S. recently posted on “girl game,” which, some of you may be surprised to find out, is NOT an oxymoron. Both normal game and girl game are designed to improve the user’s position in the sexual marketplace, but due to the different natures of man and woman, each has different objectives. While guy game is intended to make the man attractive to women, girl game is focused on getting guys to commit in the form of long-term relationships or, Allah forbid, marriage. Unfortunately, as I wrote over at Lesenjournal, women’s dating advice is as equally useless as men’s advice, because it refuses to acknowledge the differences between the sexes.
Let’s take The Rules as an example. This little book, published in 1995, has become the veritable Talmud of man-snaring. It’s sold millions of copies, has had several sequels, been featured on Oprah, and is so popular that its writers were able to form their own Love Systems-esque dating advice firm. But what sort of attitudes does The Rules try to inculcate in women? Judging from the first few, not good ones:
Rule 1: Be a “Creature Unlike Any Other”
Rule 2: Don’t Talk to a Man First (and Don’t Ask Him to Dance)
Rule 3: Don’t Stare at Men or Talk Too Much
Rule 4: Don’t Meet Him Halfway or Go Dutch on a Date
Rule 5: Don’t Call Him & Rarely Return His Calls
Rule 6: Always End Phone Calls First
Rule 7: Don’t Accept a Saturday Night Date after Wednesday
Rule 8: Fill Up Your Time before the Date
Rule 11: Always End the Date First
Rule 12: Stop Dating Him if He Doesn’t Buy You a Romantic Gift for Your Birthday or Valentine’s Day
Rule 13: Don’t See Him More than Once or Twice a Week
Rule 14: No More than Casual Kissing on the First Date
Rule 15: Don’t Rush into Sex and Other Rules for Intimacy
Sexual politics, like all forms of politics, is about gaining the upper hand. These rules are intended to allow a woman to extract as much out of a man as possible while putting in as little as possible, which is fair enough, but they don’t work because they don’t take into account the different criteria by which men and women evaluate prospective mates.
Women ascertain a man’s sexual desirability through his social dominance, and all of the various trials they put men through, such as shit tests, spring from this reality. Game is made possible through this quirk of women’s psyche; a guy who is not naturally dominant can mold himself into a man that the ladies want by altering his behaviors.
Men ascertain a woman’s sexual desirability through her looks. If she makes your penis hard, she’s a worthy conquest. This ensures that women who aren’t wildebeests and/or hippopotamuses will have an endless stream of dudes looking to bring their battering rams crashing through her iron gates of life, but it has a downside; a woman’s options for improving her sexual market value are limited. The reason a 20-year old co-ed can play the coy coquette and a 35-year old cougar has to force herself onto guys is because the former has qualities men desire (youth and beauty) that the latter doesn’t and can never get back. An unattractive woman who prances about like she’s a 10, like The Rules says that ladies should do, isn’t going to suddenly make men think that she is a 10 – they’ll just avoid her in favor of girls who are still on the same plane of reality. Men instinctively know the difference between fool’s gold and the real deal, and no games played by girls can convince them otherwise.
Furthermore, a man’s willingness to put up with shit from a woman is inversely correlated with how good he is with them. Natural-born alphas, the guys who women want to ensnare, will not tolerate the behavior of a “Rules Girl.” Only gameless schmucks will bother with chicks who won’t pay for dates or refuse to do more “than casual kissing on the first date.” The Rules ought to have been subtitled “Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Beta.”
To be fair, The Rules does contain some good advice. Here are the ones that women should follow:
Rule 16: Don’t Tell Him What to Do
Rule 17: Let Him Take the Lead
You’ll be much happier with your man if you let him be a man.
Rule 22: Don’t Live With a Man (or Leave Your Things in His Apartment)
Cohabitation will kill your chances of getting married. When you live together, you effectively take on all of the responsibilities of being a wife with none of the benefits of having a husband.
Rule 23: Don’t Date a Married Man
Very few hitched dudes will abandon their existing families to commit to you, and even if he does, what’s stopping him from doing the same to you when another hot young thing comes along?
Rule 35: Be Easy to Live With
Do I HAVE to explain this one?
The inadequacies of The Rules can be explained with some knowledge about its writers. I couldn’t dig up anything on Sherrie Schneider, but Ellen Fein apparently divorced her husband in 2000 and only remarried last year. A woman looking for dating advice from a divorced chick is like a man looking for game advice from a 40-year old virgin. Here’s a picture of Fein and Schneider to seal the deal:
The offense rests.
Unlike The Rules, I haven’t read He’s Just Not That Into You, but a glance at its table of contents shows that I probably don’t need to to get that it’s an gigantic puddle of stupid:
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Not Asking You Out
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Not Calling You
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Not Dating You
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Not Having Sex with You
File these under “No Shit, Sherlock.”
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Having Sex with Someone Else
Shows what you know about male sexuality. Men aren’t women. When we wander off to bang other broads, we do so because we’re:
a) Looking for sexual variety.
b) You don’t want to fuck anymore.
c) Your weight gain has transformed you into a walrus with tits.
d) b and c.
e) All of the above.
You can avoid B and C by laying off the ho-hos and keeping your legs open. As for A, it’s unavoidable if you’re dating an alpha or a greater beta. Take pride in knowing you’re his number one girl.
He’s Just Not That Into You If He Only Wants to See You When He’s Drunk
If he needs to be smashed in order to put up with you, the problem may be you.
He’s Just Not That Into You If He Doesn’t Want to Marry You
Marriage is an institution that, in its current form, exclusively benefits women. If you want him to pop the question, you better give him a damn good reason – and no, “I’m so awesome” doesn’t count.
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Breaking Up With You
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Disappeared on You
Again, you needed a book to tell you this?
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s Married (and Other Insane Variations of Being Unavailable)
The dick is the ultimate barometer of whether he’s into you. If it’s hard, he wants you; if it isn’t, he doesn’t. Everything else is ballast.
He’s Just Not That Into You If He’s a Selfish Jerk, a Bully, or a Really Big Freak
Explains why “selfish jerks” and “bullies” get all the pussy. And “really big freak?” As opposed to normal or little freaks?
