack says:

        RE: manipulation and control

        The most expert kind of manipulation/control is when person A can get person B to want to do what person A wants. In this case, it is not very clear to person B (or anyone other than the most observant and wise) that manipulation is present, but in fact, person B is unwittingly being used like a tool by person A for A’s purposes.

        Once you understand this, then it becomes obvious that many western social constructs are intended to “harness” various male desires for the purpose of giving women various benefits of having a modicum of control over them. Chivalry, which appeals to the male proclivity to provide and protect, is the most obvious example. The “Servant Leader” thing appeals to the male desire for headship without actually getting there. Even marriage itself could be included here, especially when the woman settles and then later divorces him and cleans him out.

        Lately however, more and more men are becoming aware of this setup, largely because men are being poorly cared for by their female hostlers. Men’s natural desires and masculine interests are being frustrated, and they are quickly losing interest in being the plowhorses for women and society.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        “The most expert kind of manipulation/control is when person A can get person B to want to do what person A wants. In this case, it is not very clear to person B (or anyone other than the most observant and wise) that manipulation is present, but in fact, person B is unwittingly being used like a tool by person A for A’s purposes.”

        Especially when person A gets person B to believe that doing person A’s bidding was person B’s idea in the first place.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        The “sex dries up after marriage” thing is women manipulating men into marriage. Nova said it: There’s an opportunistic aspect to female attraction. When she thinks sex will get him/keep him, she’ll want to have sex with him much more. When it’s in the bag, the attraction sometimes wanes. This seems/feels like fraud to men.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        I.E. sometimes when she thinks you might defect, she wants to “F your brains out.” Sad that a husband might be incentivized to make his wife feel insecure about their relationship. This is more likely to be the case if you’re a greater beta. If you’re an alpha she always understands that lots of women want to take you. If you’re lesser beta or gamma she might not value you enough to give a crap.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Jack says:

      anonymous_ng,

      “Women aren’t trying to establish control or authority over men. Instead, they’re trying to get laid by a guy who is attractive and exciting…”

      The first statement is false. It is certain that women do try to exert control over men, and that women can be quite aggressive and belligerent in doing so. Even the most conservative and traditional women are prone to this behavior. This is often referred to as “The Curse of Eve”. See this post for more.

      The second statement is true, but only for a small segment of the male population and those women who take the effort to apply their hypergamic instincts. This is the context of Lyans’ article. From this perspective, most of the remainder of your comment is true.

      I chose to study this article because it describes a mystical approach to PUArtistry (AKA “inner game”), with undertones of agency.

      The purpose of this post was to examine what Lyans says about the role of agency for both the man and the woman. The man’s role is basically, “detect her interest, and don’t screw it up”. But how a man is to do this is greatly complicated by the fact that the woman’s role in exercising agency is much more nuanced. Apparently, it is not really about the man himself, but more about…
      — The feelings she gets from the feedback loop.
      — Her “motivations” (which is Lyans’ code word for her desire, and that desire could be for any number of things, such as affirmation, attention, material resources, sex, status, validation, etc.).
      — From what I can ascertain, her ego investment in the relationship.

      Like

  2. anonymous_ng says:

    Test didn’t go so well.

    How about another look at things here?

    Moving Fast in a Bad Location:
    — See my first comment.

    “Three problems can arise when you are getting hot and heavy quickly in the wrong place:
    — You are not in control of the situation and are continuing escalation in a desperate attempt to compensate.
    — She does not feel in control of the escalation and is following you along with no answer for how to “get out of it” without cutting things short (so eventually she will).
    — You don’t know how to propose another location without making her feel like she is obligated to sleep with you, and for all she knows, maybe hooking up is where your relationship should end anyway.”

    Just my opinions:
    — You’re not in control because you don’t know how to get from here to where you want to be, so you continue doing what’s worked so far in hopes that will somehow, magically lead to the bedroom.
    — She doesn’t want to be in control. She wants you to be trustworthy, and in control enough that she can submit and get her needs met all the while decrying what happened. But, when you obviously aren’t in control, then she’s insecure and has to consider bailing, going to the bathroom, calling a friend etc., because she can’t trust that you’ve got this handled and that she can get what she wants (sex) without looking like a slut. If she just wants attention, she can get that all day, every day from OLD/SM. If she’s attractive, she’s probably got a handful of friend zone orbiters who will give her attention and validation, but she can’t have sex with them because then, they’re going to fall in love and get all clingy and needy, and who the hell has time for that?

    — Yes, this. By her response, you’re supposed to already understand that she’s going to sleep with you, and now it’s your job to manage the logisitics while providing plausible deniabilty so that she doesn’t look like a slut.

    Learn How to Pace:
    — back to my first comment: push/pull and location shifting while bringing the emotional tempo down to establish trust and rapport, and to give her confidence that you are in control of things, and that you’re not a bitter loser who has somehow gotten past her first level of defenses.

    Ask Questions, Show Humor:
    — Part of establishing rapport

    THEN, things take a weird turn.

    Different Women, Different Reactions:
    — I read this as, post sex why do women behave differently? And, I think most of what comes after this point is pure fiction pulled out of thin air mental masturbation. Of course, that’s just me.

    “Women don’t know how to inject influence into a situation and allow a man to pursue them. So when they influence a guy who is escalating, there’s a chance that he’ll suddenly stop his pursuit. And if they don’t influence a guy who is pursuing her, then she has no responsibility for what happens and is worthless in her own eyes.”

    — Says who? I don’t agree with this as some universal truth.

    “This goes back to our hunter-gatherer days when a person could run after a deer with a spear but might burn precious energy in the attempt, and fail. So the body shuts down reward centers to stop him chasing, rather than have them on full blast at all times and have him hunt until he dies of exhaustion.”

    — Talk to ultra marathoners and get back to me about shut down reward centers. Endorphin release from running is common knowledge. So, again, a flawed premise.

    “Her lizard brain tells her that if she has no influence in a relationship, she may not be able to protect her children and they’ll die, thus rendering her procreation efforts useless. ”

    — except that women know that men will expend their excess labor in support of what they believe to be their children which is why women will pretend their alpha-fux children belong to their beta-bux husband. So, again, we end up with something that just doesn’t stand the smell test.

    Allow Her to Justify Herself and Be Motivated:

    “Women wish you were like a shower faucet, and they could adjust how much hot and cold are in your mix to get the right temperature. But their wish isn’t always what ought to exist, because without the struggle, there’s no sweetness in the reward. And THIS is at the heart of all transitions from hot and heavy to the bedroom. Girls will reject you not because YOU didn’t do the right thing, but because SHE doesn’t feel SHE did.”

    — Again, the last part is complete and utter B.S. She will reject you because you didn’t take charge and handle the logistics. She will reject you because you didn’t give her cover for social ostracism. She will reject you because you are clingy, needy, or otherwise putting pressure on her.
    In none of those cases was she involved in things.

    “So how do you get her to feel she is doing things right?
    — Provide honest feedback
    — Apply a degree of pressure (not toward sex, but behind WHY you are in pursuit)
    — Playfully bridge her mistakes (don’t harp on her mess-ups)
    — Encourage her to keep trying to get the balance right rather than quit
    — Be playful and happy underneath it all no matter what happens
    And no matter the result, just feel relieved when it is over.”

    Wow!! Sign me up for this. It’s a good thing this is all unmitigated crap.

    Again, I can’t tell if this article is trying to make a point about pulling from the club, or getting your girlfriend/FWB nekkid. It bounces all over the place.

    Like

  3. thedeti says:

    To me, it’s a lot less complicated than a PUA makes it, but more complicated if you want a long term relationship from a Christian perspective. The ideal Christian marriages are Scott/Mychael, SAM/Elspeth, and Mike/Liz, mainly because there is hard visceral attraction AND “heart trust”. There is attraction AND comfort. “Heart trust” = comfort.

    The key concepts I’ve worked out:

    Women have sex because they want something, either from themselves or from the man.

    Women have sex because of how they feel, and “how they feel” is informed by any number of things: How they feel about themselves, what’s going on in their lives, whether they are having a good hair day, whether they’ve gained or lost weight, a recent breakup, job is going well or poorly, horny, bored, lonely, curious, adventurous, insecure, whatever.

    Comfort is not so much how she feels about you. It’s more about how she feels about herself, and how she feels about having sex. “How she feels about you” becomes an issue only if you raise a glaring red flag.

    A woman decides in the first 10 minutes of meeting you how far she will ever go with you.

    If a woman agrees to meet you in person for drinks, there’s some attraction/interest there. You’re a “maybe”. If a woman invites you to her home or otherwise has agreed to be alone with you, comfort is established and you’re a “yes”. She is yours for the asking, unless you screw it up royally.

    Men’s sexual failures are usually a result of not understanding all this and not reading this well. The Church is even worse at this because it won’t even so much as acknowledge any of this as true, much less help men with it.

    What makes things even harder is when we take things past “comfort” and “attraction” and get into “covenant”. A marriage is a covenant and it comes with rights and responsibilities, benefits and burdens. Women need to understand when they marry, they agree to take on responsibilities and burdens. They need to understand that they have obligations to their husbands and their husbands are entitled to things from them, sexual congress being chief among them. Men are entitled to sex from their wives, and wives are obligated to give it to them. No sex, no marriage. It doesn’t matter how she feels about it – she still has to do it.

    Husbands need to enforce that obligation and expect it to be carried out. Husbands failing to do this is a failure of headship.

    This is where both men and women have to get past feelings and get into relationship. Women: If you want a man to stick around, you have to get past your feelings and do what you agreed to do. Men: If you want sex, you have to make that clear. And yes, if you’re not a top 20%er, then you have to help her “feel” it. You’re not responsible for her feelings, and she still has to do it. But you have to help a little with “feeling” it.

    The reason the Elspeths and Lizes of the world can’t see this and think it’s easy as pie, is because they’re married to top 20% men.

    If you’re not a top 20% man, you don’t get a marriage like SAM, Mike, or Scott. If you’re a deti, you have to do a little work for it, you have to enforce it, and you have to lay down clear expectations and consequences.

    Such is life in 21st century America where even your church doesn’t support your marriage.

    Liked by 1 person

    • anonymous_ng says:

      @Deti, very nice summary.

