Saw Ms. Slav last night for her birthday. And it was good.
Here’s a story about a guy who gets everything he could ever want and is still a miserable, unhappy cunt. Is this common among successful entertainers, or do only the miserable and unhappy entertainers write autobiographies detailing how they’re fucked up?
Moby understands that most guys use non-monogamy as a way to fuck around while retaining a chick who wants monogamy, “Kelly and I were boyfriend and girlfriend, but we had an open, non-monogamous relationship. She dated other people, or so I assumed. And I dated other people, as I well knew. In fact, everyone knew that I dated other people.” Kelly gets tired of this because his SMV is much higher than hers because he’s a famous musician (and for that reason alone). Like some high-status guys, it seems he realizes that being poly is a decent way to keep a primary chick who he likes around while also having the ability to play the field.
Since then I’d fallen hard for two other women, and would have been happy to be in a monogamous relationship with either of them – except that even making plans to go on a second date made me panic. So I’d given up trying to date seriously, and had embraced being a promiscuous drunk on tour. It wasn’t the most spiritually or ethically sound behavior, but at least I wasn’t panicking.
I don’t get the panic attack via dating thing. Is it real? Is he full of shit? It seems like an awful lot of cover if he’s full of shit, though.
I find this book unusual because Moby’s feelings about “success” in his world is a bit close to some of my feelings about the game right now.
In the early 1990s going on tour had been novel, and I had been an enthusiastic evangelist for the nascent rave scene. And then for a few years, after the success of Play and 18, it had been exciting, a perpetual road-trip party with huge concerts, unceasing drunkenness, and almost effortless promiscuity. But lately touring had turned into a routine, one in which I played in smaller venues to smaller audiences who just wanted to hear older songs.
Or call it “flat.”
Suddenly everything seemed flat – the hipsters, the lights, the levity – as if life was just a staged photograph in a bad design magazine. I was sad, but underneath my sadness I was angry and disappointed. I’d been given the kingdom, and I’d squandered it.
I’m not that anhedonic, though, and I don’t have the drinking/drug problems Moby does. His manager has enough partying at some point, “We walked to the limo. Sandy was usually unflappable, but he looked angry. ‘I’m not sure I can keep doing this, Moby,’ he said.” I get him.
It’s also true that casual sex can become less exciting over time,
These women were beautiful, and they wanted to have a threesome with me. But it felt rote, as if we were playing scripted parts: the debauched musician, the Park Avenue lady drinking away her sorrow, and the wide-eyed burlesque dancer from a small town outside Reno experiencing all that life in the big city had to offer.
This is the psyche’s sign that it’s time to change lanes.
There are Red Pill moments, like with this hot divorced chick at a New York City party,
“They’re all bitches,” she said, gesturing at the room full of soft money. “A year ago they were my best friends. Now they won’t talk to me.” “Why not?” “I got divorced, and now they’re all afraid I’m going to fuck their husbands.”
They’re not bitches. They’re wise. This is why some hot chicks have trouble making and keeping female friends. Smart chicks try to keep their man away from single hot women, as a form of damage control (guys will often do the same thing). When hot chicks say they have trouble making friends, it can be a sign of damaged personality… but it can also just be chicks wisely mate guarding.
Drugs are dangerous because used well they can enhance and make magical the human experience. Used poorly, they try to fill a hole in the soul, as Moby tries to use them… and it doesn’t work.
I woke up alone, in the parking lot of the Lowry hotel in Manchester. The women were gone, the bus was cold, and I felt like gray death. There were empty vodka bottles on the floor.
This is fame, fortune, etc. But Moby can’t take those things and build something on top of them, it seems.
I had money, status, and huge swaths of pristine land. But the increasingly noisy and demanding truth was that unless I was drunk or having sex with a stranger, I wasn’t happy. And although I had decided that I was a spiritual person, I never actually did anything spiritual.
