Women don’t make emotional contracts

This post began as a reply to Nash’s comment, but it got so long that I decided to turn it into a post. It’s not about actionable game tips, so you might not find it very useful.

But it was in that context that I heard myself say, ‘women don’t make emotional “contracts.”‘ I like that line. I think it’s true.

It’s absolutely true that women don’t make emotional contracts. If they will enter such a contract, but they won’t keep it, and apart from the withdrawal of attention there is no downside to her. The non-monogamy community, online and off, is endlessly discussing how so-and-so broke their rules. It’s exhausting and pointless. Humans in general and especially women also tend to emotionally bond to people they’re fucking. That’s just how the system works. It can’t be logicked away. The downside of non-monogamy is that she might bond to another guy. Of course, at the same time other women might bond to me, and I think that is happening right now with someone I met at a party.

I’ve written about this before, but most women won’t stay in long-term, undefined relationships with guys. Pretty much all players know that women will initiate the “what are we?” talk three to eighteen months into an uncommitted relationship. It’s possible to keep her on the line for much longer, but most normal women want a family eventually. They have a biological schedule and think they want to lockdown a guy to have kids with (many are also conflicted, as evolutionary biology teaches us).  They also think they want commitment, and they do until they get bored and suffocated by seeing the same guy every day for years on end.

Non-monogamy can help keep the woman on the line while simultaneously allowing a guy to continue in the game. And if she sees the guy drawing in women who are more attractive than she is, she will get competitive and the sex will stay pretty hot. No one will get complacent because no one can.

In reality, of course, in modern marriages a guy shouldn’t get complacent because she may leave him at any time and take half his assets, child support, and the kids, and the entire state will step on his neck if he objects. Why guys agree to this kind of arrangement, I have no idea. Social pressure and expectation, I guess. I barely dodged it myself.

It appears that I’ve set off on a ramble, so let me say that I’m thinking about things more from a longer-term perspective for guys who already have okay game and who are age 30+, and guys who are younger can ignore this. Before age 30 it’s mostly about getting laid. After, a guy should be thinking, at least a little bit, about the long term. The current Western model and marriage contract do not work. They generate hate, misery, envy, and contempt. They’re so broken that the Red Pill has emerged from them.

But! A big but: most people and most guys still want something “more” than tons of random hookups. Most people will eventually want to have kids, too. I think most people age 50+ don’t get as much satisfaction from sex and get more of their satisfaction from family and community. But if you devote your entire life to chasing sex, you likely won’t build the things that matter in the second half of your life.

(Guys in their 20s can mostly ignore the above paragraph and focus on building their game, their knowledge, and their business lives. A guy without game and options basically cannot build an effective longer-term relationship today, so he has to have that first. Entering a long-term relationship without total confidence that the guy can easily find another woman is tantamount to death.)

For guys, over the long term, I think the future regarding kids is closer to something like co-parenting. Lots of guys read this and think it’s just more feminist bullshit. It can be used that way, especially in states with awful “child” support laws that are really woman-support laws. But co-parenting resolves a lot of the conflicts I’ve enumerated. The state isn’t involved through parent contracts. The two adults can maintain separate domiciles as necessary. Both should still contribute to the child. DNA testing is mandatory instead of optional. If and when sexual desire wanes, one doesn’t have to lie and look at the same person every morning for the rest of one’s life. Yet both parents have to commit to some of the crappy and boring parts of raising kids.

Instead of two people promising to erotically love each other forever, then coming to hate each other and getting into vicious, expensive legal battles, two people agree to do what’s right for the kid and agree to make sure the kid has both masculine and feminine influences in their life.

I don’t think co-parenting is perfect either, and I have basically evolved into co-parenting. My situation is far better than the situations of the many guys I know who married, let themselves go, and then divorced.

“If a man should assume there is NO SUCH THING as an emotional contract with a women… why would you strap yourself down to a financial one?? I know why men do it (bluepill thinking… but mostly… lack of options).”

Rollo is right about this: women want it all: complete, total access to a man’s finances and the complete to have sex with whoever she wants to, whenever she wants to. More guys are learning to say no to this raw deal, I hope. I have another post about the book Out of Eden: The Surprising Consequences of Polygamy, because it is also about what a society that is really committed to female monogamy and reducing hypergamy looks like.