      Like

      • thedeti says:

        Thanks, but I didn’t summarize Jack’s post nor did I intend to. What I tried to do was expound on the ideas and apply them to the current state of relationships.

        The hardest part of this is the recognition that I have to work harder than others; and that others who don’t have to work harder do not understand the burdens of those who do.

        It’s also comical how little women understand about the burdens and difficulties men have in this area of their lives. Women have literally no concept at all of what men have to do and what they go through with this.

        Like

      • anonymous_ng says:

        Yes, I understood that your summary was more a summary of male/female relationships etc. That was a good summary.

        To Oscar’s point. A friend was on match.com after he got divorced and he said he got a lot more attention the weeks before long holiday weekends.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “A friend was on match.com after he got divorced and he said he got a lot more attention the weeks before long holiday weekends.”

        Cuffin’ season. That’s what that is. We’re now going into cuffin’ season — when women need a regular dude to take to the Christmas party and to hang out with so they don’t spend the holidays alone.

        Cuffin’ season is from November 1 through March 1. It covers Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Valentine’s Day. It’s all so that lonely women can have “boyfriends” until after V-Day. Then they can break up, go out on St. Patrick’s Day, drink themselves silly, and head back out for more and better hookups.

        Like

    • Oscar says:

      “If a woman agrees to meet you in person for drinks, there’s some attraction/interest there. You’re a “maybe”.”

      Not necessarily. Many women admit that they dangle that “Maybe…” in front of men, when in their minds they’re thinking, “Hell no!”, just to get free drinks, meals, presents, etc. That’s part of the manipulation I mentioned above.

      Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Yeah, that’s fair. A lot of women will do that. The difference is that more and more men are talking about this and calling women on the carpet for it.

        Like

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      “The reason the Elspeths and Lizes of the world can’t see this and think it’s easy as pie, is because they’re married to top 20% men.”

      I’d add that along with being attracted to their husbands, they are probably constituted differently than the typical modern insufferable woman. They may have had their rough spots at times, but ultimately they did not put up anywhere near the obstinate fight that most women undertake in marriage. So they are attracted to their husbands and don’t really understand what some men are up against, because they would never imagine themselves behaving like some wives do. So in their marriages you have a combination of an attractive husband with a wife that is much more compliant than the average woman, which leads to a better than average probability of a headship marriage the way God intended.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        “I’d add that along with being attracted to their husbands, they are probably constituted differently than the typical modern insufferable woman. They may have had their rough spots at times, but ultimately they did not put up anywhere near the obstinate fight that most women undertake in marriage.”

        Attraction and submission tend to go together. Women tend to be submissive towards men they find viscerally attractive, and contentious towards men they don’t find attractive. Sometimes, the two may be the same man, but at different times.

        When a woman (especially a wife) transforms from a sweet, submissive, blushing bride to a life draining, contentious succubus, it’s a pretty safe bet that she is no longer attracted to her husband.

        By the way, that pretty much proves that women know that men find submission attractive, just as the know that men find a slender figure attractive. In both cases, most women simply can’t bring themselves to make the effort.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        I forgot to add that there is an analogue with men.

        Men instinctively feel the need to protect, and provide for women they find viscerally attractive, especially when they are the sweet, girl-next-door type, as opposed to the sultry, femme fatale type.

        It’s all part of God’s design to make us fit together like puzzle pieces. The woman makes herself attractive to a man she finds attractive. She submits to him, and he provides for, and protects her. The sinful nature, of course, screws all of that up.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Joe2 says:

        “The reason the Elspeths and Lizes of the world can’t see this and think it’s easy as pie, is because they’re married to top 20% men.”

        Of course they can’t see this and think it’s as easy as pie.

        It’s very similar to growing up in an upper middle class to affluent family and having all your material desires and needs satisfied. Then going to the best private schools and colleges (all expenses paid) and upon graduation going in and eventually taking over the family business. Work at McD’s during the summer? Nope, no need to. Always having sufficient walk around money. It’s like being born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

        They are living in an entirely different world being married to the top 20%. You either have it or you don’t. If you don’t; life’s a struggle.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Joe2 says:

      “A woman decides in the first 10 minutes of meeting you how far she will ever go with you.”

      Yes, yes a thousand times yes!! Yet the man has to have the skill or ability to recognize the signs she is broadcasting regarding how far she will go.

      Here’s an example. A young (at heart) secular professional social group had a “meet and greet” social with some coffee / dessert at the conclusion. The entire meeting was scheduled for about one hour. Everyone introduced themselves and there was the typical small talk. I was in a group of eight — four men and four women. One woman, in particular, seemed to have her sh!t together and was very sociable; smiling, laughing at jokes and seemed to be having a good time. At about 15 to 20 minutes into the small talk, she casually worked into the conversation that she had a boyfriend. And she did this twice. She made it all appear innocent and natural. At about 30 minutes we sat at a table for coffee / dessert. She continued to be sociable for about 15 minutes, finished some of her dessert and then looked at her watch and excused herself saying she had to leave early otherwise she would be late. Of course she said it was nice meeting everyone.

      The Blue Pill man would think he still had a chance because she smiled, laughed at his jokes, and seemed friendly. It would just take a little more time until she realized how nice he is and dumped her boyfriend. She left early most likely because she did have an important meeting. He becomes a beta orbiter.

      The Red Pill man would recognize that at 15 minutes she had already evaluated every man in her group and wasn’t interested in any of them. Thus, she said that she has a boyfriend; so don’t text, message, call, etc. Keep your distance. Why did she leave 15 minutes early? She didn’t want to waste any more of her time. It was too painful for her to continue feigning interest and sociability.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. thedeti says:

    Another thing that’s interesting on this front is how much the manosphere has evolved of late. No one’s talking about self improvement or Game anymore. No one’s talking about how men can improve their sexual attractiveness.

    Maybe Scott is right — it’s all about the Meet Cute, the instant lightning strike, love at first sight. It’s either there or it’s not, and if it’s not, you’re just screwed. If you didn’t experience the developmental milestone of the Meet Cute, it’s just over for you.

    The entire point of our Christian faith, covenant marriage, etc., was marriage for the masses. Everyone who wants a spouse can get one — but it comes with obligations as well as with rights. It’s less about your feelings and more about obedience.

    It’s modeled on Christ’s relationship with His Church — Christ is the Head, who sacrifices Himself for His Bride. His sacrifice at once saves her and sanctifies her. He provides for his Bride — sustenance, food, water, washes her clean. He works for her — His atoning work on the Cross; His constant intercession on our behalf to the Father. He vouches for us to His Father. In doing so He shines His glory upon us.

    Christ did not have to do any of those things. He sure did not have to do any of this for us. He could have remained in heaven with the Father and in His eternal glory and power. Any time He wanted to, He could have returned to heaven, reassumed the mantle of His glory, and left us lost and damned to hell. He did not.

    The Bride’s obligation is to submit, freely: To do what Christ says, to obey His commandments, to stay within the boundaries He sets, and to stay under His authority and His protection. To reflect Christ’s glory back to Him based on the talents and gifts He gives us, and to be in Communion with Him.

    So it is with husbands: He provides for her through his work. He makes money and produces, so she can eat, drink, and be sheltered from the elements. He works for her — he represents her and their children to the world. He stands between them and the rest of the world. He sacrifices for her — he does things for her when he would rather do them for himself. His sacrifices at once save her (keep her from starving to death or getting killed or raped) and sanctify her (elevate her above her own petty narcissism and self absorption).

    The husband does not have to do any of those things. He sure does not have to do any of this for any particular woman. He can remain by himself. He can save all that he produces and makes for himself and not share any of it with anyone. Any time he wants to, he can refuse a woman, leave a woman, take back all that belongs to him, and leave a woman without any of it.

    The woman’s obligation is to submit, freely: To do what her husband says, to obey his directions and instructions, to stay within the boundaries he sets, and to stay under his authority and protection. To build up the family based on the labor of her husband’s hands and head, and to give her husband exclusive sexual conjugal rights.

    See the parallels? See how it’s supposed to be?

    The problem happens when women have been elevated over men. And it’s happened because we as humans try to elevate ourselves above Christ. It’s happened because women worship themselves, and demand that men worship them. (“When you eat of the fruit, you will know good and evil, and you will become like God.”) It’s happened because men worship women. (Pu$$y makes men stupid.)

    That’s why we are where we are now.

    Like

    • anonymous_ng says:

      “Another thing that’s interesting on this front is how much the Manosphere has evolved of late. No one’s talking about self improvement or Game anymore. No one’s talking about how men can improve their sexual attractiveness.”

      I’m wondering if things like the very present and in your face cultural conflict, political conflict, and economic woes, including inflation far beyond what most people under 50 have ever seen in their lifetimes, hasn’t resulted in an undercurrent of malaise that contributes to what you’ve written here.

      Then, there is the possibility that like diet and exercise, there isn’t much more to be said.

      Like

      • thedeti says:

        In the Manosphere, there’s little talk of self improvement or Game for several reasons.

        The Manosphere as originally constituted from about 2005 to about 2014 was for men aged 40 on up, married or divorced, with kids — guys like Feeriker, NovaSeeker, Scott, and me. There was a sharp division point in 2014 with the Eliot Rodger incident. Since then the Manosphere has been monetized and it is moving toward video content – toward podcasting and video – and toward a younger audience.

        The younger audience part is the most important. Younger men have differing concerns. They don’t want to save marriages or get married, and a large number of them don’t even care all that much about women. They are more interested in immediate concerns like their own individual well being and interests. Older men in the sphere are turning more and more toward God (e.g. Roosh, Victor Pride/Nickolas, and Adam Piggott) or leaving altogether (Dalrock, Cane Caldo, and, apparently, NovaSeeker and Scott).

        Younger men also consume internet-available media much differently than how older men do. Younger men can create and consume more video than they can blog posts. Younger men also find more community on the internet than older men do. One of the main reasons older men don’t go into video is fear of doxxing. Younger men have less to lose. Older men getting into video content either have less to lose or are making money at it. Rollo has written 4 books and does regular video. Athol Kay tried to make a go at “coaching” but couldn’t and he’s disappeared.

