“You cannot negotiate genuine desire” is one of the most important concepts in game and life. The actual title of Rollo’s post is “Transactional vs. validation sex,” but “You cannot negotiate genuine desire.” Pretty much any guy who’s been in a long-term relationship will relate to the point.
Guys who haven’t been in a long-term relationship should be working on their game rather than reading about the distant future, but once game starts working it’s a good idea to know what the future holds.
There is a vile article on Vox.com, “My husband pressured me into sex for years. #MeToo must include sexual assault in marriage,” which I’m not going to link but you can find if you must hate-read it. You get the basic idea from the headline.
The article dovetails nicely with Rollo Tomassi’s point, “You cannot negotiate genuine desire.” Any man who attempts to negotiate genuine desire to destined to fail, as the writer’s husband should realize. But like most guys he’s probably never been taught as much, and he probably thought that marriage is a contract or system involving reciprocal obligations and duties.
In modern marriages, that isn’t true. A marriage is a one-sided contract in which a man serves at the whims of a woman. Smart guys realize that marriage is a terrible deal and refuse to enter it. Guys like the one married to the anonymous Vox writer get shat on in public.
There is a concept in engineering called “The Five Whys” that are designed to get beneath the apparent surface of a problem. In the Vox worldview, the problem is the man’s behavior towards his wife. And to be fair, his behavior might be very bad (though we can’t tell from the article). But the deepest root cause of this situation is biology. A couple levels up from that, however, is marriage. Take this guy out of the marriage contract and he’d likely realize “his” woman isn’t into him and he needs to find a woman who is. That’s at least three levels down from the Vox article, however. You’ll never find an honest exploration of male-female relationships in Vox.
Strangely, you will find many honest explorations in other female-centric publications like New York Magazine. But those explorations won’t be framed the way I frame them.
In a Tweet, Vox’s editor Ezra Klein called it a “searing read.” It is searing, but not for the reasons he thinks. It’s a searing indictment of marriage as an institution and that guy for being dumb enough to fall for it.
I propose men start a hashtag, #DontGetMarried, pointing out the reasons why smart guys don’t contort themselves into the horrible position that is marriage.
Jesus Christ. This text game breakdown is phenomenal. There are others like it on Riv’s blog and Nash’s blog. I used to think myself a good texter. No longer.
I do think I’m a functional texter, and most of my success comes from shutting the fuck up and less-is-more. But there is a level of insight around texting and text game that I do not have.
Guys who have found their way here from Reddit should pay attention: this is the kind of shit that almost never makes it onto Reddit. Experts get exasperated by Reddit’s beginner culture and migrate away.
Paul Janka’s street hustling and escalation. It’s a great essay. I’m not as aggressive as that guy, at least not in the approach and initial encounter. Maybe I’ve been doing it wrong.
I wonder if he is just very good looking. Or if he is just filtering for “yes” girls and being overly aggro in many sets, thus setting himself back.
Regardless, I can’t read this and not be impressed.
“‘The desire to have a child never goes away’: how the involuntarily childless are forming a new movement” is framed partially correctly and partially incorrect. The real story is, “Women prefer banging hot guys who don’t care much about them more than they want a family with a boring dude.”
Until it’s too late. Biology is a cruel master and pretty much no one in college and universities explains it. So you get these women who don’t understand that their own actions have consequences.
I read this just a day after posting “Catch and release women who want families.” I personally know some of these involuntarily childless women (not the ones in the article obviously but the ones who just waited too long). On the surface they often say they didn’t want children anyway, or it just “never happened.” “It just never happened” is a typical phrase players know well: for a lot of women, “it just happened” or “it just didn’t happen.” They have no agency in the issue. They’re just a pinball in the world of men.
So a player’s job is to make things appear to “just happen” for her. So many women deny their own agency. That used to baffle me, until I realized that men and women have some key biological and psychological differences that create different outcomes (on average… I have met very driven, self-aware women, but they are outside the norm).
Most women cannot have a fulfilled life without children. They prioritize, often unconsciously, the wrong parts of their life, and then they’re surprised when age catches up with them.
(Also, half of Americans will be obese by age 35. Think about that. Fat women cannot attract the kind of man they’d want to have kids with.)
“Why women prefer male bosses” won’t entertain the obvious answer: because on average male bosses are better and less likely to leave the industry.
Feminists don’t like to say this, but in industry everyone knows that most women who have kids quit work or downshift their careers. Yes, there are exceptions. One of my key mentors was a woman who didn’t downshift, but she’s the exception and she knew she was the exception. She was reluctant to mentor younger women because she’d tried before. She’d mentor them, then a couple years in they’d have a kid and goodbye.
That’s also why jobs like nursing, teaching, and pharmacy are so popular among women. They have relatively short training periods. Women can get up and running by age 25 if not sooner. They don’t have a lot of headroom or upward mobility, but those professions are all ones that make it easy to drop in and drop out of the workforce.
You could just, you know, look at women’s real priorities and infer labor market outcomes from that, or you can screech DISCRIMINATION and PATRIARCHY on Twitter instead of working.
“Women hardest hit” is another chapter in the great book of “don’t get married.”
One of the changes in the new tax law involves the tax status of alimony. Previously the payor (men) could deduct the money they pay in alimony, and the payee (women) would have it taxed as income. Starting with divorces commenced after Dec 31 2018, alimony payments will be treated like child support payments have been. Men won’t be able to deduct the amount they pay from their income, and women won’t have to pay taxes on alimony received.
You would expect that the pro divorce lobby (nearly everyone) would be cheering this enhancement to the cash and prizes we offer as a reward to women who don’t honor their wedding vows. However, the problem is ex husbands are already being bled white. It has gotten so bad that the parasite is now expressing concern for the host. All of the articles I could find on the subject object to the changes, not because they object to soaking men for women’s benefit, but because the change is seen as potentially hurting women.
If you are a man you are a wallet to the larger society. No one gives a shit about you except to the extent you can do something for them. You’re disposable to most people and to the greater society. Marriage is just a way of giving a woman half your assets and future income.
Marriage made sense in the distant past but it makes no sense today. Want to have kids? Just have kids, get a DNA test, and skip the marriage. You’ll still be liable for child support if/when your former partner gets restless, but at least you won’t be hit up for alimony too.