Chasing happiness is foolish. You have to chase a goal or a skill or whatever that is challenging to reach but not impossible to reach, a goal or skill that you can make some progress towards every day. In the absence of such a goal people become listless. Guys who can’t get laid do well with game because it has a goal and it has some ways you can make small progress every day (eat well, talk to chicks, develop new hobbies, hit the gym and watch those numbers improve, etc.).
This guy has some serious emotional problems that he never manages to address. I wonder how many guys in the community, are similar: effective on the outside (Moby is an effective music maker), totally fucked up on the inside. Seems like it’d be useful to ask… what if you get whatever you’re striving for? Humans aren’t happy in stasis… if you get everything, you’d still have to develop a new goal/purpose. We have to have a purpose, and we have to develop new ones, otherwise we stagnate and die.
This is not a typical book about the game or about how to manage your psychology and the psychology of other people. Moby doesn’t talk about writing the big songs, which is a strange omission, like a book about game that says nothing about approaches.
I’m at heart a pragmatist: I look at what works with chicks, then do that. For a long time, my impression has been that most social media use is a feminine, low-status move… as Nash says, “Instagram is for girls.” As far as I can tell, minimal social media presence has been a net benefit to me, not a drawback, because chicks associate social media with their girlfriends and orbiter guys. Maybe some guys with stratospherically interesting lives have been able to leverage it, but if they have stratospherically interesting lives they probably don’t need it, either.
You have to look at WHY she said [Instagram]:
— If she uses that as a “shit test,” my line will help
— If she was not that into you… nothing will help
IG is a “holding cell for orbiters.” I never want in there.
Sometimes I can show strength when I reject IG, and she’ll like.
Another comment from Smirking Soldier. That’s interesting, because in the last year or so, I have noticed more chicks trying to give me their Instagrams and more chicks talking about starting to date guys based on Instagram flirting (that post I linked is from two years ago… interesting… Guys badly want social media to work. Here’s why it (mostly) doesn’t is from this year).
A guy DM’ed me because I said that “It could be that this rule/principle is shifting.” My net read is that Instagram is still a slight negative. But I’m now seeing chicks on it everywhere… when I glance at a girl holding a smartphone, she seems to be on it. I’ve heard some chicks say they’re surprised when I say I think it’s a waste of time… not good surprised, which can have an element of confusion to it… negative surprised, like they’d reply to someone who says he thinks deodorant is a capitalist conspiracy. Chicks I’ve slept with have been very eager to sign me up to follow their Instagram… which is fine, as I know they increase their follower count (seems to be important to them), while I don’t interact beyond that.
So while I’m net negative on Instagram, I’m open to revision, and I have to be: if it turns out that Instagram is a form of social media that increases lays… then I guess I need to be working it harder. Guys are the sellers and girls are the buyers in the game… the only exceptions are guys who are so high-value that the market flips, like with famous guys. That’s probably less than 1% of guys and I’m not in that 1%. For the rest of us, it’s game, it’s learning how to read the market and respond to it. If you run a failing business and the market doesn’t appreciate what you’re selling, it doesn’t matter how badly you want to sell it or think the market should appreciate the product… the market has spoken.
It could be that guys working the “broadcast” model (they never interact with the chicks’s accounts and let chicks reply to them) of social media are doing all right… that appears to be Seven and Smirking Soldier above.
I’ve also thought about posting erotic but not nude or pornographic stills from video cips (no girls’s faces in them). Probably too explicit, but the thought has entered my mind before. A bit like the SnapChat in Game gambit. That might just screen chicks, though, leaving the ones who are horny or whatever. It will also piss off the women in the screen grabs, if they learn about this, which they might, even doing them as stories.
Game fundamentals are eternal, like masculinity, facing your fears, approaching the chicks, etc. But some aspects of the game change with the culture and technology. Could be that we’re witnessing that change now.
Being adaptable is good. I’m not a huge fan of being a digital sharecropper, which seems to be what a lot of online systems encourage. But I’ll do the things that increase the bang rate, and if that means Instagram, then damnit it’s time to do it. The other thing, though, is that most of my everyday life… is just not super interesting. I work, I think, I read, I go to the gym. Most of it doesn’t DHV. Except maybe to intellectual chicks, who are pretty rare.