        Younger men face an SMP/RMP that is orders of magnitude worse and more hostile than anything like I faced. There’s literally nothing in it for most of them. Society is getting more and more blackpilled, and the current iteration of the Manosphere is reflecting this. The most vocal contingent of younger men in the sphere are MGTOW and incels. More and more men can’t get anything from women and are giving up and dropping out. The MGTOW/incel contingent is concerned more with lifestyle, earning money, being part of a community, and commiseration/support. This is going to get much, much worse before it gets better.

        Women disrespect men. Men hate women. It’s where we’re headed.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        The original manosphere also was for the Average Frustrated Chump – the guy who had something going with a woman, or could get things going with women, but couldn’t keep them going.

        The AFC of the manosphere circa 2010 was the guy with some good raw material but who needed to fix some things and he would be OK. He was the guy for whom self improvement was the cure. He was the guy who needed to get more basics about female sexual nature down, and he’d be OK. Lose some weight. Work out. Lift. Get in shape. Dress better. Get a better hairstyle. Stop pedestalizing and supplicating. Stop texting her so much. Stop being needy and clingy. Leave her alone. Let her come to you.

        Today’s manosphere doesn’t serve that contingent. Today’s manosphere is a community for MGTOWs, incels, Christians, and older men, with a smattering of some women married to top 20%ers who either 1) try to help; or 2) hang around because they just want to know what the men are talking about and want to put their 2 cents in.

        Like

  5. Femmy says:

    Deti, I like the way you explain things… spell it out…

    It’s how I always wanted to hear from the preachers at church .

    And wished they would.

    It would make life so much easier (less anxious, more secure).

    Liked by 1 person

  6. redpillboomer says:

    “Yes, women are persnickety afficionadas about the conflicting traits in men that are attractive to them, but are rather clueless about what is attractive to men – other than the obvious – coquettish threads wrapped tightly around a bounteous display of smooth hide, and of course, sexual favors. Modest, demure approaches in courtship seems to be a lost art of the intersexual dance.”

    Clueless is right! You listen to clips by modern day women on social media and one thing seems to stand out over and over again: ATTITUDE! Chicks with lots of ‘tude lecturing men on intersexual relations from the proverbial A to Z subject matter. “Modest, demure” is no where in sight. Haughty and arrogant, whether they are a 10 or a 5, it doesn’t seem to matter.

    The one’s I’ve listened to that seem to get it, not the chameleons pretending to get it, all have humility in common, or at least to a degree have it in common. What men want has been told to them by now from some source or other and they still don’t get it; they still show up with ‘tons of ‘tude,’ not getting it at all.

    Generally speaking, what do men want? It’s pretty simple: Pretty, attractive, nice figure, modest amount of make-up, modest sexy clothing styles- ‘a lady in the streets and a freak between the sheets,’ showing RESPECT, being KIND, being NICE, COMPASSIONATE, SUBMISSIVE, RESPONSIBLE, etc. Men are pretty darn simple in what they want. Yet the majority of these women seem to think what we want a ‘is a hot THOT with ‘tude’ endlessly lecturing us on what we SHOULD want.

    Liked by 1 person

    • feeriker says:

      “Clueless is right! You listen to clips by modern day women on social media and one thing seems to stand out over and over again: ATTITUDE! Chicks with lots of ‘tude lecturing men on intersexual relations from the proverbial A to Z subject matter.”

      Imagine being a typical single heterosexual man today who works a typical white-collar job in which he’s exposed to this kind of woman in the workplace every day, all day. Does anybody seriously think that this man is going to want to replicate his work environment inside his home by planting a b!+chy, arrogant, ‘tudinous shrelore (triple portmanteau of “shrew,” “slu+,” and “wh0r3”) in it to make his life a 24/7 nightmare?

      No wonder the MMP is in free fall. No man with an ounce of self-respect or normal mental health involves himself romantically with the sex that never stops trying to castrate and destroy him.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Jack says:

    Deti wrote,

    “Women have sex because they want something, either from themselves or from the man.”

    “Women have sex because of how they feel, and “how they feel” is informed by any number of things: How they feel about themselves, what’s going on in their lives, whether they are having a good hair day, whether they’ve gained or lost weight, a recent breakup, job is going well or poorly, horny, bored, lonely, curious, adventurous, insecure, whatever.”

    This is the barebones message of Lyans’ article. All the talk about “influence” is a reflection of the female viewpoint. That is, women must be allowed to feel like they are in control of the relationship and “how they feel” about it (whether they actually are or not), otherwise trust is lost. This is the essence of why Lyans wrote,

    “Girls will reject you not because YOU didn’t do the right thing, but because SHE doesn’t feel SHE did.”

    IMO, this is the most interesting facet of this article, because it suggests that men should give a woman the illusion that she is in control of her own feelings, when actually, women are controlled by their feelings.

    I forgot to include some Exit Questions in the post, but here’s a few.
    1– Why do women withdraw or reject a man when they feel like they are NOT in control of their feelings (even when they are feeling the Tingles)?
    2– Why do the woman’s feelings (and interest in sex) depend on her ego investment and not so much what the man does?
    3– In the interest of married men getting more sex from their wives, how can husbands get an ego investment out of their wives?

    My answer to (1) is because women do not have a volitional ego investment. For some reason, it must be volitional — of her own choice and free will.
    My answer to (2) is because, for some reason, having an ego investment in the relationship is, for women, more important than feelings of love or security. (I think this is true for men too, but it’s not as important as pu$$y.)
    One answer to (3) is what I wrote in the post…

    “[Husbands can] maintain a balance between her level of challenge and her level of skill, which allows her to attain a state of Flow in the interaction. Flow is important for building confidence, faith, and skill. When all this is firmly established, and her faith in the relationship is growing, then the man can begin to exercise more direct demands over her behavior in the relationship. In the best case scenario, feelings of love, humility, and pair bonding would also develop.”

    Like

    • redpillboomer says:

      “Girls will reject you not because YOU didn’t do the right thing, but because SHE doesn’t feel SHE did.”

      “IMO, this is the most interesting facet of this article, because it suggests that men should give a woman the illusion that she is in control of her own feelings, when actually, women are controlled by their feelings.”

      Agree. It got me thinking, still grappling with it. I can see it both ways — there were times I didn’t do the ‘right thing,’ e.g. I was too slow to make a move towards escalation for example. At other times I could see where ‘She didn’t feel she did the right thing.’ My churchian ‘girlfriend’ (aka the Carouseller; me the long distance, oneitis dude, with her showing up to see me at my new place across country) showed up to check out my advancement and have sex (aka ‘my turn,’ as in ‘She’s not your girl, it’s just your turn’), and her running smack dab into spiritual, loving God me, wanting to begin creating a space for possible marriage me, but definitely not ‘get some p-sleeve me.’ Even though churchian, she got convicted that we were on two different wavelengths. I think convicted by God. So, in this case, ‘she didn’t feel she did the right thing’ just to show up, check out how I was doing. and let me have a turn on her before going back home to Chad and Tyrone.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      “This is the barebones message of Lyans’ article. All the talk about “influence” is a reflection of the female viewpoint. That is, women must be allowed to feel like they are in control of the relationship and “how they feel” about it (whether they actually are or not), otherwise trust is lost.”

      I know Lyans’ article is about the pick up, but women don’t miraculously change once they get married. Mrs. Apostle had a lapse into argumentative/contentious territory last night because she didn’t not agree with the direction I was heading in regarding a decision I was contemplating. She offered her opinion on the matter and did not add information to change my thoughts so I quickly made the call. She was unhappy, argued and even though I gave her a few opportunities to change her behavior she did not.

      The initial interaction took 2 minutes, me addressing her behavior after the fact took 30. In that conversation the root of her contentiousness is that she did not FEEL like I listened to her and she felt like I was being dismissive of her. This is the tyranny of feelings. I in fact did listen to her and did consider her thoughts, but did not agree, so while I actually did those things she wanted, she was upset because she didn’t feel like I did.

      This brought us to the parallels of her feelings with the thought experiment from Jesus in Mathew 21:28-3. In it the son who initially doesn’t comply with the father’s instruction then complies is good and the son who says he’ll comply but then doesn’t is in the wrong. Mrs. Apostle’s heels dug in and was more important for her to feel like I considered her viewpoint than to actually consider it. Bringing this topic back to the initial PUA basis for the post, my wife’s sentiments highlight the immense importance of headship for husbands and fathers. PUAs play on the feeling part without any substance behind it and women prove themselves inadequate to differentiate between perception and their feeling and a man of genuine substance with good intent.

      “3– In the interest of married men getting more sex from their wives, how can husbands get an ego investment out of their wives?”

      I’ll take a stab at this one. Married men need to focus on improving themselves, but for their own sake, not for anything to do with their wives. Be active, read, learn and rekindle or develop further interests and hobbies. None of this has anything to do with the Mrs., although she might benefit from them. If you don’t have a clear purpose in life pray, meditate on God’s word and ask Him to guide you in this. Your purpose can involve seemingly big or small aspects of life and it usually will allow you to use the gifts God has given you. Once you have a peace about what you are supposed to do get after it unapologetically and let the wife know how you expect her to help you in this.

      The prior paragraph is an exercise in masculinity. It is the act of pursuing your purpose and wanting your wife to be part of that with you, but being wiling to move ahead regardless, that she will find attractive. If you apply the same fearless attitude to telling your wife what you want from her sexually, you are going to get much more than you ever thought possible. Be confident when you tell her (not ask for) what you want, as if you have no doubt she’ll go along with you, and then be indifferent if she declines.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        “I in fact did listen to her and did consider her thoughts, but did not agree, so while I actually did those things she wanted, she was upset because she didn’t feel like I did.”

        You didn’t do the thing she wanted you to do. She wants you to obey her, but take all the blame when things go wrong. Why? Genesis 3:16. But, if you give her what she wants, you’ll be still be wrong. You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.

        So, you may as well do the right thing, which it sounds like you did.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Oscar — She does not think that far ahead in the moment to want me to take any blame. She thinks her way is the right way and that is enough for her. You are right that it is ultimately my responsibility so my shoulders carry the blame, which is why I have the authority to have the final say.

