The "Rational Male and Female"? - Biology and Programs in Relationships

[Andi]

Are they? Statistically speaking I mean? It would be interesting to see if any such number exist. The idea of the older guy ditching his wife for a "younger model" IS something of a meme.

It could be a meme but statistically, if the stats are right, women initiate over 70% of all divorces.
To my understanding, men are less likely to do it mainly because it would be harder for them to find a mate. A bunch of other things are at play of course.

That, however, also seems to be a general truth. Then again, in the specific context, maybe it's objectively true. Many men aren't "man enough" to give their best in a relationship/

Well women are less to blame, I think that is generally true. In the context of the book, women place a ridiculous high standard on men, and when her age is past the responsibility point(when kids are grown up) the requirements of the initial Beta male dissolve and the Alpha Male desire engages again. For men, it seems, it's not the same. The men will most likely stay faithful through out his life.

 

[Pierre]

Are they? Statistically speaking I mean? It would be interesting to see if any such number exist. The idea of the older guy ditching his wife for a "younger model" IS something of a meme.

Depending on statistical sources, wife-initiated divorce is between 60 and 80%. It makes sense to me because because husands have much more to lose (custody and money) than wives.

The leading cause for starting a divorce procedure seems to be money according to this survey, but infidelity and lack of communication/commitment are often mentioned too.

 

[Andi]

I think the reason why Hypergamy hurts a man so much is because men are more likely to make an ideology out of a relationship and since they are expected to be providers, they place highest value on being able to deliver unconditionally to stand up to the expectation placed in by the feminine agency.
Therefore a man is torn to pisces when the family he has invested his life in disappears overnight.

 

[Beau]

Notice that a lot of men get quite worked up when they 'finally realize the horrible truth about hypergamy' etc. There's a tendency to denounce female wiles and manipulations, and I'd say the invariable reason they do this is because they have suffered as a result of those 'wiles' in the past. Basically, they complain about female biological imperatives that prevented them from getting what their own biological imperatives were telling them they should get. It's almost like complaining that 'her biological imperatives are better than mine!'

The thing that is missing here in many men, obviously, is knowledge about those "wiles". And if there had been knowledge, they wouldn't be called "wiles". It's like feeling victimized because you keep falling into a hole in the road and lashing out at the evils of holes in the road, when the real problem is you obviously have not yet learned that holes in the road exist. When you do, they're not "evil" any more, and in fact, you realize they never were.

Yes, exactly! Like I wrote before, it didn't seem to me that much of this stuff about female biological imperatives was all that novel or revolutionary. Of course, there's the wish that I had known some of this stuff in my younger years, but all that that would have changed is that I would have had better results in "achieving my biological imperatives". As it stands now, probably better off that I didn't.

But yeah, I don't understand the bitterness and the feeling of victimization coming from Red Pill men. So you weren't fulfilling the female's biological imperative and they didn't choose you. Oh well, get over it. Women are not evil harpies all of a sudden because you've figured out their psychological factors in choosing a mate. No one should strive to be the male equal of the angry feminist who hates men because they never went after her.

 

[Andi]

Yes, exactly! Like I wrote before, it didn't seem to me that much of this stuff about female biological imperatives was all that novel or revolutionary. Of course, there's the wish that I had known some of this stuff in my younger years, but all that that would have changed is that I would have had better results in "achieving my biological imperatives". As it stands now, probably better off that I didn't.

But yeah, I don't understand the bitterness and the feeling of victimization coming from Red Pill men. So you weren't fulfilling the female's biological imperative and they didn't choose you. Oh well, get over it. Women are not evil harpies all of a sudden because you've figured out their psychological factors in choosing a mate. No one should strive to be the male equal of the angry feminist who hates men because they never went after her.

I tend to disagree here a little.
If you read accounts of men and how their families have disintegrated over night for no obvious reason or fault on their own, you might empathize with the fact that some men work their ass off only to find themselves single because he was not available enough for her, or did not give her enough attention ...etc..while he was out working a dangerous and hard job only to come home tired..

Added: this is why Hypergamy hurts so badly. Through not all women will do that, a sens of rejection towards their husbands is the norm in the western world.
I'd say there is a fundamental lack of colinearity and valuable commun interest that's the culprint in later LTR.

 

[Andi]

I want to add someting explained in the first book, the rational male - comunication.
Men convers overtly and women convers covertly. This everyone knows and is the old debate on women are illogical and men don't understand us women.
To me this seems like the most "in your face" problem between genders. I'll go as far as to say that women's mode of communication is actually genuinely manipulative. This covert style where you ought to read minds, dammed if you do dammed if you don't , is really want is ticking most guys nerves.
Women are masters at this from as early as they start playing with dolls and get incredibly mature in this type of language by age 20. We men do not communicate this way and we are prone to psychological manipulation.
This is where I think Tomassi's book is at its best, that is - in describing this social cultural and gender interaction.

Added: I am confident enough to say that in this respect, AWALT (all women are like that) unless they do some self work on their machine.

 

[genero81]

And I think it's pretty safe to say that in any of the above scenarios, the basic energetic feminine and masculine imperatives of inspiration/organization - protection/providence are playing out either physically, emotionally/psychologically or spiritually. Sometimes they can even switch between partners depending on the specific situation. A man can inspire or organize a woman emotionally and a woman can protect and provide guidance for a man spiritually, for instance.

Anyway, I think it's true that it's important to not lose sight of the most basic impulses and over romanticize. I think it's equally true that romance is VERY important. It can either be used as a narrative to just get what you want, or it can be the motivating factor to keep you going through the hard times and thinking of the other and higher ideals. Same with knowledge. They BOTH have the potential to take you from the 'imperative' to actual love. But only when that is your goal and only when used together.

