The manosphere is producing unresponsiblie adult men

[zekko]

Right now, all of the US is about women. To use an example, only recently Obama hailed the latest achievement of women attending college in greater numbers than men, as well as women getting paid more than men. He actually said "this is great progress".

What was missing, by him and every portion of the media......was to ask if it was bad that the trend against men has gone beyond parity and is going worse.

And I doubt that anyone will ask it either. Since according to the leftists women have been "oppressed" all these years, they will argue that the pendulum has to swing the other way for awhile so that justice can be served. Feminists will never be satisfied until they are earning as much as, or more likely more, than men do. Despite the fact that they take more time off of work due to pregnancy and such.

When they talk about men making more money than women, I wonder if they are including the alimony and child support checks in with their income. I tend to doubt it.

[QUOTE+Danger]Zekko I just wanted to add, and don't take this the wrong way, but what you said was basically another way of saying "man up".[/QUOTE]
True enough, but what is the alternative? Lay down and give up?
I agree there are legitimate reasons why men are failing, and I would like nothing more than to see this change. But there are reasons for the obesity epidemic also, and I don't see the manosphere looking to give out free passes in that regard. It's basically "man up and lose the weight". What's the alternative? The alternative is to get fat.

But just because I would like to see men doing better doesn't mean that I don't recognize that the deck is stacked against us. I agree with everything you said in your last two posts.

I get really annoyed by the feminist agenda which now cites that there are more females in college than males....Maybe so, but if you take a closer look, you will see that the DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN, REAL WORLD VALUE degrees that are based in the mathmatical / engineering fields are dominated mainly by foreign men from India and other parts of Asia

That's great for the guys from India and Asia. But it also underscores the fact that there is a problem with the men in the west. As Danger has noted, they're not being encouraged to excel or succeed. And with so many single mother families, and the feminization of the society in general, there are fewer suitable role models available. Men in the west aren't even being brought up to succeed.

 

[zekko]

Admittedly, when I went to college, the risk/reward involved was a lot better. I worked my way through college, never took out a loan, had a guaranteed job when I graduated, and even received assistance from a company in exchange for working a year for them.

Now days, people go to college, can't get a job when they get out, and are left paying off school loans for maybe ten years. Education costs have skyrocketed. Then there are the taxes you mentioned, and the social and corporate programs they support. I am keenly aware that this is not the country I grew up in. Many would say that is a good thing, and in some ways it is. But in some ways it's not.

I can understand why a guy would go for the immediate gratification, heck I've done it myself before. But the bottom line is, will that take them where they want to go? Better to have the shaky 401k than nothing.

 

[MaddXMan]

Would you rather....

1. Work hard for 40 years, go to college for a degree (with little chance of getting a job nowadays), marry a former carouseler, hopefully don't get raped in divorce court and by good luck eek out a hopefully somewhat sustainable retirement from what's left of Social Security and your IRA/401k (Which hopefully isn't confiscated by then)
2. Spend your money on having fun now, try to get laid with easy young girls, play video games with your friends, and worry about tomorrow when it gets here, knowing there are all sorts of safety nets in society to protect you from your bad decisions?

Given the situation of today......most Men are choosing option number 2.

And honestly, can you blame them?

I'm dating a couple women now who are in their mid-40's and recently divorced. I suspected they were loaded. And when I saw their houses for "movie night" it confirmed it. Huge, huge houses and lots of toys. And I'm sitting there thinking, all this came from the exes money. And where is he now, in an apartment somewhere? Throws cold water on the situation.

 

[PlayHer Man]

I don't think men are "laying down and giving up" so much as they are choosing "at the margin".

Basically, people are rational, respond to incentives, and often will act with perspective on "what the next action will do for you".

This is a concept that is unfortunately all too ignored by the left-leaning, well-intentioned folks (not to get political, but this is leading to an example).

Think in terms of poverty, entitlements, welfare, EBT, disability, etc,... All around us we see people in poverty and we think the answer is to increase entitlements or some sort of wealth transfer to help these people out. Without realize, that we are increasing the incentive of doing little, while decreasing the incentive to work.

We all have our own "at the margin" graph that determines what our next choice will be. I may be ok with sexing up two girls at once, but a guy like Bradd may decide it's worth his time to spin three plates. Likewise with work. I may decide that it's no longer worth it to go to school and get a higher paying/more stressful job....and thus I sit here and earn less $$. You however have a different "margin" and decide you want to go to school for that doctorate and lead a division at a corporation.