The single best source I’ve found on girl game is the infrequently updated but always interesting LovelySexyBeauty. But then again, LSB reads both Roissy and Roosh and occasionally comments on the former’s blog. I wonder if those two facts are related? Nah…
{ 66 comments… read them below or add one }
Women’s game in 2009 = Delusion-based shaming language = Reinforcing men’s attraction to singleness = Rising spinsterhood
FB,
You might have seen my posts on supposed “Girl Game” over at Roissy’s in recent weeks; I even did a truncated comparison analysis of The Rules to The Game/Mystery Method; no surprise, there really isn’t any comparison.
As you noted above, and I’ve said at Roissy’s the single biggest “weapon” a Woman has in the sexual marketplace is something that, even today in our times, is largely out of her control-her family history wrt beauty. Bottomline, if she’s inherited good genes, she’s in like Flynn; if not, she’s basically SOL. And like you said, a more Plain Jane type can fuget ’bout it if she thinks doing “The Rules” type stuff is gonna make a difference. All she’ll do is run the guy off, if he’s a Man of any consequence.
As for Lovely Sexy Beauty, I find her to be highly impractical, as one of her most recent posts suggests. She’s moving into her latter 20s and has yet to find “Mr. Right”, and the main reason for this is due directly to “Rules” type thinking. As you noted about one of its authors, consider the source.
Finally, ANY book along these lines that is actually endorsed by Oprah, should really tell you all you know. She’s never been married, never had any relationship w/a Man that we know about other than Steadman, which is largely believed to be staged. Some speculate that Oprah’s a lesbian; I really don’t know, but in any event, a rational person would think that the last Woman giving ANY relationship advice would be her.
There is no such thing as “Girl Game”, when one really thinks about it. Simply put, if the gal’s born Hot, she’s got a lot more wiggle room to make a Man jump through hoops-she can shit test more effectively and far more extensively. If, on the other hand, if the gal’s born a Plain Jane, she’d do well to have a very pleasing personality and put out-w/a big ole smile.
The.
End.
Holla back
The Obsidian
‘The Rules’ is a bit of an outlier in terms of dating advice marketed at women. It has many shortcoming s as you clearly pointed out. On the other hand, the strengths you pointed out are absent from much of the other dreck on the shelves about feeling good about yourself and other nonsense being attractive.
Ugly women didn’t used to have problems getting married until recently. If I remember correctly the Rules Specifically state that you need to choose from men who are actually attracted to whatever it is she actually looks like and not chose down men out of her league.
Would men prefer the prettiest possible mate? Sure. But come on, you’ve seen ugly women get love at some point I’m sure.
i do agree that women are missing the honesty of the differences (inequalties) between the genders and how that affects the way they act and the way men act. We would greatly benefit form this. Maybe if you wrote such a book, it would be a best seller? Maybe not as some like to deceive themselves that they “aren’t like that” and wouldn’t listen. But other would harken to it..
@Obsidian –
Steadman is a beard. Oprah may not be gay, but she’s not straight either. Her main goal, I think, is to peddle feminist ideas to mainstream women through her program, website and magazine. The interesting thing is that millions of women are being ringled by this woman, who clearly is not a mainstream straight woman herself. It’s the world turned on its ear, really.
I think that The Rules work for men in a certain woman’s league, more or less. That is, if they are sufficiently attractive to the men they are trying to attract, the rules can work for stringing along a guy — essentially that is the core of the rules: to encourage women to be disciplined enough to string a guy along. As you say, that only works if the guy is sufficiently attracted –> if not, he will not put up with being strung along at all. The rules really presuppose some level of attraction in order to be effective.
Guy game is very different because it *creates* attraction itself, rather than manipulating behavior once attraction has been established, which is what The Rules do.
I realize this is off-topic, but I’d just like to post it as an occasional reminder …
One thing I’d like the Game blogs to periodically do is remind their readers of the Men who “did everything right” according to societal programming and yet, they still got totally screwed over. Until the system that screws these men over collapses, this makes it clear that Game, No Marriage, No Children, No Cohabitation, is the way to go.
For example, read POST #2 by njslave here:
http://dontmarry.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/best-of-njslave/
Somebody should make a blog comprised of these horrendous marriage/divorce stories.
I could never put myself through the pain of reading those books. Anyhow, since you’re reading books about how women should treat men, you should check out the MANual by Steve Santagati. It’s written by an ex-badboy for women. Has some pretty good game that naturals use to get women into bed.
“You can avoid B and C by laying off the ho-hos and keeping your legs open.”
LMFAO!!!
I agree though that “Girl Game” is more about enhancing her looks, than modifying her behavior.
In short, a guy is going to want the hottest chick, not the one hardest to get.
Of course, that is also in fantasy. In reality, many guys will also get “sour grapes” over their inability to ever actually land hot chicks and intentionally chase easier , less attractive prey. Chubby chasers and rice kings are 2 that come to mind first.
Yeah njslave’s stuff is required reading for all men.
All women *are* like that, given the incentives that the system provides them. Cash out on starter husbands in the 40s as the kids are mid teens or older, and have your ex-husband support you for the rest of your life. Who wouldn’t follow that game plan, given the opportunity?
The one thing I will say about njslave is that he wasn’t critical of his wife enough. He says his wife wasn’t that bad — I really disagree. She rooked him silly, ended up with a mortgage free house, lifetime alimony, tons of CS, 900k in property settlement. Just insane. That woman planned things very, very well. Nothing njslave could do, of course, but she was far from not that bad.
All those “He’s Just Not That Into You”s are pretty self-evident, like you said. The only girl game tenet that was a bit surprising was, “Cohabitation will kill your chances of getting married.”
I lived with one of my boyfriends; I always thought it made him desire me more. I love getting the opportunity to display my domestic prowess, and I’d clean up the apartment every day after he left for work (I’m a student). He always seemed appreciative and marginally impressed by all those little things I always made a continuous effort to do. Including not letting the sex taper off, but increase, if such a thing was possible.
I’ve never played hard to get in my life. If you play mind games with someone, expect to be played in return. I don’t have the necessary manipulative skills to get away with it, and I’m bad at being deceptive (masking my overwhelming attraction to someone). One guy told me it wasall too apparent in my “starry eyed” glances. I’m not “easy” either, mind you, but like all things in life, isn’t it about finding a healthy balance?
Quite frankly, it’s impossible to be with any man who’s a man by playing hard to get. Most men are fairly aloof, especially when you start dating, so not returning calls and pulling shit like that will get you guys nowhere!
