Over the past six months, I haven’t had much enthusiasm, time, or energy for game. Around the end of 2021, my carefully managed ENM relationship nearly blew up, because of a girl who’s been in my life (we’ll call her “long distance boyfriend girl”), for many years. I met her through someone in the same sex-party community as me. Initially, I had to turn down sleeping with her even though there was a strong mutual attraction, because at the time the rules between my girlfriend and me for sleeping with other partners weren’t clear, and my gf was out of town. Sadly, that small opportunity window closed, and long-distance-boyfriend girl started dating a dude…long distance. Most long-distance relationships are effectively non-monogamous relationships, they just lack the crucial “ethical” part.
Xbtusd is back, with a fresh report on what women who date women can teach us.
I have a bunch of friends who are lesbians—like, real lesbians, not the ones you see on Pornhub. It’s fascinating to hear about their sex lives and how they navigate the sexual landscape. However, things get really interesting when bisexual women date, or attempt to date, other bisexual women.
A chick named Jordana, of the “U Up?” podcast, admits what players and all women know: a guy who waits around and doesn’t make any moves isn’t attractive to women. A guy explicitly asking a woman to consent to sex is a turn-off. Women are creatures of indirection and uncertainty, and they live in the land of “maybe,” and they want a story for themselves and others about how whatever happened sexually “just happened.” Women don’t want to take responsibility for their sex lives. They want to get offers and say “yes” or “no” to them in the moment it’s happening, and that’s it. Jordana takes about 35 minutes of beating around the bush while talking to the guy to get to the main point: despite feminism, despite her progressive politics, despite her political beliefs… she wants the guy to make the move. She finds him asking her explicitly for sex to be a turnoff.
The strange thing isn’t that this is true… the strange thing is that she’s willing to admit it, publicly.
The best thing written about modern dating is by The Last Psychiatrist, and it’s so good he felt compelled to delete it, Don’t Settle For The Man You Want. It’s about narcissistic monster Lori Gottlieb, a woman who can’t see herself for who and what she is but is compelled to ladle advice out to everyone else. She thinks TV shows like Will & Grace and movies like Titanic are somehow real… “Nothing characterizes the dumbest generation of narcissists in the history of the world better than using throw away cinema as a template for life.” Lori can’t find a man for many reasons, one being that “She wants someone who will see her the way she wants to be seen and fulfill various other roles she has planned for him, leaving herself free to ‘grow.'” People are people, not roles, and not props in another person’s drama, however much social media tries to convince us otherwise (the best women I’ve met and dated in the last decade use social media minimally, if at all: not a coincidence). Lori is an expert in the negative, not in the positive,
A reasonable question might be, what kind of a man is this woman looking for? I defy you to answer this question. She’s two books and at least three essays into the topic, and still I have no idea. What I do know, however, is what she’s not looking for. That’s where her laser focus is pointed.
She is all “want” and no “give.” Real relationships mean give and take. Too much of either makes them impossible or dysfunctional. But, lots of people (especially women) have been trained to think like Lori: the man is an accessory to their life, not a person with whom she’ll build a new thing. Religion used to try to fight against narcissism, but it’s dead, and now it’s all about you. Advertising tells us so. And we have good psychological defense mechanisms that prevent us from realizing that we only want to take and never want to give. “Gottlieb figures that because she’s attractive and intelligent, the problem must be her standards are too high or men are threatened by her. Wrong. The problem is she is daring someone to like her.” Well that is one problem, and not the only one. But the key word “standards.” Listen to single women and you’ll hear endless talk of “standards.” Listen to married women and they’ll talk about how much they love their kids. Coincidence?
Listen to women’s dating podcasts (I don’t recommend it, but xbtusd listens to them, masochistically) and the idea of “standards” recurs over and over again. It’s right up there with “Living your truth” and letting emotions rule, and ruin, your life.
Xbtusd has a curious hobby: listening to women’s dating podcasts, which, to me, seems like an exercise in masochism, but to him, women’s podcasts are comedy, mixed with information from behind enemy lines. His latest find is a gem, What Grandma Thinks We’re Doing Wrong with “Excuse My Grandma,” in which two girls in their 20s talk to “Grandma Gail,” who is brilliant, while the girls in their 20s sound… is “r^tarded” still a word that gets one cancelled? Sorry, it’s the first word that leaps to mind. Grandma Gail is so smart, and keeps telling the girls the most obvious stuff, and they keep replying with inane, narcissistic remarks. Grandma Gail says, “If you’re going to pick somebody apart, as most of you girls seem to do, it’s just a never-ending stream….” and then she gets interrupted. Anyone who wants a real, adult relationship understands that relationships are about compromise. If you can’t compromise, you’ll never be in a relationship, though, if you are a woman, you can sleep with guys a couple points above you in sexual market value (SMV). Similar problem happens with people addicted to new relationship energy (NRE… I cop to that addiction… the high of fresh p***y is unbelievable…). Few years back this hot chick I was flirting with admitted that she only loves what she called the “cupcake” stage of relationships. She’d married early and was divorced or in the process of getting divorced… she had “problems, but the sex will be great” written all over her.
I’m getting off the point, which is that Grandma Gail is full of wisdom, like when she says, “If you’re looking for perfection, you better stay by yourself, because it’s never going to happen.” I don’t have anything to add. Not everything she says is perfectly on the mark… Grandma Gail says a lot of men feel “a fear of commitment.” Often it’s not a fear. It’s cost. And a lot of men LOVE f**king. So do women. So why would a man get married (risk high costs, divorce is expensive), if he can get sex without marriage? High-status men know this. Hypergamy isn’t part of Grandma’s vocabulary, but it’s lurking there in her speech without being mentioned.