Yes, great summation. I especially like the way you compared the dynamic to knowledge itself. What is the intent? Tomassi is making clear a dynamic that pretty clearly exist, which in itself is a type of knowledge. What's done with that knowledge is up to the individual.

 

[furryfrog]

"dualistic sexual strategy" (as I think I understand it, since I'm not entirely sure what it means)

Which is why I find some articles on the topic laughable and caricatural - like the one about "if she doesn't have sex with you within 3 dates, move on, it means she's not really into you/you're not her priority". I think on this particular point, RT's very much deluded.

Tomasi himself covers both of these topics at 20:45.

It seems, Tomasi just lays it out in basic terms on his blog without providing the underlying details as to why. It's the underlying details which are useful, one does not need to take his action recommendations at face value.

 

[genero81]

Even though the books provide a comprehensive understanding of hypergamy, who’s definition only becomes clear by actually reading the material, I will attempt to describe this abstract idea using my own words.

Well I bought the second book and read the first 25% this morning. I would say you did a good enough job summarizing, I could have just saved my money! lol Don't worry, I will keep reading

 

[genero81]

The thing that is missing here in many men, obviously, is knowledge about those "wiles". And if there had been knowledge, they wouldn't be called "wiles". It's like feeling victimized because you keep falling into a hole in the road and lashing out at the evils of holes in the road, when the real problem is you obviously have not yet learned that holes in the road exist. When you do, they're not "evil" any more, and in fact, you realize they never were.

Yeah exactly, if anything I think it can make men more compassionate by understanding these biological imperatives driving both sexes.

 

[Adaryn]

Thank you Andi for your post.
For few weeks I have used and I'm still using knowledge from these authors and it's helping a lot...helping in the way that dynamics are changing, influence of her frame decreased almost instantly when this knowledge is utilized (this is also a great battlefield for practicing disagreeableness(enduring sh*t-testing etc) if your are more agreeable person), also her appreciation increased despite not being a "Nice Guy", so...!

For anyone who thinks that this approach is "cruel", "amoral" or similar - read again Timothies post. Level of your repulsion may indicate level of your "Nice Guy" programming and please do yourself a favor and separate the wheat from the chaff.

@Balance (and others): Do you know this book? No More Mr Nice Guy: A Proven Plan for Getting What You Want in Love, Sex, and Life
It came up as a book suggestion while I was reading reviews of Tomassi's books on Amazon. The reviews seem overwhelmingly positive so if you haven't already, you might be interested in taking a look at it.

Originally published as an e-book that became a controversial media phenomenon, No More Mr. Nice Guy! landed its author, a certified marriage and family therapist, on The O'Reilly Factor and the Rush Limbaugh radio show. Dr. Robert Glover has dubbed the "Nice Guy Syndrome" trying too hard to please others while neglecting one's own needs, thus causing unhappiness and resentfulness. It's no wonder that unfulfilled Nice Guys lash out in frustration at their loved ones, claims Dr. Glover. He explains how they can stop seeking approval and start getting what they want in life, by presenting the information and tools to help them ensure their needs are met, to express their emotions, to have a satisfying sex life, to embrace their masculinity and form meaningful relationships with other men, and to live up to their creative potential.

 

[furryfrog]

And understanding this second aspect helps explain why women are paradoxically drawn to the quintessential “bad boy”. The man with an attitude, who acts arrogant and dismissive, who is unlikely to be a good long term provider, and who may not even be conventionally handsome, but still manages somehow to enthral and get beautiful women to go to bed with him.

This is also a commonly accepted social trope.

For some reason nature has also selected for the Alpha qualities of confidence, aloofness, and self-assured indifference to become strong unconscious attractors to women’s basic desires.

I don’t know why this is, but I suspect that when a man demonstrates his own worth by outwardly showing that he’s indifferent to the sexual charms and lures of woman, he triggers something in a women’s brain

This is hypergamy, the female imparative is to acquire the highest status male she can. Because these 2 examples of men treat her like she is "below" them, she feels like she is with a man that is superior than herself, and has topped out on her personal hypergamy ladder.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Depending on statistical sources, wife-initiated divorce is between 60 and 80%. It makes sense to me because because husands have much more to lose (custody and money) than wives.

The leading cause for starting a divorce procedure seems to be money according to this survey, but infidelity and lack of communication/commitment are often mentioned too.

And JBP has hypothesized on several occasions that the stats may be the result of women being higher in neuroticism, i.e. their tendency to experience negative emotions more intensely.

 

[Joe]

According to Tomasi, while men have an "idealistic" (delusional and self-centered) view of love, i.e. "love me just as I am, even if I'm a mess", women have a more practical concept of what love is, i.e. men should be "real men", i.e. Alpha and Beta as appropriate. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable request. It demands that men be the best they can be. Maybe that's where a lot of the resentment in men comes from: the fact that they were required to better themselves in ways that are beneficial for them and their partner.

 

[Pierre]

I don't understand the bitterness and the feeling of victimization coming from Red Pill men

I think, in some cases, this bitterness comes from an unconscious projection. The man has had a bad experience with a female figure and, if this bad experience remains unresolved, he will project onto every single woman the evilness that stems from this bad experience.

These types of projections are more and more frequent because we live in a society where feminism has a strong influence on media, politics, courts.

The injustices due to the feminist influence offers a perfect narrative to the hurt men where they can dissert on the very real abuses committed against men while being oblivious that the fuel of this analysis is personal and emotional.

On top of that, the emotional thinking points to the wrong culprit, while the real cuplrits are the psychopathic individuals who divide and conquer by pitting men against women.

In this sense the feminist (action) and the MGOW (reaction) movements are two sides of the same coin: seemingly opposite ideologies rooted in the same demonizing of the other sex.