“I’ve never played hard to get in my life.”
From this, I would assume that you are likely still in your 20s and attractive. I think “The Rules” are for women who are not (older and/or less attractive) – although such tactics could be actually compounding the problem for such women, not compensating for it…
Personally, I’m happiest with an attractive woman who openly desires me and treats me well.
TJust like how most mail-order brides are. The free market reveals want men really prefer, given the choice. Women who are young, attractive and a pleaser rather than a conniving, self-centered bitch.
Whereas if men really preferred game-playing cougars, then that’s what most mail-order brides would be…
Out of curiosity, why would playing hard to get work if you’re older and unattractive? (I am only 20, as for being attractive, well, I don’t know where I objectively fall on the scale, so I won’t tread that territory.) If you’re older and unattractive, shouldn’t you be working harder to make your attraction transparent, albeit not desperate?
It’s funny, in “Girl Game” the first rule is “Be a Creature unlike any other”. What a lofty goal, huh? This dovetails exactly into PC, leftist, feminist wishful thinking that we can be whatever we want to be. It’s just not true.
“Guy Game” is based in reality, not fantasy. Guy Game teaches us to be like everyone else, or at least everyone else that is getting pussy.
Here are the only rules a woman needs to know:
Don’t fuck him on the first date or meeting.
Don’t nag.
Don’t emasculate him.
Don’t neglect the balls.
“Her main goal, I think, is to peddle feminist ideas to mainstream women through her program, website and magazine.”
ANd all that pseudoscience garbage like The Secret, healing crystals, vaccines cause autism, etc…
“Out of curiosity, why would playing hard to get work if you’re older and unattractive?
If you’re older and unattractive, shouldn’t you be working harder to make your attraction transparent”
Exactly, hence I said:
“such tactics could be actually compounding the problem for such women, not compensating for it”
BTW, I can tell you’re attractive from your lack of need to manipulate men, while still attaining good results. Yet another reason men prefer young, attractive women – who don’t feel they need to play artificial games. Secondly, if you were unattractive, you would have a blank avy. Women don’t flaunt what they don’t got. Whereas in your case, you at least have a nice pair of DSL.. :)
The converse of you (blank avy, bad attitude) here would be sparky. She is obviously old and unattractive. Probably over 40 and 160 lbs. For women, above an optimum range (perhaps something around 130-150?), the higher your age + weight total is, the lower your mate value.
This merely shows why men invent 99.99% of all new innovations, and women merely follow along whatever leader they are swayed by.
Game is sophisticated, and the men who teach Game know far more about women than women could ever articulate about themselves.
Women know so little about the male psyche, and they don’t know what they don’t know. Nor are they even curious about it.
Women are very good at manipulating Betas, yes. But once a man studies just the basic parts of Game, and can sidestep this, most women have to further power over him.
Whoops. Sorry. I misread your comment.
I wouldn’t mind sparky so much if she had some tact, or flair. She simply echoes the same vapid arguments without substantiating it, and therefore makes for a bad troll. She also doesn’t provide anecdotal evidence because she refuses to talk about ANY sort of personal details, even if they are anonymous. You can infer that she’s had a bad experience in general from this…
If a book as amateurish as ‘He is just not that into you’ can sell so many copies, then there is a huge market for a man with Game to peddle something even more sophisticated than the Rules (knowing full well that it will not work on men) and sell millions of copies to women who are so easily duped.
This is an opportunity.
S.,
The best thing an older Woman-and by that I’m setting the bar at 40-can do is BE ACCESSIBLE. Doing Rules-type stuff is a guarantee that she’ll either be alone outright, or, land Clark Kent, instead of Superman.
As Chuck points out, we live in a very warped time insofar as commonsense truths are concerned. Women are not all that different, beyond some cultural quirks. But essentially, they’re all the same, and want the same things. Otherwise, romance novels wouldn’t be a multi-billion dollar a year business, worldwide.
I also agree w/Chuck’s advice to the ladies: don’t be a nag, don’t cut the Man down (read about Boaz & Ruth in the Bible about this, for those so inclined), don’t put out immediately on the first date (try the Three Date Rule) and finally, absolutely do not forget to lovingly lick the balls while giving him some mean Vanessa Del Rio/Belladonna type head.
Its really that simple. Women, by dint of Nature, will either have, or not have, to varying degrees, all they need to attract potential mates, imprinted in their DNA and which will be made manifest in time. All they need to do is learn how to make the best choice they can before the clock runs out and not to get too much mileage downstairs.
The Obsidian
Well, she’s got too many Fs on her report card:
40s
Fat
Fugly
Feminist
Frustrated
Fvcked
But instead of seeking self-improvement and appealing to men, she compounds the problem with her “Rules” behavior of arguing with men using outdated and phony feminist propaganda. I guess any attention online is better than no attention in real life.
Thing is, I’ve been in the men’s movement for a while now, and she absolutely fits the textbook profile of the frustrated, feminist cougar who wasted her youth due to feminist brainwashing…and now has little options left but to anonymously troll men’s boards for a target-rich environment of men (regardless of if they are all disgusted by her). There is usually one of these in every board, who just sucks the energy out like a whirlpool..
BTW, I am not normally so judgmental of women’s appearances, as far as human worth (but perhaps mate worth). However, her “frustrated feminist” attitude compounds her problems and is probably driven by those precise factors – and so are therefore relevant in dissecting her behavior here.
Wouldn’t it be an ironic turn of events if she turned out to be a hot, twentysomething, surrounded by alphas everywhere she goes?
I don’t understand why more women support the men’s rights movement. When any society, any culture, at any point in time, caters unfavourably and too liberally to any one group, while ignoring the deeply embedded context of biological human proclivites, they are doomed to fail. (See Beta Revolution or A.J. Travis’ blog.) I would rather amend the problems we have now, in terms of imbalance in sexual & gender dynamic, than have to face an extreme restructuring of values.
Feminism is hurting the average woman, by brewing long-standing resentments on behalf of men everywhere.
“Wouldn’t it be an ironic turn of events if she turned out to be a hot, twentysomething, surrounded by alphas everywhere she goes?”
Lol, well it is actually conceivable that she USED to be a hot 20-something…20 years ago. This could explain her stubborn, supremacist attitude over men. Old attitudes die hard.
