attraction, battle of the sexes, break up, break ups, casual sex, commitment, dating, divorce, hypergamy, love, marriage, red pill, relationships, romance
According to Red Pill philosophy, the achilles heel of each gender is women are hypergamous while men are polygamous. Or in other words, women are always on the lookout for a better deal, while men are always on the lookout for additional partners.
Now of course these are generalizations, and not everyone acts upon these base drivers. But that does not mean they are not there, and one is wise to guard against them as acting upon them has a tendency to be destructive more often than not.
Since this blog is directed toward women, we will now ignore the topic of men and polygamy (perhaps we can talk of this another day) and focus instead on women and hypergamy.
In college, I remember clearly my abnormal psychology professor talking about the “theory of availability.” In short, he said that the idea of total commitment was all but dead in American culture — that everybody was available if the offer was right. I was appalled at the thought, even then, many years prior to discovering the Red Pill. But 20 some years of life experience later and seeing that very scenario in real life many times, I’d say like it or not, for a large part it is likely true. Especially if people are unaware or in denial of this.
Ladies, no matter how great of a guy you have, or how ideal of a situation you are in, there is always the risk that hyperemic urges will strike. And my advice is to be aware of and to conciously counter them. Otherwise they can feaster and grow in power, these thoughts of “What if?” or “Why not?”
Case in point: Tonight I was at a charity event representing my biz. It was an interesting and accomplished crowd. Some of the most influential and powerful people in my area were there, in fact. There were four single, accomplished, attractive, and interested men giving me very clear IOI’s at the event. Any one of them would be a “catch” by anyone’s standards. I am sure with any encouragement, I could have followed up on any or all four of those threads. But I didn’t.
Why? Because I am already in and pursuing a relationship with a single, accomplished, attractive, and interesting guy who is committed to me and things are going well, are more than promising in fact. To allow my hyperemic urge to take the lead tonight could (would) have spelled disaster for that. And for what? The “possibility” of something more? No thanks.
So I took it as the flattery it was (it always feels good to be noticed), and of course those guys don’t know I am seeing someone so I can’t blame them, but I didn’t return or encourage the IOI’s, packed up my stuff at the end, and went home alone.
Because I know, thanks to the Red Pill, that hypergamy is simply a house of cards. To indulge in it once one has “chosen” will only result in disaster.
But if you don’t know the enemy you cannot confront it. Ladies, meet hypergamy — destroyer of lives, families, happiness, and futures. My advice? Avoid it at all costs. Dance with the one who brought you. Once you have chosen, be happy with and stand by your choice. No matter how tempting other offers may seem. Trust me on this — the grass isn’t greener. It’s astroturf.
This is the worst issue women are going to have to face. When women cannot be trusted to behave themselves–and they cannot, so no point arguing this–then men have no incentive to offer what will be a unilateral commitment. You are going to have to show your ability and inclination to remain loyal. If you fail to do this, then the men you meet are either going to use you and then move along or ignore you altogether. Complicating your efforts are men who are not consciously deciding on this strategy, but adapting it out of instinct, because they are going to be both more numerous and more difficult to convince.
The Shadowed Knight
I don’t think that you gave a food example of hypergamy in the original post. What you side stepped was the temptation to step out on your beau. The best short description of hypergamy I can make is that it is like greed, wanting the best possible man. This may be troublesome out of a relationship but, once in one, it’s poison.
About TSK’s comment, trust is crucial. I made fun about Choicy’s place being the ideal spot for Russian girls to vacation in. It’s full winter in Russia and high summer at Choicy’s. What I didn’t know was that one accusation out of girl where he lives, he may as well hand over the keys to everything he has worked all hi life to build. That’s too much risk and so he continues to live alone.
It is good to see you! I hope that you see this comment, as I hope you are monitoring.
Very true tsk!
@ fuzzie I am not following, what would be a good definition of hypergamy?
Being faithful and loyal are qualities that everyone, male and female, should want to cultivate. It’s common sense to want to encourage these qualities in ourselves and others.
A good start to a definition would be wanting a man out of your SMV rank. However, as it stands now, that is the baseline. The Ok Trends October 2009 article laid it all out there. While men saw women evenly distributed along a healthy bell curve for attractiveness, women saw their counterparts as eighty percent being below average. The women presumed that were forty percent better looking that they were.
I took a quick glance at it and it is worse than I remembered.
It is hard to find physical evidence for hypergamy. It not something that can be percievd through the five senses.
I see Fuzzie. True, I had forgotten the out of her league part. And I have seen examples of that, too. I suppose I was using the term in the more general sense, to describe how women can sometimes keep mentally (or actually) shopping for potential mates even after she’s supposed to be “taken.” I have even seen married women do this, blow up their families, trying to “move up” in rank socially/economically/etc.
For example, My friend Red’s ex wife, who as she got promoted at work, decided that “blue collar” Red wasn’t good enough for her anymore, so she had an affair and is now living with a guy who has a white collar job and makes better money. (The whole thing was very very sad, especially for their children.) He’s not “out of her league” necessarily or they wouldn’t be together, but he was (in her mind) “better.” This is more the type of hypergamy I am talking about.
(As an aside Red is actually better looking than her current partner, but has less social rank. For women looks are only part of the female attraction equation, remember.)
SFC Ton said:
I reckon the big obstacle is for being to understand these things are biologically driven, makes perfect sense when you think about our evolutionary past and no one is above them.
Hypergammy = women fuck up….. but that is dicey because typical their definition of up is pretty screwy again because its evolutionary driven and more primal then folks want to deal with
@ fuzzie, also as I tried to explain before long ago on j4g, women somewhat have the opposite experience men have, we tend to get approached more often than we want or even when we don’t want or aren’t looking, which might seem to a guy to be nothing to complain about, but it’s actually bad in its own way. You see, not all of those approaches are serious ones, many might be from guys seeking a short term or no strings physical relationship rather than something more serious. So women do tend to have their guard up, so to speak, or should in my opinion. Of those four last night, I have no idea of course what their intentions were or where any of that would have gone, but in my experience anyway there are more guys looking for casual experiences than serious ones so a gal is stupid to risk a serious committed partner for a potential fling. But women do just that all the time
I think you can spot a woman in a hypergamic fever pretty easily, and while her intentions are therefore as plain as mud, there are alarm bells ringing.
