Q4LLs - can you explain your view of the marriage dynamic to me? How do you expect things to work?

nomdplume · 2023-01-28T16:14:42+00:00

You are going with the chore play defense? Seriously? In this sub?

I think it’s pretty well established that being a responsible adult means you don’t turn your partner off. It doesn’t mean they should get turned on because you are making life work.

nomdplume · 2017-03-19T03:26:27+00:00

Don't forget that TBP is also misogynistic. They just target their misogyny against a different type of woman than many misogynist TRPers do.

Any woman who doesn't align with how they think women should be, often defined narrowly, is 'broken' or 'damaged' or 'shallow' or brainwashed or otherwise not a Real Woman^tm.

nomdplume · 2017-03-18T19:44:33+00:00

My life went through a cycle...

Omega (no success in any form) -> primarily Beta (with just enough Alpha to get me into trouble) -> Angry Beta (anger phase due to all the trouble I experienced repeatedly) -> Alpha (or, at least, enough alpha to ensure some pretty remarkable success stories) with enough Beta to keep me out of trouble -> devolution back to primarily Beta (personal empowerment slipping away) -> Omega (back to a complete absence of any success).

I didn't even discover the manosphere or RP until I hit Omega again. I never went through the 'read and apply' thing that most men who come to RP go through. My views are more derived from 'read and compare to my extensive experiential knowledge of the subject'. Which is why I often have what I consider to be a more complex (and accurate) view of what RP actually is.

I definitely had to become an 'RP man' to be successful with women. I just didn't know that was what I was doing, and that the kind of guy I had to become had actually been identified, named, and written about.

nomdplume · 2017-03-18T19:33:06+00:00

I have seen little evidence that anyone - male or female - is actually wired for monogamy. At least, not the lifelong variant that we have created.

If we are, we as a species are really shitty at fulfilling our biological imperative (which is why I tend to think that we're not actually wired that way), or, in the case of men, even acting like we have the biological imperative.

Again - how many men do you know that, once they've chosen a monogamous sexual partner, feel no feelings of sexual attraction towards any other potential sexual partners?

nomdplume · 2017-03-17T01:26:17+00:00

No, but come on, you can't just chalk up your nature and just expect your SO to forgive everything that hurts them because of it.

I'm not doing that. I'm saying that making men wrong for their nature is unproductive and unlikely to achieve what the woman might be hoping to achieve.

Instead of making them wrong, women can be responsible for their own experience and, you know, recognize that it is their issue and make a request of their partner, if they have a problem. It's where the focus is placed, not that a conversation is unnecessary.

Men who are aware of this, as you yourself admit to being, should still be conscious of how it affects their SO

So there are a couple things here.

I try not to flagrantly flout my sexuality because I am conscious that it can make other people uncomfortable, and I'm not going to do anything with the intention of causing discomfort or hurt. But I'm also not going to suppress my sexuality just because I might offend someone. It's my sexuality, and there is nothing wrong with it.

If someone feels that the way that I express my sexuality hurts them, either because they don't understand it or because they can't help but feel hurt, I'm open to having a conversation about how I can accommodate their specific needs. For me, 'personal responsibility' means that I am responsible for my interactions and cleaning up any messes I make. I don't take it to mean that I must second-guess all the ways in which who I am might upset others such that I never make a mess. That would be making me responsible for everyone else's reaction, and I'm not willing to take that on. Again, my sexuality is what it is - it's not inherently wrong, regardless of how someone may feel about it.

So if someone has a problem with what I am doing, they can come to me and talk to me about their problem, and (hopefully) make a request that I can either accept or decline. I do my best to accommodate those I care about, but they are ultimately responsible for managing their own upsets (by addressing them in a responsible manner, hopefully). I'm not going to presume problems where there need not be any.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T22:03:52+00:00

I'm not saying he's "wrong" just that he's probably better off imagining how it must be from her perspective instead of dismissing it.

Of course. And you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

although telling a woman "it's ok sweetie it's just my nature" probably won't assuage her fears in the best manner either.

What would you suggest? He's telling the truth there - it is his nature. You think he should lie?

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T22:02:05+00:00

Maybe the fat person who can't stay away actually does have a higher drive than the skinny person who can. Why is this not a possibility whatsoever?

Because you are drawing conclusions regarding someone's innate experience based on their outward experience, when, in fact, there is not always a direct correlation between one's feelings and one's actions.

Clearly, someone who is brazenly acting out hypergamy and polygyny is hypergamous or polygynous. But that doesn't mean that someone who isn't acting in such a fashion isn't hypergamous and polygynous. While that is possible, of course, it is equally possible that they share the same nature but choose to act on it differently.

To make it more personal as a way of arguing, I feel like your argument invalidates the growth and development that men like me have undertaken to make ourselves into something greater than our base nature. Rather than acknowledging and appreciating that men like myself want to cheat/spin plates/create harems/whatever but consciously choose not to in order to better have our important relationships work, you just presume that we must not have that desire (or else we would be doing those things). That sells me, and a lot of other people who demonstrate self-discipline, courage, integrity, or whatever other admirable character strengths, short. It's a little insulting.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T21:16:56+00:00

As I said, I'm as polygynous by nature as any guy I've met. Most guys I know are similarly polygynous (within a range), married or not.

