It’s all about her Ego

…not comfort, control, love, security, and not even hypergamy nor Tingles.

Readership: Men; Christian Men;
Theme: Agency
Length: 3,000 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes

“More the knowledge, lesser the ego.
Lesser the knowledge, more the ego.”

Albert Einstein

A Review of Lyans’ Approach

In my last post, Women have sex to influence men (2021-11-10), we examined one PUAs approach towards consolidating on the interaction with a woman, leading to sex.

Lyans’ article is about pick-up Game, 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 all men, married men especially. It’s basically because AWALT.

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. As anonymous_ng pointed out, Lyans is talking about a woman who has most likely already decided to have sex with the man. The man’s role is basically, “detect her interest, and don’t screw it up”. Lyans offered this basic list of pointers about how not to screw it up.

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

Lyans doesn’t say this explicitly, but I can see how Lyans is holding on to a solid ego primacy that is grounded in himself, his own frame of reality. He’s also focused on maintaining an internal locus of control, as I covered before. This state of being is assumed to be the man’s intuitive compass from here on, and this is where the men are divided between failure and success. If a man can latch on to this intuition, then he can develop it and refine it. If he can’t, then he’ll always screw up the interaction because he won’t know what he’s doing.

Even if a man has this intuition, it is impossible to pinpoint any specific details about what a man should do to “not screw it up”, simply because relationships are dynamic, not static. How a man is to pull this off 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…

  1. The social context (e.g. Lyans’ “choosing location”, opinions of peers, etc.)
  2. The feelings she gets from the feedback loop (i.e. Lyans’ “control pacing”).
  3. Her “motivations”.
  4. From what I can ascertain, her ego investment in the relationship.

Here, I won’t go into Point 1 – Context, but I’ll discuss my reasoning for the remaining three points below.

Point 2 – The Feeelz

Among long time readers, there should be no doubt about the centrality of the feeelz within the female psychology. Concerning the subject at hand, Deti wrote,

“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.”

Deti concluded,

“[In an ideal relationship] there is hard visceral attraction AND “Heart Trust”. There is attraction AND comfort. “Heart Trust” = comfort.”

“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.”

This is the barebones message of Lyans’ article, and Deti’s take on it is a standard Red Pill assessment. All the talk about “influence” is a reflection of the female viewpoint.

Case Study 1 – The Tyranny of Mrs. Apostle’s Feeelz

Red Pill Apostle gave us this account [edited for clarity].

“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. Mrs. Apostle’s heels dug in because it was more important for her to feel like I considered her viewpoint than to actually consider it. 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.

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 centrality of women’s feelings without offering any substance behind it, and women prove themselves inadequate to differentiate between their perceptions and feelings enough to recognize a man of genuine substance with good intent.”

From RPA’s story, we see that her need for feedback, and a certain kind of feedback at that, shows that the feedback is more important than how she feels about the feedback. RPA called this the Tyranny of Feelings, but it may be more accurate to call this the Tyranny of the Need for Feedback. This is where men need to do the talking and spell out their Frame in no uncertain terms. RPA seems to have done this, but if RPA had given her half an hour of feedback to patiently explain why his position was superior and why her position was fallible, then he might have avoided spending half an hour chastising her behavior. The point here is not to string out a defensive argument to prove himself right, but to allow her to get on board with his Frame. I believe this approach (which is similar to Lyans’) would also increase her feelings of love and intimacy, leading to more sparks in the bedroom.

Point 3 – A Woman’s Motivation is for Ego Relevancy

Concerning the third point, in the previous post, I gathered that “motivation” 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. Deti thought this way too, as he wrote,

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

Initially, I assumed that Lyans was saying that the reason women fail at this endeavor is because they are adopting an external locus of control. But as I consider this further, I think my initial assessment was wrong in assuming that women’s motivation is purpose driven, with that purpose being the attainment of her desire. No, this would be thinking like a man thinks. For women, there is a more fundamental motivation than the attainment of a desire. It is a motivation to maintain ego relevancy, to monitor the feedback loop, and to keep treading the waters of emotional vitality until the object of her desire drops into her lap. This is more along the lines of how women think and operate. This would also correspond to Lyans assertion that women lie on a spectrum between being smooth and being a hassle. Men will naturally view them as being either smooth or “high maintenance”, but from a woman’s perspective, they’re just doing whatever they’ve learned will give them feedback, and I would surmise that a lot of that goes back to her upbringing.