That’s because she’ll start talking about how the man should “be on his best behavior” and “not prey on my naivete” and “I don’t know what I was thinking, you shouldn’t get me so drunk” and a bunch of other things I have on my phone from the last three weeks. All of this signifies a woman on the hard-core make who is simultaneously denying she knows what she’s doing, and even denies her own feminist agency, that she’s otherwise yakking ceaselessly about. So in the end, “things just happen” and she’s not responsible for any regrets or outcomes. In the current climate, these are the women who can turn into lying, manipulative, vindictive banshees.
Remember, feminism simultaneously celebrates Go Gurrl! culture and the permanent elevated status accorded to self-styled victims. It’s a weird salad of “Let’s Get this Party Started!” and “How could you do that to me I’m calling the cops?!!!?.”
On one level, feminism is founded on the premise of hypergamy: the premise that women are uniquely entitled to have it all. Meanwhile the individual’s definition of having it all is protean. Only a 10 year-old’s mind can cycle between such incompatible states without embarrassment.
There’s only one reason men with options approach so many women: a goodly percentage of women respond affirmatively to it. Moreso today that at any time in western history. Men didn’t create this world, men sure don’t own it; still, men are expected both to entertain if not thrill the hypergamous. “I’m finally ready, and I know what I want” is a common theme in online dating by the 35 year-olds who see the writing on the wall (if it’s not already smashed into their faces). Then men are supposed to pay to Man Up and clean up the mess that the hypergamous dump on families, children, institutions.
Since, in our Open Hypergamy social model today women are urged to do better if they can, for that’s just a therapeutic culture’s idea of personal fulfillment, the masculine impulse to bond, build and protect has been replaced by crass defensive postures: “Be careful out there” or “If it flies, fucks or floats, rent it.”
Of the four guys one is a senator who seems to be an eternal bachelor, one was a chef of a well known local restaurant and “hip cat” in the local food scene (relationship status unknown), one was an upper level manager in local govt. who went thru a nasty divorce a few years back and is as far as I know single, and the fourth guy I don’t know who he was, have never seen him before.
This sterling example of femininity lived in the same house as the father of her child.
But it was her birthday and darn if she just wanted her man out of the house so she could have *more fun* with a second man, her current boyfriend. So she had the live-in boyfriend arrested and jailed for domestic assault. The woman’s girlfriend kindly punched her in the face, first, and then supported the false allegation. This is hypergamy with a side order of criminal conspiracy.
The story notes that another woman, last fall, wrote threatening texts to herself on her ex-boyfriend’s phone. The boyfriend got to spend 40 days in jail as a result of the scam, prior to the detective unraveling that case too.
Note how the cop sustains the social lie that NAWALT, that these were just isolated incidents. He might as well have said, “Hey, we know women do this, and we will continue to arrest and imprison men unless they can prove their innocence.” He’s a tool of the feminist narrative, probably because he’d lose his job and have his house picketed if he just said, “Women need to stop trying to frame men they no longer like as criminals.”
I’m sure at trial the false accuser will enter a groveling plea for mercy for her delicate soul, on account of she had a difficult childhood, and the falsely accused man refused to put the toilet seat down, traumatizing her, or something.
I have personal experience of similar behavior — of a woman flipping the switch with the cops and CPS, and having them descend on me and my son — but it’s been covered before.
Most people like money, yet not everyone is a thief.
But among a culture of thieves just about everyone is a thief (and should be suspected to be a thief). Example: gypsies.
I was also likely the only unmarried/unescorted woman at this event, so it’s not like I had a lot of competition. So I am not trying to say I am all that by any means. Anymore I am almost always analyzing situations via a red pill lens so last night was interesting for that reason. New blog topic material! I was happy to go home alone, because I know I am not alone! And I like that very much! 🙂
“But it was her birthday and darn if she just wanted her man out of the house so she could have *more fun* with a second man, her current boyfriend. So she had the live-in boyfriend arrested and jailed for domestic assault. The woman’s girlfriend kindly punched her in the face, first, and then supported the false allegation. This is hypergamy with a side order of criminal conspiracy.
The story notes that another woman, last fall, wrote threatening texts to herself on her ex-boyfriend’s phone. The boyfriend got to spend 40 days in jail as a result of the scam, prior to the detective unraveling that case too.”
A simply misdemeanor, eh? Unless and until they throw the book at these people this behavior will never end. The father should get full custody too. But we know what’s going to happen here. Sickening stuff.
Wow BV! That Iowa news story is something else and then her photo… Egads!
I agree w Liz, they should have thrown the book at these gals!
RPG and Bloom,
It’s not going to happen as much as we wish that it would. Someone ran the numbers in England and figured out that if men were prosecuted with as much vigor as women, eighty percent of them would be out of jail. Maybe the bias comes from raising kids. .
Here is a musical interpretation of hypergamy.
We went to an impromptu gathering last night, at a friend’s house, that was pretty fun. Our oldest came with us. We hadn’t planned to make him the designated driver but it worked out well as the night wore on. The cougars (everyone in the room was a high paid professional except me), really tried to work it with my 17 year old son. Later everyone told me how brilliant he was and congratulated us. We mentioned in the car that everyone in that room thought he was brilliant and he said, “well, it’s easy to be the brilliant one when everyone else is drunk.” Later I looked at my phone and there were messages from him, hours earlier, “When are we going home?” “When are we leaving?” and so forth.
One female friend mentioned a neighbor she hates. I guess this neighbor comes by to flirt with her husband all of the time, and wears some skanky stuff. That conversation was pretty funny, she said, “I hate this woman! I. HATE. THIS. WOMAN!!” and the husband mentioned she was “hot”. Mike quipped, “I already knew that. Have you ever heard a woman say she hated a girl with a hunchback and club foot?”
In all charity, I have to modify my previous statement. In the past, women did not pull these tricks at the same rate that they do now. Public awareness has to catch up.
However, I am still mad at that woman in the House of Lords that wants to see all women’s prisons in the UK shut down in favor of halfway houses.
Some of them are murderers. Bad idea.
I can identify with your seventeen year old son. It never happened to me me but, they’re a lot bolder now. One more thing to add to his disgust, I’ll bet you are better looking than the lot of them. That is not to flatter you but say how deep the insult to him was.
“In the past, women did not pull these tricks at the same rate that they do now.”
That’s the point I was trying to make with my “thievery” analogy above. Of course they didn’t. Because the culture and incentives were different. Social mores, consequences, value system and character are all integral to those cost to gains equations.