Likewise, we get to men and the dating market. First it starts with no-fault divorce, so fewer men get married. Then comes a hostile family court when it comes to children, so fewer are being born. Next comes hypergamy and women doling it out for the top athletes and such in their early years (again, at the margin....so not all women are doing this, but many are), only to get married or settle for a beta later on.

In short, men, young men in particular, are recognizing that there is less and less point, or an ever decreasing "margin" for them to perform certain functions within society. Less return on their effort, if you will. It has not been an immediate drop, but it has been consistent with the rise of feminism, socialism and hypergamy.

Now, most people without much education of, experience in or application of economics will immediately blame men for the "problem" (not insulting anyone, but just recognizing that very few people understand this concept of "at the margin" as it applies to incentives.). What those people cannot link together is how young men are seeing what is and isn't working for attaining women, how ability is becoming subservient to "who you know", and also how extra money just gets confiscated to go to those who produce little......and as a result those young men are going Cad instead of Dad.

Nature will not be denied. It is naturally self-correcting. When you punish specific actions, they will start to decrease. When you reward other actions, those actions will increase in number. We can't blame men for responding rationally to a situation society has placed them in. It reminds me of how in Rome when the farms becamse too heavily taxed, farmers started disappearing and going to the cities to live on the dole.
Rome eventually had to pass laws forbidding people from quitting or leaving their farms. The same incentives apply today for men in general.


Would you rather....

1. Work hard for 40 years, go to college for a degree (with little chance of getting a job nowadays), marry a former carouseler, hopefully don't get raped in divorce court and by good luck eek out a hopefully somewhat sustainable retirement from what's left of Social Security and your IRA/401k (Which hopefully isn't confiscated by then)
2. Spend your money on having fun now, try to get laid with easy young girls, play video games with your friends, and worry about tomorrow when it gets here, knowing there are all sorts of safety nets in society to protect you from your bad decisions?

Given the situation of today......most Men are choosing option number 2.

And honestly, can you blame them?

Amazing post Danger. Brilliantly articulated and packed with wisdom.



In the end the concept is simple --> People will not willingly work for FREE.

Asking men to "step up" and work hard because its their job as men goes against their natural reward based tendencies. You are basically saying: "Work for free at my company because I need you to" :crackup: :crackup:

No sane man is going to willingly flush his life away because society believes he is less important than everyone with a vagina or with less than 18 years of life under their belt.

 

[backbreaker]

Work hard for 40 years, go to college for a degree (with little chance of getting a job nowadays), marry a former carouseler, hopefully don't get raped in divorce court and by good luck eek out a hopefully somewhat sustainable retirement from what's left of Social Security and your IRA/401k (Which hopefully isn't confiscated by then)
Spend your money on having fun now, try to get laid with easy young girls, play video games with your friends, and worry about tomorrow when it gets here, knowing there are all sorts of safety nets in society to protect you from your bad decisions?

in reality, you can't have 2 without having 1.

how are you going to bang all these hot young girls? you have to have some type of value. you either gotta be hot, or have a good job. if you say well i am just going to have game and have a good job you still have to take care of yourself, go to the gym, eat right.. it costs about.. with gym membership and the foods i eat, about 800-900 a month between protein powder, gym membership, multi v, and the food i eat to stay in the shape i'm in now. granted i live in the 2nd most expensive city in the country but you get the point.


to add, once you get past the age pf.. 26-28, is sitting around and playing video games and ****ing skanks really all that fun? i mean, it's NOT unfun, but it's not "fun" as i see it today. the older you get the more fun costs money hich means, you have to have some which means you have to have a decent job. football games, for me the misses and the son, traveling, hotels, tickets, about 200-300 a Saturday. a week. 5-6 times a year. horse track? normal person is going to blow 100-200 a day at the track not including drinks. concerts? drinks + tickets probably run you 100-200 depending on what you want to go see


I mean, that's not horrible advice for someone whose in high school. don't worry so much about the future, kick it, bang brads, play video games, when kicking it with the friends meant playing madden all night long or going to the movies and spending 15 dollars or taking 20 dollars to the newest arcade and playing mortal kombat all day long, but someone who is 28 and not 18 that's not very practical real world advice IMHO. What's the point of living in LA if you are too broke to ever do anything in LA lol?


whichi mean, goes back to the point of my OP. I"m not even telling you that there is anything wrong with kicking it, ****ing braods and having fun. I'm simply saying that not being educated, not having a good job, is not the way to go about seriously doing these things. you can't even do a good job of having fun if you don't have a good job. how are you going to go kick it in maui for a week if you don't have a job that offers paid vacation lol?