Unfortunately for her, overestimating her own value could be cutting her off from more realistic opportunities – resulting in her trolling male-dominated boards in search of maintaining the “sexual leverage” its privileges that she once enjoyed many moons ago in real life. But no longer does.
“I don’t understand why more women (don’t) support the men’s rights movement.
Feminism is hurting the average woman, by brewing long-standing resentments on behalf of men everywhere.”
2nd-wave feminism was a way for ugly, bitter girls to level the playing field against pretty girls by attempting to negate the “looks bias” and use of sex as currency. No lie – look up al lthe leading feminists – like Andrea Dworkin. They were mostly all ugly, bookish and Jewish. So, it was always intended to empower ugly girls at the expense of pretty (or at least average-looking) women.
Pretty women have always had it good. Way better than your average man, in fact.
Fact of the matter is, sex and beauty are some of the most potent weapons in any woman’s arsenal, and choosing not to use them in the jungle of life is like choosing to play 18 holes of golf against Tiger Woods blindfolded.
This is why girls (who can) have now all returned to their natural instincts of dolling themselves up and accentuating their sex appeal. For their own personal power and because as competitive as life is now, who can afford not to maximize ALL your assets? Whether they are looks, brains or talent?
Meanwhile, ugly feminists will sit in the corner with frowny faces guilt-tripping men and women who both naturally enjoy looking their best and being in each others’ company.
Seriously, if you’ve ever travelled abroad to say, certain countries in Europe – it is SO refreshing to meet people there who are not embroiled in a gender war with chips on their shoulders – but love to mingle and enjoy each other as men and women. Feminists really laid a LOT of baggage on men and women in this country that has vastly distorted our natural relationship to each other and our overall life happiness quotient.
I think it will take progressive men and women like us to reset a more natural, functional and realistic communion between the genders.
Sofia –
That depends on who is winning and losing at any one time.
I suspect that women who feel they are winning have no incentive to change things.
And feminism teaches them that this is justified because they were “oppressed” by men for millenia. So this is payback. That attitude doesn’t exactly generate any real empathy for the broader impact of feminism on children and men. The idea is ” okay, assuming there are some problems there, we will get around to them when we are done fixing everything we want about women, so call us in say 200 years.”
By the way Ferdinand is there any way to disable this cascading posting? It is very extreme and hard to read and write as well. I cannot see half of what I am writing here because the etxt box is only half visible due to the cascading.
Well, what’s funny is how feminism has finally backfired on itself in many ways.
1) The “women’s lib” sexual revolution has now led to the pornification of America. Women not only have the choice now, but are even essentially forced to “out-slut” each other.
Hence you have many celebs “leaking” home sex vids or poledancing at 16 like Miley Cyrus now.
And who is complaining about this the most? Feminists. LMAO!
2) The harsh mass rejection of beta males directly led to the innovation of PUA Game. Who whines about Game now? Feminists. LMFAO!
You see bitches, every ecosystem naturally seeks homeostasis. So, for every jack move, there will eventually be a counterstrike. And feminists are basically screwing the next generations of girls by inducing a huge BETA BACKLASH.
MRAs and PUAs are NOT going away. We were a fringe minority at first, but are growing like wildfire and will soon become the NORM. How you like DEM apples, feminuts???
The trouble is that feminism has resulted in women using their natural advantages (as you say, they have reverted to that), while also having gains in areas where men predominated. In essence it was a huge, unequal, power grab. The equalizer, of course, is Game. With Game, men use the equivalent of looks for women. And Game is not just about being attractive to women — it helps all areas of life.
Apologize for spelling errors, I can see only one-half of the text box.
Hello. Just a comment from a fat fugly chick that ended up happily married without needing self-help books…
Why is it that my fellow women can’t seem to grasp the most basic thing that is necessary for a sucessful relationship?
Compatability!!!!!!
Why should anyone, man or woman, waste any time chasing anyone that isn’t compatable with them? I’m about as attractive as the ass-end of a baboon and yet I just celebrated 3 years of marriage to a wonderful handsome, fit, strong, masculine man who loves me. He actually loves me ~ even though “pretty” is not a word that anyone would ever use to describe me.
We were married when I was 31 and he was 44 and the reason we ended up at the altar is because both of us put our hormones and our emotions aside and talked with one another about our goals and desires for marriage. Only when we saw that we had the same hopes and desires did we bother moving forward with our relationship.
I wanted to be a housewife, to dote on my man, and give him babies.
He wanted a wife and children and he hoped and dreamed that he’d find a woman that would stay home with those children and care for them herself.
Fugly can be tolerated to an amazing extent when your man is given hot, home cooked meals, clean laundry, willing sex, a cheerful, joyful mood, and RESPECT.
Hmmm. I wonder how many of these chick self-help dating books touches on any of that?? God forbid if a woman gives something of herself in a relationship instead of demanding everything be handed to HER on a silver platter!
Viola! So there you have it. One ugly fat chick happily hitched to a wonderful man with a 9 month old daughter upstairs howling in her crib (she hates bedtime) and twins due in January.
Neither of us need some dumb book ~ we used good old common sense. Duh!
These books are so totally stupid. Have we women really become that stupid?? I guess my question is answered just by looking through the table of contents list for “He’s just not that in to you.”
In the name of all that is sacred…
Anyway, I know many of you are like, “Fat chicks are disgusting and I’d not touch them with a ten foot pole” but even us fat fugly chicks can make a man happy ~ if both ourselves and the man are on the same sheet of music and we women know that it is perfectly ok to treat your man like gold.
Cheers!
Feminism was never about seeking equality with men…it was about ugly girls seeking supremacy over men (and pretty girls)…by any means necessary (like fradulent “studies” and stats, revisionist history and unfair policies).
Nature is a very delicate balance. Even the slightest adjustment can often result in a “butterfly effect” that totally throws it out of whack. I mean, all it takes is a hair more on one side of a scale to totally unbalance it.
Anyways, same shyt happened in the fall of Rome…womyn were given all the power and that was their deathknell.
Thanks for resetting it, Ferdinand. Just a lot easier to to work with, given the traffic you’re seeing. Thanks.
Yep. J.D. Unwin, “Sex and Power”: http://menforjustice.net/library/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=613&Itemid=37
“I wanted to be a housewife, to dote on my man, and give him babies.