So yeah. I’ll also note that I did a little experiment over the last week or so, which has shaken some of my confidence about the relatively good state of the world. Story later.
I’m thinking about patterns… and in the last year, it may have changed, and I may not have changed with it (yet). Chicks adding me to Facebook has been a demonstration of interest for a long time, even though I don’t use it much either.
The gap between demonstrating higher value, “DHV,” and demonstrating lower value, “DLV” can be narrow (more narrow than some guys think). In my experience, no or little social media seems to have been a “DHV” for the last ten or so years. But if that shifts among the hotter young chicks… then it can become a DLV thing where you’re a weirdo for not doing what “everyone else” does. Sometimes, not doing what everyone else does is good… not eating sugar, hitting the weights, interacting with real people in real life… those are things not everyone does that are good. But the deodorant example above is bad. Refusing to get a real job because you want to be true to your “authentic self” by living at home with your parents is typically bad. Etc. And these things can shift. Being a dirty grunge rocker in 1990-1995 seems to have been cool and possibly a path to getting laid. Not so much today.
Earlier today I met a friend for coffee… had two very good interactions with chicks who seemed into me but claimed boyfriends… but they were very pleasant, even in what is technically a rejection. The contrast w/ online is startling. My buddy is in the non-mono community… lower SMV than me, if I can be honest / possibly an asshole. There was an older-but-not-old woman there too, with her big fake tits hanging out, and I left to leave my friend time to get her number. He didn’t… lacks killer instinct… after she left I asked him about it and he said that being in the community makes him lazy. This is probably true, although lazy and cowardly can be pretty close together too, like DHV and DLV. I have my cowardly moments… but I have enough game and enough underlying value to get the multiplier effect going, by bringing new chicks into the non-mono community. Leveraging both game and the non-mono community has led me to great results, in my view, and that is why I have been writing about it, before I leave or dramatically scale back both.
Usually Feeld is only useful for couples: I’ve used it, on and off, for dates w/ other couples, and it’s been fairly successful for that (see archives for some examples… Peaches came from there originally). Some “unicorns” (single, unattached girls open to sex with couples) show up, but they’re pretty rare and I don’t think I’ve had a real-life meet with a true unicorn from the app. Till now. Matched with a couple of unicorns, but I push the meet pretty quickly as I don’t want to be anyone’s penpal. This girl, I’m going to call her “Marcia,” was planning to visit town and said so in her profile. She’s surprisingly pretty (7) and interested in sexual exploration, and, most surprising of all, she shows up to the first date, after relatively minimal talk about sex clubs and how they work, as well as where she lives. On the first date she’s put off that I didn’t bring a girl, but I asked how many girls she’s dated from online (zero) and then reminded her that girls are flakey as hell, and on the fly I told her that I often vet chicks. The last bit is not precisely true but true enough.
[Strangely, I’ve been getting a lot of questions from players / wannabe players about how to start doing non-monogamy, and then I say, check the book, and they’re like, what book? Not sure what’s up with that, but it’s in the side bar.]
Back to the story: lots of talk about respective countries, what she’s looking for, and lots of sex talk… given how we met, the sex talk was a given. She’s not living in the biggest city in her country, which is likely a big barrier to good kink and non-monogamy communities. Pretty standard two-venue, two drinks at each venue, did the bang. Mid 7, mid 20s, not too exceptional, although young & thin is way too rare in the age of relentless sugar consumption. Next night, my threesome buddy was around, so we banged her pretty relentlessly together. He’s been seeing a new girl for a while, and we double teamed her a while ago, but there wasn’t a story in that one. Lately I feel like I’ve been picking up random lays here and there rather than having a consistent main chick, although that may change here… I may be finding my way out of the game… we shall see.
