Desperate for attention

Dalrock nails an important aspect of intersexual relations:

Feminists desperately crave to be accepted as one of the guys in a mostly futile effort to experience manly pride.  This obsession is core to our integration of the military and is a staple in feminist fiction.  In The Last Psychiatrist’s brilliant review of the Hunger Games he describes the unlikely scene in the movie which has feminists so enthralled:

There’s a banquet and the contestants have to show off their skills, but the overlords are eating a roast pig and bored with Katniss (because she misses a target) so Katniss turns her arrow towards them and shoots an apple.  Katniss says, “you better recognize, mothafuckas!”, flashes a gang sign, and the audience swoons.  That’s when she’s a badass. Yes, she was wonderful in the Games, I’m sure, but what got your adrenaline going, what made her a badass, is showing off her abilities– to men.

TLP goes on to assert that to the delighted female viewers Badass = showing she can compete on a male level, but if you watch the scene it is very obviously not about competing on a male level but instead a plea for attention and acceptance from the men.  The look on Katniss’ face screams:

Notice me!  Take me seriously!

This is exactly how Entertainment Tonight characterized the same scene:

While in the training area getting prepared to enter the arena for the Hunger Games, a literal fight to the death, Jennifer’s character Katniss Everdeen shows her skill with a bow and arrow. But when the game makers seem more interested in a pig that just arrived, an angry Katniss gets their attention.

This is why women like Feisty Women and FeministX are constantly showing up at the leading Game blogs and address direct messages to Roosh, Roissy, and I.  It's not because they disagree with us anymore than they disagree with the average Game blogger, it is because we represent the ultimate currency they crave, which is status male respect.

You're not going to see actresses or female athletes here doing that, because the status is situational.  If a woman is interested in intersexual relations, then the big dogs of Game have status in her eyes and she craves that male attention.

The same thing is true of politics.  When my WND column was nationally syndicated, I used to get long emails telling me how wrong and terrible I was, not infrequently accompanied by pictures.  At the time, I didn't understand it.  Now, of course, the answer is obvious. The same mechanic is at work in the book world; being a real author publishing actual can bring status in the local coffee shop to even the saddest little gamma male.

So, if a woman is angrily attempting to get your attention, relax and enjoy her performance.  She's admitting that she views you as higher status, so if it amuses you, throw her a bone and give her a little of the attention she is seeking.  And remember, the competition in which women engage with each other is largely for male benefit; it's no different than the way a pair of dogs won't wrestle and play-fight with each other without a human audience.

The Alpha walk

A reader at the Chateau asks how to handle an attempted AMOG:

I would like your take on this situation that arose with my GF. Been together about a month. Went to a pub, I brought a friend, its kind of her turf so she runs into coworkers and friends there a lot. Two dudes she used to work with come in, she hugs them. She is pretty bad for introducing me to people…often she says hello to a group, I wait a minute then introduce myself. She follows up by saying I’m her BF, etc, but she leaves it to me to break the ice.

Once again no intro, this time I didn’t care much to say hi, so me and my friend went for a drink. At last call, her and I are chatting, I see another friend and go say hi, she sees these two coworkers again. I come up to do the introduction, and one of the dudes grabs her tit when she moves in for a hug. She shoves his hand away but laughs and hugs him. I’m literally over this dudes shoulder, she knows I saw it.

What’s the alpha play here? (I walked away, she chased after me asking why i was running away…fully aware of the reason)

First, one's response to another man hitting on your wife or girlfriend completely depends upon her response to it.  If she reacts coldly or angrily to his attention, the correct move is to support her rejection of the other man.  Keep in mind that sexual poachers seldom attempt anything, no matter how hot the woman, if she appears to be sufficiently into you. 

Spacebunny is not infrequently the prettiest woman at the party, and while we tend to split up and circulate, I occasionally see her catching my attention and pointing me out to a man who is talking to her.  I just nod or raise an eyebrow; if she feels she needs more in the way of backup, she'll wave me over.  If it's late and everyone has a few drinks in them, I'll stick closer if a man appears to be visually locked in on her; almost always my presence in the vicinity is enough to prevent any awkwardness.