He wanted a wife and children and he hoped and dreamed that he’d find a woman that would stay home with those children and care for them herself.
Fugly can be tolerated to an amazing extent when your man is given hot, home cooked meals, clean laundry, willing sex, a cheerful, joyful mood, and RESPECT.
Anyway, I know many of you are like, “Fat chicks are disgusting and I’d not touch them with a ten foot pole†but even us fat fugly chicks can make a man happy ~ if both ourselves and the man are on the same sheet of music and we women know that it is perfectly ok to treat your man like gold.”
I wholeheartedly agree. You admitted to yourself that you’re not the hottest thing on the block, and compensated with better behavior and treatment. Which worked. You tooka negative, added a positive and got back to even.
As opposed to adding 2 negatives and going even further in the hole!
Maybe YOU should write a book! Please, do pass your realistic wisdom on to other women out there!
This is why girls (who can) have now all returned to their natural instincts of dolling themselves up and accentuating their sex appeal. For their own personal power and because as competitive as life is now, who can afford not to maximize ALL your assets? Whether they are looks, brains or talent?
So, would you now say we are in a post-feminist era?
On the one hand, maybe because I am young, I never really witnessed a strong chanting cry of “We are womyn!” from my peers. I have however, been exposed to a whole heap of it on T.V. – from the archetypal nagging, controlling sitcom wife to the sexually liberated Sex and the City girls – in magazines (think Cosmo), and academia. Especially academia.
Effectively, I think women today are largely post-feminist, and the behaviors are a settled, taken for grantedness of our preceding generation. Feminist philosophy however, still wields a huge influence in the Arts & Humanities of most major universities. So what I tend to notice, is women coming in fairly “unaware”, with natural behaviors, and leaving “converts”.
I also think the Andrea Dworkin brand realizes nothing has fundamentally changed concerning the age old rules of attraction. The only thing that has transformed is the way we treat it superficially and couch it in politically correct terms.
Hey, who knew Andrea Dworkin was HOT:
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/04/15/andrea_dworkin_narrowweb__200x266.jpg
I think the Rules have some utility for women. I find myself much more attracted to women who are using the Rules on me, or similar common wisdoms that grandmothers used to teach their lineages. I can usually tell when a woman is following passed-down rules, and it among other things proves her self-discipline and thoughtfulness. If a woman throws herself at me I don’t respect her and proceed accordingly.
The key to its success, as just me mentions, is that the woman has to be realistic about who she can get. The range of improvement is much more restricted for practitioners of girl game than it is with male game.
The sad thing is that Feminism has deluded women into thinking that if they, the women, behave like ADULTS in a relationship then they are somehow selling themselves out and becoming doormats.
So instead women are taught to behave like demanding, self-centered b*tches and then they wonder why they can’t find “Mr. Right”? (BTW, “Mr. Right” says it all, doesn’t it? As in, the *man* has to be the one to be perfect but the woman doesn’t have to be?)
I don’t feel as if I’ve been cheated because I woke up and smelled the coffee and realized that I needed to GIVE in a relationship and not just take, take, take. Ugly, fat, or not, a woman needs to understand that she can’t treat her lover/husband like trash and expect good returns.
Every time I cook a roast or make myself available in bed or change those dirty diapers and clean the laundry I’m making an *investment* in my marriage that reaps fantastic profits! My husband treats me like a Queen! But he would never do that if I didn’t treat him like a King.
Feminism has caused women to lose sight of the fact that equality TAKES WORK. You can’t have an “equal relationship” if you’re demanding special treatment while giving nothing in return but your haughty liberated bull****.
Feminism is poison. It’s a cancer that needs to be removed from our society. I am college educated, world-travelled, and thus not some ignorant lady that just left a convent. And yet I’m happier being a housewife and popping out babies while my husband takes care of the finances and “wears the pants in the family” then I was *ever* happy as a “liberated” woman persuing grand dreams of a hot career.
It’s all lies and that is why women are flocking to these stupid self-help dating books. They lost the plot when the first cry for a woman’s right to vote echoed down the streets.
Feminism needs to go and I for one am doing what I can to bring sanity back to our society ~ treating my man with respect and having children. That’s key, really ~ because for the most part Feminists are too “liberated” to breed and so they’re starting to die off from sheer lack of numbers.
If I were to write a book it would have one page and that page would say: “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.”
Feminists, with all of your abortion and birth control and bitter, childless selfishness coupled with perpetual victimhood ~ you can put that in your pipe and smoke it! While you’re busy being “liberated” and spitting in the faces of men we are busy breeding like rabits and raising our children in normal homes where Daddy Is A Man And Not Ashamed Of Being So. Our kids will grow up to be full of joy! And yours? Well, if they exist they’ll certainly be out numbered. Your vile, poisionous ideology is about to expire.
Byrdeye,
I think there are now two possible outcomes of the feminist movement, thanks to the separate schools.
1) Is the sluttification disguised as sexual liberation you mentioned.
2) Is total prudery since according to radical feminists, all sex is considered mysogynistic.
This is why you can get women who are extremely sexual, yet who lack any sort of sensuality. It’s all way too clinical and hyper-intellectualized. Feminist philosophy is schizophrenic at its core.
Women like you are the hope. You understand well what works and what does not, and it is not “oppression” or “Patriarchy” — it is complementarity.
You should write a book of more than one page. When you are done with the little ones being so little, of course.
The voices of women like you need to become more publicized.
Nice blog, by the way. I was born and raised Catholic and was received into the Eastern Orthodox Church 9 years ago — but I still have very close connections to the RCC.
So, would you now say we are in a post-feminist era?
Absolutely not!
However, the founders of the 2nd guard have essentially (and somewhat literally) died off. And therefore power and influence has shifted to their disciples – who are often more mainstream and less physically repulsive. And thus more naturally tolerant of beautification, heterosexuality and natural instincts (for their own personal benefit).
Naomi Wolfe even recently made a comment about how her daughter watches America’s Top Model, and is ok with that. Evo-psych instinct is like gravity, it will keep pulling you back. Which is why these unnatural fads can never last long on their own.
Now, even though the 2nd-wave leaders have died off, their ideology and legacy still do remain firmly entrenched in government and academia. So, by no means are we “post-feminist.” In fact, the stuff has become so ingrained that it’s less overt but more ominpresent now – like water to a fish.
