“Woman unhappy: high-value men won’t commit to her” is a better, more accurate title than “I Can’t Do Casual.” As with this woman, the problem is mismatched sexual market value: it’s easy for women to have casual sex with guys +2 or +3 above them but hard to get relationships from those guys. Then women yowl about the problem to other women who pet and soothe them, without getting real.
We don’t learn the age (likely over 30) or the place where the woman lives. I’ve meant to do a post on the book Date-onomics, which describes how sex ratios change dating and f**king. New York City has more single college-educated women than men , and its ratio is more lopsided than any other big city in the country. Basic women over age 30 are everywhere, and they’re all competing against hot chicks in their 20s.
Players should know this and move towards cities with a lot of women and fewer men. Women should do the opposite. I’ve had some private and Twitter conversations about this book, but it should be thrust into the open. The advice giver in the original article has either never read this book (would not be surprising) or has not thought to mention it.
The original woman likely has 1. SMV expectation mismatch and 2. Lives in a city unfavorable to her. She should move to Seattle and guys in Seattle should move to NYC, Nashville, or Austin (NYC’s cost of living for those not receiving state subsidies may be prohibitive to guys who also want to dedicate themselves to the game).
Most people (chicks and, I’m sorry to say, guys) would rather bitch about their circumstances than change them.
Most guys are invisible to the original chick,
It feels like my only options are to be alone, or to just have a rotating cast of guys to fuck while I hope that one of them might eventually deign to invite me to have an emotional connection. If I go that route, they get everything they want out of me, and I get nothing that I want. It makes me feel powerless and disposable, like they have all the power, and I hate it.
There is a third option, guys within her SMV range, but they are likely invisible to her and as unhappy with their plight (celibacy, video games) as she is with hers.
Women want emotion… AND financial support… AND from a high-value, high-status guy. It’s the woman’s trilemma. It’s easy to get any ONE of those things: weak guys will give her emotion or financial support. High-value, high-status guys will give her a tumble. Getting all three from one guy? Very hard. And many women thrash in this trilemma, without even recognizing that it exists. Sort of like how a lot of men want a young, very hot, and very loyal chick. Except for men, even getting #2 is hard.
The Red Quest 
> while I hope that one of them might eventually deign to invite me to have an emotional connection. If I go that route, they get everything they want out of me, and I get nothing that I want. It makes me feel powerless and disposable, like they have all the power, and I hate it.
Do we think she really means “emotional connection?” Or rather monogamy and financial support? Or worse yet… monogamy IN ORDER TO FACILITATE financial support?
I know we are to believe that men only want sex. But the men I know are not usually like that. They want sex. They want sex in a somewhat urgent way, that puts sex quite high indeed on the hierarchy of wants. That is true for me. But almost every guy I know already has emotion in his relationships… even when they non-committed.
It is a myth that men aren’t emotional, and particularly in their rels with women. Men are inarticulate in terms of their emotions, they hide emotion (ineffectively), the emotion comes out at odd times, but the emotion is there… much more than reported.
For my part, I’m never monogamous, but almost always “emotional” in my relationship to the girls. And I also see the emotion in other guys relating to women.
There are times when I am cold/consumptive with a girl, but that’s usually only very early in getting to know a girl or it rarely happens at all. Based on what RedQuest is saying about her… she might find men to be “less emotional” when they are +1/+2 pts higher than her in SMV. That might be true.
I don’t actually think she wants “emotion.” I bet there is plenty of that out there for her. I think girls phrase it that way to make what they really want a more palatable “ask.”
What she wants (to borrow from TheRedQuests previous post) is a guy that will “commit to her room, board, and upkeep.” And someone to validate her in the latter half of her life.
And there she might be in trouble… for all the reasons you mention. Most of her best qualities are fading… and she is looking to extract that highest price just as the fruit is overripe.
LikeLiked by 2 people
>>I don’t actually think she wants “emotion.” I bet there is plenty of that out there for her. I think girls phrase it that way to make what they really want a more palatable “ask.”
What she wants (to borrow from TheRedQuests previous post) is a guy that will “commit to her room, board, and upkeep.” And someone to validate her in the latter half of her life.
I actually think she does want emotion… AND financial support… AND from a high-value, high-status guy. It’s the woman’s trilemma. It’s easy to get any ONE of those things: weak guys will give her emotion or financial support. High-value, high-status guys will give her a tumble. Getting all three from one guy? Very hard.
Women who want families… they compromise on one of these, often the “high-status, high-value” guy part. Women who don’t, sometimes wait it out, right into spinsterhood. Super sad, but also a somewhat common story.
Painful thing is watching most of the female-female discourse on the subject… Almost no chicks even frame the situation correctly, let alone get to a reasonable solution.
It’s like listening to guys who don’t know shit about game, talk about women. Guys who are not naturals and want to learn the game HAVE to figure out some aspects of female psychology.