I get a lot of slack on this forum for bieng successful and a lot of guys, in particular newer guys come around and tell me that hte only reason that I feel the way i feel is because i'm not broke but you know what, mother****er i WAS broke. I was very very very broke. and i sucked it up and i did hat i had to do to not be broke. i didn't whine, i didn't cry about it, i just fought threw it and endured it because i knew that it had to be done to get where i wanted to go. There were times 11-12 years ago (Damn lol) that iw as having to budget 10 dollars for food for a week.

I said i can deal with not having fun now, getting bent over now\, to be able to enjoy the rest of my life the way i want to enjoy it and that's exactly what happened. I make no excuses for being where i am because i earned every bit of it. If you don't like it or think i'm brash that's on you that's some **** you need to process lol.

there is nothing BETA about sucking it up and doing what needs to be done. That's all i am saying. you're not even accomplishing what YOU want to accomplish by being unproductive. I don't give a **** what you do with your money or how you spend your free time or your political or religious beliefs or even if you want kids or not. could care less. But by not being a productive, responsible member of normal society you don't have any option but to not do anything.


look here is a parable lol. You live in Atlanta. There are these apartments in a ****ty part of town. there are 2 guys that live next door to each other. Both are 45 years old. Neither has any furniture, neither has a car that is worth a ****, neither has any credit. One got divorced from his wife and even though he makes about 5 grand a month his wife right now is getting 2 grand of that and he still has to pay the house note and her car note so he's doing what he has to do right now just to get by. The other guy is works as a manager at pizza hut, spends all his money on xbox and playstation games. both are miserable, both are lonely, both are broke as hell with a dim future

how is one better than the other? that's what i am saying. neither your point 1 or point 2 is the correct answer just beucase those are the only 2 points you posted.



what's wrong with option 3? the guy who bucks down, does what ne needs to do in life, goes a while without getting laid but once he starts to get some money and a steady job he starts eating better, taking care of himself, dressing better, gets a decent place, starts to get some ***** on the reg, starts having more of a social life, but always puts his interests first at all times. he spins plates for a while, but every decision he makes is for his own best interests. he dates, he maybe marries a girl, he maybe doesn't but if he does it's on him and he's smart enough to screen his woman if he does decide to marry her. he may very well not but he is always in a general good mood because he has high self esteem beucase he knows he's a catch, he takes care of himself still, and he is enjoying the fruits of his labor.


If i am going to be 45 years old and single. i want to be the 45 year old guy who has his own house, with his own furniture, with his own car, has nice clothes, can go out of town on the weekend when he wants, can take a day off when he wants, has enough money in hte savings to know that he is at least, not stressing out about what is going to happen in 20 years and is in good health because he takes care of himself. If I am single i know it's because i just have not ran into someone worth my tie to date not because i'm not worth dating. if i am going to be 45 and single i want to be option 3 45 and single.

that's what i thought this forum was for to make option 3 guys. that's what it was when i first came here 11 years ago.

Sorry, but I have to ask, BACKBREAKER, how long have you been married now?

2 years, 1 month, 3 days.

 

[backbreaker]

Danger

I apologize for thinking you held that point of view. My bad. I agree with alot of what you are saying if not all of it.

It's funny, we are really saying the same thing I m just not as tactful as you are


What I am trying to say, I understand WHY kids act the way they do.

Take me. I could have very easily went down a different path. IF I were not a member of this forum when my old oneitis was doing the **** she did to me, I very well could have just said, **** it I quit. The **** I went through iwth her, the amount of money i spent, the amount of blue balls she gave me is hall of fame worthy.

This forum helped me realize that hey, a lot of it is my fault and not to play the victim card and while that's screwed up this is what you can do to ensure that you 1. have a happy productive life and 2. never have to experience that type of chick again if you don't have to.

But instead of that, I feel that too many just wallow in the hurt and bitterness.