        When I addressed her behavior the specifics that came up were that I gave her a few opportunities to back off her argumentativeness (she had a bad headache after work so more grace was warranted) and she did not. Her feelings are not necessarily valid and I won’t be controlled by them. Ultimately, I told her to reset her mind so that her default assumption is that I listen to her, because I do, whether she feels like I did or not. It was asinine female behavior at it’s finest, seeking to use the tyranny of female feelings to exert control. This is not acceptable behavior for a wife.

        For those single men who are thinking about marriage, this is a real life example of how women seek to exert control over their husbands. In the past I would have capitulated to her wanting me to validate her feelings because it matters that I care that her feelings matter to her. In this case it was a power play, in that she was trying to get me to bend to her whim, over an argument that she started. She also told me that when she feels that I am being dismissive of her then there are consequences to this, which is just another power play to usurp headship. This is why I told her that her feelings don’t matter when they don’t align with reality and that she doesn’t need me to make her feel like I listened or help her know that I listened, she just needs to understand that I listen all the time. She was not happy with this, but she figured out a way to get over it. I know this because she apologized this morning for arguing last night even after I used some choice, yet accurate, language to describe her behavior.

        Let me say that there are times when I do validate my wife’s feelings because I know it makes her feel appreciated. There is nothing wrong with doing that for her. The issue is her using her feelings, and wanting to feel validated to get me to bend the knee to her and that aint’ gunna happen.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        “I know Lyans’ article is about the pick up, but women don’t miraculously change once they get married.”

        This is exactly why PUA’s accounts of women’s nature is of relevant interest to married men. AWALT, basically.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ RPA

        “She does not think that far ahead in the moment to want me to take any blame.”

        I never said there was any thinking involved. But, think about this. Suppose she told you to do something, you did it, and the result turned out horribly. Would she say, “I’m so sorry, honey, I gave you bad advice”? Or, would she blame you anyway?

        For reference, see Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar.

        Like

  8. Lastmod says:

    And….. as usual…… all of this has to be calculated, executed, and done flawlessly within three seconds. Maybe a minute at most…..

    OR

    It fails. Because attraction “isn’t” a choice for women. No matter what you do. If she doesn’t have the tingles hard for you immediately or has a visceral look. You are wasting your time (and hers).

    This is exactly what PUA and Game says. Massive contradictions but telling you a glimmer or stroke of hope.

    IF you do EVERYTHING correctly within a tiny, tiny window of time. But pawing it off as basic stuff. Easy. Know her personality, attitude, her values, what she likes and how to make her “laugh” within a few seconds. No problem.

    OR

    You’re a man who has never heard of Game. Women just come to you. You have never read books, articles, watched podcasts, changed your personality, your fashion or hairstyle. A man like this, IF he reads an article like this, shakes his head and laughs to himself.

    Game psychopaths must defend Game at all costs. They will call what this man has as natural Game. When it isn’t. Women come to HIM. ALWAYS. Game says and purports men must go to women (and they still claim Game isn’t Blue Pilled or giving / doing what women want or expect). Men who have this never mention the full and backed-up checkbook of looks they have.

    But Women are very easy to understand. Deti and DS will tell you so.

    Sorry if this has a misspelling here and there. Using my phone. In San Diego for the next four days. Laptop is in the office here.

    Like

    • thedeti says:

      “But Women are very easy to understand. Deti and DS will tell you so.”

      Yes, they are. But that doesn’t equate to “no work”, especially when you’re a Deti, and you’re not a Scott, a SAM or a Mike. Like I said:

      “…if you’re not a top 20%er, then you have to help her “feel” it. You’re not responsible for her feelings, and she still has to do it. But you have to help a little with “feeling” it.”

      “If you’re not a top 20% man, you don’t get a marriage like SAM, Mike, or Scott. If you’re a Deti, you have to do a little work for it, you have to enforce it, and you have to lay down clear expectations and consequences.”

      Like

  9. Oscar says:

    Off topic: From sci-fi / fantasy writer, Sara Hoyt.

    According to Hoyt: Shoes, Feet and American Feminism (2021-11-10)

    When I was fourteen or so, I was listening to an American comedian and he said that “America is the only matriarchy in which women feel the need to complain about being oppressed.”

    At the time I knew clear nothing about America, or how it was different from Portugal, so the joke went absolutely wide of the mark. But over the years of living here, it keeps coming back to mind at all sorts of times.

    Look, I’m not saying that some women didn’t have a terrible time in the US, or that women weren’t discriminated against in the region they grew up in. The US is a massive place both in territory and population. It is possible to come across families whose idea of the relations between the sexes is practically Elizabethan. It is possible to come across towns/areas that are very sure women should be seen and not heard. I’ll point out that these days the first of those are very covert, and the second almost non-existent.

    I’ll also point out that in the US, in 37 years, I’ve come across more tyrannical females than males, partly because the leadership and the myth is that women are oppressed (the myth is stuck circa IMAGINARY 1950s) and therefore any man pulling the sh!t women pull, from physical violence to actual “rule with an iron fist by psychological torture” in their families, jobs and circles, would be crucified in the public square.

    It’s a pretty good read. For a girl!

    Like

  10. Devon70 says:

    I think the Black Pill channels promote an unhealthy mindset for men, but I agree with their assertion that modern dating is mostly about looks and most of your appearance are factors that you don’t control (face, lesser extent height). The self-improvement hamster wheel men are supposed to be on doesn’t help much. The guys women are seeing in their twenties aren’t doing all this crap.

    Like

    • Lastmod says:

      No. The unhealthy mindset for men is to be told to be masculine, man up, get confidence, and stand up for yourself. Red Pill.

      Black Pill at least strips it all down to that man’s naked reality: “You’re 30 years old and never had a date?????”

      “You’re ugly. You serve zero use to women and are negative integers with fellow men. Time now to focus on you, what you need.”

      Red Pill always…. always deflects to what women want / what women find attractive / what women need for you as a man to do and behave like.

      Black Pill removes this and again tells the truth. “Not a hit with ladies? Never have been? Yeah its you (mostly your physical looks)! Move on! Deal. Cope.”

      Red Pill worships the sex act. Black Pill tells the truth that sex still is only a part of a relationship. Red Pill advocates Game. Black Pill exposes it for the fraud it is, and always was.

      Red Pill has harmed more men in ego destruction, keeping up with other men, and again…. it always caters to what women demand in men….. and Red Pill never fails to notice your weakness and deliver a well placed kick right there.

      Most if not all lower value men were tired of being lied to. Women….. that was a given. The crunch and final betrayal was by fellow men. Mostly Red Pill.

      Hence the only cure was to rip it all down. Black Pill at least tells these men the truth.

      Like

      • Devon70 says:

        The blackpill channels I have seen worship the sex act even more and their identity is based on the fact that women don’t want to have sex with them. Incel. Your identity should not be based on what women think of you.

        I listened to a FaceandLMS stream one day and him and the other guys were depressed because women didn’t like them even though they know the reason women don’t like them is something they can’t change. It didn’t seem like they were getting on with life and it’s unhealthy to spend your time obsessing over something you can’t change.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        No.

        Red Pill says,

        “Here is the truth. Here is reality. Here are your strengths. Here are your limitations. Men, what do you want? Individual man, what do you want? What can you do to get what you want, consistent with your limitations and reality?”

        Like

  11. Pingback: It’s all about her Ego | Σ Frame

  12. thedeti says:

    @ Red Pill Apostle

    “Her feelings are not necessarily valid and I won’t be controlled by them.”

    I’ll pick nits here. The second clause is correct; the first is not. Her feelings are valid to her. That doesn’t mean they’re valid to anyone else. The fact that her feelings are valid to her means only that I’ll hear and listen to her statements on how she feels. It does not mean I will do anything about them, respond to them, coddle them, or make decisions based on them. It does not mean she gets to take action against me or anyone else based on how she feels (scream, yell, lash out, attack, throw a tantrum, start making unilateral decisions).

    This is important to remember: It also does not mean I’m responsible for her feelings I didn’t cause her to feel this way. I don’t have to do anything to stop them, alleviate them, prevent them, help them, or help her with them. Women claim to be big girls, adults, in full control of their faculties and with full agency. I take women at their word on this, so I expect them to be responsible for their own feelings.

    When I don’t think her feelings are valid, I just listen and say “OK”. That acknowledges I heard what she said and heard her expressions of her emotions. That’s all that’s required.

    Women: You’re big girls. You’re adults, or at least you claim to be. Own your own feelings and be responsible for them. I’m not responsible for your feelings. You are. Just because you feel a certain way doesn’t mean I have to do anything about it other than acknowledge “OK, you feel this way. And….?”

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Our feelings are always valid to us. But think about it, RPA – when you have had feelings, most times, people would not even listen to you talk about your feelings. Most people won’t even acknowledge that you feel a certain way. Know why? Because they don’t care. The world does not owe us understanding.

      So Mrs. Apostle is getting more from you than you get from the world.

      It strikes me that one of the main problems with women is that they get effusive, fulsome “validation” from the world. Not only does the world give women copious “understanding”, the world coddles women and encourages them that their feelings are reality, so they should therefore live in that feelings/reality. They should make decisions based on feelings. They should live their lives based on feelings. Women shame men who won’t countenance this. “You’re being mean. You’re being cruel and heartless. If you won’t validate my fee fees, I’ll find someone else who will!”

      Our nation’s entire legal, social, and cultural policy toward women is based on this – women’s fee fees are always, always valid. Women’s fee fees must be given voice and must be accommodated at all times. Our nation’s abortion policy and jurisprudence are based on this. Churchian “theology” is based on this.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      Deti – Point taken and I acknowledge that being empathetic to her feelings is a way that I can live in understanding of Mrs. A as the weaker sex the way that God instructs me to do as a husband. In the context of the specific conversation I was having with her, she was using her feelings as a power play counter to me saying that I did in fact listen to her, but did not agree. The summary of her argument is that she did not believe I listened because I made a relatively quick call on the matter and because she did not “feel” like I listened. This is the context in which I told her that feelings are irrelevant to whether I listened or not.

