Is Attraction strictly a binary function?
Readership: All; Christians
Theme: Perspectives on the Topic of Attraction
Length: 3,700 words
Reading Time: 20 minutes
My post On Curating a Christian Culture of Attraction (2022-8-18) received a lot of discussion about the nature of attraction. Two more posts spun off of the topic of attraction, so I’ve decided to have a mini-theme about these Perspectives on the Topic of Attraction.
Thedeti voiced a strong disagreement with the question, “Can sexual attraction be trained or taught?” He said that it cannot, under any circumstances, as it is dictated solely by biology and evolutionary-psychology.
Rowena wrote a long email to me on 2022-8-22 in response to Thedeti’s statements. In her essay, she made a lot of important distinctions about things that only women would know about. I think it is important for men to know these things. So I have sorted through her ideas, made a few changes, and have presented them below. In fact, most of her ideas agree with what we already know from the Red Pill lore, but the viewpoint comes from a different perspective.
The value of having Rowena’s feedback is that women are extremely skilled in hiding their feelings of attraction, and so it may not be easily observed. Secondly, only women would know whether certain things related to their own feelings of attraction are true or not, so we have to trust their word to some extent. The problem in obtaining such a confirmation is in finding an articulate, honest, self-aware, and trustworthy woman.
There are a few reasons why I believe we can trust Rowena’s general assessments of women.
- Rowena is an older married Christian woman with children (not a younger woman who is obsessed with her social status and sexual competition).
- She has no personal interest in the outcome of our discussions except that we get it right.
- In her email, she stated that she hoped we could make progress in reestablishing patriarchy.
- Her track record of displaying respect to men. For example, in the beginning of her email, she wrote,
“I wanted to respond to what Thedeti said, because I agree and disagree with him. Except your forum is not my place to disagree and it may come across as disrespectful. Also being a woman, I know I have the capacity to hamster and to be deceived (that is Biblical). I am aware of that and so I also want to take that into account. So, I respectfully present a few of my observations and if there is truth in them – you can perhaps sort the wheat from the chaff.”
I really appreciate the way she wrote to me privately to voice her objections to Thedeti’s points. This shows honor and respect to Thedeti as a man, and trust and respect for my authority as a Christian writer and blog host. Her faith does not go unnoticed. I wish more women had this kind of habit.
When Rowena says that she agrees or disagrees with a statement, men should be careful not to interpret this as a logical argument, but rather a confirmation of its truth according to the female experience.
A Trifurcated Hierarchy of Attraction
Rowena described a hierarchy of attraction that is different from the strict bifurcation of the “have’s” and “have not’s” that we are familiar with. In her model, there are “have’s”, “have not’s”, and “depends on maybe’s” which roughly corresponds to our SMV conventions.
Thus, statements like the following are not easily answered.
- “Women are either turned on or off sexually.”
- “A man can do nothing to turn the needle.”
- “Sexual attraction is either there or it is not”
Such statements appear too vague, childishly simplistic, and overly reductionist to the female mind. Furthermore, women conclude that the reason why men have such a simplistic view of “attraction” is because it is based solely on whether the interaction “pays off” in terms of male interests (i.e. ego, self-esteem, sex, etc.). For example, men do not care if they can attract a woman who is grossly unattractive to them. They would consider this an annoyance, not the attraction that it truly is. True, women are the same way, but neither men nor women think this far. For this reason, women are very careful not to allow men any “pay offs” unless it is clearly beneficial to her own interests. Women who do so are considered by other women to have loose boundaries or no self-esteem, casually described as being “easy”, “flighty”, “flirty”, “stupid”, “loose”, “ungrounded”, or “vulnerable”, which is the diametric opposite of the widely celebrated Strong Independent Woman™. Men are much more generous in this regard, and often let women take advantage of them.
Putting Rowena’s model into an easily digestible bon mot, these three categories of men are summed up as follows.