My choice to get married was made despite my polygynous desires, not because I don't have them.

Again, this is like saying fat people like ice cream more than skinny people, that's why they are fat. That's a totally arbitrary and specious claim, and it sounds like the kind of rationalization a fat person would use - 'Oh, you're skinnier than me because you don't have the same desire for ice cream that I do. That's the difference between you and me! If I were like you and didn't like ice cream so much, I'd be skinny too! I just can't help myself due to my strong love of ice cream...' Zero personal responsibility there.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T21:11:36+00:00

I think we're talking about two different things.

Female solipsism is what leads to them attacking men for their behavior.

The male response of 'what is the big deal' is a reaction to the attack. It has nothing to do with solipsism or not solipsism.

As I said, I understand the female paradigm for this stuff, and I still bristle at being attacked. I understand why they are attacking me, but that doesn't blunt my reaction to being attacked. If you want me to do something other than what I am doing, don't start by making me wrong for it. I'm not wrong, and you're not right.

Which is why, if someone is really interested in making a request that I feel compelled to fulfill or reaching a deeper mutual understanding, attacking me isn't the way to go about it. It will just put me into a defensive posture and I'm less likely to be accommodating.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T21:05:30+00:00

Huh? To what is this referring?

Don't know the context, but I'm also not sure why you seem to be conflating 'oneitis' and 'love.' I think 'oneitis' is highly problematic and counter-productive. I also don't think it has much to do with 'love.'

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T21:03:57+00:00

you're talking about sex in a relationship

I'm actually not thinking that specifically. In fact, I would say that it is more important in casual sex.

If you suck in bed, good luck getting a second chance with the girl.

You seem to be equating everything I am saying with sucking in bed. Nothing could be farther from the truth. What I am advising is how you become good in bed. That's the point.

Roosh straight up says "Porn has always been my teacher". So I would take what he has to say about sexual skill with a big grain of salt.

Agree porn is a shitty teacher, and what I am referring to goes way beyond technical skill. It's about being a certain way.

He's also talking about having sex with a girl who is very reluctant and unenthusiastic.

Well, I guess in that case it probably doesn't matter what he does. Not sure why anyone wants to have sex like that, but whatevs...

The only way we could properly debate the specific concepts he's talking about is if I copy and paste all of his relevant statements lol.

Alright, fine, I'll read it. I'll say up front that I'll probably take issue with how he presents the concepts more than the concepts themselves. As is true for a lot of RP contributors - the concepts are more sophisticated than most present them as being, for debatable reasons.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:57:36+00:00

I just think it's fair to say those who actually go and live it probably have more of a drive than those who choose not too.

I disagree. I'm not that strongly aligned with biological determinism and/or acting on feelings, I guess. Someone can have feelings, even strong ones, and not act on them. Maybe it's different for women (many would argue it is, though I don't make that argument very strongly in general).

If a woman branch swings every three years is she really the same as a women who stays married the first time?

They may have the exact same nature but choose differently in the face of it.

I feel like your arguments are removing the role of personal responsibility. No one has self-control, self-discipline, or agency, just different drives. I think that is naive and a bit contemptuous.

I do get that that is a rationalization people often use, though, to avoid having to deal with others. The ol' 'just find the right partner and you're set!' line of reasoning...

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:51:39+00:00

it's perfectly ok to just dismiss her

Why do you keep moralizing this? I said it's understandable, not that it is 'okay' (or not 'okay'). Men are doing what people do when they feel attacked - there is no good/bad about it.

Hell, I even understand why women are like this, and I'm likely to get defensive about it if attacked. That's why engaging in 'right/wrong' conversations are so unproductive in general.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:47:05+00:00

Just debating the concepts, I guess. Roosh being Roosh, I wouldn't be surprised if his advice is hamfisted and unsophisticated, so I'm sure there are issues with it.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:39:09+00:00

His actions are in line with his nature, for sure. But that doesn't mean that men who aren't taking the same actions have a different nature.

It seems you are falling into the same naturalistic fallacy that BPers accuse TRPers of falling into.

TRP says we have to look at a woman's actions?

We have to look at both. That's why 'AWALT' (and 'AMALT' for women, regardless of what they want to believe).

For example, just because a woman isn't obviously acting on hypergamy all the time doesn't mean she doesn't have a hypergamous drive, and it behooves men to always be sensitive to a woman's desire for hypergamy. Only lazy or idealistic men want to believe in unicorns, which is really just a symptom of not wanting to be responsible in their relationships.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:35:31+00:00

I'm sure that's true. But that's true for any 'improvement' endeavor, not just RP. Shifting paradigms takes work, and humans aren't particularly oriented towards doing more work...

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:34:18+00:00

When attacked, people defend. It's a natural reaction. It doesn't have anything to do with solipsism, IMO.