  • Vexing women were likely brought up in a conflict laden home, and/or they learned that “the squeaky wheel gets the oil.”
  • Smooth women were likely brought up in an orderly home, and/or were taught that “kindness attracts love.”

Or something to that effect.

So here it becomes obvious that it is critically important to give a woman constant feedback. Lyans even puts this first in his final list of how to “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.

We also see that “getting her to feel she is doing things right”, is confusingly stated from the woman’s perspective. What this actually means is that she is getting feedback and is able to adjust herself accordingly to the man’s Frame. Again, women’s idea of “doing things right” has little to do with morality nor agency, and much to do with feeling good about herself (Point 2) and maintaining ego relevancy.

Point 4 – Getting a Return on Her Ego Investment

I included the fourth point because Lyans wrote,

“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.”

So what is Lyans talking about here?  I can only assume that he means a woman’s “self-worth” is dependent on her ego-feedback mechanism and whether she is getting what she wants out of the interaction, all of which reinforces her “motivation”. But the thing that women want is not well understood by men. Men who think like men want specific outcomes, but not so for women. Women want feedback leading to good feelz and ego relevancy, even more than she wants to attain her desires.

This is why women will withdraw or reject a man when they feel like they are NOT getting the right kind of feedback, even when they are feeling the Tingles.

This understanding also answers the question of why women must be allowed to feel like they have “influence”, which I initially translated as meaning some sort of control. The reason is because women must always feel like they are an integral part of what is going on (c.f. the herd mentality), and they depend on “how they feel” as a guide to their intuitions in this respect. This need for relevancy is why it is so important that if a certain kind of feedback is not present, then she loses trust. For women, Trust = Relevancy, and Relevancy = Comfort, as Deti pointed out above. 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.”

IOW, she can’t establish the chain of…

Feedback –> Trust –> Relevancy –> Humility –> Comfort –> Security

and since women are relationally oriented, she sees this as her fault.

This also explains why the woman’s feelings (and interest in sex) depend more on her getting a positive return on her ego investment and not so much what the man actually does. This is why the moral character of the man is not even a consideration for women. What matters most to her is establishing the chain of Feedback –> Trust –> Relevancy –> Humility –> Comfort –> Security, and attaining this state of sanctification is the crux of the “motivation” that Lyans is referring to. Female “agency” revolves around this structure, not the purposes or morality of the man nor herself. Hence the PUA’s successes.

IMO, this is the most interesting facet of Lyans’ 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.

Case Study 2 – RedPillBoomer and the Churchian Carouseller

RedPillBoomer gave us this little story.

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

Jack: “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.”

RPB: “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.”

In summary, she thought she would do some casual sex tourism with an old F-buddy, but after meeting RPB, she felt “convicted” that something was “not right” about following through with her plans. The PUA might say that RPB screwed it up, but Christian readers would say RPB did the right thing in staying true to his new, God fearing self. But the thing is, if RPB had reverted to his old self, then she probably would have felt it was “right” to have sex with him. Overall, it wasn’t about the morality of having sex or not that made it right or wrong, but rather how she could best adapt her ego to the situation.

So why wasn’t she “feeling it”?  It’s because the feedback she was getting from RPB wasn’t assuaging her ego to have sex, but rather, the feedback she got from RPB made her realize that her ego could be built up more (in this instance) by making the decision to NOT have sex. We could call this conviction, but if she went back home and continued on with her old habit of riding the carousel, then we can’t really say it was true conviction. At best, RPB planted a seed of conviction that might grow in her later on. That’s why I say her decision was based on ego investment – not raw desire, not the Tingles, and not even respect for RPB’s convictions.

Conclusions

I am quickly coming to the conclusion that women of the modern feminist era are ego buoys. Ebb or flow, high tide or low, her ego will always bob to the surface. Everything women want and every decision they make revolves around whatever happens to stoke their ego in a given context.