SMV = 8-10 “The Have’s”
Only 8-10’s (men very high in good looks and athletic ability – a part of LAMPS) can elicit the raw visceral sexual attraction that Scott and Thedeti are referring to.
For 8-10’s, the Tingle button is permanently ON. These men are ALWAYS sexually attractive to women. And to practically ALL women. Even though they may not show it, respond to it, or express interest (because that would be a pay off.)
In this case, Rowena and Thedeti AGREE.
SMV = 5-7 “It depends on maybe’s”
There is no sexual attraction but there is no sexual repulsion either. However, sexual attraction or sexual repulsion can be generated if the context changes.
So in this case, Rowena and Thedeti DISAGREE.
For men in the 5-7 category, the question is how to change and/or control the context. The contextual factors of attraction will be covered in the next section.
SMV ≤ 4 “The Have Not’s”
For men below 5, the Tingle button is permanently OFF. This includes the morbidly obese, profoundly ugly, etc. These men are sexually REPULSIVE. This is not the zone of a lack of sexual attraction, it is the zone of sexual REPULSION, meaning, “No way will I ever let this person touch me!” Nothing can change this.
This is the same for BOTH men and women (some men might have a lower threshold for casual sex), however men and women respond differently to it. Men joke about it amongst themselves, but women have absolutely no sense of humor in this area. So women are much more volatile and dramatic about their repulsion than men are. In fact, this repulsion is so strong that younger women can be very rude in expressing this repulsion and quite nasty in avoiding such men, even going to excessive lengths to avoid any social association with such men.
So, Rowena and Thedeti AGREE here too.
Rowena said most men and women fall in the 5-7 category. 8-10’s are exceedingly rare, and below 5’s are a very small category. I’ll comment that this categorization doesn’t agree with the data from OKCupid which indicates that women find the vast majority of men unattractive. But her views do agree with the OKCupid data indicating that women show a large amount of interest in the men in the middle. Make of this what you will.
Contextual Factors of Attraction
There are many fundamental differences between men and women.
In general, Men are aroused by the sight of a feminine figure. Women are also aroused by the sight of a handsome man. The difference here is that men are turned on by looking at nearly any woman who is above average, whereas women are only turned on by a man’s appearance when he is tall, lean, well built, and very fit, which is a very small segment of men.
For men, sexual attraction is almost entirely created by a woman’s youth, physical proportions, and beauty. But for a woman, sex is not ONLY about physical attraction. There are other considerations that go through a woman’s mind.
- Sex is about submission to a man. Essentially, when a woman gives her body to a man, she is submitting to him.
- Sex involves emotional vulnerability. Can she open up her heart and body and be herself without feeling ashamed or being rejected by him for it?
- Sex is bonding with a man. The woman tunes into the man’s thinking and world view. They share feelings and emotions. They have synchronicities (e.g. saying the same thing at the same time). Women often describe this as “oneness”. This extends past the bedroom into everyday life, and it can be addictive if it feeds her emotional needs. OTOH, Men get addicted to the sex, however, the Manosphere has picked up on the important aspect of bonding.
- Sex is an identification with a man. When a woman has sex with a man, she identifies herself as his, emotionally, physically, sexually, and (with the exception of one night stands) socially too. This is how God created sex to be. However, Women these days don’t like the idea of “belonging” to a man, so the way women usually express this phenomenon is by recasting it in terms of her ownership of him. “He is MINE!” “I got a new man!” and so on. This identification is not just psychological, it also includes the spiritual constitution of a woman, hence the Alpha Widow syndrome.
- Biblically, sex was designed to be a ratification of the marriage covenant in which the woman submits to a man’s Headship covering. Women who engage in sex but reject being submissive to the Headship covering lose all the blessings and benefits of that covering (and create lots of headaches and sleepless nights for the man as well). This is a vital spiritual aspect of sex that Christian women are (or should be) aware of that our modern culture entirely ignores.