It's funny I saw one of my sponsees last night he is having a real rough time, he will have a year clean on Monday and he's really getting down on himself because while he's clean and I can personally see a lot of progress in him, he is not getting anywhere in life. He wants his old life back, all right now. he's a little overweight but not a lot. about like 5'10 190 pounds, wants to lose some weight, so he goes super duper hard in the gym and crashes and has to miss 2 days lol. he over works himself then gets burned out and doesn't want to work and can't sale anything.

i told him when i first met him dude, slow down. you will get everything you want w hen you are supposed to have it. now a year later, he's exaclty where he was a year ago lol when he could have gotten his weight down to his goal if he slowed down and took it a day at a time, if he paced himself.

that's kinda the mentality of a lot of guys in the mansophere. i am either going to get a slew of women right now, i'm going to be baller status right now, or **** women all together and that's what we are here for, tos ay that's not a realistic or healthy point of view. work for it and it will happen.

watch, this guy, he's fianlly at a place where i think he is willing to listen. if he doesn't **** up he will be fine. within a few months he will get to his weight, he will pace himself, he will slowly start to build his self esteem up. if he makes it to 2 years clean he will be a different peson than he is now. but a year takes a year lol. time takes time.

 

[FairShake]

I don't know if the manosphere produces guys who refuse to grow up or that guys who refuse (or can't) grow up are attracted to the manosphere. I suspect the latter is true but that is definitely reinforces the former.

 

[Boilermaker]

^
Very good point.

Your observation makes the issue more complicated.

 

[evan12]

OP : How do you explain Mystery when he tell you in his famous book to pass your genetic to next generation and that all selection is based on breading strategies . Actually nothing motivate me to have kids than when I read mystery method.

 

[zekko]

that's what i thought this forum was for to make option 3 guys. that's what it was when i first came here 11 years ago.

This is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems to me like the quality of this forum has dropped dramatically in the last 6-12 months. And I've never been the type to say things like that. I always liked coming here because I knew I would be motivated and pushed to excel. There would be talk about self improvement and becoming a better man - in all areas. Now if you want to achieve something for yourself you get called a beta faggot for being socially conditioned into contributing to the feminist government and society.

Danger, let me make this clear: I understand the rationales about why younger men are giving up, and you've explained it very well. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

But I was not aware that this forum was about embracing mediocrity. I know times are hard now, and I've been through some hard times too. I've been dirt poor. But I was raised that if you want to eat, you work. I busted my butt to succeed. Now some in the manosphere see that as becoming a slave of the feminist government. But if you're not being productive, you're on the dole. I don't care to be one of those guys.

Too many guys are using this as an excuse to give up. "It's hard, so I'm not going to try. The odds are against me, so I'm not going to try". It's no wonder guys here cling so tightly to this notion that women only really want lowlifes. It gives them just one more rationalization to be one themselves.

HINT: The answer goes back to my previous statement that we have built ENTIRE SYSTEMS AND SAFETY NETS to keep them from trying. Add to that the inability for them to land a decent woman at an early age and you have the recipe for modern day USA.

This reminds me of the bit in The Dark Knight Returns where Batman has to have the fear of death in order to make the leap to escape Bane's prison. I think it's good we have a safety net, but it has definitely worked against us in many ways, unfortunately.

 

[PlayHer Man]

This is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems to me like the quality of this forum has dropped dramatically in the last 6-12 months. And I've never been the type to say things like that. I always liked coming here because I knew I would be motivated and pushed to excel. There would be talk about self improvement and becoming a better man - in all areas. Now if you want to achieve something for yourself you get called a beta faggot for being socially conditioned into contributing to the feminist government and society.

Danger, let me make this clear: I understand the rationales about why younger men are giving up, and you've explained it very well. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

But I was not aware that this forum was about embracing mediocrity. I know times are hard now, and I've been through some hard times too. I've been dirt poor. But I was raised that if you want to eat, you work. I busted my butt to succeed. Now some in the manosphere see that as becoming a slave of the feminist government. But if you're not being productive, you're on the dole. I don't care to be one of those guys.

Too many guys are using this as an excuse to give up. "It's hard, so I'm not going to try. The odds are against me, so I'm not going to try". It's no wonder guys here cling so tightly to this notion that women only really want lowlifes. It gives them just one more rationalization to be one themselves.