Another quip I thought was funny (though it might not be well received, I thought it was a clever retort). The topic of replacing pilots with AI came up. Someone asserted that pilots will be obsolete very soon so of course that gets Mike’s dander up. He says, “Oh yeah? They said the same thing about the vibrator, yet here we are.” 😛
They are VERY bold, Fuzzie!
@ Liz when you say “high paid professionals” did you mean actual escorts? Or SIW types?
The next time you go with your son to one of these functions, please keep an eye on your phone. Along that same line, do you think a wing “girlfriend” would help?
To the latter point, I’m still mad that the Army gave up their horses in 1935.
LOL! Sorry Bloom rereading that it did sound like I was referring to escorts. No, I wouldn’t bring my son to that type of party. 😛
Pilots, IT people, a dentist, and so forth. 🙂
@ Liz I figured 😉
David Foster said:
“To the latter point, I’m still mad that the Army gave up their horses in 1935″…not totally….there were American guys in Afghanistan riding horses and equipped with laser target designators
There is a vast gulf between cavalry and mounted infantry. I saw something recently with R. Lee Ermey trying to hit a five gallon water jug from a galloping horse from a distance of less than a dozen feet. He couldn’t and he is a good shot
I have sen some pictures of men on horses in Afganistan and it did warm my heart. .
RPG nice post and here is another example.
Awhile back I broke up with a girl I had been seeing. We had been going out for 6 months or so and had the “exclusive” talk. Shortly thereafter, I noticed that her Match, POF, etc profiles were still up so spoke to her about them. She claimed they were old and she never checks anymore. I told her not according to the sites … because it tells others when the last time you logged in to check your msgs … so they can know if you’re an active user or not. And the sites are saying that you are checking your messages …
She claimed that … well, its tied to my email on my phone. Or my facebook account. When I log in on my phone … it makes it look like I’m checking my messages but I’m really not. Huge hamstering ! So anyway, I said … well, if we are exclusive now … why don’t you take them down … you don’t need to look anymore … because you have me now. And got more bs.
A few weeks later I noticed they were still up and she was still checking them. So she forced my hand: I either to put my foot down like a dick and demand she take them down or I’d demote her back to plate and take her off the serious contender list … Which I did. And shortly afterwards it was done. Could it have gone somewhere ??? I think so … did it ? Nope … hypergamy in action. She’s got a man … but still looking for something better.
So RPG, its not just turning down unwanted attention … its women actively seeking the attention of men when they already have one. And women will let it ruin their lives, no doubt about that. Getting attention off the internet like this is a huge problem for women. An addiction that they cannot control.
As RPG said … the grass is not always greener …
I will also add … if you have a man … quit looking … and get your profiles off the internet. He will probably find out and when he does … he will not be happy.
I don’t thin that was hypergamy. What I think it was was lining up the next boyfriend after setting up up the present. It is amazing how a week after a gorl breaks up, she has a new beau on her arm. You may have found the answer.
While don’t know about POF, OkCupid allowed to to list your status as single , seeing someone , or married. This was before facebook really took off and people did use it as a social media site too. However, the story doesn’t wash today.
She knows better now..
Absolutely Tocket! Well said. 🙂 sorry to hear she didnt get that but I suppose she self screened and saved you lots of future heartache by showing her hand. Bullet dodged!
Farm Boy said:
Here is some more info,
@ bv thinking on this further, you are absolutely correct that in the mainstream culture, hypergamy is encouraged! It’s couched as “personal growth” or “self fulfillment” or some such, rather than seen as the negative and destructive thing it is. We live in an “Eat, Pray, Love” culture where divorce is often seen as some kind of evolution/rite of passage in a woman’s life.
Perfect example, Red’s ex. She’s very tied into the local community. As she prepared for her branch swing, she set the stage, running Red down, justifying her choice, when in fact she was having an affair. And the crazy thing was when she frivorced Red and shacked up with her lover just THREE MONTHS later, what did people do? Support her, clap, called her “brave” and all the rest of that “Go Gurrrrl!” nonsense. I was amazed, floored, not one person called her on it! Well except me, I did my best to tell her to work on her marriage (this was before the boyfriend was revealed, but based on how she was acting, and not having been born yesterday, I strongly suspected she had someone else in the works.) she gave me every excuse in the book why “she had to do this” and then sure enough a few months later my hunch as to what the real truth was, was revealed. It still boggles my mind that others did not see the obvious! 😦 but that’s the open hypergamy culture we live in!
I think there’s an app where a person can read another’s text messages (if they share an account). Mike was on a trip the other day with a guy who knows a guy (although I guess now we’re getting into urban legend territory) who found out about his wife’s liaison that way. But the cell started messing up due to the app, so she took it in for repair and found out about the app. After finding out that she’d been caught red handed, she was angry at him for spying.
Liz wrote: “Because the culture and incentives were different. Social mores, consequences, value system and character are all integral to those cost to gains equations.”
This is so true. All of this. It’s this simple. Values, character — if you aren’t raised to have them, this is what society gets. It’s heartbreaking.
“After finding out that she had been caught red handed, she was agry at him for spying.”
That got me laughing! Thank you!
Red’s wife may have thought that she was trading up up but, I don’t think that she does now, from previous threads. That traitorous witch! What’s really sad is that she has provided an example. She got away with it. Women will be emboldened and men will be cautious.
There is already too much out there to make men cautious.
This is not meant as a comment on you or your situation, RPG.
But the phrase “pursuing a relationship” could mean so many different things that it’s pretty much meaningless.
Marriage? Living together? Just having mutually exclusive sex while living apart? And in some cases, just biding time waiting for something better to come along.
This is the problem in our ‘culture’ today. There are no defined courtship rituals, there are no rules to dating/hooking up, and so there is no real commitment or planning for what comes next. Many couples are just ‘having fun’ and ‘seeing where this leads’. And then, once they have wasted years with someone they ‘sort of’ like, they figure that they have been together so long that they should just get married.
And if someone else enters the picture: the one that the girl or guy SHOULD have married, if they hadn’t been pissing around with their ‘girlfriend/boyfriend’ while ‘pursuing a relationship’.
This rarely works out well. Hence the redefinition of the term ‘hypergamy’ to mean that a woman will leave a good man for a ‘bad boy’ at the drop of a hat. “Hypergamy” simply means that women marry up; they want a man of higher status and wealth than themselves.