I have been the “out of reach” guy https://theredquest.wordpress.com/2019/04/22/game-or-relationship-levels-different-for-men-and-women/ to a lot of 6s, especially… for a lot of 6s, I’m a good reach candidate… plausible, but still attractive. But my interest level in return is usually pretty low.
There was research from online dating platforms that made the news a few months ago: most people are trying to get someone about 20% more attractive than they are. If people have an honest assessment of their SMV… they do fine. I know so many people who have honest assessments and, if they are a chick and want a family, they find a way to make it happen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
> Women who don’t, sometimes wait it out, right into spinsterhood. Super sad, but also a somewhat common story.
I look at how “smart”, “high value” girls handle this:
CASE #1: She knows all this, locks a guy down while she is still young/attractive. She is calculated about it (not necessarily in a bad way, but maybe). She is very practical (and conservative).
CASE #2: She is “too high value” for her own good, never chooses, and “dies alone” drinking wine and complaining about men.
These are the “very smart” girl paths, as I see it.
I am not so sad for either of them. They are smart girls… they’ll be okay.
It’s CASE #3 that I feel bad for. For girls that are less smart/independent that “follow the career girls” into spinsterhood… that is sad. That is the culture steering otherwise nice girls in the wrong direction.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think there’s a case #4 for a lot of smart girls: they realize that no guy is perfect and, when they’re passing age 30, decide to prioritize having a family, and do it. She might not be all that young and attractive anymore, but there are still plenty of guys who’ll wife her up and knock her up. Case #4 realizes that she should compromise intelligently; Case #2 doesn’t figure this out.
Case #4 may have read https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-him/306651, maybe because her mom or older sister sent it to her, and altered her trajectory accordingly.
I’m not sure that a huge number of less smart and independent girls follow the career girls into spinsterhood; I think a lot of them have more reasonable expectations, feel the desire for a man/baby, and they just go with the flow and have a family and meaningful life.
I have dated various versions of Case #2… Case #2 is also often so finicky that she can barely date effectively at all.
LikeLike
> I think there’s a case #4 for a lot of smart girls: they realize that no guy is perfect and, when they’re passing age 30, decide to prioritize having a family, and do it.
For sure.
There is a slice of this girl that “over compensates,” and goes from Bad Boy to Nice Guy as she makes that move… and ends up with a very stale, sexless arrangement. Not to mention all the Nice Guys that think they finally “scored” and then can’t understand why she’s really not that into him and doesn’t want to fuck him.
Resources can work against you… when you’re craving romance/passion.
> I’m not sure that a huge number of less smart and independent girls follow the career girls into spinsterhood; I think a lot of them have more reasonable expectations, feel the desire for a man/baby, and they just go with the flow and have a family and meaningful life.
I have dated a lot of girls that had a LTR from 23-30 (something like that), and then, at 30, “want some independence,” go back to get a degree, etc. A lot of Asian girls come to America during this kind of period in their lives. And I know how important those years from 30-35 are for girls that hope for a traditional arrangements… and I can’t help but wish for them to lock down some solid guy while their sex appeal is still giving them leverage.
> I have dated various versions of Case #2… Case #2 is also often so finicky that she can barely date effectively at all.
Definitely. My wing Sundance had a date two weeks ago with a very hot, very powerful girl. She was a C U Next Tuesday, in a major way. He was proud that he kept her on her toes, kept surprising on, never ended up under her thumb… but the whole date was like combat.
A beautiful, smart girl that treats me that way… is worthless. She’s a “0.” No thanks.
…
I am so happy I am not a girl. Thank you, Baby Jesus.
LikeLike
“monogamy IN ORDER TO FACILITATE financial support”
In my experience there are two types of ladies, once you get past kid/family years (i.e. 40+ years old). They are either financially independent and don’t care about your money, or they are looking to lock-down a guy for the resources. The difference in attitudes is stark. I do well with educated ladies who have their shit together. The other ones, not so much. Women can determine the potential resource value of a guy very quickly. It’s disturbing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
> I do well with educated ladies who have their shit together.
Before I was good with game… this ^ was the kind of girl I dated. Not always particularly feminine, in my case – and I didn’t realize it at the time.
Now… I can’t even see those girls. I rarely date girls with serious careers… I still like “smart” (to a degree), but I am looking for something more whimsical to balance my “order.”
But as long as it’s “short term,” I could have a good time with a wide range of women.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is borne out by the dynamic of swipe/online dating. Because men are super thirsty and swipe right nearly 50% of the time, while women swipe right under 20% of the time, women live in a state of abundance and men live in a state of scarcity. At the upper end with 8’s and 9’s, they can still probably match with guys similar to their SMV, but the problem is those guys are Chad, and as we know, he’s not settling down–why would he? It’s never been so easy to get laid by hot chicks.