This reminds me of the bit in The Dark Knight Returns where Batman has to have the fear of death in order to make the leap to escape Bane's prison. I think it's good we have a safety net, but it has definitely worked against us in many ways, unfortunately.

No one is telling men to be losers or embrace mediocrity. I think they are just telling men to do whats good for them. If a man wants to be a doctor.. it should be because HE wants that for HIMSELF. It should not be to impress a woman or validate his family.

Human nature has not changed at all. It has always been reward based. In the past, fear was the main tool.. through Religion. Religion is fading now and lots of the fear with it.

Only TWO things motivate human beings:

1. Fear

2. Reward

All Danger is saying is the fear and rewards that motivated men before are mostly gone. If a person is going to get food, shelter, safety and sex without work.. of course they are not going to work. ESPECIALLY if they believe they will be punished for it.

You take the position of morality: Men should do the right thing because its the right thing. Right for who? Why just men? Society doesn't have to do right by men.. but men must do right by society? :crackup:

 

[zekko]

No one is telling men to be losers or embrace mediocrity. I think they are just telling men to do whats good for them. If a man wants to be a doctor.. it should be because HE wants that for HIMSELF. It should not be to impress a woman or validate his family.

Of course it should be because he wants it himself. Where have I said a man should do ANYTHING to impress a woman?

You take the position of morality: Men should do the right thing because its the right thing. Right for who? Why just men?

It's not "just men". But I am a man, and we on this forum are men, so that's why I'm talking specifically about men. I do think men should do the right thing. And I do believe that doing the right thing is in his best interest. As for women, men are supposed to be leaders. If men do not do the right thing, if men do not conduct themselves with honor, you can pretty much bet that women will not.

As I said, I was raised that if you want to eat, you should work. If not, you are a parasite. I've worked hard to succeed, and I do not regret it. Quite the opposite. Nor am I sitting here crying about how society has screwed me or how I can't get a woman. I've taken care of myself.

Having said that, I don't approve of the feminine leanings in today's society, and I do empathize with the position many men are in. But I don't think the answer for them is to give up.

 

[zekko]

You say we need to remove mediocrity, but I say we can only do it by hitting the "reset" button. We are now barreling down a one-way street picking up speed. There is no turning around. If you think society can change back to allowing incentives for men equally, I would like to hear how it can be done without a "reset". Women and politicians will fight it every way possible. Nothing will change until nature forces it to change.

I totally agree, unfortunately. And this isn't just about men and women, it's about our general loss of freedoms. Your analogy is perfect - we are barreling down this road and there isn't going to be any turning around. Don't forget, I'm 52 years old, and I've seen all these changes happen moreso than the majority of guys here.

Telling men to "man up" is an effort to keep the boot on men as long as possible.

I see what you are saying, but I don't look it at it that way. When I say "man up", I'm not saying just accept all the BS without question. I mean do what you have to do as an individual to make your life the best it can be. There used to be a lot of talk about tough love around here. What I'm trying to say is pretty much what you said in your post:

"I think this forum is about recognizing, adapting to, and embracing reality. And turning that reality to your advantage."

So is there a way to speed up the "reset" button in a society that denigrates men?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you talk about a reset, you're talking about a catastrophic event of some sort that forces us to revert to our original gender roles in order to survive, yes? Such as a complete collapse of our economic system or maybe a giant meteor strike. I can understand the appeal of such a idea, but considering that you, I, and most of the rest of us are likely to be destroyed or swept away by such an event, I'm not sure I want to work toward speeding it up.

Furthermore, I think it's entirely possible that from an evolutionary standpoint, the human race may slowly be seeing its gender differences disappearing as time goes on. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is a good thing, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be surprising if that's what our future holds. We may not ever see the days again when women will not be allowed to vote, for example (and I think you'd have to reset things at least that far back to fix everything).

 

[PlayHer Man]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you talk about a reset, you're talking about a catastrophic event of some sort that forces us to revert to our original gender roles in order to survive, yes? Such as a complete collapse of our economic system or maybe a giant meteor strike. I can understand the appeal of such a idea, but considering that you, I, and most of the rest of us are likely to be destroyed or swept away by such an event, I'm not sure I want to work toward speeding it up.