What I do when she sends nudes

This is a pretty new problem, because way back in the day guys who wanted nudes had to shoot them on film cameras and have a method to develop the film. Then digital came along and guys who wanted nudes still had to shoot them themselves, usually with an early DSLR like the first Canon Rebel, or with a point & shoot. Now smartphones are ubiquitous and chicks send nudes or partial nudes of their own volition and without prompting.

In my view requesting nudes from women is usually a demonstration of lower value and thus should be avoided; if you want nudes, get a camera and shoot them yourself after you’ve slept with her.

But when she sends you unsolicited nudes, what do you do? I’m still not 100% sure, but I’ve begun saying, “Pretty,” or “cool” or a similar one-word answer, and then, often, returning an erotic but not explicit pic of me with another chick. A front view of the chick, with me behind her, covering her nipples with my hands. A side view of me going down on a chick. That kind of thing.

Chicks will go one of two ways: some will be turned on and may accelerate the meeting or next meeting, and some will start asking questions about the other girl, and I’ll say, “Let’s discuss in person and meet at this bar and this time.”

The more sexually forward the chick is, the better this works, I think. Chicks who want monogamy now, I think this works worse on. It can be a higher risk move than ignoring or saying very little to the chick. A little bit like my Snapchat in game move. It’s a perfect move with chicks who are already into non-monogamy and group sex.

I don’t include faces, but it’s pretty clear that the pics I send are from me. This is a light form of attempting to make the other girl jealous or showing a hard-to-fake signal that other chicks desire me. Chicks most want guys other chicks want. I said in “Evolutionary biology underlies game” that most chicks have no idea what they want and are their desires are often incoherent.  Implicitly saying, “If you don’t get on this ride, another girl is going to, soon,” makes her want to get on the ride.

I usually get the pics of me through screen grabs from sex tapes. VLC has a screen grab feature that will export the exact frame. Today, 4K video is widely available and that makes getting the right pic easy.

There also seems to be an uptick in the number of chicks who send nudes as a form of teasing and attention-getting but who have no desire to meet up or have real life wetsex. It’s hard to separate out the chicks who tease-but-want-it from the chicks who just want attention. At some point if a chick won’t meet or won’t come home with me I stop contacting her or responding to her messages, and that will usually shake out the flakes from the chicks who want it.

Today, I see nudes as being in practice part of one’s romantic portfolio, the same way you should have a professional portfolio demonstrating your work products. Be prepared and good things will come. I hadn’t explicitly realized that I’m doing this kind of romantic preparation till earlier this week, but once I did I also realized that most guys are probably doing this sort of thing on the fly, when they should be doing it as part of a larger strategy. Unless they’re already swimming in quim, in which case they don’t need strategy.

“I don’t know who I am anymore”

Bike Girl told me, “I don’t know who I am anymore,” and she was referencing sex clubs and group sex dates. I didn’t handle her as well as I could have, I think because I’ve been through this before and I couldn’t get up the emotional affect necessary to deal with it properly. Instead I was half engaged during the conversation and that confused her and, I think, made her try even harder.

I reassured her that she is a good girl and that I’m watching out for her and that she doesn’t have to do anything she doesn’t want to do. I think she fears losing me to other women at sex parties. For kind of good reasons. Sex with a new person is very intense and humans, especially women, are primed to pair bond with guys they have sex with. I don’t know how to say this without being arrogant, but I combine looks/masculinity/presence and career/money/earning effectively, or more effectively than most guys. Most guys do the one or the other. Realistically, most guys do neither, but most attractive, dominant guys have weak careers and most strong career guys are fat and repulsive. Or at least look like they’ve spent their life on their careers.

So Bike Girl is having, I think, both an identity and relationship crisis (or doubts) at once. We’ve been talking explicitly about open relationships and how to live non-monogamously, and for her I think it’s a lot to take in. For most girls it is. Some chicks have been searching for this kind of thing for their entire lives and take right to it, but they’re in the minority.

It takes a lot of re-programming to get an average woman into a non-monogamous mindset. There are non-average women who like sex enough, or who have sufficiently damaged emotions, to jump right in. They’re the exception. It may also depend on who has greater investment in the relationship. Since I’m almost always less invested than the woman, the women is more worried about losing me. But with non-monogamy, she can lose me two ways: she can lose me by agreeing (and thus seeing me have sex with other women) but she can also lose me by not agreeing (because she’s not doing what all those other dirty chicks will do).