However, the countermove is already building and swelling, so the pendulum has probably reached its apex and is slowly starting to switch directions back now. 2nd-wave feminism, like Communism, has proven to be a quite seductive, yet highly-destructive failure.
Suddenly, 2-parent married homes with a mother caretaking kids don’t seem so bad anymore…compared to scores of welfare-funded single moms, feral daddyless kids and nice beta males shunned and footing the bill.
I used to write so much more on my blog but I found myself repeating myself over and over again ~ basically beating a dead horse. So I’m taking a break.
I do want to write a book but not a self-help book. Just a sort-of memoirs (sp??) done anonymously (sp again?) that shows that we women are much happier outside of Feminism!
Goodnight for now. :-)
Yes, we ARE in a post-feminist era, as we are now in a misandrist era. Misandrists may still call themselves ‘feminists’ but the goals that the feminists of the 150s had have been achieved or exceeded.
Well, that contradiction was there from the start.
1) Men were “evil” for “exploiting and objectifying women,” and reducing them to sex objects.
2) Men were “evil” for “suppressing women’s sexuality,” and not allowing them to be sex objects.
Obviously then, these were somewhat red herrings for some underlying motives.
1) Again, fugs trying to negate looks as part of a woman’s sexual and social value out of catty, competitive self-interest…Marica, Marcia, Marcia!
2) This was an attempt to destroy the nuclear family and disempower men by eliminating their roles as husband and father. Committed monogamy (marriage) was portrayed as “oppressive,” instead of stable and protective.
Of course, the irony is that without “patriarchal sexual oppression” and premarital sex “bans” anymore, women are sexually objectifying (pornifying) themselves more than ever.
And both men and women are shying away from marriage (what’s the point?). All of which feminists now rail against, even though they’re the ones who made the change!
The deepest sadness though is on a personal level for those naive individuals who followed feminism in good faith their whole lives – and ended up old and lonely – like George “no more Mr. Nice Guy” Sodini or sparky. It is truly incredibly heartbreaking to have wasted your best years, never to be gotten back, due to miseducation from someone else’s bitter, self-serving agenda…and to be left with nothing but loneliness and regret at the end when it’s too late to change anything…
This is why we need to fix the situation. There’s a lot of good men and women pointlessly and cruelly having their lives ruined by these virulent memes.
*Standing O!*
Seriously, you really should write a book to help counteract all the absolute self-destructive nonsense out there in “women’s lit.” Please. :D
And good thing you came to your senses before it was too late! As opposed to frustrated, lonely trolls with no husband/father and kids – just angry feminist ideology and lost causes to keep them warm at night. Sparky, you listening? Start taking notes here!
Brydeye,
All true. The solution is Game. The enemies of Game are feminists and social cons.
This is why you can get women who are extremely sexual, yet who lack any sort of sensuality. It’s all way too clinical and hyper-intellectualized. Feminist philosophy is schizophrenic at its core.
That’s because feminism is anti-feminine and pro-masculine at its core. The radical notion that humans are inherently androgynous and all apparent gender differences are socially-conditioned. And in practice, women should act like stereotypical frat boys. So, trade feminine sensuality for male sexuality.
Ergo, a generation of “Girls Gone Wild” who boast more sexual partners than men, but are frustrated inside because they are essentially drag kings completely out-of-touch with their own femininity.
Obsidian:
“As for Lovely Sexy Beauty, I find her to be highly impractical, as one of her most recent posts suggests. She’s moving into her latter 20s and has yet to find “Mr. Rightâ€, and the main reason for this is due directly to “Rules†type thinking. As you noted about one of its authors, consider the source.”
She ain’t perfect, but she’s better than the rest. Hopefully she’ll get it in her head that “The Rules” don’t work before she hits spinster age. By reading Roissy et al, she’s on the right track.
“There is no such thing as “Girl Gameâ€, when one really thinks about it.”
This is where I disagree. Girl game does exist, but a lot of it is head-smackingly obvious (see Chuck’s comments) and can’t help women who lack the crucial components of youth and beauty. Girl game should be focused on helping girls make the most of their assets when they have them.
Here is an “AWESOME post Byrdeye. Great explanation of why feminism is torn between the two extremes of sexual liberation and objectification.”
Oops, fixed link: AWESOME post
Somewhat on topic with your comment where you mention the old, tired claim of men being evil for objectifying women:
I have to speak up and say that it’s **women** that have always put the most pressure on other women to look a certain way ~ clothing fashions, hair styles, etc.
I’m not saying that men never put pressure on women to be pretty and fit (and thus healthy and fertile because a sloppy out-of-shape woman looks ill) but it is, and always has been, **women** that take these natural things even further, hype them up to almost impossible levels, and then torment and harass any other woman that doesn’t fit their unnatural beauty and fashion standards.
It’s only NATURAL that a man will desire a woman that looks healthy enough to be **fertile** and to have the energy to raise her own children. EVEN if that man doesn’t want a relationship he’ll instinctively be drawn to healthy, fertile-looking women. What the heck is wrong with that??? Nothing. It’s normal. And women should revel in that and realize their true calling in life which is, eventually (but not too late…) MOTHERHOOD.
FEMINISTS hate fertility… they loathe the idea of barefoot-and-pregnant (which my husband says is the most beautiful thing!) and so they want women to look like emaciated prostitutes instead…
I’m the opposite. Fat (not WHALE size but still fat compared with the crazy acceptable emaciation standards) and barefoot-and-pregnant. Notice the happiness in my life?? **Grin**
Being an “ugly” woman myself, I know exactly what it’s like to be on the receiving end of The Matriarchy’s collective scorn. Second class citizen anyone?
I’ll freely admit it though that the depression of being a second-class-citizen did get to me and I let myself feel inferior.
Also, at the time that I was in college I wasn’t able to find any MODEST DECENT clothing that didn’t make me look like a ho and so I went about in baggy men’s jeans and baggy t-shirts. But then I discovered the internet… and now I have a lovely, tidy, very feminine wardrobe. (Which does not meet the demands of any fashion standards so I’m still a second-class-citizen.)
BTW, It doesn’t take much to be “fat” in the eyes of other women ~ anyone over a size zero is pushing it… but I refused (and still refuse) to starve-diet myself so that I’d up my chances of remaining as fertile as possible.