Rowena said Thedeti is mistaken in assuming this submission will happen ONLY if there is raw visceral sexual attraction. The truth is that many women will refuse sex with their husbands because there is a confounding problem with one of the above factors. But Thedeti is right in that if a man is exceedingly good looking, a woman will hamsterize and justify any of these other problems in order to be his sexual plaything.
7 Contextual Vectors of Attraction
As mentioned before, Men are aroused by the sight of a young feminine figure, clear complexion, full round breasts, long hair, slim tummy, WHR < 0.7, etc. For women, a man’s health, fitness, and strength are also arousing, but there are other factors that come into play. Some of these overlap with LAMPS and are described as follows.
1. MONEY / POWER
A wealthy powerful man has the capacity to make a woman want to submit to him. (And I am not talking about r@pe.) Money and raw power can generate sexual attraction where none exists. This is assuming the man is in the 5-7 category. If he is below 5 – he is sexually repulsive – any woman who sleeps with a man below 5 is hamstering a justification to sleep with him. But not so with a 5-7 man.
Let me give some examples.
Example 1 – Bill Gates
If Bill Gates was a guy you met in a bar – he would not generate any sexual attraction but he would not be sexually repulsive either. He is in the 5-7 category. A woman might peg him as a regular guy. Not attractive. Not repulsive.
Thedeti would say, “This man has no chance!”
But change the CONTEXT. BILL GATES – the billionaire walks into a bar; she recognises him as BILL GATES. He walks up to her and looks deep into her eyes. And says – Hi. I guarantee you – that woman will ‘tingle’. She is not hamstering her way into it. She is genuinely sexually attracted.
SAME GUY – DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
The MONEY, STATUS and POWER generates the tingles!
Example 2 – Donald Trump
Let’s consider the older version of Donald Trump. If you meet him as a regular guy – you will look at him as Grandpa. But if the multibillionaire PRESIDENT OF THE USA walks up to you and said, “Hi!”… Well, some tingles would be generated – even if you hated the man. It is the POWER of his position.
SAME GUY – DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
Example 3 – An underworld criminal / don / thug
There are many guys in the 5- 7 in looks category who would never receive sexualized attention from women, but the DANGER in what they do changes the context.
Meet them in a regular situation – woman will not look at them. She is not repulsed. He just does not interest her. She will swipe left so to speak. But she finds out what he does – or she sees him hit someone – suddenly tingles will happen.
SAME GUY – DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
Example 4 – A Serviceman
By serviceman, I’m referring to a firefighter, military, navy seal, policeman… basically anyone in a uniform.
Girl meets him in regular clothes – if he is a 5-7, she will not take a second look.
But when she sees him in uniform – tingles will happen.
SAME GUY – DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
What is common in all these examples is POWER – these men symbolise POWER – through their jobs; the authority they hold.
A woman is NOT hamstering when she sleeps with this man. She is GENUINELY sexually attracted to him.
2. STATUS / FAME / REPUTATION
Fame and reputation often ties into the status, money, and power angle.
Actors, CEO’s, politicians, sports stars, TV personalities, etc. fall into this category, but the most noteworthy example of this is ROCK STARS.
Look at men like Mick Jagger, Michael Jackson, or Steve Tyler. These men are not objectively good looking – they’re not tall, no lantern jaw, and stuff. If you were to meet these men in a bar, they would NOT generate automatic visceral sexual attraction.
But put these men on stage in a rock concert and the context changes. When she sees them play music and sees his musical talent, she recognizes the larger than life image of the man. He is now Steve Tyler from AEROSMITH. He is “THE” MICHAEL JACKSON – the ONE who can dance, do the moonwalk, etc. He is the one everyone imitates with sequined gloves and so on. Now, turn and look at the women in the crowd. They’re twerking and flashing their breasts.