She’s caught, psychologically, in other words, and I think last night I saw Bike Girl thrashing in this trap. This contradiction. To her it’s all new. But to me it’s not. I’ve been in it for long enough to see the problems. Because of my relative experience, I’ve held back more, and let her take a lot of the first steps with others, and worked to let her get comfortable. For example, it’s common for a person (guy, realistically) with a new partner to let her be the focus of the other couple, and for the person (guy) not to have sex with the other woman the first time, in order to let the partner acclimate.

I’ve done some of that. I think last night was also a reaction to the couple from New Years Eve, who I mentioned. The woman is incredibly beautiful, and she makes Bike Girl nervous. Bike Girl is in the same league but the blonde is at least a solid point higher. The blonde’s guy seems to have his virtues but I think I’m a bit better and kinkier in bed than he is. I think Bike Girl is worried about the heat between the blonde and me, which is not quite matched by what is between her and the other guy.

This is speculation and I don’t know for sure, but it does match experience and what I know of female psychology, as well as Bike Girl’s personality. Bike Girl has been with me long enough to be past the casual stage, so she wants to figure out if she’s going to be with me and non-monogamous over the long term, or with me and make me monogamous, or if she should get rid of me and protect herself emotionally or psychologically. I respect that last choice, too. It may be the rational one for her.

I don’t know where things will go with Bike Girl. I think she knows or suspects that, on some nights when I’ve not been with her, I’ve been with other women. Not a lot of nights, but definitely a few. I frankly don’t have the time or sexual energy to have boundless relationships anymore. Sex every other day is now plenty for me (in college I’d prefer twice a day).

I don’t say that I’ve seen other women to Bike Girl, I don’t rub her face in it, and I’m not trying to be mean to her, but it is what it is. I’ve also done less of this simply because she is very good at meeting my sexual needs, and I think she knows that the better she is about that, the better things will be between us. But she’s also figuring out that on a lot of weekends I’d rather do sex parties, or a specific number of other things, than I would like to do her dumb chick activities. I tell her to do those alone and she is torn: she wants to be with me on the one hand but knows my independent nature on the other. In some ways I’m very patterned, very mechanical, choosing a small number of activities very specifically. Some chicks get bored with my way of being. They don’t like that I don’t care about their friend’s birthday or about seeing that movie or doing stuff for the Instagram pic.

I think Bike Girl also isn’t that used to guys with options. I get the sense she’s used to “dating down.” I don’t know why, because she has a great body, but I think her exes have either been very short FWBs or guys who are more into her than she was into them. So now she’s in a reversed situation and it disorients her.

Oh yeah, and somewhere in the midst of it I told her that I love her, which I probably shouldn’t have done either. Oops. I have a thing about telling chicks I love them… usually during sex… then never mentioning it again. Probably bad game and bad for the chick’s emotional health. But I did it. Can’t take it back now.

So that is where we stand. We are supposed to see another couple tonight and I think that’s going to happen. I will have to get a hotel room because my place will be off-limits.

Bike Girl understands a lot without being able to articulate what she understands. Like I think she understands that a person who is really serious about fitness and diet is also serious about sex. Why is a man so diligent about the gym that he won’t be thrown off by female needs? Because he’s serious about finding another woman if the current one doesn’t work out. Other women have also seen my obsessions with swimming, working out, and not eating sugar as a threat to them. And they’re a little right about that.

Maybe I need to take another week off. That typically restores me to equilibrium. This isn’t much of a “game” post. Get good enough at game (or being) and the problem becomes relationships, not sex.

I don’t know if Bike Girl will re-mold her personality, break, or suffer. They all seem possible. But now we’ve got to the point where she has to accept this as her new normal or start again. Re-molding a personality is very hard and I’ve been through it multiple times. Being outside the mainstream and outside typical cultural expectations has its costs.

‘Cheap Sex,’ our lives, our politics

Like I said, this book is good to read. In the article, the best sentence is, “The fuckboy lifestyle — in which a man can be basically worthless yet sexually successful — was simply not viable.” Absolutely. And men are still adjusting, psychologically, emotionally, and culturally to this shift. Women, especially young hot ones, now value sexual and sensual pleasure more than world-building and income. Every guy has seen some hot chick not just fuck but obsess over a degenerate guy. Then the guy thinks, “What is the degenerate doing that I’m not?”

Guys who follow that thought far enough find game.

The author neglects to make clear that sex is “cheap” for the top 20 or 25% of guys. It’s still very expensive for all the other guys. Those other guys are forced to watch porn, be celibate, cling futilely to their one-itis, become extremely wealthy, become famous, or learn game. In my view only that last one is practical for the vast majority of men.