      The conversation we had, while frustrating, was good from the standpoint that issues around expected behavior were addressed. It was a play from Jack’s concept that husband initiated conflict, that is the man proactively managing his household, wife included, to the standards he has set, tends to reinforce the structure of headship God designed for marriage. And while the initial conflict ruffles her feathers a little, the end result is a move in the direction closer to the biblical model. As Deti often says, “She’ll get over it” and she did.

      Liked by 2 people

  13. surfdumb says:

    Great statement Deti. Now if we all emailed that to every pastor we know, how many would be in agreement? More or less than the number of them that would feel concerned about you and who would immediately try to rebuke or correct you? Maybe some would even try to shoo you out with a soft excommunication.

    Liked by 2 people

    • thedeti says:

      I just know I’m going to get kicked out of the churches I frequent for saying things like I say here. So I just kind of stay away from most men’s “ministries”. I’ve attended church much less of late, mostly because there’s so little there for me.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Sharkly says:

        The churches are idolatrous women-worshipping covens, whoring after Satanic Female Supremacism.

        2 Corinthians 6:17 (KJV)
        Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.

        What you’re doing right here, is participating in the fellowship of believers. Men, don’t need to go to a specific building full of apostates and sing vainly repetitious homoerotic love songs to Jesus. If your life is in obedience to Christ’s word, then He already can see that you love Him. If you don’t obey Christ’s word, then all your praise of Him is just vain lying, guile, flattery, and an abomination to Him. Sing to God in your heart and privately if you feel led to, don’t fake it if you don’t. (He knows.)

        John 4:24 (KJV)
        God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth.

        Jesus Christ said people must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. You worship God in your spirit all the time. And the woman-worshipping churches do not worship God in truth. In truth, they always put women and women’s feelings above God’s commands. I’ve got two websites that document how they do that. You have to separate yourself from the Great Whore AKA the Mother of Harlots and all her whoring daughter churches,(established religion) if you want to worship God in true fidelity.

        Like Adam’s rib, the bride of Christ is to be made from a tiny remnant separated out away from the body of Christ, who is the Last Adam. Christ does not marry his own body, which has taken on the sin of the world. God makes a bride for the Last Adam from a tiny remnant separated out away from His slumbering body. For Christ to receive you, you have to separate yourself from the greatly whoring churches which have committed sexual immorality with the rulers of this world.

        If you are His own, He will be leading you out. Don’t resist the Spirit in you. Your (holy) Spirit should be at enmity within you when you are in those temples of goddess worship, and hear their worldly spin on God’s word. Let the spiritually dead bury their dead, Leave them and follow God’s Word in Spirit and in Truth only. If you feel that you must show up to some building and associate with some group of churchians to show fidelity to God, you are deceived. You are, right now, seeking God and the truth here. The churchians don’t want to hear the truth. If the churchians want to kick you out for sharing truth, it is of the Lord, and you should be proud to be unwelcomed by the company of the Great Whore, kicked out to join the tiny remnant who are betrothed and faithful only to Christ, giving Christ the worth-ship to be obeyed in both their spirit and through their true actions. It is a very exclusive group, those called out to be the pure bride of Christ, He will also scrub us clean. Can you sense Him scouring away the scales from your eyes? Can you begin to see now?

        Like

  14. Lastmod says:

    LOL. What a crock.

    “Here is the truth. Here is reality. Here are your strengths. Here are your limitations. Men, what do you want? Individual man, what do you want? What can you do to get what you want, consistent with your limitations and reality?”

    Red Pill has NEVER adhered to ro even lived up to 1% that last sentence. That’s a lie and you know it.

    Red Pill never told me my limitations. It ONLY and ONLY said, “It didn’t work? You obviously like being a simp / blue pilled / chump who worships women.”

    It also said for a long-ass time, “Looks don’t matter to women.” You guys shifted streams only recently. I was attacked in Dal’s forum for daring to say, “Hey! Looks do matter to women!” in 2012.

    All of you. All of you were experts in complex “female psychological-socio-sexual-banter” and told me, argued with me about how wrong I was.

    Red Pill advocates, and hates most people, and pedestalizes women in ways that border on the absurd.

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      “It also said for a long-ass time, “Looks don’t matter to women.” You guys shifted streams only recently.”

      That’s a lie. From 2013:

      Donal Graeme: Going APE — What Attributes do Women Find Attractive in Men? Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power, and Status (LAMPS) (2013-07-21)

      “Under these three categories are five more specific subcategories which contain the sets of attributes which determine male attractiveness: Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power, and Status, or LAMPS for short.”

      Why do you think pretty much everyone advises men to lift weights? Because your physical appearance matters, and lifting weights improves a man’s physical appearance.

      Besides, looks aren’t your problem. You’re a normal looking man who’s 6’3″. I know multiple men who are less physically attractive, and much shorter than you are, who are happily married. Looks aren’t your problem.

      “Red Pill never told me my limitations.”

      I have. You whine too much, you wallow in self pity, you have perpetual victimhood mentality, you’re angry, bitter, and you “seethe with hatred for” your “fellow man”. No one — male or female — enjoys being around a whiny, self-pitying, perpetual victim, who’s angry, bitter, and seethes with hatred. Not even a whiny, self-pitying, perpetual victim, who is angry, bitter, and seethes with hatred wants to be around a whiny, self-pitying, perpetual victim, who’s angry, bitter, and seethes with hatred.

      But hey, you’re free to keep repeating the same cycle in perpetuity. Maybe you’ll eventually get a different result.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      Lastmod – Why in the world do you continue to spend time in the red pill parts of the internet if what is purported here doesn’t work for you and even worse, obviously upsets you? Why keep going through the consternation if it doesn’t work and it won’t help you improve your life?

      Also, applying RP concepts to existing marriages did in fact improve them for both me and Deti. Those are 2 data points that show the concepts do yield at least some results with women. Since both cases involve existing marriages the variable of physical appearance in each case is held about as constant as it could be, which points to behavioral factors as the most probable cause of the change. But since you derive no value from this RP knowledge, again, why keep commenting on the topic instead of spending your time doing something beneficial to you? I don’t get it.

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Ask Oscar. He’ll tell you :’l

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Why in the world would you, RPA, and others… spend all your time claiming this works….. and daily, weekly, for years……. we see that we have new models, new concepts almost weekly, new definitions on what “Red Pill” is or isn’t. Lots of complaining about women…..

        Yet…….. getting them is the most important thing in life?

        I do things beneficial to me. My life has vastly improved since 2016 since:

        — I kicked this Christian thing to the curb. Its a club that told me that, “there is no marriage in heaven”, and then spent every week telling me that “men need to grow up and meet women, they don’t bite”, and “be a leader”, and “be responsible”, and here on this end I get the message that “There’s no good women left. We….. the Red Pilled Real Men, married them…. and all the good ones just want us, and we have vast opportunities if our wives blew up our marriages.”
        — I realized and understood that I will never be any of you. I would never be allowed to be any of you.
        — Men like myself….. the lower 80%, see no value in Red Pill for the fact that you… the “elect”, don’t want to help men. You want to help men who are “cool” and have high intelligence, and just-happen-to-be better than the rest of us.
        — Red Pill has become Game 2.0. It only talks about women, women, women / STEM, STEM, STEM, and sex, sex, sex. When I fully understood that I was never going to have a great career, never going to get women, a date, marriage or even sex……… things became clear.

        I have done so many things. From 2000-2016 I listened to Game, PUA, Red Pill, and a gazillion dating experts….. even “leaders” in the Christian faith…….. men in the church who told me not to “sin”, and yet their own sons were f*cking every single gal in the church. To this they said, “God is working on him.”

        My purpose on the side is to expose the fraud and misery and waste of time you will give men who are not: naturally good looking, intelligent, and have Egos the size of god himself.

        I post here to warn other chumps who stumble on here that you guys are about as loving and caring as a toilet seat.

        That is how most of this info here comes off. Otherwise, I love everyone of you. 🙂

        Like

    • Jack says:

      Lastmod,

      What you have written is a justifiable reaction to the Manosphere that existed several years ago. Times have changed since then. The Manosphere now is not what it was back then. It has split into several factions: Bachelors, Based, Black Pill, MGTOW, PUAs, a few others I don’t care to mention, and the Christian Red Pill (AKA the White Pill among secular audiences). Σ Frame focuses on Christian Red Pill for men interested in building confidence, frame, marriage (which is a very unpopular topic right now), and other things, and is included in the fringe of the Based movement.

      The men who follow Red Pill stuff have chosen the branch that is most appropriate to their interests and lifestyles, and are now participating in those discussions and contributing what they can to those particular practices and philosophies, except you. You’ve left 5 comments under this post (a total of 1,113 words), but none of them show that you have given any thought about the content, or what others have written about the content in their comments. Your mind seems to be somewhere else. In fact, I am wondering how many major topics we’ve covered this year on Σ Frame that you could even name off the top of your head — without looking back at old posts. Judging from what you repeatedly talk about, you would probably have a better reception and get a better response if you wrote those things in a Black Pill or MGTOW forum.

      If you really believe that this site is leading men down a path to perdition, and that you need to be a watchdog, then you’ll make more progress by engaging with the discussion and pointing out what is wrong, or why it doesn’t work. Sensationalized blanket statements of doom and gloom addressed to “All of you” won’t convince anyone that you have anything interesting to say or that you’re someone to be emulated. Not here.

      If you’re proselytizing Black Pill, hoping to draw more followers to that ideology (which you do quite well), then you should post some links to your favorite sites and give us a brief description of what readers will find there, what you’ve learned from it, and how it has benefitted your life.

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Well, I have replied. Oscar cuts me down. You all stand there looking at each other.

        I have brought up some concepts. You refuse to comment on them or I am told I am wrong, or made an example of why I am wrong with just facts pulled out of the air… hailed as truth.

        99% of the Black Pill material out there is saying how wrong Red Pill is.

        I belong to a few Dischords by invite. I’ll admit too many of the guys there are bummers. I get outright aggressive on young guys there. Not because I think I am more Black Pill than others…. but because I effing care about them enough to say, “No! Not yet. You’re young. Life can turn on dime.
        You still have time. You still are forming a personality.”