Rollo Tomassi and others have perverted this definition to reflect their personal experiences with the opposite sex. Well, people would do well to remember that Rollo WAS IN A BAND in Southern California in the 1980s. A fairly semi-famous band, according to Rollo. From my own band experiences, I can tell you that most guys start bands to get chicks…until they meet the groupies and see what a perverse group of women they are. Honestly, who wants to marry the Blowjob Queen who sucks off 5 different guys every weekend? Or the girl whose sole mission in life is to meet and bang drummers? Meeting drunk sluts after the show…yeah, you’re gonna meet a lot of marriage material that way.
If you read between the lines of his blog posts, Rollo knows that he settled. Rollo also knows that his wife rode the carousel before they hooked up. And that Rollo almost expects his wife to cheat on him someday. All this talk about how he could have any one of the girls he works with…yeah, I’ll believe it when I see it.
As for Vox Day, well, the only thing that saved Vox from his promiscuous ways was his conversion to Christianity. Otherwise, Spacebunny marries some other rich guy and is still living in the Twin Cities.
While I am not quite on the level of hatred for these guys as Bob Wallace, you have to take this whole “Alpha/Beta/hypergamy” thing with a grain of salt. Yes, there are some truths there. But it all boils down to this: be a man and you will attract women. If you don’t know how, then get some old John Wayne and Humphrey Bogart movies and watch them closely. Then emulate what you see.
Ugh, this comment got out of hand quickly. Guess I should write a book…
SFC Ton said:
typically women are angry because they got caught etc vs feeling like shit etc they did zyx
SFC Ton said:
get some old John Wayne and Humphrey Bogart movies and watch them closely. Then emulate what you see.
maybe good advice 30 years ago but will utterly fail for todays 20 year old dudes
Fuzzie: “That got me laughing! Thank you!”
Glad I made you smile, Fuzzie. 🙂
This is true, the values you were raised with were what kept these worst parts of human nature (on both sides) in check. In the mainstream culture those values and social norms no longer apply, are openly scoffed at actually. That’s a big part of the problems we see in society today 😦
True Fuzzie, although I don’t completely give Red a pass on things and this is why: when he told me they had separated but they were working on things, I was at that time just starting to date Mr. Smith. A few weeks later Red showed up at my biz, warned me not to trust Mr. Smith — then asked me out himself!!! I was shocked and asked, “I thought you were trying to work on your marriage???” He said, “well yeah but…how about it?” That conversation got him put on the “never” list in my book. When he came by a year or so later, he asked me out again. I said “let’s just be friends” and that is what we are, and that is why.
RJ, agreed that is a pretty vague way to put it. I only consider marriage minded men, and he is that, and now that we have gotten to know each other a bit better, he’s marriage minded about me. He’s a very good man, I am very lucky to have met him! But he’s asked me not to talk too much about us here, so I don’t or when I do I am deliberatley vague, out of respect for his privacy. But yes, those are all things women should think about for sure! :).
“typically women are angry because they got caught etc vs feeling like shit etc they did zyx”
I wonder if that would be an example of poor character or just sheer stupidity?
If it’s just the burning stupid one could be pretty tricksy with a person like that.
Her: “You mean I have to suck your dick for the car to start? Really?”
Ok so this is weird… of the four men last night, the most direct with the IOI was the chef. He made a point to come over, hand me his card, ask for my card, flirt, stand way too close for my comfort, and insisted on talking a selfie with me. So I look online and find an article from about a year ago that mentions is WIFE AND NEW BABY. So either 1.) His wife has a cad on her hands or 2.) He’s just more friendly and touchy feeley than most and truly was networking for biz reasons. I usually have pretty good intuition but I hope that I was wrong on that one! Regardless, she would have nothing to worry about w me, I have a hard rule about “no guys w someone else, ever” wife/girlfriend/plate/whatever but I do hope for her sake I read that all wrong. 😦
I’ll bet you are better looking than the lot of them.
True this would be.
Kittens cuter than Cougars they are
Here a picture of Liz and her son from a few years back it is
Course as I make fun of the dopes I am constantly reminded I’m pretty dopey myself. I just went out to see if Mike got gas for the boat (the larger one, we sold the minnow). He wasn’t there and the kids told me, “Daddy sold the big boat too!”
So I said, “No, he’s just getting gas for the boat.”
And after a pause, my oldest said, “I’m actually kind of surprised you didn’t fall for that.”
He wasn’t kidding.
Another day in the Life of Liz. They do keep me on my toes. 😛
LOL! I love it, Yoda! 😀
“Hence the redefinition of the term ‘hypergamy’ to mean that a woman will leave a good man for a ‘bad boy’ at the drop of a hat. “Hypergamy” simply means that women marry up; they want a man of higher status and wealth than themselves.”
This is tradcon horseshit, mainly because the author thinks a historical, biological imperative (hypergamy) reflects an imperative for a modern social convention (marriage).
But thanks for the advice, the glib ad hominem libeling of Vox and Rollo, and the suggestion that the way to tame a shrew today is to memorize The African Queen.
I’m still trembling at the shocking revelation (made by Rollo hundreds of times) *that he was in a band*! Quel horreur!
And how many women have you dated this year? Or are you like some of our fair Sues, who have all the answers to a world they’ve never visited?
The chef is just a networker, not a Lothario. Somebody mistook advanced personal marketing and networking for sexual interest, I suspect. It always puzzles me, that women think everyone wants to get in their pants.
(If the married chef were interested in poon, as you suggest, he wouldn’t have made a such a public display of being “interested in your work.”)
Not very red pill, Bloom.
Also RJ, I hope you are wrong about Rollo and his marriage. He’s always been very nice to me. I’d like to think they are happy.
I dunno BV, he didn’t actually suggest we work together or anything obvious biz related like that, but yes I hope you are right. I actually would like to work with him, our two biz are very like minded.
So yes, it is possible that he is just naturally very affectionate with everyone. I have never met him before so I really cannot say. I am very standoffish and do not touch, hug, or take selfies with people (or alone, for that matter) unless they are in my inner, inner circle so perhaps it’s a personality thing.
Liz, there are a ton of apps that can be installed on another person’s phone and mimic that phone’s texting traffic on another phone. As you imply, this is only legal if the phone in question is owned by the person/entity doing the tracking and copying.
Lying is a mortal sin, so I don’t care if someone wants to read my texts, because I have enough things to think about at 3 a.m. However, in the current age, within open hypergamy, with EPL, I doubt there are a lot of single girls who would agree.
Regarding Rocket’s note on his girlfriend maintaining her dating site profiles mid-relationship, this is my experience also. I just track it down and tell them, “Turn it off or we’re done. I don’t share women.” That usually does the trick.