When a man truly realizes sex is cheap, everything about him changes. “Cheap sex” is another phrase for “abundance mentality.” But when a man has abundance, it’s not just a mentality. It’s his life.

“Tinder and the Tyranny of Language” is an argument for daygame

Tinder and the Tyranny of Language” is about the online horror stories you’re familiar with, and it explains why Tinder works poorly for the vast majority of guys… but the author also sucks at Tinder:

Expect several days of intimate, evocative and tantalising back-and-forth, conversations running into the early hours of the morning, a reliable hit of dopamine at the peering at of one’s lock screen. You organise a face to face, a real live date—and the anxiety hits infinity, as this person who you have finally clicked with, will suddenly become real.

WTF? No. Why would this guy do that? Get a drink with whoever quickly. Usually after three to five messages. If she won’t show up in person it isn’t real. Guys who do less often do better than guys who do more. This guy becomes her dancing monkey and attention drip, like a bag of morphine straight into her arm.

Location is important. This guy’s Twitter bio says he’s in Melbourne, Australia. I don’t know shit about Melbourne but Roy Walker says it’s awful. Guys in bad cities with lots of men in them (Melbourne, San Francisco, Seattle) are going to have a bad time compared to guys in cities with lots of chicks (NYC, maybe Sydney? I don’t know Australia).

The author:

I’ve decided that Tinder worked a hell of a lot better as a hook-up app, than it does as serious dating one, and that these strange textual romances—sterile, devoid of physical communication or exchange—can only produce a skewed experience of person, that might, in theory, be rectifiable via some promptly organised outbreak of touch, sensual engagement and sexual exploration. But in practice, they only lead to an equally sterile series of dates.

I don’t know this guy, but there are several possibilities: he’s ugly, he’s in the wrong place, he has no game, he doesn’t understand evolutionary biology, or like most guys he shouldn’t be using Tinder. He needs to learn daygame and get offline.

Guys who try Tinder today suffer, unless they’re extremely good looking. Tinder and all apps also now have systems that reward new users and punish existing ones. The only way they work is to boot it up, pay for one month, use it for two weeks or so, cancel the subscription, and then re-activate a month or two later to get fresh matches.

Mostly, though, guys are better off hitting the gym and learning daygame. That guy is like three-quarters right, but he’s missing some key elements he can learn through game.

Catch and release women who want families

This is a controversial one, and it’s only relevant to guys with intermediate or advanced game.

I think it’s wise to release older chicks (at least age 25, likely older than that) who want to have a family, when you (a man) don’t want one, or don’t want one yet, or don’t want one with her.

This comes from Nash’s post, Back to daygame, a breakup, and a close call. He breaks up with an amazing girl, Miss Thick, because “her kids/family goals were real and that I respected them.” So I wanted to know how old she is…

She is 29… and from China. She’s a “Chinese” girl at heart… but an artsy, and unusual one.

Then I like the idea of letting her go and not having her dangle a lot of prime reproductive years. Let her go and tell her that, if her next serious relationship doesn’t work out, she can come back for a month or two of fun and recovery. She may come back or she may not.

That’s in line with what I wrote about frame and non-monogamy

over time [most] women have a biological need to find guys to have kids with and subsidize them and their kids. That’s part of the reason long-term, undefined, FWBs-type relationships are so uncommon. Few chicks will allow them, at least past the age of 25. Even if they do, they will drop the FWB when they find a hot-enough provider guy.

(If you’re dating a chick under the age of 25 in a contemporary Western country, you can ignore the last two paragraphs, because chicks that age are all about the feelz and the hot sex.)

Players know that it’s uncommon to have an undefined FWB-type relationship with a girl for more than 18 months. Even six months is uncommon. That is because most chicks who don’t have a family want one. They may fuck up en route to getting a family or hitting menopause, but they want it.

[Note this comment: “Lover” may be a better word than “FWB,” and I also screwed up a little bit of the story.]

And I think guys who are dating women over age 25 or 26 should cut them free and tell them to go get their provider guy. This goes against some of the “Red Pill” comments amid the hardass maxims of anger phase warriors. It’s true that it’s possible for guys to string along a girl through a lot of her prime fertility years. I’ve seen that many times. Yes, the girl should be responsible and break it off, but girls are weak (just like guys) and prone to wishful thinking (just like guys). Guys who put girls in that position will also often find… SURPRISE!… the birth control failed and you’re going to be a DADDY!