        The YouTube guys are Face LMS / Wheat Waffels. Both are English and I agree in concept with much of what they say. It is indeed over for most men by the time they hit their thirties if they still have never dated. It’s bigger than you men here understand.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        Lastmod,

        “I have brought up some concepts. You refuse to comment on them or I am told I am wrong…”

        The concepts you brought up strayed from the topic at hand. You’re welcome to write a post as a contributing author at Σ Frame. If you choose to do so, then you’ll need to explain the background and foundations of your argument more clearly and concisely.

        “99% of the Black Pill material out there is saying how wrong Red Pill is.

        I agree in concept with much of what they say.”

        I’ll take this as a confirmation that you are identifying as Black Pill. Knowing this helps us understand your stance.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Jason

        First, you whined that no one told you what your limitations are.

        “Red Pill never told me my limitations.” ~ Lastmod 2021-11-13 at 10:51 am

        Now, you whine that I did tell you what your limitations are.

        “Oscar cuts me down.”

        Thanks for proving one of my points.

        “I belong to a few Dischords by invite. I’ll admit too many of the guys there are bummers.”

        Yeah. Like I said, not even a whiny, self-pitying, perpetual victim, who is angry, bitter, and seethes with hatred wants to be around a whiny, self-pitying, perpetual victim, who’s angry, bitter, and seethes with hatred.

        Thanks for proving another of my points.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        Jack:

        I have my original cut and paste. You switched or reworded what I said, or posted it incorrectly.

        You put:

        “99% of the Black Pill material out there is saying how wrong Red Pill is.”

        Where in my original post, it should have said,

        “99% of Black Pill material is Red Pill posters saying how wrong it is.”

        Please fix.

        Most Black Pill information is indeed Red Pill bros calling Black Pill “losers”, and Rich Cooper should look in the mirror. He married a woman in this toxic culture (he knew better), she divorces him, and then he dedicates a whole v-broadcast saying what dumb, Blue Pilled, loser men we all are…. and yet….. we have to be stopped. “We’re ruining the younger generation!”

        Nah….. Red Pill did that on their own with guys like Rich Cooper.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        Lastmod,
        I will clean up typographical errors, misspellings, poor grammar, quotations, and references in the comments when it is needed and if I have time. In doing so, I always try to preserve the original intent of the commenter, but sometimes I have to guess what the commenter is really trying to say. I don’t see a big difference between those two sentences, unless “it” is referring to something other than the Red Pill. What is the distinction you wish to make?

        Furthermore, I’ll remind you that your comments do not address the content of the post. This post is not about Black Pill, and you have not established a specific connection between the contents of the post and the Black Pill.

        Like

    • thedeti says:

      Lastmod:

      I’ve interacted with you online for years. First at Dalrock, then at some of your own sites, and here. I know a lot of your history and your general trajectory.

      I don’t blame you one bit for being pissed off. You SHOULD be pissed off. I’m with you there.

      Now:

      How is being pissed off and lashing out at me helping you?

      How is spending time here cutting down this work helping you?

      How is any of what you’re doing here helping you?

      If this really is helping you, and Jack will permit it, well, then more power to you, I guess.

      I would hope your anger and resentment would motivate you to something that will help you. That will help YOU. YOU. Not other people. YOU. Whatever you’re doing here or anywhere else should benefit you.

      Whatever you do, always ask yourself: “Is this helping me? Does this benefit me? How does this advance me and what I want for myself?”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        Okay…..

        Deti…. My life is actually pretty good. It actually turned out okay despite most of it wasted (my post college / grad school career… drugs, the drink… Game / PUA… church, massive depression). According to many… I really should have just offed myself. Might have helped me in the short term.

        I never did for the facts of: I would have never been remembered. It also would admit you guys won (or men like you. men who had all the answers, the solutions, the Ego to tell me so, and who then shifted the goalposts and watched me and a countless, countless others flail / fail….. then backslapping / gladhanding / gaffing… “You didn’t… You should have….” answers).

        I also accepted that since I already was dead or invisible to just about the whole world, and was indeed alone. No family left. Friends gone, scattered, Grew apart over the decades… Well, it was now a necessity to stay alive.

        I don’t know how I arrived at the conclusions I got. Back in 2011? 2012? I was looking on the internet for places that helped me, or attempted to. I found a few places. Dal’s forum… sure, others. I realized I wasn’t smart enough for most of you, and I also discovered most of you never practiced what you purported, or preached… but expected the dullards like myself to follow them to the letter.

        I also really hated the comments section. Oscar here claims many falsehoods about me, but never once did he step in and offer a solution. He smelled blood, and while I was being kicked around, he joined in on the attack. I at LEAST had the the “gonads” to disagree. On some… most topics it was a goose stepping firetorch rally in there.

        The decent advice there… and there was plenty… I discovered only worked if a person had the looks, or experience under their belt already to make it work. I realized quickly I was already a lost cause… I tried to explain… didn’t work… and many just loved backing me into a corner like a frightened animal to get a rise outta of me, if truth be told.

        After awhile at some point Dal told me he was going to ban me, and I dared him to. He did.

        Along comes Scott a bit later and published “Meet Cute” on this forum.

        Most of you have taken it in a way that I don’t even think he would agree with… but I cannot or won’t speak for him on that matter. What that whole series DID do was at least give me a relief of “Okay… he ‘gets it’ or least ‘understands’ or is ‘looking at this differently’.”

        The tone of the sphere to men like myself is: “Again, you pathetic beta, cucks are just not getting it… again, we’ll explain, talk down to you / only help you if you tell me how many reps, and how much you can bench, come back when you can meet x threshold”, and countless other insults and negs and passive aggressive put downs……

        Scott. A man who could stop traffic at midnight on Melrose and Fairfax said it PLAINLY, and said it with a HEART. He was prayed up, or at least had his Christian sensibilities expressed. He didn’t break it down into psychological terms. Schools of thought, confusing charts, backpage research.

        Just a guy in his car, plain speech and actually understanding that “Well… it has to be something more than all these men just needing to take a shower and reading Red Pill stuff…… something, something…… they never had, and well… at some point or age, it probably won’t happen.”

        A man like me, if I had said this in the exact same way, would have been crucified here in this forum, or others like it. I would have been pounced on for indeed “not being a man” and “giving up”.

        Scott was the ONLY person who could say this, and speak for men like this. He didn’t offer solutions. He didn’t “pity” or “justify” why many are like this. He just said it. If I know Scott, which I don’t, I would assume…….. he would want someone to look into this more. It looks like he laid a foundation. From what I see after this… well, its being twisted back into the Red Pill narrative and the crux of what he was saying is being tossed out.

        I don’t know why I am still here… many of you need a slap of reality of what most men are: unattractive

        It’s not easy to just go from a 2 to an 8 at age 40, or 35. This is where most of you are effing delusional. You still don’t hold women to account, you make men BE what THEY want by your game, your snide remarks, and arrogance.

        When I did quit listening to a good lot of you… my life did improve. I hope I can warn men who come here who are under a 7 in looks that all this advice will not work for them.

        🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Lastmod:

        Fair enough. Let’s get down to it.

        Yes. Most men are unattractive for sex. Yes, Scott is correct about pretty much everything he’s published. The “Meet Cute” is the best way to start most relationships. Yes, if you haven’t experienced a “Meet Cute” by age 30, it’s probably not going to happen for you. Yes, if your relationship didn’t start with a Meet Cute, it’s going to be a hard slog, she’s not sexually attracted to you, and you aren’t going to get all the sex you want — that’s if the relationship survives. (That’s where I am. I’m working on accepting this. I have limitations, but so does Mrs. Deti.)

        Yeah, we deal mostly with the male side of things. Most women are unattractive for relationships. Most women know how to “work” their “jobs” and have sex, and that’s about it. I could say a lot more about that, but I’ll leave that for now.

        Those sexually unattractive men and those insufferable b!tches are still going to find each other and make babies. So the way I see it, they might as well find ways to live together.

        OK. Like I said — let’s assume you’re correct and it’s over for you sexually and relationally. Let’s just assume that’s correct. (You believe it, so let’s go with it.) What will you do for yourself to carve out the best life for yourself that brings you fulfillment, happiness, and joy?

        Every man has to answer this for himself. So I’ll ask it again, and you don’t have to answer me. What will you do for yourself to carve out the best life for yourself that brings you fulfillment, happiness, and joy?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        “It’s not easy to just go from a 2 to an 8 at age 40, or 35. This is where most of you are effing delusional. You still don’t hold women to account, you make men BE what THEY want by your game, your snide remarks, and arrogance.”

        This is patently false. Deti laid down the law with Mrs. Deti and her behavior changed. Jack takes the approach of husband initiated conflict as a means of sanctification for his wife and has experienced good results. In the past nearly 2 years, Mrs. Apostle has heard what the expectations are and what acceptable behavior for my wife is dozens of times and the marriage has improved greatly for both of us. This is holding women to account in action and all of us did so at roughly the age of 40.

        Holding women to account necessitates male action. This is where a man improving himself comes into the equation. This is also where we see Biblical masculinity being applied. There is a reason that Paul compares marriage to Christ and the church. Just like Christ is the active one in the relationship, constantly chasing us down in our sin and being the agent of our sanctification, men are to be the active ones in dating and marriage relationships, actively leading them. Many of the Red Pill concepts address the both parts of mem leading relationships, setting the standards (which may mean self improvement), and holding women to account of those standards.

        I wish I would have understood this 2 decades ago. In all likelihood, Red Pill concepts would have changed my marriage for the better much sooner. I know that when I finally did start to apply them to my own marriage (when the risk was losing decades of savings, my house, the relationship with my sons, and generally tearing lives apart, not just a break up) that they worked. There are no delusions. The work is not easy, but it can be quite effective.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        “There is a reason that Paul compares marriage to Christ and the church. Just like Christ is the active one in the relationship, constantly chasing us down in our sin and being the agent of our sanctification, men are to be the active ones in dating and marriage relationships, actively leading them.”

        And if we don’t respond to Christ’s calling our sin out, we reject sanctification, and we won’t follow…

        Then Christ lets us leave. He lets us bear the consequences of our sin. He lets us do it all ourselves. He lets us walk away. And He lets us pay for it. No amount of protesting “it’s not fair” sways Him. There is no spiritual alimony. There is only “come back and I’ll take care of it” or “you’re on your own”.