Do you really believe these women are going to be hamstering themselves into having sex with these men if asked? Nope! There is ACTUAL and GENUINE sexual attraction that has been AROUSED.
And yet, if any of these women met men like this in a bar — just as REGULAR men — how much visceral sexual attraction do you think they would generate?
SAME MAN. DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
3. ATHLETICISM / MUSCLES
Regular 5-7 man with a Dad bod goes to church. No woman gives him a second glance. He starts working out, loses weight, and starts wearing T-shirts that show his muscles. Suddenly women are feeling up his biceps at the church BBQ.
SAME GUY DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
A 5-7 man can stand out from the crowd by being competent, decisive, displaying confidence, conversational skills, having useful knowledge, using practical skills, taking up a martial art, etc. He can also look the part by dressing smart, maintaining good posture, and making eye contact. All these can be learned or trained. These things may or may not create attraction, however, such a man will have a distinctive presence and find it easier to become a leader in his small group at church or in his office. If he is assertive then suddenly women start checking him out.
SAME GUY DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
Women are emotional. If you can change her emotions – you can generate sexual attraction.
The following are controversial examples.
Example 1 – FEAR
Stockholm syndrome – These women end up sleeping with their captors. A large part of this is the power dynamic. But there is also an element of fear.
Same if she goes on a date which includes some kind of risk or shock.
- Risk: Motorcycling, rock climbing, roller coasters, white water kayaking or rafting, etc.
- Shock: Horror movies, losing her keys, spilling a drink on herself, surprises, if the man is hit on by other women,* etc.
All of these tap into her fear. The FEAR induces humility, which sparks the chemistry of love. The FEAR triggers sexual arousal.
* Dread Game can also generate attraction because it invokes the fear of losing someone. When a woman sees her husband flirting with another woman, she might get angry about this, but it can also make her want to go home and do him.
SAME GUY, DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
Example 2 – GAME
Keeping ethical considerations aside – the manipulation part – not going into whether you should game or not, but on the effect of game on a woman.
The tricks and techniques that the PUA’s advocate do have some results. At the core of it is you are manipulating emotions.
People either feel Game works or it does not. A huge part of its effectiveness lies in the charisma of the man, and whether his particular brand of charisma comes across as charming to a certain woman. If the woman can easily tune in to a man’s charisma, then she will naturally want to submit to him if only to bask in the exciting warmth of his presence. Imposing Frame tends to reinforce this attraction.
However, it does NOT work if the man is below 5 – that man is sexually REPULSIVE
But if he is a 5-7 it CAN work – because you manipulate the woman’s EMOTIONS
She is not hamstering when she sleeps with him. There is genuine sexual attraction where none existed before.
Regularly, when she meets a 5-7, she will not feel anything. But change the CONTEXT – Fear, Dread, Shock, Charisma, Frame, even Flattery – “I am gay but I am starting to feel things for you. Could you help me out?” – Yep! There are women that would fall for a line like that and would sleep with that guy. Not by hamstering but because she is genuinely sexually aroused by what he said.
SAME GUY, DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
At certain times of the month, if she’s ovulating or if she wants to have a baby, Oh Yeah! Suddenly 8-10 men become practically irresistible, and 5-7 guys become VERY sexually attractive. If he is below 5, sex might happen but with definite hamstering. The rest of the month it will go back to a lack of interest.
But yes, for a 5-7 guy there is actual genuine sexual arousal.
SAME GUY, DIFFERENT CONTEXT!
Unfortunately, thanks to hormonal birth control and all the drugs women take these days, this part is totally messed up.
7. PHYSICAL TOUCH ON A VIRGIN / MARRIAGE
While a woman can be visually attracted to a man, men waaay underestimate the TOUCH of a man on a virgin. When a husband imprints his TOUCH on a virgin – it is her FIRST introduction to sex. It AWAKENS something in her that explodes.