With this girl, the night after, we had a threesome with Ms. Slav, so Marcia got her girl-girl threesome too. She seemed pretty impressed that she expressed a desire for group sex and then… got group sex. I get that perspective, as most people, particularly women, can’t execute anything. When I told Marcia that chicks are flakey and bad at planning, at first she denied, but after some back and forth where I challenged her on what women have made happen romantically in her life, she came around to agreeing. Night after I rested, night after that I took her to a sex club w/ Ms. Slav and others, and did a nice swap with a pretty blonde girl whose boyfriend seemed very happy to be f**king a new girl. I was pretty beat by the end.
This happened a while ago… I wrote most of this story, then didn’t get around to posting. Marcia did get what she wanted in the form of sexual experimentation (she’d mentioned it in her original profile). She seemed happy to see me and amazed at what’s possible. I think she can get sex positivity and kink from her home country, just not from where she is living.
Overall it was a positive experience for both of us, but it is not a very repeatable experience because Feeld works best for couple-to-couple dating. Many couples on it are seeking unicorns (I will snag one if I see one, which I don’t) but I get the sense that the unicorn thing almost never works out. Doesn’t stop people from trying, though.
It’s useful to distinguish between attainable, repeatable strategies versus weird one-offs. Many guys online focus on daygame because it’s attainable and repeatable. Advice like, “Just become a famous actor or musician” may be repeatable, but it’s not attainable. Guys who get ecosystems going (like being in a cool local band) may have systems that are repeatable, but not useful for a guy with zero inclination towards music. Non-monogamy systems like Feeld or SDC can work for guys with one decently hot chick and who are seeking others but will probably not work for a guy without a chick. You have to have the first chick, like you can’t do nuclear fission without a high element like uranium.
But if you, the player, are out trying various things, various angles, sometimes you will get a good some random lays, as happened to me here, from unexpected sources. It does seem like non-monogamy is more popular than it used to be, and that, for guys having casual sex with multiple women, there is little reason not to attempt this. Since the girl you’re casually f**king is likely casually f**king other guys anyway, why not make that impulse work for you?
It seems average people, even average players, don’t understand how powerful the non-monogamy thing can be. I have this system set up, where I can pretty much (not perfectly) deliver on many women’s deepest fantasies. This chick Marcia came along and discovered that I can make things happen that other guys can’t make happen… pretty cool if you think about it. Other players can also layer the non-monogamy network on top of the rest of their game.
Marica learned a lot about how non-monogamy works, and I explained to her that for a lot of people the hardest part is not jealousy, it’s not the things that people typically expect… it’s time management.
I have been seeing some of Ms. Slav, just not that much. Enough to keep the demons at bay, but in some ways I feel a little stupid about Ms. Slav, like I brought fresh meat to the village and haven’t gotten enough credit for it… or enough of the meat. Doesn’t matter much now, but it’s a feeling I’ve been having… maybe I’m turning into a chick, but I’m trying to pay more attention to how I feel, rather than just what I do and how effective I am at doing it.
It’s kind of a weird sensation. Is this how chicks live? No wonder they can’t get shit done. Intellectually, I know that Ms. Slav and I had an implicit deal and I have more or less held up my side and despite some flakiness from her she has actually more or less held up her side. A chick like her is why some guys go to the sex clubs and parties… they will occasionally get a free lunch, a young hot chick who just loves to f**k, and that is her. Right place, right time, you can get what you came for. Pretty unusual, but not impossible. Everything I have seen in this world reaffirms the idea that there are no shortcuts, even as I keep looking for them, wanting them to exist. Pointless, really. Marica was a sort of shortcut, but one who comes along so rarely that there is no point is seeking other chicks like her.
I think Marica might genuinely have flown across an ocean to attempt to have casual group sex experiences. Seems like a damn long way to go. She seems a little unimaginative… like those travel bores who are droning on about where they went and what they ate, but have zero insight and seem to have set fire to a bunch of money so they can tell their friends they once went to Italy. Right after I finished this post, I saw a Long Burn The Fire tweet, “When you ask a girl to describe how a particular experience made her feel and she replies with ‘i dunno, why are you asking this, thats weird’ youll know youve arrived in retard land.” Marcia is not in retard land… but she’s also living not too far from the border. (Long Burn The Fire, if you are reading this, where is your blog???)