Furthermore, I think it's entirely possible that from an evolutionary standpoint, the human race may slowly be seeing its gender differences disappearing as time goes on. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is a good thing, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be surprising if that's what our future holds. We may not ever see the days again when women will not be allowed to vote, for example (and I think you'd have to reset things at least that far back to fix everything).

From my observation, humans are taking on the gender roles of lions. If you look at lions.. you'll see one alpha male in a pride that usually has several females. All the lesser male lions are killed or driven away by the alpha. Outside of keeping other male lions away from the pride.. the male lion doesn't do much. The females hunt and protect the kids.

As women rise and men fall in modern society.. we will have this exact situation: A few alpha males at the top with all the power and several women directly under them. Then.. loads of beta males who simply take whatever scraps they can get.

In many ways we've already reached this point. And if you look at history.. it has happened before. Look at the time of the pyramids. You had the Pharaohs / Kings at the top with several wives or wh0res at their disposal. Then you have hundreds / thousands of male SLAVES building the pyramids.

This "reset" is already happening.. but its not the reset most of us want. This is why I advocate doing all you can to become and STAY an alpha. Education, money, and power is the key.

 

[LiveFreeX]

Would you rather....

Work hard for 40 years, go to college for a degree (with little chance of getting a job nowadays), marry a former carouseler, hopefully don't get raped in divorce court and by good luck eek out a hopefully somewhat sustainable retirement from what's left of Social Security and your IRA/401k (Which hopefully isn't confiscated by then)
Spend your money on having fun now, try to get laid with easy young girls, play video games with your friends, and worry about tomorrow when it gets here, knowing there are all sorts of safety nets in society to protect you from your bad decisions?

Given the situation of today......most Men are choosing option number 2.

And honestly, can you blame them?

Option 3. Change country, change value system. Easiest option.

Men both in sosuave and off of it are just plain lazy today. I don't think its a manosphere problem so much as it is a societal/decadence problem.

 

[CollegeLife]

This discussion is a great read. However, I think it did drifted a little from the original point. I think original topic is not only about why men are dropping out, but if the manosphere is also encouraging/teaching it.

I think it is safe to say that the manosphere parts that most view as one of main voices (like Heartiste or Roosh) don't say to drop out. The manosphere of almost any corner has plenty of posts with advice about improving game, body, finance, and etc.

However, I think I know where the impression is coming from. As I pointed earlier to the Dan and Nadine post. Heartiste's point maybe about don't be Dan with the boringness and over-investment, but no reader feel good sharing any qualities of Dan - including being "real stand-up".

There also the many American women sucks posts, climbing the corporate ladder is pointless as HR is out to get you posts, the weekly post that women love jerk/cad/serial-killers, leftist is going to destroy western civilization, and in this thread alone admits to getting a career is to get taxed to the hilt. There are commentators and manosphere blogs that mocks universities, but that's less part of the main voices.

Each post tends to have an consistency exemplifying beta or indirectly contrasted with the opposite of being reliable, diligent, kind.... generally traits of being responsible. Yeah, the typical lesson is don't be a beta - go adopt the attitude and everything. But beta and "responsible" sure seem to be always used in the same sentence. With the examples (from the Heartiste post) being an actor having illigitimate daughters and the Boston Bomber as defining jerks. Reading comprehension be damned, what degree exactly to apply to the readers.

 

[zekko]

Each post tends to have an consistency exemplifying beta or indirectly contrasted with the opposite of being reliable, diligent, kind.... generally traits of being responsible. Yeah, the typical lesson is don't be a beta - go adopt the attitude and everything. But beta and "responsible" sure seem to be always used in the same sentence.

Fantastic point, you have a head on your shoulders! The poor, ficticious rejected guy always has to be depicted with good qualities (like being reliable, diligent, kind). While the guy the woman goes for always has to be depicted with bad qualities. Because the male readers want to wallow in the fact that women make bad choices and they'll never make the smart choice (like themselves). This is where the manosphere starts to fall apart - when it starts getting so caught up with feeling sorry for itself that they paint themselves into a no win situation.

It's like I've always said about jerks and @ssholes. Most gurus do NOT suggest that guys become jerks in order to woo women. And yet they are always setting up the jerk as the ultimate example as the type of guy women go for. If the jerk is the role model, why bother to cherrypick attributes from him, why not just be a jerk? It's a read between the lines type of thing.