  • Why do women want a tall hawt guy?  Ego rush.
  • Why do women want a man with power, status, athleticism, looks, and money?  Ego dominance.
  • Why do women want some men but not others? Because those men stroke their ego.
  • Why do women buy into the lies of feminism?  Having a career, education, financial independence, P-power, sexual liberation, and so on, appeals to their Ego.
  • Why do women want to ride the carousel?  Solipsistic Ego trip, one after the other.
  • Why do women refuse sex with otherwise hawt guys?  Ego is not being affirmed.
  • Why would a woman abstain from sex?  When it’s a distraction from Ego primacy.
  • Why do women resort to contentiousness, gaslighting, hamsterbating, $h!t tests, etc.?  Ego expression and preservation.
  • Why do women monkey branch?  Choice driven Ego.
  • Why do women want to get married?  Status and security driven Ego.
  • Why do women settle for Beta Bob?  More Ego from getting married than not.
  • Why do women want children?  To capitalize on having a family as an Ego investment.
  • Why do women NOT want children?  Children mirror adult behavior which is felt as mocking her ego, and thereby interferes with her Ego dominance.
  • Why do women want to control the man in their life?  Pride driven Ego with a hefty load of distrust.
  • Why is the word “submission” profane to women?  It requires them to swallow their egotistical pride.

The list goes on…

So when we look at female behavior through this lens, it’s a no brainer…

  • What makes women eager to have sex?  When it’s a grand mal Ego trip.

Here’s something else to think about. It’s the same way for men too.

  • Men get married as an Ego investment.

For some readers, perhaps this is oversimplifying things beyond usefulness, while for other readers, this may be the key that unlocks a world of understanding.

As a final note, in writing these things, I don’t mean to convey that the ego and maintaining ego relevancy is bad or evil. In fact, the ego is an important element of human psychology and having one is a healthy sign of life. However, the way in which a woman achieves ego primacy can be grossly maladaptive or even destructive. The key is whether a woman’s ego is well adjusted or not.

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 Agency, Attitude, Attraction, Authenticity, Child Development, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Communications, Conserving Power, Desire, Desire, Passion, Determination, Discernment, Wisdom, Fantasy and Illusion, Female Power, Feminism, Fundamental Frame, Game, Game Theory, Headship and Patriarchy, Holding Frame, Inner Game, Introspection, Leadership, Love, Male Power, Manosphere, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Personal Presentation, Persuasion, Psychology, Purpose, Relationships, Reviews, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Sexual Authority, Sphere of Influence, Strategy, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to It’s all about her Ego

  1. Femmy says:

    I’m not sure I understand Feedback.

    Can we use Eve as an example?

    If Adam gave her Feedback, then the rest of that loop would follow?

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Femmy says:

      As I am thinking about this, is Feedback attention?

      If it is, that’s what females crave.

      Therefore, going back to Eve, all females crave moral attention.

      Like

    • Jack says:

      Femmy,

      “Can we use Eve as an example?”

      In the story of Adam and Eve, Satan’s lies posed an appeal to Eve’s ego.

      Genesis 3:5 (ESV)
      “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

      The idea of being like God is definitely an ego trip. It was a temptation because this lie stoked her ego more than the idea of being Adam’s helpmate.

      “If Adam gave her Feedback, then the rest of that loop would follow?”

      We don’t know the details about how or why Adam didn’t intervene, but either she didn’t confide in Adam until after she made the decision to eat the forbidden fruit, or else Adam stood by and did nothing. Either way, there was no feedback from Adam, and apparently, she didn’t get any immediate feedback from God either. So the chain of…

      Feedback –> Trust –> Relevancy –> Humility –> Comfort –> Security

      was broken between her and Adam (and God), and was replaced by Feedback, Trust, and so on, with Satan.

      “…is Feedback attention?”

      Getting attention opens the door of interpersonal communication which is necessary for her to get feedback, and makes it more likely. I’m not sure what you mean by “moral attention”.

      Like

      • info says:

        God witnessed the whole thing. So I think this was a trial that the first couple failed.

        Which also Israel failed in the Wilderness in the 40 years

        And paralleled by 40 days in the Wilderness by our God in the flesh which God in his Son overcame.

        All of which involved Satanic temptation.

        Like

      • Femmy says:

        Ahhh. I see. Thanks.