        This is the choice we have to give our women: Get with my program, get in my frame, or there’s the door. If they will not do it our way, we need to let them walk, or show them the door. No money. No support. No spiritual covering. No return unless you get with the program.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “When I did quit listening to a good lot of you… my life did improve. I hope I can warn men who come here who are under a 7 in looks that all this advice will not work for them.”

        OK. Make the case. Gather and marshal evidence. Think out and construct arguments, and present them wherever you’re allowed. Maybe here if Jack permits; maybe somewhere else. I’ll admit that Black Pill makes a good case for some men. I’ll admit that if you didn’t have a Meet Cute by age 30, you probably won’t. I’ll admit that Game won’t work for some men — but then, it never claimed to. Game works for the average frustrated chump who can get women but can’t keep things going with women. If you can’t get anything started, then, yeah, Game won’t work for you.

        Make the case. Present your evidence. Whatever you do, do it only if it benefits you.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Jason

        “Oscar here claims many falsehoods about me…”

        Name one. Provide a quote.

        “…but never once did he step in and offer a solution.”

        Every single time someone offers you a possible solution, you respond with venom and vitriol, just like you did to Deti a few days ago. Do you think responding with venom and vitriol encourages people to want to help you?

        “He smelled blood, and while I was being kicked around, he joined in on the attack.”

        That’s a lie. You lie about other men on this, and other blogs, constantly. For example:

        “It was also said for a long-ass time, “Looks don’t matter to women.” You guys shifted streams only recently.”

        You can’t provide a single quote from me, Deti, Scott, Nova, Jack, or anyone else on this blog stating that “looks don’t matter”. If that’s false, then provide a quote. If you can’t provide a quote, then you’re lying.

        Furthermore, I can provide quotes from other bloggers that contradict what your false accusation. For example:

        Donal Graeme: Going APE — What Attributes do Women Find Attractive in Men? Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power, and Status (LAMPS) (2013-07-21)

        “Under these three categories are five more specific subcategories which contain the sets of attributes which determine male attractiveness: Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power, and Status, or LAMPS for short.”

        If you don’t like me pointing out your lies, then you could try telling the truth for a change. (That’s a suggestion that could help you, by the way. People don’t like being lied about.) But, we both know that’s not going to happen.

        Like

  15. Pingback: A Volitional Model of Cascade Courtship | Σ Frame

  16. thedeti says:

    “Men like myself….. the lower 80%, see no value in Red Pill for the fact that you… the “elect”, don’t want to help men. You want to help men who are “cool” and have high intelligence, and just-happen-to-be better than the rest of us.”

    Lastmod, one of the biggest misconceptions you have is that the men who post here are top 20% men. We are not. This is, or should be, self evident. If we were top 20% men, we would never have found the Manosphere because we would never have needed it.

    We are like recovering addicts with some years of recovery under our belts. We used to live as addicts, but we do no longer, because we’ve learned better ways of living our lives. Some recovering addicts help others who are just getting into recovery. What is it they say: “Sharing our experience, strength, and hope”, and “carrying a message of hope and recovery to the addict who still suffers”? Something like that. These are concepts I would think you, of all people, would understand.

    The ‘sphere isn’t here just to help men get pu$$y. We’re here to help men live their best lives, lives that they want, for themselves. “What we want” doesn’t necessarily mean we get everything we want. It means we get what we want in light of our own limitations and conditions on the ground, as well as in light of what we already have. In my own experience: Yeah, Red Pill and my implementation of it helped me salvage a marriage hanging off a cliff by its fingernails. Is it better? Sure. But it could just as easily have gone in a different direction. It still could. No one knows the future.

    Here’s the difference between me circa 2010 and me now: If it does end, it will be hard and difficult and costly and my life would change in a lot of ways. But it will not destroy me. I have options (no, not just options for other women). I can still live a good life. MY life. The way I want. With or without Mrs. Deti.

    I wanted a career in a major metropolitan area. I didn’t get to have that. My education and my law school academic performance limited me. I was not in the top 25% of my class. The job market was tight when I was coming out of school. I had to take what I could get, so I took a job in a small metro 150 miles away from the nearest major population center. I made it work. I carved out a life here. It has not been perfect. But I’ve been able to experience some enjoyment in it. I’ve accepted it.

    Let’s apply that to you. Almost certainly, having children isn’t going to happen for you. Let’s assume that you’re correct: having sex isn’t going to happen for you. A satisfying relationship with a woman is not in the cards for you. OK. Let’s take that as a given. (I don’t think that’s necessarily off the table, but you apparently do, so we’ll go with it.) What’s caused you so much pain and anger is that you won’t accept this.. The last 5 or so years of your railing against everyone hasn’t alleviated your pain and anger. So how about trying something else? How about accepting it? How about accepting in your life what DOES work: your career in California. Your hobby as an Anglophile. Your backpacking hobby. Your entertaining and informative YouTube channel. Whatever else is in your life that works.

    Yes. It’s true that some men won’t get relationships. I can’t pretend to know what that’s like. I do, however, know what it’s like to experience profound disappointment. I do, however, know what it’s like to experience pain, anger, loss, frustration, and disillusionment. Everyone here does. I also know what it’s like to do my level best to accept loss, disappointment, and deprivation of something I wanted, and move on from it to things I can have. I have tried to focus on what I do have, instead of what I don’t have. Sometimes I’m not very good at these things, but I try.

    I wanted a lot of things that I didn’t get, and that I’ll never get. But I was given a lot. I did work for and earn a lot of other things. I try to focus on, maintain, and be thankful for, what I was given.

    Just a suggestion: maybe focus on what you do have instead of what you don’t. Maybe focus on what you can do instead of what you cannot. No one here can do any of this for you. No one here can do the work for you. No one here can work through the pain, anger, and resentment for you. You have to do it on your own, in a way that works for you and that helps you. It doesn’t look to me like lashing out at people in WordPress comboxes helps you.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      Most of the men who post here a beta males. Alpha males don’t care about this crap, reading about it or writing about it. Scott maybe the exception.

      When I say “beta males” I don’t mean the common caricature of a blue pill wimp or whatever. I mean average guys – in the middle 60% or whatever.

      I am a 5 or 6 maybe in looks. A 5-inch shorter version of Jason with more hair on my head. I have a wife who has sex with me on a regular basis and treats me very well.

      I see younger men around me who are not alpha males who are married to pretty wives. Some quite pretty. These men are engineers and other reasonable successful professionals (not even very high achievers like doctors and lawyers). Now who knows the marriages might fail but I’m not seeing it so far. The key seems to be that you have to be some sort of reasonably high status professional – a guy with a corporate job.

      You don’t have to be in the top 20% to marry, at least it hasn’t been that way in my lifetime. Maybe it will be that way with my sons IDK.

      As Deti has emphasized, if you are an alpha, your marriage will probably be better all things equal (as in, if you don’t defect on her or treat her like crap), e.g. more sex given with a happy, enthusiastic heart, and less discontentment. On average. I guess that’s how it is – I’m sure there are examples of men who don’t treat their overweight or plain or ugly wives as they deserve to be treated.

      Like

  17. feeriker says:

    “Most women know how to “work” their “jobs” and have sex, and that’s about it.”

    Most aren’t even any good at those two things, something nearly every man eventually discovers. There’s a certain degree of cold comfort/Schadenfreude in that realization. If nothing else, it pulls the pedestal right out from under most women.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Lastmod says:

    “Do you think responding with venom and vitriol encourages people to want to help you?”

    You should ask yourself that. When I have asked, and at one time I did want help:

    — Move to eastern Europe, learn the language and culture, get a really, really, really good job in the STEM field, and you will be meeting perfect women who just want to be a good housewife.
    — Move to Asia, learn the language and culture, get a really, really, really good job in the STEM field, and you will be meeting plenty of women who just want to be a good wife.

    When I asked, “Okay… so how come all you men here didn’t have to do that, and I do? I am late 40-something” (which I was at that time).

    The usual smatterings: “You like being miserable / you don’t want to put in the hard work / stop complaining, if you really want to be married… this is what you have to do / Game denier / I know tons of men in their forties who did this. They went back to university got an engineering degree and moved overseas… What is your excuse?”

    AS for LAMPS… Yes, he came to that conclusion. Look at Dal’s forum in the comments. You’ll see… all of you said, “looks don’t matter to women”, and when LAMPS appeared, you didn’t attack him and say, “looks matter to women”, or all still attacked me for daring to state stuff like that.

    You agreed. Why? Because he is deemed “in” by you all. Looks don’t matter to women is ALWAYS said by men who never had to WORRY about their looks, and that includes all of you here.

    The best cure for you Oscar is to not reply to me. You are a billion times better man than I will be or could be on your worst day. Wasting your time “knit picking” my comments over the past decade hasn’t gotten you any brownie points with me, or anyone else for that matter. 😉

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      “Look at Dal’s forum in the comments. You’ll see… all of you said, “looks don’t matter to women”, and when LAMPS appeared, you didn’t attack him and say, “looks matter to women”, or all still attacked me for daring to state stuff like that.

      All of who, Jason? I never said “looks don’t matter”. Scott never said “looks don’t matter”. Deti never said “looks don’t matter”.

      Why can’t you provide a quote of anyone here saying that? Because you’re lying. That’s why. If you’re not, then provide a quote. You can’t do that, because you’re lying.

      Like

      • Jack says:

        Lastmod wrote,

        “Look at Dal’s forum in the comments. You’ll see… all of you said, “looks don’t matter to women”, and when LAMPS appeared, you didn’t attack him and say, “looks matter to women”, or all still attacked me for daring to state stuff like that.

        I think it would be good for you to do a search on Dalrock’s and Donal Graeme’s sites. Go back to review those old discussions that you are remembering now. There is a divine reason why you are remembering these things now. Oscar is giving you an impetus to do so.

        Oscar wrote,

        “Why can’t you provide a quote of anyone here saying that? Because you’re lying. That’s why. If you’re not, then provide a quote. You can’t do that, because you’re lying.”

        Lastmod, if you really want to save face here, then you’ll need to go find those discussions you are referring to. Afterwards, give us some links to those comments so that we can see where you’re coming from. I suspect that you may be misremembering some things. Either way, you would be giving everyone, including yourself, peace of mind by settling this question.