The one time a guy did try to AMOG me with her was, ironically enough, the evening of the day we got engaged.  The bass player from a popular local band she and her friends had followed for years - the lead singer was in love with her, but had been involved with one of her friends - positioned himself in a manner to try to physically edge me out of the conversation when I walked up to the group.  I simply cleared my throat, and when he glanced over at me, I made a flicking "move over" gesture with my fingers.  He did so, albeit a little reluctantly, at which point the lead singer, who had noticed the budding confrontation, stepped in and introduced me to the rest of the band as a) Spacebunny's fiance, and, b) a member of Psykosonik, ergo a man with an amount of status in their little world.  Problem solved.

So, there is seldom any problem when a woman doesn't welcome the would-be rival's attention, so long as a man stands his ground and doesn't exacerbate the situation.  It can be done in a threatening manner: "dude, watch that hand if you don't want to lose it".  It can be done in a polite and non-confrontational manner: "excuse me, but I can only assume you did not notice the pretty lady is wearing her wedding ring". It can be done in a humorous manner: "My wife?  Lady, I've never seen you before in my life!"  But it has to be done, one way or another.

That's not true if a woman clearly welcomes the attention. In such cases, the worst thing a man can do is get angry, petulant, and confrontational.  That is BETA behavior. Unless she is seriously drunk, the woman knows what she is doing and she simply doesn't care that you don't like it. I think the reader's response in this particular case was absolutely flawless; she was only a girlfriend of short standing, she probably had a sexual history with the man concerned, and the fact that she went chasing after him illustrates that she was testing him and that his response was effective, especially if he didn't permit her to play dumb about attempting to provoke him.  Her behavior doesn't necessarily mean that she's an out-of-control slut, it just means that she seeks a high level of dominance and rejecting her behavior by walking away is sufficient to demonstrate that.

It's a bigger problem if a wife or longtime girlfriend behaves in such a manner.  In that case, a higher level of dominance, bordering on the violent, is necessary, because the test is a more serious one.  If you carry and she knows it, or if you are observably physically superior to the other man, you can probably step forward and simply demand an apology from him.  He'll likely back down and apologize, however insincerely, if she reacts in a wide-eyed manner indicating a visible concerned about the prospect for immediate violence.

If he not only doesn't back down, but she takes his side and starts trying to defend his actions, this is an indication that the relationship is in dire straits.  In which case, the best thing to do is to look at her, say: "I see", and leave.  I'm not saying it is necessary to leave the relationship altogether, especially if it is a marital relationship, but it is necessary to leave her to her own resources in those circumstances as a warning that the relationship is in a critical condition.  No self-respecting man will tolerate a woman who takes sides against her own husband on behalf of a man who is pursuing her sexually, especially if she does so in public.

It should be kept in mind that "forsaking all others" is a vow that does not merely refer to sex.  It means "my wife, right or wrong".  It means "my man, right or wrong".

Anyhow, ALPHAs walk all the time.  They walk every single time a woman sufficiently displeases them.  This is why women are so often chasing after them, and why women tend to feel so stimulatingly insecure in their relationships with them.  Because the Alpha, (and particularly the Sigma, who unlike the Alpha, is unconcerned about the social implications), is never, ever, afraid to walk.  He may not want to walk, he may have no intention of walking, but he is always willing to do so if sufficiently provoked. Why?  Because there are plenty of girls on the girl tree.

Hypergamy in action

Hypergamy doesn't get much more blatant than this:

Now that she’s pregnant with Simon Cowell’s baby, scheming Manhattan social climber Lauren Silverman wants the filthy-rich “X-Factor” mogul to marry her, sources said.... Cowell and Lauren had been carrying on their illicit trysts for more than a year, right under the nose of spurned spouse Andrew, several sources noted....