        I was wondering since females crave attention/feedback, moral attention instead of regular attention would satisfy that craving and continue positively through the loop for the guy. Sort of a moral guidance based attention; which we agree, Adam didn’t give. If every single guy gave every single female moral attention–moral guidance instead of regular attention, wouldn’t it satisfy her craving and result in a positive outcome for the guy by the end of the loop?

        But, I see now because of her ego decision at the Tree, she won’t desire moral guidance based attention.

        But, I still think it would be a great experiment to see if there would be positive results.

        I think there are guys who would try this. I would love to see it done as a social experiment and see results.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. feeriker says:

    “If every single guy gave every single female moral attention–moral guidance instead of regular attention, wouldn’t it satisfy her craving and result in a positive outcome for the guy by the end of the loop?

    I think there are guys who would try this. I would love to see it done as a social experiment and see results.”

    That’s a great question, and it would be interesting to see some men try this out. I’m tempted to say, based on observation and experience, that it’s unlikely that most women would exhibit the desired reaction, and would instead respond negatively. Why? Because “moral attention-moral guidance” is aimed at what a woman SHOULD desire for her own spiritual health and wellbeing, whereas the ego-centric attention that most women get from most men gives them what they (think they) desire at the moment. To use a metaphor, giving a woman “moral attention-spiritual guidance” instead of the usual ego-stoking attention is like putting a plate of vegetables in front of a child instead of a big slice of chocolate cake. Even though the former is healthy and the latter is not, the child rejects the former because it doesn’t instantly gratify.

    I know that this comparison of women to children will upset some here, perhaps even you, but observation leads me to believe that in many respects the biologically conditioned ego-driven passions of women as a sex more resemble those of children than adults.

    Liked by 1 person

    • redpillboomer says:

      “If every single guy gave every single female moral attention–moral guidance instead of regular attention…”

      I tried this as a little thought experiment. Here’s what I think would happen: 1) An explosion of anger, aka bordering on uncontrollable rage by the fairer sex directed toward men of all ages, followed by 2) A plethora of social media clips and media shows shaming men for the unacceptable way they are treating women in these ‘modern times,’ then 3) One by one women capitulating, beginning with the youngest (remember even Chad and Tyrone are now giving them moral attention-moral guidance instead of the phallus) on to the older ones. The holdouts would be the 40 somethings and up because they are so indoctrinated and invested in the feminist life script to one degree or another.

      Of course this is ludicrously hypothetical, however I think we see an imperfect glimmer of this with the spreading of MGTOW. I haven’t been at this Red Pill game as long as many of you have, about four years now, but even I’ve seen in that short period of time what occurs to me as a steady rise in #1 & 2 above, anger and shaming men for ‘leaving the game;’ and remember the men ‘leaving the game’ would by definition be the ‘bottom 80%’ who women treat as invisible anyways until they need them for their resources during their post-wall years.

      I haven’t seen #3 much yet, except for an occasional younger woman <35 on a clip lecturing her ‘sisters’ on how the ‘feminist life script’ is lying to them and causing them untold misery as they get older. I’m not talking here about the female chameleons out there putting out disingenuous, pseudo Red Pill content. I’m talking about the every now and then woman I hear that sounds truly genuine; genuine in like she really gets it and she’s trying to ‘wake her sisters up’ to the lies they’ve been told and the lies they’re living.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Femmy says:

    Haha, not offended Mr. F.

    I agree!

    Though, I have LEARNED to like vegetables, I would still like chocolate cake every day for lunch dessert! 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Oscar says:

    Off topic, but always relevant.

    Like

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

  6. Pingback: Womens’ main sin nature: Enviousness, discontent, and validation | Christianity and masculinity

  7. Pingback: Summary of the Meet Cute Phenomenon | Σ Frame

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

  9. Pingback: Tracking Raw Sex Performance on a Spread Sheet | Σ Frame

  10. Pingback: Tracking Raw Sex Performance on a Spread Sheet | Σ Frame

  11. Pingback: A Distrusting Woman is a Divorcing Woman | Σ Frame

  12. Pingback: What can a husband do in response to a rebellious wife? | Σ Frame

  13. Pingback: Why you will marry the wrong person | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: Harnessing the Motivations of Others | Σ Frame

  15. Pingback: Pursuing Flow to develop Confidence and Trust | 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 )

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