, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A post over at The Rational Male and the comments that follow got me thinking about some of the games girls play, and how men are getting hip to such games and are countering with self-preservation strategies of their own.

(NOTE: A word to the wise, before you go to that blog and post how “not all women are like that” NAWALT or to try to argue, just don’t. I guarantee you will not be met with understanding or a warm reception. It’s a “guy space.” Please respect that and just read but not comment. Comment here instead.)

For example, consider this comment by YaReally from a guy point of view of such games, and ask yourself how many times have you seen a girlfriend do this (or have done it yourself?) Then ask yourself if you were a guy, how would you feel if almost every girl you dated offered you this deal?

“No man “committing” to a girl raised in 2016 culture is in a monogamous LTR. He’s in a one-sided pLTR (Primary LTR, a primary partner with multiple orbiters/side-poon) but in the GIRL’S favor (aka she keeps her options available while he restricts his own).

Social media and women out of the kitchen and into the workplace etc creates a system where women can openly gather and string orbiters along and openly seek higher-value options than her current man and this is socially acceptable because it’s all done under the guise of “just being friends” or anonymity.

If her significant other tries to restrict her access to that stuff, he’s labelled controlling, insecure, jealous, abusive, etc And if the guy keeps his own options open, he’s a player, cheat, unfaithful, emotionally abusive, etc

In the old days, before modern technology (especially before phones were invented but even in, like, the 50s say), a woman had to go out of her way to gather and keep orbiters around. It took actual effort and even if she went out looking she really only had access to a handful of men besides her husband. Once she determined that he was her best option, her Hypergamy was satisfied enough to make a relationship work long-term. That doesn’t mean women didn’t cheat, or weren’t subconsciously still on the prowl for some mysterious high-value stranger who passes through town, but like, it was significantly more difficult to entertain that shit (plus she had other shit to do with her day, like keeping the house/family taken care of before modern technology turned cooking, laundry, cleaning, etc into short often automated tasks that give her tons of free time to be bored).

But today’s technology means that a girl can be dating the greatest catch in her social circle, but still potentially have access to an even higher value guy through her social media. And if she switches to that guy, when he’s sitting on the couch beside her being boring, she can be communicating with a AAA celebrity through her social media.

Hypergamy doesn’t “shut off”, it NEVER sleeps…it’s ALWAYS there, always pinging for value. If you can keep her away from other men that don’t necessarily HAVE higher-value than you but that she PERCEIVES *MAY* have higher-value than you in HER value system of what constitutes high-value (which causes her to feel that compelling instinctive urge to test to SEE if he is juuuust incase he IS and she should pursue him), then you have a shot. But all the actions that would help that are demonized and villified as controlling, abusive, etc thanks to feminism pushing for Open Hypergamy and Open Cuckolding. This is why they’ll keep pushing that stuff trying to program boys from an early age so that it’s normalized to them when they’re adults and they don’t question the arrangement where they give up all their options while the girl says she does but is still pinging for better in the background thanks to the technology that’s made that abundant, easy and discreet (and connected her to astronomically high-value males like celebrities).

The ruse is that a relationship where a man gives up all his options and is sexually faithful to a woman, while the woman is sexually faithful to him (for now) but is constantly subconsciously on the prowl for better (because social media and being in male spaces like male workplaces and hobbies) under an “innocent” frame of “oh that’s just some guy from work, it’s no big deal, why are you getting jealous don’t be so insecure!”, is still “a monogamous relationship”.

That’s NOT a monoLTR. That is a pLTR in the woman’s favor. No guy dating/settling with a girl in 2016 is settling into a “monogamous LTR”, he’s settling into a “pLTR in the woman’s favor”. Like, guys need to really let that concept sink in.

The only guys in ACTUAL monoLTRs are guys who’s significant others don’t (or barely) use social media (so a lot of guys with older wives which is why I stress the raised in 2016 culture thing, or if you can find like, an Amish girl lol), and/or don’t (or barely) spend time in male spaces around other men (like working at a place where she’s surrounded by high-value men).

Literally any girl with social media is only offering guys a pLTR in her favor, but everyone in society including the man agreeing to it will still call it a monoLTR, and that man will find himself frustrated that she has orbiters posting/flirting on her Facebook wall but will then realize he’s in a Kobayashi Maru when he tries to call her out on it and is labelled jealous/insecure for it…he won’t be able to articulate it unless he’s a Red Pill guy and even then it depends on how much of the pill he’s swallowed, but he’ll instinctively know that him sitting on the couch watching Netflix while she sits beside him surfing Facebook and responding to guys on her Facebook wall, that something isn’t “right” with that agreement he’s entered. Because it’s lopsided in her favor.