With one woman though, whom I saw in NYC but also was the baby sister of a guy I got in a fight with in high school (no shit, the last time I saw her she was three years old), and who today has a lake house 55 miles from my lake house (the coincidences are piling up) 1200 miles from NYC, and whose father is a friend of mine, she became extremely angry and went into Peak Shaming Mode about my “over-reacting to a silly hobby”. That’s a woman who has relationships that begin and end with her avowal: “I will always be in hypergamous pursuit of a better Plan B.” I had introduced my son to her and her boys, and I then shut it down fast. Very embarrassed and guilty there, having introduced my son. I felt like a very bad person for involving my 6 year-old in that. And I think I was, in truth, a bad person for doing so.
Bloom, what you’ve described is not hustling, just the sort of aggressive “build a relationship” b.s. that women practice with other women. A selfie is not a pat on the ass or an invitation to discuss business in the car in a dark parking lot.
In general, mature women overvalue the appeal of their magical vagina. Especially with successful men (as you describe him to be). That’s just high school stuff.
As an experiment to test my hypothesis, try flirting aggressively with such a guy. He’ll laugh and acknowledge it’s just a flirt and a business hustle.
The reason Red reached out to you the first time was because you showed a personal interest in him. He reached out as an emotionally drowning man. Forgive him for that. I don’t know about the second time but, he likes you and that is good.
I don’t know about the chef. Your Gut may be right or he may be touchy-feely. I do remember seeing something that could have turned into a diplomatic incident with the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Japan. Japanese are not touchy-feely.
Selfies not good they are.
Lead to vanity they do.
Vanity leads to attention whoring it does.
Attention whoring leads to broken women it does.
Mrs. Yoda said:
mature women overvalue the appeal of their magical vagina
Comment on this I will not.
But for 800 years been Yoda’s I have
@RJ – was gonna comment along the lines of BV and since he beat me to it, I don’t need too. And as the knight said, don’t feed the trolls. All I want to know is … who the hell is Bob Wallace ? Then again … given the source and the nature of the comment … no, I probably don’t. Ignore. Next. Dont’-feed-the-trolls.
So, given that I’m not playing along, and not interested in speaking in gibberish, he overvalued it? Congrats.
Bob Wallace has his own blog, “Uncle Bob’s Treehouse”. He has a different take on things that doesn’t conform to manosphere doctrine. He is worth reading as you can’t take this stuff for dogma.
Wouldn’t taking selfies be antithetical to Jedi philosophy? They are not conducive to humility.
There is no price that can be placed on virtue.
@ Fuzzie, perhaps. But I was dating his friend when he asked me out, and he was supposedly trying to fix his marriage??? That doesn’t add up, to me… But yes, he was in “my life has imploded” mode so maybe he gets a pass. I still would not date him tho, for other reasons, too.
Are you beginning to see something? For the boys, there are a million ways to fail, most them unknown, and few to succeed. A lot of the time, it’s the unknowns that get you.
At this point in time, Red needs a fresh start with a new girl.
@ fuzzie don’t most guys know a gal their friend is dating is off limits? Or if they are trying to make their marriage work he shouldn’t be dating?
Another game hater. Using Dalrock’s ‘Only Real Man In The Room’ game. If only we acted like real men–like he is, amiright–then we would have women attracted to us. Of course he dismisses any experiences that do not fit his idea of game either as stuff any ‘real man’ would do or as a massive collective delusion on the part of all the men that benefited from the theories of game. His advice is to LARP the 50s and everything will work out.
He is full of shit. I have seen plenty of good men, real men, destroyed by women. Military men that are far better men than him. Those get dismissed with a flippant reply of how some women are just no good.
Bob Wallace is a man who has been off of the market for decades, failed to raise his adopted children properly, and now gives advice to young men how to end up like him.
The Shadowed Knight
Yes and yes. However Red was a drowning man reaching for a lifesaver.
I have had my heart broken and done some silly things. They weren’t malicious, just silly. The point about rejection is that it is a lot like applying for a loan. If you can prove to the bank that you don’t need the money, they are tripping over themselves trying to loan it to you.
@ fuzzie I care for Red deeply as a friend. We are not well matched. I didn’t want to be his rebound. I didn’t want to add more hurt to what he had already experienced by dating him knowing it would not and could not be what he hoped it would. We had a long talk about all that, and he gets it. I was glad he asked me, as he truly was in a position where someone could have really taken advantage of his emotional state at that time. I get it…
Let’s say no more about it. It could be that I am a little sensitive about rejection.
@ Fuzzie, we all are. Nobody likes rejection. We’ll say no more…
@ Fuzzie, we all are. Nobody likes rejection. We’ll say no more…
It’s time for a bear video featuring a frustrated bear.
Misha Darling said:
I thought I was the only one who thought this….
Artisanal Toad said:
But if you don’t know the enemy you cannot confront it. Ladies, meet hypergamy — destroyer of lives, families, happiness, and futures. My advice? Avoid it at all costs.
Good advice, but it’s important to know where hypergamy came from, why women have it and the context in which it happened.
The problem with describing hypergamy is everyone wants to do so from an evo-psych perspective. There are two problems with this (three, actually) because evo-psych is bullshit and conjecture on steroids to begin with. The foundational premise of evo-psych is that evolution is a correct as a theory and thus the results and inferences of said theory form a correct worldview. Evo-psych starts with a known postulate (hypergamy) and attempts to form a theory on how it came into being with zero data based on a theory that cannot be proven. It exists as an accepted postulate by Christians because the Christians do not want to accept the truth of what their own text says about it.
Trigger Alert- The resident iconoclast (that would be me) is about to throw a sacred cow and a perfumed pig on the BBQ.
In saying that the evo-psych explanation of hypergamy as an evolutionary development in women is complete and utter bullshit, it is incumbent upon me to advance a more rational and reasonable explanation as to where hypergamy came from and why it exists. That’s not difficult to do, just difficult for women to accept.
Hypergamy is part of the curse that God inflicted upon the daughters of Eve, recorded in Genesis 3:16. The curse consisted of two parts, the greatly increased pain in childbirth and hypergamy. Personally, I believe the curse on Eve was also a punishment of men, but that’s opinion born out of strong evidence, not doctrine. The fact is, after telling Eve that her pain would be greatly increased in childbirth, God said “Yet your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you.”