However, the chicks who are 5’s, 6’s, and 7’s often match with guys who are 7′, 8’s, and 9’s, and yeah, no way those guys are going to commit to an LTR, let alone marriage, with a woman who’s so far below their SMV. In short, SOD (along with social media) has given women an inflated sense of their own SMV, as well as a distorted picture of what sort of man they can expect to attract.
Women would do a lot better in terms of finding deeper connection or marriage if they met guys IRL…but as you said, most people would rather complain about their circumstances than take action to change them.
LikeLike
I felt this with my regular Bumblebee.
43, independent, but lost as to how to lock down a man, particularly a guy five years younger than her and an aspirational player.
I received a text from her recently:
“You are finally be who you wanted to be. You are handsome, very intelligent with literature & histories etc…, excellent sense of humour, has lots of hobbies with talent, fit and nice. So many girls/ladies would love to be with you. You would need your copy soon!”
This to me reads like a woman who just can’t compete on an SMV level.
It’s quite sad, though, because ten years ago she would have made an ideal long term partner – feminine, empathetic, fertile, funny.
Now she is facing the prospect of a lonely existence. I genuinely feel for her. I like her and was in love with her.
What I like about this community is the Nashes and Red Quests and Magnums and Red Pill Dads can share stories of women suffering the same fate. We read to know we are not alone.
LikeLike
If you were in love with her, then why did it end?
To me the text you quoted seems like she has way too many expectations in order to recognize the one with whom she might click?
I mean, yes, what she writes seems nice, but in general who will live up to that 24/7?
I think it has less to do with a SMV-wise mismatch than with generally unrealistic expectations.
Even if she meets him, she will be unable to recognize him, because instead of looking for a real person, she wants her fairytale world being realized and therefore nobody whom she dates will feel like she truly means him, but only the picture she has created from him.
She might be empathic, but as long as she empathizes only with the ideas she has created about the other she will be unable to any genuine response.
It then is exactly about one thing, her expectations.
Most people, particularly high consciousness people and this seems to be the ones she is looking for, will intuitively feel that reactions are missing them, that reactions have nothing to do with the intentions of the person behind. Even if they are not conscious, people will just feel if they are truly meant or not. If they consider themselves low value as well, they might compromise but end up unhappy in empty marriages anyway.
If you want to do her a favour, try to make her understand that she needs to be patient and to listen first before she decides. Try to show her how to restore the openness and curiosity with respect to the person behind the images. That might be her missing piece on her path to someone with high consciousness.
LikeLike
This is what really happens:
Society tells us that men want sex, and women want relationships. But that’s horribly wrong.
Actually, women want good sex, and men want good relationships.
To nail a woman, you have to make her lust, and give good sex to her. Not relationships. As soon as you give any relationship vive, the woman kicks you in the ass, and runs to the hills.
You need a good relationship, because as male, you have zero certainty about being the father of the baby that sex produces.
To have any certainty, she has to give you devotion, and a perfect relationship, so you can trust her.
So, it is women’s role to give you a relationship. A quality relationship. They have to seduce you into a relationship. It is her work, not yours.
Women don’t understand that (same as nice boys don’t understand that they have to give sex). For that reason, women keep expecting the man to provide sex AND a relationship. It doesn’t works.
The blue pill has reversed the natural role of genders, and that’s why it leads to failure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“This is what really happens:
Society tells us that men want sex, and women want relationships. But that’s horribly wrong.
Actually, women want good sex, and men want good relationships.”
Yes, I totally agree! It seems like society (both red pill and blue pill) feels that men are simply supposed to enjoy fucking as many women as possible. That’s simply not the way that I feel. I want a relationship. I want quality. I want a woman to be “into me”. I want it to be real, not about my resources or whatever favors a lady can extract.
Tapping into a lady’s carnal nature, her need to be entertained, her need for the status that my presence confers: those are all concepts that I have intuitively known but that I am just starting separate from the manosphere drivel.
LikeLike
That is interesting, because I am a man and I have never missed not having a relationship. I have almost no sexual experience and I obviously miss the sex, but I have never ever been fazed by typical family questions about girlfriends and the like. Since very young I knew I did not want to marry.
I just don’t understand why you need somebody else to sort of “complete” you… I always have things to do on my own. I don’t think that I would interact with women much were it not for my sexual interest in them.
Not judging in any way, just curious because from what I get from friends it is me who is in the minority.
LikeLike
>>I have almost no sexual experience and I obviously miss the sex, but I have never ever been fazed by typical family questions about girlfriends and the like.
Why are you reading the manosphere and Red Pill?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, because I want to have some sex with girls without paying for it like I have done most of the time. I feel like I am being robbed of that experience. I am not looking for a girlfriend in the traditional sense, although I would not mind having one.
The way things are going however, despite implementing some changes (gym, going out, etc), don’t promise much. I am finding it very hard to catch up this (relatively) late in life.
LikeLike