Once a woman has her first sexual experience, the innocence of her virginity is gone, and she becomes sexually ACTIVATED. If a girl loses her virginity outside of marriage, she WILL become promiscuous. Unless she is RAPIDLY married off to him (which is what the Bible advocates). Or she regularly does it with the man she lost it with and then gets married to him. But if her first relationship ends, she will continue to be sexually active – just with another guy, and then another, and so on.
It was this SEXUAL AWAKENING that unleashes a woman’s dormant libido that the early church fathers were referring to (in Sharkly’s quote), in saying that women were lustful creatures. These church men had virginal wives. They knew how sleeping with their virgin wives pulled the pin on their sexual grenade. They KNEW what they were talking about. Most modern men don’t even know this about women.
That is why the early church fathers and all patriarchal societies pursue the template of giving a girl in marriage when she is young and as a virgin. For this reason, for many women across cultures and ages, sexual TOUCH is associated with her HUSBAND. He is the first man who awakens that in her.
That is why women close their eyes when they kiss. It is why women have no problem making love in the dark. It is his TOUCH that stimulates her. Man is VISUAL – he needs to SEE her for it to happen. Not saying women are not visual, but it is secondary to TOUCH.
That is also why sexual abuse is devastating for a girl. A young girl – who has been sexually abused – has ZERO visceral sexual attraction to her predator – but his touch imprints on her. He awakens a desire that, in the normal course, only her husband would AWAKEN. And she goes crazy. That is universally why most sexually abused girls end up promiscuous. If you see an abused 12-13-year-old girl sleeping with anything that moves, she is not viscerally sexually attracted to the men she is sleeping with. She is RESPONDING to what the predator awakened in her and acting out those desires.
We know that women are extremely skilled in hiding their arousal. But what few men know is that…
- A virgin’s first time having sex is a sexual AWAKENING.
- Women who are not virgins are sexually ACTIVATED.
- Women who are NOT virgins and are NOT married are, by and large, promiscuous.
Non-virginal women are going to have sex, and it’s just a question of CONTEXT. All women prefer the 8-10 man, but since these men are in very short supply, a 5-7 man will do her just fine — IF the CONTEXT hits her right.
The Christian context for sexual awakening and arousal is marriage. When marriage is postponed until after a woman’s first sexual awakening, and if marriage is not seized immediately, then the natural result is promiscuity followed by a deferred and debased marriage.
Women’s Attraction to Men Sans Context
- 8-10’s will ALWAYS generate raw visceral sexual attraction.
- 5-7 – GREY AREA – NEUTRAL – NOT sexually attractive but the KEY here is NOT sexually REPULSIVE either.
- Below 5’s – Sexually REPULSIVE (they first have to get to a 5 – bariatric surgery perhaps!!!)
Women’s Attraction to Men having one or more of the above Contextual Vectors of Attraction
- 8-10’s – She will DEFINITELY sleep with him and DEFINITELY marry him.
- 5-7 – GOOD chance of sleeping with him at the moment when genuine sexual attraction has been AROUSED. She MAY marry him.
- If he is below 5 – Sex is out of the question. She MAY marry him, but expect a dead bedroom and/or hamstering to sleep with him.
Rowena said Thedeti is mistaken in assuming “lack of sexual attraction” = “sexually repulsive”.
Rowena disagrees with Thedeti in the 5-7 category because the CONTEXT matters and sexual attraction can be generated. She says women are NOT hamstering when they sleep with a 5-7 man under certain conditions. There is genuine sexual attraction which has been generated by the CONTEXT.
- Σ Frame (Jack): The Influence of Culturally Imposed Sexuality on Women (2021-8-2)
- Σ Frame (Jack): It’s all about her Ego (2021-11-12)
- Σ Frame (Thedeti): The Unsolvable Problem of The Modern Sexual/Relationship Market (2022-2-7)
- Σ Frame (Jack): What Women find Attractive: Fit and Skilled (2022-4-18)