I feel kind of tired of chasing down chicks for sex who aren’t that good… I know that the smart thing to do is to keep chasing, but be more discriminating… I don’t know, though, as I’ve been thinking about some of the really top chicks in my life, and there just aren’t that many of them. I have a much darker view of humanity in general than I used to. A lot of people just seem kid of worthless. That makes me wonder, though, does someone who is like 20 IQ points above me, who has achieved far more than me, look at me and think I’m kind of worthless? For some people, that could be a legitimate view. I read biographies of some of the real greats, especially in science, math, and engineering, and it’s like, “These guys were doing shit beyond anything I can even attempt.” This is not a terribly productive line of thought, but sometimes dark thoughts help us better orient ourselves toward the future.
“Enrollment Shortfalls Spread to More Colleges.” A few of you have noted that I seem pretty “pro-college.” I’m not pro- or anti-college. College is good for guys who have the skills and inclination to succeed, and who go to relatively inexpensive state schools and major in real subjects like computer science, engineering, economics, etc.
College is terrible for unmotivated, low-IQ guys who go because their parents told them to, or because it’s what you’re supposed to do after high school. Colleges are fleecing those kids and their families and they (the colleges) just don’t give a f**k to stop. They should be ashamed of themselves but that’s like saying the guys selling tobacco should be ashamed of themselves… shame rarely beats the profit motive.
Date-onomics (yesterday’s post, you should read it) points out that most non-engineering schools also have more women in them than men. If you are an 18-22 year old guy who wants to get laid, being in college is much better than not being in college, all else being equal.
Most expensive private schools are overpriced and will saddle you with too much debt. Most people who go to schools like Ithaca and Bucknell (named in the article) are just stupid and wasting their money. “Bucknell, where the full cost of attendance is nearly $70,000 a year, had a discount rate of about 31 percent and underspent its financial-aid budget by about $1.2 million.” 69 percent of $70 grant is still $48,000, or two to three times as much as a guy with a brain should be spending.
There is an anti-college brigade in the Red Pill world… many of their points are accurate, as college can leave you deeply in debt with nothing to show for it. College can also be an awesome, life-affirming experience. It really depends on you. Lots of guys are going to college who have no business being there, because they lack the cognitive abilities and the work ethic to make it make sense. But lots of guys should be in college because the college wage premium is real and most people are not self-taught prodigies who will make it on their own without college.
Too many guys appear to spend college doing the minimum necessary to get by and spending all their free time playing video games and watching TV or porn. For them, they might as well not go. Some guys appear to spend college developing themselves and their skills and their ability to meet with and bond with and interact with other people. For them, college is great.
I keep mentioning Date-onomics: How Dating Became a Lopsided Numbers Game in private, and I finally mentioned it in a post, but I didn’t elaborate, so: small changes in male-female ratios have pronounced effects in sex culture. If there are lots more guys than chicks, like engineering schools or military bases, there’s a lot of monogamy, a lot of long courtships, longer waits for sex, and more transfer of financial resources from men to chicks. If there are lots more chicks than guys, like liberal arts colleges and New York City, there are more hookups, less monogamy, shorter courtships, and more casual sex. In American cities, there are profound differences in male-female ratios. In most cities, there are more single college-educated females than single college-educated males. San Francisco and Seattle are exceptions: those cities have more dudes than chicks. New York and L.A. have among the most skewed ratios, in favor of men, in the country: both have far more chicks than dudes. Get out of SF and Seattle if you can. Choose similar jobs in NYC or LA.