The key is the word desire, which is used only two other places in Scripture, once in Genesis 4:7, where the “desire” is to control and conquer, the other in the Song of Solomon 7:10, where the “desire” is sexual. Scholars have argued for centuries which definition should be used in Genesis 3:16, but an understanding of hypergamy demonstrates that it’s both. Women are cursed to be ruled by men and they seek and desire a man who is fit to rule them. To find such a man they test them and even after finding such a man they continue to test him to make sure he’s still “got it.”
The synthesis of the desire to conquer/control and sexual desire is easily seen in women’s shit testing. Any man who is game aware has seen what happens when he blows through a woman’s shit tests and watches her attraction for him spike. Likewise, he’s experienced and observed the reaction of a woman to a man who does not pass her shit tests. (Hint: it isn’t attraction) All women are like this, all of them, because all women are cursed with pain in childbirth and hypergamy.
The effect has long been seen in the glib “women marry up” admission (in its barest form) that hypergamy exists, but it always comes with the refrain of “But NAWALT.” And, as has been pointed out in many a manosphere and game forum, one of the bitterest effects of the red pill is coming to the understanding that no, all women really ARE like that. Your mother, your sister, your daughter… All of them. Keep in mind when this happened and what the context was. Where did “original sin” and the “sin nature” come from? The same place that hypergamy came from and for the same reason.
Is it hardwired in? Yes. However, hypergamy expresses itself in many different ways that are culturally conditioned. Thus, when feminism sought to destroy all the social constructs of marriage and society that were there for the protection of women, suddenly we were able to see hypergamy played out on the stage, front and center. It ain’t been pretty as almost everyone here can attest.
Quick digression- what is a slut? Is it her “bad” behavior in bed, or her willingness to bounce from one man’s bed to another? I suspect it’s an amalgamation of the two, the experience and lack of inhibition in bed being an indication of how many beds she’s been bounced in. If that’s the case, I suspect the other men here will back me up when I say that most men can appreciate a slut, as long as she’s *his* slut.
It’s the women who are the ones who do the majority of sexual policing and slut-shaming, not the men, because the slut is the one who is depressing the female market price of sexual access by giving it away. Small wonder then that most sexually promiscuous women don’t have many female friends.
The reason a reasonably sane man would *not* want a slut is because long experience shows that her bed-bouncing skills were gained by bouncing from bed to bed and there’s a high likelihood that such a woman will sooner or later bounce to another man’s bed. And… for some men, an experienced woman is like sitting down on a warm toilet seat in a public restroom: Nice to find, but you always wonder who was there before you. Show me a pill that causes women to be faithful to their husbands and I’ll show you how fast men line up to marry experienced sluts (as long as they’re submissive, young and pretty).
Talking about the siren song of hypergamy… you may as well be talking about the siren song of sin. Given that everyone has a sin nature, one must likewise admit that women have a hypergamous nature because to deny the one is to deny the other. The curse was part and parcel of the same event that brought sin into the world and for those who claim the curse is lifted by salvation, I recommend a quick trip to the zoo to see if snakes still crawl on their bellies along with a trip to a maternity ward to see if Christian women are squirting their babies out like watermelon seeds at a picnic.
Now… here’s where it gets tricky. Nobody in the church wants to discuss this because there are so many doctrines that have been hanging around for about a thousand years that deny women are cursed. In denying this fundamental aspect of women and creating doctrines that put women on a pedestal (that woman named Mary, for example), the church literally created feminism. Women absolutely do not want to hear this message because it is just as offensive as the message of the cross. The reason the Gospel of Jesus Christ is so offensive is because unlike every “religion” on earth, Christianity teaches that there is *nothing* anyone can do to save themselves. Nothing they can do to please God. Sin is the ultimate zero-sum game, where one sin, regardless of the form, is sufficient to invoke the automatic penalty of death. Thus, the only way out is to willingly ask to be redeemed by the one person who was willing to pay that price of death for everyone who chooses to be redeemed, and in doing so they become His servant.
The thing is, hypergamy isn’t a sin, it’s a curse. It is a pre-set module of desires and responses that are hardwired in, but in the same way that a person’s desire is for food when they get hungry. Being hungry might cause someone to be tempted to sin, but there are perfectly legitimate ways in which the hunger for food may be satisfied. It’s true that some people are able to afford delicacies and sweets while others can only satisfy their hunger with bland, simple food, thus, there will always be those who envy the “dishes” that someone else is able to eat and be tempted to taste the forbidden fruit, which is sin. Especially if they’re stuck with food that’s repulsive and practically inedible. (Don’t go there Liz)
Show me a faithful Christian wife and I’ll show you a hypergamous woman who works hard to restrain her desire to sin against both her husband and God.
The social structures that restrained women were there for a reason. Women, read Numbers 30 and tell me you have agency. I’ll be doing a post on my blog about Deuteronomy 22 soon, but if one studies Deut. 22 (Hint- it’s the only spot in the Bible for this subject) the question arises- why does the crime of what we call “rape” only apply to married women (betrothed virgins were legally married)? For virgins not betrothed, being forced to have sex results in marriage to the guy that did it and widows and divorced women are not mentioned at all. Given that the text is so specific the omission is rather glaring, which leads to the question of whether the crime isn’t rape at all but rather forced adultery.
The reason I bring that up is because when discussing hypergamy the context must be considered. Between the curse in Genesis 3:16, the accountability required of women in Numbers 30 and the issues related to marriage and divorce, it becomes clear (at least to me- I don’t know anyone else who has seriously studied this) that God’s design for women is that they are to be ruled by a man- either their father or their husband. Being widowed or divorced should be a temporary thing. According to Isaiah 4:1 it is a reproach for an adult woman not to be married. In fact, divorce was never part of the program at all.
Unfortunately, to admit the problem is to admit the need for a solution. The Bible has a couple of them that work quite well, but I’ll have to keep that to myself for now. It would be really fun to delve into the significance of the microbiome WRT sex, the permanent addition of the father’s DNA into the mother during pregnancy and the peculiar effects of certain prostaglandins found in semen (that women do not produce) when they are absorbed by the mucosa after being deposited. We could even discuss the effects of how oxytocin production in women is impacted by orgasm and how the resultant flood of oxytocin impacts the absorption rate of the semen, but, alas, this is already a wall of text.
Misha Darling said:
*oops wrong person, sorry!
“It’s the women who are the ones who do the majority of sexual policing and slut-shaming, not the men, because the slut is the one who is depressing the female market price of sexual access by giving it away. Small wonder then that most sexually promiscuous women don’t have many female friends.”