Women sexually objectify **themselves** and then pressure every other woman around them to do the same: Diet! Become as thin as a rail with big boobs and then show off your body with slutty clothing!!!!
This isn’t “liberation” ~ this is self-imposed sexual objectification. And then for some reason men get told off for having a look at those exposed breasts and thights AND (this is the punch line…) after seeing “hot” and “sexy” everywhere under the sun for 40+ years who can deny that men are getting bored with it? It’s old hat. Boobs and thighs have become as common as hair and shoes.
Ladies, if you want to turn heads and attract a man, don’t let The Matriarchy sexually objectify you (and then blame it on men…) Instead, dress in elegant, feminine clothing that leaves a bit of mystery ~ and work on your character and additude. After all, you catch more bees with honey then vinegar!!
(** I’m a farmer’s wife. It is a known, scientific fact that the fat cows and sheep (not morbidly fat, but fat just the same) have better fertility, much better stamina during labor and delivery, as well as much better ability to raise and nurse their offspring after birth. Women do themselves a serious diservice when they starve themselves into unnatural thinness. Is this maybe why men are instinctively not so marriage-minded with super-thin women? I don’t know. It’s worth thinking about though… I’m not advocating women become beached whales but would plumper women (vs. starved skeletons) be more attractive as marriage material?)
Byrdeye:
You wrote, “Seriously, you really should write a book to help counteract all the absolute self-destructive nonsense out there in “women’s lit.†Please. :D
And good thing you came to your senses before it was too late! As opposed to frustrated, lonely trolls with no husband/father and kids – just angry feminist ideology and lost causes to keep them warm at night”
What “liberated” women won’t, and don’t, want to hear is that THEY have to come to THEIR senses and get a freakin’ grip on reality. Instead, we women have been brainwashed since little-girlhood into blaming **all** of OUR problems on “someone else” ~ including men.
So it’s always the MENS’ fault that we are suffering anything, or unhappy, or not making it as far in life as we think we are **entitled** to do, or… still being single and/or childless.
I divide women into two classes: Feminists and Non-Feminists. There are a surprising number of NF’s and the ranks are growing and growing but many of us are found in Christian circles, which means we’re not at the bars or clubs or other traditional places for modern matchmaking.
The non-religious NF’s are kept invisible because they are also a huge threat to the Feminists and their dying, sick ideology.
I’ve read some great NF books:
“What Our Mothers Didn’t Tell Us.”
“Girls Gone Mild”
“Return To Modesty”
“Women Who Make The World Worse”
and a book written by a couple with 18 children:
“The Duggars: 20 and Counting!”
There’s already some great books out there but you won’t hear about them in any book reviews. You have to search them out yourself.
I was going to start working on a book kind of like the Duggars’ book ~ discussing my growing up with Feminism being forced down my throat via public school and the media, me going off into adulthood well-programmed with the “perpetual victim” chip on my shoulder and the brainwashing of college-and-career-while-delaying-children etc etc, then me waking up, snapping out of it all, and how I was able to find a wonderful man and end up HAPPILY barefoot and pregnant on a farm as far from the Feminist ideology as one can get these days short of being Amish!
I never chose Feminism. It was forced on me. I want to really point that out in my book ~ that girls aren’t given choices. We are not told that yeah, sure, we can have a career but it’s also just as wonderful to stay home and have kids (and possibly do college-and-career later when they are grown.)
No, we’re told to jack ourselves up on b/c, stuff our purses with condoms, go sleep around like ho’s, hate men, persue college-and-career, hate men, delay having kids, hate men… Choice? What choice? Feminism = forcibly brainwashing children because the Feminists know that no one will be Feminist otherwise becuase it’s such a stupid, abnormal ideology!
(Thank God I didn’t sleep around. At least I don’t have **that** scar on my soul. )
FEMINISTS hate fertility… they loathe the idea of barefoot-and-pregnant (which my husband says is the most beautiful thing!) and so they want women to look like emaciated prostitutes instead…
Agreed. A woman pregnant with your baby is 1000X sexier than some nasty feminist-correct Amy Winehouse skank. *barf!*
HAPPILY barefoot and pregnant
GREAT title for a book, Michelle! And this message needs to be spread to non-Christians too! Moreso, if anything!
“HAPPILY barefoot and pregnant
GREAT title for a book, Michelle! And this message needs to be spread to non-Christians too! Moreso, if anything!”
………………………….
Actually, non-Christians like Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and others have less divorce and more babies than Christians.
It’s Western Christian “culture” (and I use that term loosely) that is the f*cked up one.
“It’s worth thinking about though… I’m not advocating women become beached whales but would plumper women (vs. starved skeletons) be more attractive as marriage material?)”
YES.
I’ve never understood white American mens’ preference for “thin”. Skinny is not healthy.
Most other men in the world, with the exception of Far East Asians, like their women with a “little meat on their bones”.
can any American enlighten me please. What happens if a divorced husband like njslave just says : “darling, I am taking a year off to travel the world”
What happens then? His income falls to zero for 12 months while he travels the world. if he asks his lawyer to formally warn the judge and the harpy-wife that he won´t get any income for 12 months, what could be done against him?
“Here’s a picture of Fein and Schneider to seal the deal”
Those women are ugly. However, that’s to be expected because Jews are almost always ugly.
White American men don’t exactly prefer thin, either. Although thin is > than fat.
By the same token, Black men don’t really prefer fat women either, but sometimes will settle for fat if she’s light-skinned or white. Since they see white as superior.
But ideally, most men of any race prefer women you see in porno mags or strip clubs. Not too skinny, and certainly not fat. But a happy ideal medium with good hourglass proportions signifying high fertility & health.
DR. DEUM: Well, she’s got too many Fs on her report card:
40s
Fat
Fugly
Feminist
Frustrated
Fvcked
ME: You really think the women featured in this photo are FAT?!?!?!
You’ve got to be kidding me.
I’m not seeing any fat, anywhere. You’ve either been brainwashed or you prefer women with more testosterone than estrogen.
(second posting, this one in correct place, sorry)
No, I was referring to the feminist poster “sparky” here, not the 2 authors of the book pictured.
Ha! The Rules explains a lot of what I’ve observed in Manhattan.
These women are horrible. They don’t return calls, habitually show up 20 minutes late for dates, always end the date first, and have had too much casual sex. They’re crass and unladylike. A woman who behaves herself and treats both men and herself with respect is going to be placing herself in a much-desired niche. If she’s cute, she’ll have a great guy within 6 months.