Like you say, "beta" and "responsible" are always in the same sentence. Just like "jerk" and "wet panties" are always in the same sentence. But it's usually not the gurus themselves who get it totally screwed up, it's the misguided followers who take the main message and twist it around until they have completely confused it (although the gurus are not entirely without blame, as you point out). And they are the ones who go out and make the most extreme posts saying the most far fetched, ridiculous things.

Not really a catastrophic event so much as the "reversion to the mean".

As I had mentioned before, nature can only be pushed so far before there is a push in the opposite direction. Nature is self-correcting.

Women SAY they want to have high powered careers.....but look at how unhappy they are when they cannot find a man who is of higher value than they are? There is a natural pushback from them engaging in the roles of men.

That sounds all well and good, Danger. But I'm not sure I can see this happening outside of the big catastrophe I was talking about. We're sliding down the slope too fast, and I'm not sure you can put the genie back in the bottle. The pill is not going away, and that was a big factor in changing gender roles. Also, with the current economy, most couples need (or want) two incomes, so I'm not sure you're going to see the housewife option open up too soon.

 

[backbreaker]

collegelife you should post more awesome post.

The poor, ficticious rejected guy always has to be depicted with good qualities (like being reliable, diligent, kind). While the guy the woman goes for always has to be depicted with bad qualities.

in AP Lit I learned this is what's called an archetype. The black / dark villian, the white / good / pure hero. It's the same thing here. The Beta that pays all the bills but can't keep a woman. the super cool Jerk wh doesn't give a **** about any female yet gets all the females, etc.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Fantastic point, you have a head on your shoulders! The poor, ficticious rejected guy always has to be depicted with good qualities (like being reliable, diligent, kind). While the guy the woman goes for always has to be depicted with bad qualities. Because the male readers want to wallow in the fact that women make bad choices and they'll never make the smart choice (like themselves). This is where the manosphere starts to fall apart - when it starts getting so caught up with feeling sorry for itself that they paint themselves into a no win situation.

It's like I've always said about jerks and @ssholes. Most gurus do NOT suggest that guys become jerks in order to woo women. And yet they are always setting up the jerk as the ultimate example as the type of guy women go for. If the jerk is the role model, why bother to cherrypick attributes from him, why not just be a jerk? It's a read between the lines type of thing.

Like you say, "beta" and "responsible" are always in the same sentence. Just like "jerk" and "wet panties" are always in the same sentence. But it's usually not the gurus themselves who get it totally screwed up, it's the misguided followers who take the main message and twist it around until they have completely confused it (although the gurus are not entirely without blame, as you point out). And they are the ones who go out and make the most extreme posts saying the most far fetched, ridiculous things.

It's largely because PUA and the manosphere falsely believe attracting females is mostly due to the "right" attitude/personality/game/psychological traits and mentality and not mostly due to looks and appearance. Of course they can't believe or say being mainstream or nice will cause attraction. That's been proven to not cause attraction in itself. So being a jerk must be the solution.

But what if "personality" or "game" was not really that important or the causation of attraction and it mostly caused by appearance and looks? Then you start to realize personality/game makes no real difference in and of itself. And you realize if a guy is good looking, attractive and good apearance, he can attract women whether he is objectively "nice or a "jerk". Faulty attribution. You don't need to be or should be nice or a jerk, just have a good apearance and behave somewhere in between the two extremes.

 

[Lexington]

It's largely because PUA and the manosphere falsely believe attracting females is mostly due to the "right" attitude/personality/game/psychological traits and mentality and not mostly due to looks and appearance. Of course they can't believe or say being mainstream or nice will cause attraction. That's been proven to not cause attraction in itself. So being a jerk must be the solution.

But what if "personality" or "game" was not really that important or the causation of attraction and it mostly caused by appearance and looks? Then you start to realize personality/game makes no real difference in and of itself. And you realize if a guy is good looking, attractive and good apearance, he can attract women whether he is objectively "nice or a "jerk". Faulty attribution. You don't need to be or should be nice or a jerk, just have a good apearance and behave somewhere in between the two extremes.

I believe that attraction is a combination of looks, status, wealth, Game and some other factors (e.g. cultural/religious/ethnic background). You seem to think that Game doesn't have much effect on the outcome. I'm curious, Stagger, roughly what percentage of attraction would you say is attributable to looks and what percentage to other factors?