It is true that women do the majority of slut shaming. Currently the trend is kind of the opposite. The media is purposely shaming slut shamers en masse, and ghetto values are encouraged. There is a trend of “slut empowerment” (you’ll see those “proud slut” emblems written plainly on the tee shirts next to the “consent commitee” ones).
How is that working out?
Slut shaming is effective, for the same reason that memes like “crime doesn’t pay” are effective. It isn’t in anyone’s interest to push that bar any lower. Unsurprisingly, now that they’re shaming the shamers as “prudes” we see all manner of unhealthy (excuse me, “empowered”) behaviors that are socially destructive long term. There’s a reason no one wants a daughter who is a slut (well, exception some of the really crazy mothers).
Internalizing proper behavior is much more effective than lectures to “cure” improper behaviors in an environment where those behaviors are accepted and celebrated. Internalization occurs under social conditioning, often pretty organically.
“Especially if they’re stuck with food that’s repulsive and practically inedible. (Don’t go there Liz)”
Spitters are quitters! Bwahaha! 😛
(sorry, couldn’t resist…I have to release that “devil” from time to time or he’d eventually overpower my angel!) 😉
So true Liz! Today slut shaming is akin to a hate crime, but when you look at what NOT slut shaming leads to, is it really? Women who encourage other women in this direction vs away from it aren’t doing anyone any favors.
Even writing this post, or the one befor, might be considered “slut shaming.” But I am not trying to shame anyone, I am trying to HELP women understand why and how today’s sex positive approach harms them, children, families, relationships, etc. that’s what “mature” women used to do, guide the younger women toward a good path. I do it out of love!
Peer pressure is pretty strong. Especially in the absence of social restrictions. And, they start early, like grade school.
In a recent post, Robert Stacy McCain said that one of the prerequisites for a relationship is that a woman has to admire the man. That, in itself, can answer a lot of questions.
SFC Ton said:
As a bar owner, lots of selfies with pretty girls for your digital media campaign is good for bidness. Not sure why but girls think its a glamours life and where the girls go the boys follow….. but to girly and they don’t show up because their won’t be boys. Its a weird balancing act and I would say the same holds for the chef but that’s a guess. He could also be using a little dread game on his wife to keep her lubed up. Who knows?
AT where you go wrong is failing to see the difference between macro and micro evolution
Could be Ton, well if that selfie helps improve his marriage, then I will be happy! 🙂
I actually hope bv is right and that he’s legit, it would be great to collaborate with him, a top chef doing an open air meal on a summer eve at my place featuring his food crafted w my products — it would be pretty darn spectacular! Maybe I shall suggest it!
RPG, just because a married man flirts with you, in addition, it doesn’t mean he’s obsessing on your shorts. He might just be having fun. You might consider having the same kind of fun. European women are better at this, inasmuch as they enjoy receiving attention as women.
In general, middle aged women overvalue their sexual appeal, and repeat the behaviors that they practiced in high school and college. That’s because middle aged men with options are no longer adolescent boys, and they’re no longer tracking poon like a good hunting dog.
I went through this on Friday/Saturday with Madame Librarian. She went full peak “I’m a lost and vulnerable damsel don’t seduce me horrors!” on me. Juvenile. I suggested she date her brother. Of course, the reason she asked me to go line dancing was that I flirted with her whenever it was time to process an interlibrary loan or something. But then flirting became a sexual assault precursor, or something.
@ Liz. About no one wanting a daughter who is a slut… What are the parents doing to find her a man? Because if they don’t, someone else will.
Getting back to the original post, the problem with hypergamy is that it alters perception. A high value woman might see her equivilent as something very much less and discount him as such. That kind of narrows her field and may limit it to men that see her as less than LTR material. When that happens, she has priced herself out of the market.
BV, I was quietly letting your “mature women always think everyone wants in their pants” comment earlier slide, but since you bring it up again…honestly pretty much every guy DOES want in my pants, and I am not kidding about that. (Beware: this is not meant to be a brag.) I don’t even do anything, am extra cautious NOT to encourage men, and it STILL happens. It is embarrassing to me, actually. That’s one reason I have such a large personal bubble and am careful to not dress provocatively or act too much a flirt. Several guys w/i the last few months have flat out said, “What is it with you, I get a boner the minute you walk through the door?!?!” Awkward! Those guys are JUST FRIENDS and I have never ever done anything to encourage that reaction or led them to believe there would be any hanky panky. So trust me, I am not imagining it, and I don’t think it would be advisable for me to be more friendly. Even women have said the same, one gal said to me, “Do you have some crazy strong pheromones or what? The guys just CIRCLE you.” I don’t understand it myself. I mean, maybe that happens to other women and they just don’t talk about it? I dunno… If I had a different personality I suppose I might work that for all it is worth but I am super cautious NOT to work that. Personally I don’t even think I am all that attractive, certainly not in the Barbie doll type way.
Unlike your librarian friend, when I am in a relationship with someone, I am a very sensual and passionate person. I have no hang ups about sex, I just am not into casual sex.
Oh and by the way, based on your observations BV and Ton, I reached out to the chef about doing a farm to fork style local food dinner here and he’s all in. So yay! Nationally known award winning chef, right here at little old Chateau Bloom! Score!
Artisanal Toad said:
I was talking about the general theory of evolution, i.e. that we evolved from primordial slime, etc.. I’m not denying adaptation of species, that’s real. But, according to evo-psych it took millions of years, yada, yada, yada; and using mitochondrial DNA there is no way that humans can have been around for more than 200,000 years, max (and they fudged the parameters to get that). Better estimates are down around 140,000 years.
I am not buying into either of those two numbers at all (what happens when the next generation of tests come out showing that it isn’t 140k years but rather 14k years?), the point is simple: that piece of data takes every aspect of the general theory of evolution and throws it in the trash. The second point was that in terms of a theological position, one cannot accept the idea of original sin without accepting hypergamy in women originating from the same event. If the curse isn’t real then original sin isn’t real and that’s a huge problem for Christians because they’re so buy putting women on pedestals that they can’t see what they’re doing.
Shoot me an email with the address for this bar you mentioned and I’ll see if I can’t wander by sometime. I’m open to a discussion on the recent evolutionary changes to the bush, because starting about 40 years ago they started getting smaller and smaller and they’ve damn near disappeared these days. It’s a subject that definitely needs more ethanol-fueled field research.
There’s a reason no one wants a daughter who is a slut (well, exception some of the really crazy mothers).