Or a massive beta walk out. Don’t think that is not happening. More and more men are realizing what a raw deal marriage is, and that it’s a means for women and the state to strip a man of his freedom, children and assets. In other words, marriage has been turned into state sanctioned slavery. Beta males are not stupid, and as one I get a lot of schadenfreude from alpha males thinking with their peckers and paying the price for it. We see what happens to men at the hands of vengeful, crazy, evil and vindictive women with the full participation and blessing of the feminist poisoned state. We know how women also get men to kill or otherwise harm other men for them. Men are rightfully angry at how they’re being oppressed by both women and the state, and there is no way they will get their grievance redressed as long as feminists exert political power. That is why there is a marriage strike. That is why men are refusing to follow the roles they were expected to in previous generations. It’s why men form gangs and join political or religious extremist movements. What this means for women in the future are legions of men suspicious, hostile and contemptuous towards them. Men will also become much more rebellious and violent towards women and society as a whole, meaning women’s lives will be fraught with danger. It means women will not be able to count on a man to raise her children and protect them and her from harm. It will certainly lead to men regarding women as property or “booty.” You women living today should be scared for your children and grandchildren, because the world that is coming will not be a place for either boys or girls to grow up and become happy, successful men and women.
I think a good book for married or single women is the book by Dr. Laura – The Proper Care & Feeding of Husbands.
10 things you can take away from the book:
Realize Men Need Women
Don’t Favour Children Over Husband.
Realize Men and Women Are Different
Not Every Thought and Feeling Needs to be Said
Men Are Not Mind-Readers
Keep Yourself Attractive
Don’t Neglect Your Man
Don’t Refuse Sex (and Be Good at It)
Women Should Appreciate Men’s Masculinity
Realize You Can’t Have It All (directed at feminists)
Oh my goodness! I didn’t realize I was mentioned here at all until I noticed a link from LILGRL’s football post on GirlGame… started reading around…
It’s really flattering to even be mentioned! Eeeks wowza :-) I am a very, very confused girl but I am trying my best to figure it out all out. And do the right thing. Thanks for the encouragement, helps when I feel really dumb (like right now).
It’s super late, I’m super tired and this thread is pretty old now… but just few points:
- My opinion lately is that Rules in their literal interpretation are supposed to be a very low-risk way of getting a guy to commit. Meaning, to get a guy who looks at you as being so amazingly special, better than what he’ll ever get, that he won’t leave you. He may not be an Alpha at all, but that darnit, that Beta will be with you forever and you will KNOW he loves you. You just have to focus on trying to appreciate him though.
(FYI – the authors themselves interpret different rules differently by the way – one is known as the strict by the book one, one is known as the “Rules lite” one. Also, the authors have said before they were pressured by their publisher to write things certain ways in the books. So they say…)
When I was clueless lil LSB, growing up from my sheltered youth across two cultures feeling very confused about what it means to be a girl and how to act with guys…. I got what started out as VERY good and later turned into VERY bad and Rules advice. I will write about this some day… maybe when I am engaged (Godwilling)?
It was good to learn that you should always follow a guy’s lead, including his lead on whether you should even get to know each other not (aka he needs to ask you out first to very clearly know he likes your look, which is absolutely crucial). Also good to learn that you shouldn’t make a guy your world and personal God, because it will probably annoy him and turn him away – and you will probably start demanding things of him and mess up with the “let him lead” part.
But what Rules didn’t encourage was that it’s OK to show that you actually like a guy a little, and that it’s OK to show how amazing you think a guy is, and that it’s OK to do what he says because it makes sense and not because you have to keep up some sort of princess act a la Rules.
Letting my best years pass by did teach me this wisdom: if it freaks you out that a guy you love will leave you, then you have to get over the reality of the world first. It is how it is, guys care about looks mainly and traditional gender roles are confusing and seem to imply the inferiority of females, but so what. You just have to try your best to do the right thing and know that making mistakes isn’t the end of the world. You need to work on your inner self and find peace with how confusing it all is. You have to find a balance between needing a guy (who is in your league!), and also being independent. You have to be ready to accept being alone if that’s how life turns out. Or if he ends up leaving you..
I’m not there yet with fully believing this (and maybe I shouldn’t), but at least I’m not a stressy LSB freaking out about this stuff every second. It makes it easier to try to maximize my chances… but if I fail, that’s fine. I’m just trying my best :-) It’s all ultimately in God’s hands any way.
- Some girls are THAT clueless that they need the obvious do need to be told, Mr. Bardamu! Girls tend to overanalyze, and get all emotional and block out important facts. And forget the basics. That’s why “He’s Just Not Into You” was so popular. With the Girls Gone Wild culture of how to get a man, most girls are clueless about the simple basics…
Any way staying up past by beauty sleep time to read a few of your posts was so worth it :-) I look forward to reading more, a lot of great info. and advice here! :-) Sorry for being so roundy roundy with my thoughts…
Now I know what everyone means when they are talking about “The Rules.”
How lame.
I lived with my girlfriend for eight years before we got married. Why did I get married? She was 8 1/2 months pregnant (that is cutting it close) . Was I trapped? No way. I decided it was time to start a family. She wasn’t sure. I insisted. Twenty minutes later she was pregnant (we both felt the spark – the first and only time – three more children followed. )
One of the best decisions I ever made. In fact it has been the greatest adventure in a life full of adventure. No one who can should miss the experience provided you can find a suitable mate.
When I was younger (about 45 years ago) I dated an virgin ugly girl suggested by a Navy buddy of mine (yo Davidson). She was really sweet. And a fine rack. And great fun in bed. And she turned me on to Heinikins. It has been my favorite beer ever since.
I recently tracked her down and we had a nice e-mail exchange. Like the vast majority of women I have been with I never stopped loving her. But she wanted to try out other guys. So I moved on. Nice to make a little connect after all these years. And I’m still in love with her. I told my mate about my attitude and I understand the drawbacks for her. On the plus side I will never stop loving her. A breakup would have to be her decision. That is a pretty big plus. The mate agrees.
Women want commitment, not just sex. Being hot and making men’s dick hard will get them laid but it won’t get them a husband. You don’t understand women and men’s differing goals.
{ 10 trackbacks }