You jack her around, she’ll jack you around.

Plus, I think it’s unnecessary to waste years of a woman’s prime child-bearing life. A guy with strong game will find another girl. Maybe a better one. So the chick who wants kids the guy isn’t going to willingly provide should be released.

I’m not saying you should sleep with chicks age 25 – 40. That would be insane. Those chicks want one-night stands and orgasms and hot lovers. I’m only saying you shouldn’t string them along and you should be direct about not being their baby’s father.

In my view it’s often better to be the bigger person and enable people to live the right way. For most women that means letting her have a family. Normal girls in the right age bracket who want kids will leave the guy when she figures out he’s a player, but some need the push. At least be honest, and then let her go when she’s ready.

If a guy gets into a position of strength, and he gets into the habit of helping people build the right lives (this is NOT being a “nice guy”).

I don’t preach about living better. I do show it. That means zero sugar. That means inviting chicks (and guys!) to the gym with me, after an appropriate period of time. Obviously I’m not doing deadlifting on the first date. But if I’m going to the gym I invite her to go with me, whoever the “her” is. I’ve probably taught ten or fifteen girls how to swim for exercise or how to lift. That’s ten or fifteen more than most guys.

Those girls also know I’m serious about the body. Talking about the joys of lifting in an online dating profile won’t totally repel fatties but it will help. And when I meet a girl for a drink for a first date, if she’s too fat sometimes I’ll just leave and sometimes I’ll invite her to the gym. Not necessarily that night but in two days or whenever. Their reactions are funny. Especially the ones who say, “Are you saying I’m fat?” Easy response: “I’m saying I’m going to the gym and you should come.”

In a position of strength, a guy can say, “I want you to go find a man who will give you a family. In the meantime, if you want to keep having fun with me, do it. If you find a guy and things don’t work out and you want a break, text me.”

Sometimes she will. Chicks can be like comets, swinging into a guy’s solar system for a couple weeks at a time.

I also have weird ethics. I think women in the 26 – 40 age range who genuinely want children should be released by guys who catch them and who have investment from those women. This essay only applies to a guy with a woman who is invested. If she’s not invested it doesn’t count.

If a guy’s game is strong and he’s in the secret society, he won’t have trouble moving on to the next one. But in my ethical inversion, I like sleeping with chicks who have boyfriends or husbands. Now you can see why I don’t talk about the deepest shit with people I know. Not even swingers or poly people will admit that kind of thing. I think humans are ill-equipped for long-term monogamy and that if she’s available for seduction, I want me in her instead of some other guy swooping in.

Next post up should continue the non-monogamy theme. It’s the one I keep mentioning, about how sex clubs layer on top of conventional game. In my view, for the right man they are a powerful tool, but I don’t think I’ve seen any active game guys writing about them.

Attention is the only tool modern men have

I don’t have a lot of time today, but this is a reply to “Let’s say a girl is acting bitchy,” a good post you should read.

“When having a boundary crossed actually means you’ll walk out, and you have zero tolerance for bullshit, it will show up as soon as the micro transgressions happen. This permeates the whole thing since your very first moment.”

This is good. I have a half-written post about how the only real tool modern men have at their disposal is attention. You either give attention or withdraw it. That’s really it. The rest is commentary. When you blow up a girl’s phone you’re dissipating one of the only or the only tool you have.

There is a wonderful book by David Barash, Out of Eden: The Surprising Consequences of Polygamy, that lists all the tools men used to have to enforce monogamy. They could kill their wife’s lover (seriously, that used to be legal in the United States). They had physical force. They had the weight of society enforcing monogamy. Abandoned women would be completely fucked, and not in a good way.

Now… men have nothing but attention themselves. Which is one of many reasons why marriage is such a bad deal for men, at least in the United States. Attention is the only resource.

This is also why I think most men should not use most social media. It’s a way of giving women attention and validation that is unlikely to lead to sex.

It’s not impossible to use social media well, but it’s never or pretty much never a good idea to “like” women’s photos and statutes. Yet I see guys do it all the time.

When a woman crosses a boundary, withdraw attention. Better yet, give attention to other, better behaved women. Guys with options are very different than guys without. Girls know you have options when you shut the fuck up.

“Shutting the fuck up.” No one talks about this in today’s verbal diarrhea culture, but because no one talks about it or does it, it’s valuable.