Have you ever noticed how the guys who played football in high school push their sons to be on the team so they can vicariously relive the experience? Moms do it too and it happens more than you’d think. Just sayin…
Wasn’t accusing you of slut-shaming, I was just pointing out that hypergamy isn’t a choice for women, it’s part of the curse. The choice is what they do about it.
AT I didn’t think you were accusing me of slut shaming, we’re good!
BV, another example, I hired my babysitter’s then 16-year-old brother to mow my place with the big tractor and even HE got confused somehow that something might happen between us and made a move on me. I was so shocked, I immediately shut him down HARD and told him, “Are you kidding me? I am way too old for you!” and he looked like a puppy who had been kicked, I felt so bad for not being more soft landing about it but I in NO WAY saw that coming and know I did NOTHING to lead him on and HELL NO was I going to mack with a 16 year old boy. I was dressed up (in a skirt and flowy top, nothing too tight or revealing but feminine) to go somewhere, maybe he thought I was a possible cougar or had dressed up for him? I dunno… He is a good looking young man, so I am sure he has options with gals his own age?
If I knew what I am doing to provoke such reactions, I would stop but believe me, I don’t get it either.
Belle of the Library said:
I know this directly contradicts the Red Pill teaching that you should choose someone and settle down while you’re young and your SMV is high, but I really think the thing that keeps me from looking around the room for something better is the fact that I dated around for a few years. My guy may not be six feet tall, with a full head of hair, but I’ve been out with that guy, and he’s a douche. My guy is plenty attractive and he’s smart and chivalrous and loyal. I’m not interested in browsing, because I’ve already browsed and the options kind of sucked. At 28, I think most Red Pill philosophers would say I’m about to hit the wall, but I think it’s been really beneficial to me to see what’s out there, in regards to valuing what I already have.
Artisanal Toad said:
This seems as appropriate a thread as any to put this in.
(H/T Le Chateau Heartiste)
Wimmenz, read it and understand why no man in his right mind will sign up for monogamy at this point. I must assume that any man who willingly signs up for state-licensed monogamy is simply ignorant of the facts (quite common) or being stupidly irrational. However, you shall not hear any discussion today about the alternatives, not from me.
I urge each man to read the divorce and child support details for the state he’s living in before engaging in procreative activities. If one wants to read a true horror story, check out Massachusetts. Pay particular attention to the abortion extortion commentary.
Here’s a money quote for ya… think about it on payday:
“There are a lot of women collecting child support from more than one man,” Nissenbaum noted. “I remember one enterprising young lady who worked as a waitress at Boston’s Logan airport. She targeted three airline pilots, had a child by each of them, and back then was collecting $25,000 in tax-free child support from each pilot. Of course, instead of serving food and beverages, she did have to care for those children.” Using the USDA-estimated actual costs of children and the 2013 Massachusetts child support guidelines, compared to the college/work alternative a woman would have more spending power collecting child support from two men when each had an income of at least $95,000 per year (sufficient to generate $39,264 per year in tax-free income or $377 per week from each defendant).
Everyone keep steady, nothing to worry about… that gentle rocking motion is not an earthquake, it’s all the gold-digging whores relocating to Massachusetts.
Men, if you read nothing else, read the Summary Page:
Roughly 93 percent of the Americans collecting child support in the March 2014 U.S. Census Current Population Survey were women. In other words, men lose the winner-take-all custody-and-child-support fight about 93 percent of the time nationwide.
Asked to comment on the statement that “Nobody takes a job as a divorce judge unless they enjoy taking money from men and giving it to women,” an attorney said “He’s almost right except that in my experience what divorce judges enjoy most is taking money from very wealthy people and giving it to slightly less wealthy people. They call this ‘social justice.'”
Divorce laws are primarily developed by people whose income depends on litigation
It goes on. The “Practical Tips” section is also an eye-opener. Just a rough skim says Texas is the only state in which a man comes close to a “fair” shake in divorce court, but this site is a MGTOW wet dream in terms of justifying their choices.
Somebody doth protest too much.
Whatever BV, you’d have to check it out for yourself I guess. If you think you could handle it, that is. 😉 I don’t get it myself… but it has been a lifelong bane.
To begin with, let me say that I am speaking generally. With my previous comments on rejection and yours on attraction, it reminds me that women have an irrationally large abundance mentality in spite of the demographics. Men and women start off at even up but, as men die faster, there is a growing surplus of women as they age. I wish that I could understand how this abundance mentality came to be. It’s like there are twenty guys for each girl.
Well, that’s a plan. Let’s meet at the Fairmont in San Francisco. For conversation only, of course. Are you over 5’8″?
More seriously, I’ve never witnessed a single man say “You give me a boner when you walk in the room.” I’ve found that “You’re radiant today” induces more feminine blushing.
Flirting makes the world go ’round, especially for married men and women who enjoy the in-the-bounds attentions of the opposite sex. I had quite a good marriage for a long time. We had a gang that came over to our house most Sunday evenings for wine, pasta and cognac. We all kissed each other hello and joked about matrimony and its ironies. We didn’t say, “Oh, Louise, you give me a boner when you walk in the room (or, “Oh, BV, how do you maintain that butt?”).
Louise, incidentally, did once say to me, “You look at me like we’re fucking.” She later kidnapped her 10 and 12 year-old boys and moved them to Zurich with a banker. They didn’t see their father again for years. I’m wary of women who think their magical private parts transform all men into panting hound dogs. They tend to justify a lot of questionable behavior.
Mike and a friend of ours (callsign Yo) kind of kid that way (about us wives).
It’s very funny. 🙂
The other night they had a gathering and as we left, Mike said to Helga (not her real name) in front of Yo:
“Okay, two knocks means come down.”
“I’ll knock two times on the window and that’s your queue to come down later while Yo is asleep.”
Yo: “You have to speak slowly for the Nordic princess.”
Mike: “Okay, Helga. Later I will come over and knock two times on the window. And Yo, you’ll pretend to be asleep….”
Bv now… I dont think that. Could I be wrong some of the time about IOIs? Sure. I am just sharing those details to make a larger point which is about hypergamy and the trouble it can lead to. But yes, next time I visit SF I will be sure to let you know, we can meet up, that would be interesting I am sure! Now let’s move on about me personally and back to hypergamy… 😉
Thanks for your insight into the chef, we’ll be doing a dinner together, I will try to keep in mind that he’s not flirting bc he wants in my pants, he’s flirting bc he wants to do biz. 😉
Pingback: Games Girls Play | Notes From a Red Pill Girl