        In fact, I think this is so important for you (and everyone else’s peace of mind) that I’m going to put you on moderation until you can come up with some linkage and quotage. Consider it your homework assignment from Prof. Jack.

        Thanks~!

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        “I think it would be good for you to do a search on Dalrock’s and Donal Graeme’s sites. Go back to review those old discussions that you are remembering now. There is a divine reason why you are remembering these things now. Oscar is giving you an impetus to do so.”

        In fact, we got into this a few months ago, about ol’ Dal’s advice to me.

        I posted the link, with HIS quotes. But it was not acknowledged by anyone… If people are not in a place where they’re able to “hear”, then it seems nothing will be able to drive the point home.

        People do the same thing with Jesus.

        Even if I sent links, no one would pick up on it, or they would still change the meaning, or dig in their heels. “That-snot-what-he-meant” or “that poster was just trolling you”, and the classic: ignoring it.

        Giving out “homework” assigments is a wasted effort, especially if it’s about the “Christian nature”. Hence all of these rebukes. 😉

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        My comments have been mysteriously deleted from Dalrock? I wonder why???????

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        I posted at Dal’s under a different name. I never said and never thought that looks don’t matter to women.

        There absolutely WERE men that said that. Quite a few of them. The PUA crowd. “I know this guy who’s short and fat and bald and women are throwing themselves at him because of his game/confidence/whatever.” Jason, if you ask: “Why didn’t you guys push back at them?” Well, some of us were just learning and didn’t have the confidence yet to push back. Also, some people are just naturally less confrontational than others.

        I think women evaluate men on a broader set of criteria so looks is just one aspect. Looks are probably a screening tool for most women just like they are for men. They want a lot of different, often conflicting things out of a man (one of the biggest problems in relationships).

        BTW, I took crap at Dal’s too – e.g. for claiming that there are overweight women who are nice and make good wives for men who can look past that aspect of their appearance. “No, all overweight women are of bad moral character/promiscuous/whatever.”

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        “There absolutely WERE men that said that. Quite a few of them. The PUA crowd.”

        Are any of them here? Are any of them you, or me, or Deti, or Jack, or Nova, or Scott, or any of the regular posters here? Because Jason specifically said…

        “…all of you said, “looks don’t matter to women”…”

        Who is “all of you”? Last I checked, “all” means “all”. Therefore, if it wasn’t “all”, then Jason lied. Jason made false accusations, which he does frequently.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        I have told him that the inability or unwillingness to distinguish between different Manosphere commenters is frustrating to our discussions. I don’t know what you guys told him except I’m fairly confident Scott didn’t tell him that and I doubt most guys here did either. There were, over time, I’m sure many dozens if not hundreds of commenters at Dal’s.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        “I have told him that the inability or unwillingness to distinguish between different Manosphere commenters is frustrating to our discussions.”

        It’s called lying, dude. We’re men. Call it what it is.

        Like

    • thedeti says:

      I am going to keep asking this

      Is arguing with Oscar helping you?

      Is writing your comments helping you?

      Is this helping you give voice to or express your anger? Is this helping you?

      You’re angry and pissed and hurt. I understand that. Is any of this helping you lessen your anger and pain so you can live the best life you can?

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I am not arguing with Oscar. Since day one here he has just hated me. I reply back. He then changes the question, breaks sentences into a meaning that he likes. You love that he does this btw.

        I am not angry, pissed and hurt. I was at one time. Then I just accepted that I will never be happy, and I won’t let any of you give false hope to a man. Is it helping me? No, not in particular, but I am not angry. I just won’t allow what happened to me here to happen to any other loser that strays in here looking for something and have you all throw big words, knit picking assessment by the man above here and solutions fobbed off as “Easy, no problem…. Just do it!”

        I am living the best life I can:

        — Never went back to drugs and drink
        — Never killed myself
        — Rebuilt my life from zero in 2005… and no my career is not something I love or have a passion for… but I fell into it, and it is providing me something that is better than 7-11 or going back to college to retrain for a career that I don’t have the intellect to do (STEM field).
        — I have adjusted to the loss of parents, brother and uncles and aunts
        — I got out of debt
        — I have traveled a bit and done things for me, that I like

        So I have done just about everything for the best life I can have at my age, with my past, with my mistakes, with my unforgivable genetics (not just in looks / appearance… but with intellectual potentials and stuff like that).

        I don’t give myself an A… probably a C minus, but at least I didn’t relapse or off myself, and I found better work than just minimum wage stuff.

        There really isn’t much else to “strive for” at this point. I probably have topped out at what I can learn, do or achieve at the tender age of 51. 🙂

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “I am not angry, pissed and hurt. I was at one time. Then I just accepted that I will never be happy, and I won’t let any of you give false hope to a man.”

        Spreading your misery won’t help you. If you have “accepted” that you “will never be happy”, then nothing can help you. If you truly believe you can never be happy, then you cannot be helped. You don’t want help.

        “Is it helping me? No, not in particular…”

        Then you’re trying to “help” other men?

        — Never went back to drugs and drink
        — Never killed myself
        — Rebuilt my life from zero in 2005… and no my career is not something I love or have a passion for… but I fell into it, and it is providing me something that is better than 7-11 or going back to college to retrain for a career that I don’t have the intellect to do (STEM field).
        — I have adjusted to the loss of parents, brother and uncles and aunts
        — I got out of debt
        — I have traveled a bit and done things for me, that I like

        That’s all a damn sight better than most men. You have a lot to be at least content about.

        But I will not harp on this. If you truly believe you “will never be happy”, I don’t know what to tell you, other than this: I would respectfully suggest a better way to look at your life would be…

        “I have learned to be content in the circumstances and to be happy for what I do have. I do my best not to focus on what I do not have.”

        Blessings, Lastmod. I’ll shut up. I suppose if Jack will permit you to post here for the purpose of telling others to take the Black Pill and not to read here, then that’s how it will be.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Where are the quotes, Jason? You can’t provide any quotes of anyone here stating that “looks don’t matter”, because you’re lying.

        Here’s further evidence that you’re lying. First, you said:

        “It also said for a long-ass time, “Looks don’t matter to women.” You guys shifted streams only recently.”

        Then, when I showed you Donal’s post from 2013, you said:

        “You agreed. Why? Because he is deemed “in” by you all.”

        Those statements contradict each other. So, were you lying when you said, “You guys shifted streams only recently”, or were you lying when you said “you agreed” in 2013?

        You’re lying, Jason. That’s why you can’t provide a single quote of anyone here saying that “looks don’t matter.”

        People don’t like being lied about, Jason. You lie about people constantly. That might have something to do with all the trouble you’ve had your entire life.

        Like

    • thedeti says:

      I know you hate being miserable. I know you can put in work. I know you’re less complaining than you are expressing justifiable anger, frustration, and pain. I know you have a better life now than you did when you were a drunk and a drug addict. I know others really f__ked you over. It sucks. I know it does.

      Is this helping you? Is this making your life better?

      Like

  19. thedeti says:

    With respect to our brother Lastmod, here’s the whole thing, right here:

    “I am not angry, pissed and hurt. I was at one time. Then I just accepted that I will never be happy, and I won’t let any of you give false hope to a man. Is it helping me? No, not in particular, but I am not angry. I just won’t allow what happened to me here to happen to any other loser that strays in here looking for something and have you all throw big words…..”

    Lastmod, I hope you are reading this.

    I’m not a mental health professional at all. But I can say that that statement — “I will never be happy” — that’s the problem right there. That’s the entire crux of what’s going on with you.

    You must, you MUST, find a way to AT LEAST be content in your circumstances, or you will never, ever find peace. You need to find a place to talk about this, fully and frankly, with someone you trust fully, who has your back, and who will be there to hear it and help you. You need therapy. I urge you to seek it out. That’s not an insult. That’s not a dig. That’s advice to you. You need to talk to a mental health professional who can help you learn to be content, and from there happy, and from there, experience joy. You need to talk to someone who will do little other than listen and help you gain perspective on you, yourself, your life, your circumstances, and your approach to all of the above.

    Everyone, and I mean everyone, lives with not having gotten things they wanted. Everyone lives with having lost things or people they had, and they have no longer. Everyone has to learn to accept what they have, accept what they don’t have, and be content in their circumstances. Therapy can help you accept reality and find contentedness.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Lastmod says:

    Seems like society is set up to keep a man weak and a beta……..

    I live in LA, and I work in West LA. Every office tower filled with shrinks, pill peddlers and people who supposedly are “helping” people. If I am not happy now, a therapist will be a torpedo to my frail Ego. “You’re still not good enough / not cool enough / not good looking enough / not smart enough….. but don’t worry, you just need to be happy. Here, take these pills, and these pills, and these pills to counter the side effects from the first prescription… Oh, make sure you sign the waiver that you understand the “serious risks” the second prescription may cause you….. but it’s OK, because you will be NUMB, compliant and happy!! My sessions are by the hour, and if the session ends early I don’t refund your insurance or cash. I also don’t take appointments on this date, or these days… So you have to take time off from YOUR job to see me, and pay me! Chump!”

    The nerve of shrinks who get 100 bux an hour to listen to you ramble and then give you a fistful of pills and then tell you:

    “Put in the hard work. Keep trying. Talk to people more often. See! Easy. You can do it! Your past???? Let it go. Just be happy!”

    Good enough for the Betas, I suppose. It takes a real man to see through the racket. Priceless!

    Like

  21. Red Pill Apostle says:

    Colossians 1:24 I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church,

    Paul is suffering, but he finds joy in his hardships because they are endured for a purpose that is larger than himself. Lasting purpose, and for Paul it was easier to directly see the eternal ramifications of his work, is the key to understanding people who find joy in seemingly hopeless situations. What many fail to realize is that everything we do has eternal significance, whether we can envision this reality or not. Those who understand this fact often find joy even in unpleasant circumstances.

    Like

  22. Pingback: The Meet Cute as a Positive Feedback Loop | Σ Frame

  23. Pingback: Moral Guidance Based Feedback vs. Sexual Attention | Σ Frame

  24. Pingback: Wives reap what they sow | Σ Frame

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s