I’ve been seeing the screenshots make the rounds: a woman’s online dating profile says, “no ENM” or “no poly.” The most interesting part of those profiles isn’t whether she’s telling the truth… it’s that enough guys have figured out ENM for women to preemptively declare they’re not into it. I’m sure some of those declarations are sincere and they’re looking for their babydaddy. RPD thinks we’re still in a situation in which most women will say “no” to ENM… I think there’s some truth in that point of view, maybe a lot of truth, but it’s also true that, pitched properly, a lot of chicks will be up for it.
How? It’s not the guy being like, “Let’s go to a sex club, maybe we can fuck some new chicks.” Instead, it’s the guy whose social world is intertwined with ENM world (THE GOOD GIRL depicts this). The guy meets a new girl, she likes him, they sleep together, the guy makes risotto for her on the sex date, they date a bit, she meets his friends. His friends are cool (like your friends are cool, right?). They’re hosting parties. At the parties, a lot of the people take mdma, but they’re cool, functional people, not drug idiots. The girl will take some, or, if she doesn’t, she’ll be around people having the time of their lives. There’d be a mini-orgy in one corner. Some girl would tell your girl, let’s call her Marcia, she’s pretty… and the two girls would make out.
Science, engineering, math, and other nerds often care foremost about correctness, and their conversation shows their main priority, but “caring deeply about correctness” is unusual… in conversation, most people, especially attractive women, care about creating a positive vibe, laughing, group feeling, finding hierarchies, showcasing values, yeeting the outgroup, etc. Being factually right and learning new things is less than secondary, less than tertiary. This divergence in interest and purpose leads to a common failure mode between nerds and attractive women, and the conversation often goes something like,
Cute girl: blah blah blah blather…
Nerd: Excuse me, but, actually, I need to interrupt to say I know that, in reality, if you look at the fossil record and consider what this one paper says, you’ll see…
Cute Girl: No one cares! Like I was saying, Tommy said that Bobby said this crazy thing about Bree…
Male nerds think gossip is stupid, and then discount the conversation of most attractive women, and in doing so reduce their chances of sleeping with those attractive women. Male nerds might be right or wrong about gossip being stupid, but gossip is how women determine rank and hierarchy, and thus who to f**k. Attractive women seeking good vibes are going to care a lot about fluency and how a man makes them feel, and not so much about the precise content of the man’s patter.
In contrast, someone focused on factual correctness in conversation will often stumble and pause, regroup to think, choose words carefully, stop to overwrite himself, etc. He’ll be less fluent but more accurate. Women often interpret nerd conversational style as weakness or stupidity, though it may be the opposite, as the nerd is groping towards correctness.
Online dating optimizes for women considering: 1. men’s looks and 2. their ability to engage in mildly witty banter via text. Not too surprisingly, it’s not obvious that either is a great predictor of long-term relationship formation or success, or of true compatibility. Lots of great guys may not be immediately, obviously, photogenically good looking, and many probably don’t do the witty banter women seem to like over text. For particularly good looking guys, online swipe dating is an extreme force multiplier for success. I think I’m just below the looks threshold for online swipe dating to really work, but so it goes… I’ve also not done much online dating since like 2014 or 2015, apart from some stints on Feeld, but those are quite different. It seems that many women aren’t cognizant of the way online swipe pushes women to judge guys based on metrics that may select against what they’re supposedly seeking.
I want to talk not about how, during a holiday, I wound up naked with my then-girlfriend and two other couples while rolling on MDMA, but about how we got there, over time, and through deep knowledge of the other participants. Neither of the other couples had ever done anything like this before… I’m going to name the other couples after the girls in them, “Allison” and “Zephyra.” “Hot girl in her 20s gives me a blowjob!” could the salacious, pornified headline, and, don’t get me wrong, it was great… I could write a whole story from the perspective of that moment, and me being such a baller player, but, as with The game’s endgame and picking up a girl at a private party, the moment of hot consummation isn’t the most educational, relevant element (there are many educational, relevant elements in the free book). Neither is the fact that our other female friend, Zephyra, offered a bit of a contribution, so, technically, two other girls were involved. I know of zero straight guys who don’t want to look down and see two pretty girls knob polishing (if you are one, feel free to comment on why you don’t want to see this).
“Build wealth slowly” xbtusd likes to say. Like many things he says, there’s an oracular, inscrutable quality to that… in another life, he could be one of those Buddhist teachers, wapping their acolytes with a stick and emitting peculiar koans. What’s “Build wealth slowly” mean? We’re all familiar with “get rich quick” schemes, which never really work out and which ensnare the unwary. They don’t work, but they’re appealing because of their speed.
Madd Monk suggests men “Become a Top Guy or Die Trying,” something I’m not opposed to (who doesn’t want to be top?), but it’s something that conceals as much as it reveals, because a lot of guys have problems with value delivery as much as or more than value building… Madd Monk says “If you want to live a certain lifestyle, and you want women that complement your lifestyle, it’s top guy or bust” and that “game is the delivery mechanism to display your value.” I don’t love the word “display” and would prefer another word, like “convey,” but I understand what he’s saying.
It’s a good post, read it, especially the section about his former mother-in-law pulling him aside for some hard-core realpolitik on his wedding day… but I notice that Madd Monk doesn’t define the “top guy.” Does “top” mean… money? Social respect? Skill in some domain? Something else? “Top” can be a lot of things, and no one is “top” in all things. A lot of guys think being the “top” guy concerns money, but, once we get to an income level where we can pay our bills and lead a normal life, chicks don’t care much about money. We’ve all likely met rich
simps guys with no game and outcomes with women consistent with no game. We’ve all met guys in debt who do extraordinarily well with women. I don’t code as wealthy to women and have done well, and I think smart women realize that many of the richest guys blend in, rather than standing out.