If you are a guy, you want to go where the chicks are and the dudes aren’t. I have said before that there are really three levels of game: 1. Your interpersonal game itself, 2. Your underlying value and 3. Your environment. Ideally, a guy will try to improve all three at once. If you have strong game and value, but a terrible environment, the game may still be very hard for you, because you are competing heavily against all other men. If the opposite is true, you may still succeed despite yourself. Date-onomics also explains why so much of the online advice guys give each other is useless… we don’t know how cool a guy is, what his life is like, what he looks like, how he acts around other people, or where he lives. The last one is important, as guys who live in cities will do better than guys who live in rural areas (a lot more men than women) or suburbs.
It’s strange to me that almost no players talk about this. Many players talk about Mark Manson and The Book of Pook, but this should be on the player’s reading list, despite its extremely Blue Pill framing.
The author says “I realize most people do not want to think about supply and demand when contemplating matters of the heart.” Players sure as fuck should. If you are a player or just a guy who gives a shit about your sex life, don’t take the job in San Francisco. Take it in L.A., NYC, or almost anywhere else instead. If you are a guy debating whether you should go to college, the author writes “By 1992, the female-to-male ratio among freshly minted graduates reached 54:46. At first glance, 54:46 may not sound like much of a gap, but it meant 17 percent more women than men graduating from college.” “By 2012, the college gender gap has doubled to 34 percent more women than men.” College is where the chicks are, so there can be good reasons to go there.
The book also uses college education as a proxy. If you’re a guy who looks, acts, earns, and behaves like you’re college educated, whether you actually are or not is probably irrelevant. If you’re a guy who behaves like an idiot and you don’t have good game, then you are probably not going to get chicks whether you went to college or not.
Admirably, the author is willing to use words most mainstream authors will not “A surplus of women in cities may be a geographic manifestation of the general phenomenon of hypergyny, that is, women’s marrying up.” I think the correct term is “hypergamy,” but whatever, that’s something almost no one admits in the mainstream (except Jordan B. Peterson, whatever his other flaws).
To be sure, New York has downsides in that it’s expensive as fuck all. Birger has tables from the Census showing the male-female ratio in different cities. Chicago has 40% more college educated chicks 22-29 and 20% more college educated chicks age 30 – 39. Same in New Orleans. Same in Vegas (although I don’t like Vegas as much because of the lack of foot traffic on streets; it is also about driving). Austin, Texas is not as favorable to guys, but Houston is. Nashville is favorable to guys. Philadelphia is.
The book has story after story about supposedly “gorgeous” women age 30 – 45 and their travails dating. I do not sympathize much with those women because they just waited until their sexual market value had begun to decline to value marriage. Much like this chick and numerous others you’ll read about in the media, all with the same whine about the same predictable problem. The highest-level men don’t care that much about women’s careers; high-level men just want a woman who is economically functional. I myself like hearing about teachers and nurses, because they are economically functional without being married to their jobs. I’m not as thrilled by women in the corporate rat race who are sweating because they can’t fit a baby and their careers together. I, like many men, think those women are fine for casual sex but problematic for relationships. This book helps explain the spinster epidemic overtaking us all.
I’m getting off topic, but players need to know that where they live will affect how their dating life works. A bunch of guys writing about the game right now seem to be living in the Bay Area… maybe that’s why they’re writing about the game… the Bay Area is game on hard mode. Bully for them but I would refer it on easy mode.
Roy Walker didn’t like New York, but he’s comparing it to London/Europe, so I don’t have his perspective. It does seem like Eastern Europe and Russia just have hotter chicks than any other country, but, again, I don’t have the experience to offer personal testimonials.
This book is also useful for guys who have a son. Girls do much better at school than boys because they typically mature faster. A 5 year old boy is about as mature as a 6 year old girl. Same with a 15 year old girl and a 16 year old boy. If you have a boy, try to get him to start school relatively late, compared to his peers. That will likely improve his school prospects. Most people don’t do this and that’s part of the reason there are way more girls in college than boys.
In summary, ignore the Blue Pill wrapping and please read the book for yourself, taking from it the important lessons about environment. I am guessing that far more urban, college-educated women read books than do rural, not-college-educated men, so the author has wisely decided to pander to his audience. Many guys report that the game feels way different in some cities than in others, and that has been my experience as well.
“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.