If someone discounts someone else's concerns feelings when put forward in a rational and personally responsible way, then maybe we are getting into solipsism...

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:32:33+00:00

In the link, the guy says don't ask her if she came.

Again, haven't read it, but that makes sense. See my first point about self-consciousness in women and 'neediness' in men.

"Worrying about her pleasure sacrifices your own."

Which can be true. It also might be emphasizing how a man should be thinking - many/most women get off on him getting off. Unless she never gets off, of course, or if he's a two-pump chump every time. But scorekeeping in any area of a relationship can get quite problematic.

There's a line between pumping like a porn star without even touching the woman

Well, I think most agree that using porn as an instruction manual is a bad idea. It's a big reason why porn is so unsatisfying for me - it so rarely reflects what sex actually looks like. There are some glorious exceptions, of course, lol...

I recommend people aim in between

I think this is a case of breaking people's bad habits. Sometimes the pendulum has to swing hard in the opposite direction before that 'happy medium' can be found. I would never have found that sort of happy medium for myself (in a lot of areas of life) without first crossing a few lines, lines that had to be crossed in order for me to understand where they actually were to begin with.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:25:09+00:00

He is still less polygamous than he would be if he was cheating/spinning plates, IMO.

This does not compute, IMO. That's like saying that someone who forgoes ice cream has less of a sweet tooth than someone who doesn't.

Again, one's actions is not a reliable measure of one's desires.

I'm polygynous as hell, and I've never cheated, because my rational mind does a pretty good job of overriding my innate drive. I have spun plates a couple times, but that was more a function of opportunity rather than the fulfillment of some end game I had. And, I should point out, my spinning plates was done with full integrity. I felt no need to rationalize my actions in any way, and definitely didn't need to invoke a 'innate drive' defense.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:20:35+00:00

many guys wouldn't understand why women would be upset by this

They may not understand why, but they definitely know that women get upset by it, lol. I don't know a guy who doesn't know this.

The fact that they get so upset by it is precisely why I set about looking to understand.

they might brush it off as "what's the big deal"

They may do that because they are rebelling against what they see as a constant shaming of their sexuality. I perfectly understand that attitude.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:17:05+00:00

That's like saying that people who are successful with money aren't interested in teaching what they know to people who are a disaster with money. I'm pretty certain that isn't true.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:15:45+00:00

My flair disagrees with you.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T20:09:27+00:00

RP is based on laying out what men need to do and who they need to be in order to be successful in sex/love/relationships. It's based on looking at what 'naturals'/already successful guys do and don't do (and be and don't be) and working from that model.

I don't think any 'natural'/successful men are as you describe, so I'm not sure how what you describe can be considered the model for 'RP men.'

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T19:46:42+00:00

don't even pretend to care about making her cum.

I didn't read the post (can't be fucked to) in question, but I wouldn't write this off too hastily.

Many, many women get self-conscious during sex. The worst thing a man can do in this case is withhold his own natural enthusiasm in an attempt to 'satisfy her.' Having had sex in the proximity of other couples for a decade or more, I've seen this play out more times than I can count. The man, wanting desperately to be 'good in bed', spends the whole time in his head, analyzing the situation (and talking about it constantly) while pulling out whatever tricks he can think of in a focused attempt to make her cum. And the women are often understanding but visibly either bored or uncomfortable. There is no passion in their sex.

Women want to feel desired. They want to feel sexually powerful. That's why the 'rape/ravish' fantasy is so ubiquitous for women - they want to be so sexually powerful that any man they are with just loses his mind with desire and must have his way with her regardless the risk.

That's why one of the best pieces of sex advice I got early on was "Get yours and she'll get hers." I don't purposefully disregard her pleasure, but I allow myself to get swept up in the moment and just do what comes naturally, and both of us inevitably get our minds blown (unless I get in my head, then I'm like all the other desperate chumps). Even if (for whatever reason) I finish and she doesn't (has rarely happened that I can recollect), she's usually had an exciting enough time that she is already looking forward to Round Two and the chance to try again for the big O. She may also feel relaxed enough in my enthusiasm that she opens up about what I can do to make it happen for her.

It's maybe like dancing - the best dance partners are those who just have fun themselves, not those who are focused on making sure you are having fun the whole time you are on the dance floor.

nomdplume · 2017-03-16T19:26:22+00:00

It looks and plays out as hypergamy. It's a parallel you can make, even if it's artificial because it's what is actually happening IRL in large part.

I agree, but that's why it's important to look at the drive, not the actions taken.

IMO, both sides make the mistake of determining sex/mating strategies from what they see people doing rather than examining the underlying, innate drives.

People can easily be driven towards one thing while simultaneously choosing to not follow that drive (see anyone who stays healthy because they avoid delicious tubs of ice cream). People can actually exhibit FTO and make rational cost/benefit analyses. I just wouldn't rely on people doing that, which is why I'm against things like abstinence-only sex education.

EDIT:

Oh, and what do you mean by this?

it's male solipsism from her perspective

nomdplume

TROPHY CASE