This is why I’m pushing for guys to understand and explore the dynamics of how pLTRs and oLTRs work, and how oLTRs naturally become pLTRs if you can keep her Hypergamy triggered, and just REQUIRING a pLTR from her already puts you near the top of her Hypergamous options because it’s giving her all the shit she needs (dread, jealousy, etc) and giving you all the shit you need (sexworthiness, charisma to flirt with other girls, abundance mentality to walk away, etc) for her to stay attracted to you.

And it’s why I’m pushing for guys to start experimenting with pLTRs so we can get more guys in them and get more guys thinking about how we can successfully have and raise kids in a pLTR (in the man’s favor) arrangement with no legal ties and possibly accepting the fact that women may not stay past the 7 year itch and prepare for accepting that and prospering within the new system.

Because the old system is DEAD. MonoLTRs don’t exist anymore. I can’t re-state that enough.

Unless you can keep your girl jobless in your home and off all forms of social media (even the seemingly innocent ones that are for hobby groups or business networking etc)…which with a 20+yo girl in 2016 with a huge social network, is pretty unrealistic (her friends/family (who are all in shitty relationships themselves) will likely view you as abusive and be trying to turn her against you to “save” her from the horror that is your relationship actually having a chance at working out lol). You may manage to make an “LTR” work in 2016 with a girl raised in 2016 culture, but understand that unless you’re pro-actively running a pLTR in your favor, you are making a “pLTR in her favor” work, not a “monoLTR”.

This is a big part of why marriage is a bad deal. Even if you marry a chick who doesn’t use social media, and get her to quit her job to be a housewife, when she’s sitting around at home all day long bored out of her mind, she’s VERY likely going to end up getting social media to have some kind of contact with the outside world, and now you’re legally tied to a pLTR in her favor. The best you can do is even the odds out with your own girls, but you’ve signed legal paperwork handing her all the power in the world to destroy your life if you miscalibrate at some point in the next 40+ years.

And none of this is even taking into account the social conditioning girls are receiving from an early age telling them boyfriends and commitment and monogamy are all a drag that keeps you from having fun going to Avicii concerts with your BFF girlfriends and hooking up with guys and you’ll be young forever and Amy Schumer gets the rich doctor when she’s 35 and shit.”

Or in other words, if you are a girl who wants to have a successful relationship in an era where more and more men are seeing trading commitment for sex in an era of free and easy sex and no fault divorce as a fools game, you should NOT play such games.

And the thing is, you may fall into playing these girl games without even realizing that you are doing it or why. Because women are hard wired to seek the best match possible (hypergamy). At one time, engagement/marriage was the end of that, largely because women who divorced without VERY GOOD reasons were ostracized. But not anymore. The removal of the social stigma of divorce and/or serial monogamy (moving from one sexually active “LTR” to the next) have removed the safeguards that in the past protected men once they committed to a woman that she would stay and be committed to him. Being conscious of said girl games and guarding yourself from playing them will set you ahead of the other girls who are playing such games. Often because dating and relationship advice aimed at women encourages such games.

In days past, men were the ones who were on the commitment hot seat. Not anymore. Today it is the woman who needs to prove her worthiness of commitment, not the other way around. Why? Because more often than not today women are the ones to initiate breaking said commitment, not him. And she will get plenty of support from society when she decides to break said commitment, unlike a guy who will still be shamed for doing so.

Many a woman today can be heard wailing, “Where have all the good guys gone?” But the truth is in many (most) cases, the actions of women themselves, the very real financial and emotional risks a man takes by getting legally entangled with a women via marriage and children, and the obvious societal support for women to hold the right to exercise moving on (or up) whenever she sees fit without condemnation or shame, have chased those good guys off. Not the other way around.

Why are the good guys dropping out? Because modern women are presenting them with a no-win deal. End of. Why commit to someone who always has the socially sanctioned and even encouraged option to uncommit to you? Instead, they choose to opt out by playing the “let’s not commit” game themselves.

So before we blame the guys, ladies, it’s good to do a personal inventory and ask yourself, are you playing girl games — and likely losing now that men are getting hip to these games? If so, perhaps it’s time to do and be different.

What do you think? Please share in the comments, while at the same time respecting the point of view of other commenters.