Lauren had pretended to treat Cowell as just a close pal as they yachted and hobnobbed together — only to blindside her real estate developer husband Andrew, 37, well after the affair was in full swing, sources said. “It is an unbelievable story of betrayal. It is a sad story and a tragic story,” Andrew’s brother, Alexander, told The Post.

One friend of the shapely brunette said that the Silvermans “weren’t estranged, as some friends of Lauren have claimed. “The suggestion that she was an estranged wife who fell into another man’s arms is not the case.”

In fact, Andrew had been so oblivious to the sordid, under-his-nose affair that he recently upgraded Lauren’s engagement ring with a 10-karat diamond, a friend said.

“She is a total gold digger,” one pal said.

Another added, “The pregnancy was by design.”

This is why it's a terrible idea for men to involve themselves with gold diggers, even if they have a reasonable amount of gold.  Because there is always someone with a larger supply.  Notice how even years of marriage, a son, and a 10-karat diamond weren't enough to secure fidelity when someone with sufficient money and fame was in the picture.

And I very much doubt Mr. Silverman was completely blindsided.  The gift of the 10-karat diamond was likely a last-ditch attempt to secure her affections which he already suspected, even if he didn't know with certainty, had been transferred to Mr. Cowell. When a BETA is losing a woman to an ALPHA, he almost always knows it is happening, he just doesn't understand why.

It is said that the heart wants what it wants.  And what the female heart wants is more.

The importance of respect

If you don't show respect for and loyalty to an Alpha, he will wash his hands of you without thinking twice about it:

Charles Saatchi announces he is to divorce Nigella Lawson.  The multi-millionaire art collector, 70, said he made the “heartbreaking” decision to formally split from his wife of 10 years because she refused to defend his reputation after he was seen grabbing her outside Scott’s restaurant in London.

He told the Mail on Sunday: "I am sorry to announce that Nigella Lawson and I are getting divorced.

"I feel that I have clearly been a disappointment to Nigella during the last year or so, and I am disappointed that she was advised to make no public comment to explain that I abhor violence of any kind against women, and have never abused her physically in any way."

Mr Saatchi is said by the paper not to have spoken to his wife since the pictures were published.

There are a number of Game-related elements to the Saatchi story.  First, one of the bones of contention between the couple was that the husband didn't want this step-son around the house.  While some men are capable of becoming step-fathers, many aren't, which is the source of many horrific crimes against children whose mothers chose poorly, one way or another, when it came to their fathers.

Second, despite being the publicly designated "victim" of the story, Lawson isn't the one who decided to end the marriage. Saatchi, being a master of PR, knew it was necessary to take the wrist-slap from the police, which he did not hesitate to do in order to bring the matter to a speedy close.  But Lawson, instead of doing her part and presenting a united front to the media, was more concerned about how she would look to her female friends and audience if she didn't play the poor abused victim than she was about her husband's reputation.

In short, she made it clear her loyalties did not lie with him, but to her public image.  This is the one thing a woman married to an ALPHA absolutely cannot do.  The ALPHA always knows he has options, and in the absence of the one thing he absolutely demands, respect, he will not hesitate to exercise them.  Once a woman shows herself to be disloyal in some manner, few Alphas are inclined to forgive or forget.

And what is true of Alphas is also true, in lesser amounts, of lower-ranking men. It appears that Lawson miscalculated and didn't realize how important his reputation was to Saatchi.  She is not the first woman to make this sort of mistake and she probably will not be the last.

UPDATE: Yes, as I said, Alpha:

A friend told the Mail: ‘Nigella is absolutely floored and blindsided by the statement. That he would do something like this when there are the children to consider amazes her. Charles is seeing himself and his feelings as the most important part of the equation. It really is stunning behaviour.’

She added: ‘Nigella finds the idea that she didn’t help him over the pictures ludicrous. What was she meant to say? She very nearly had a nervous breakdown with the stress she was under.

‘Nigella was trying to protect him by saying nothing in public. It was so difficult for her because she was hoping all the while that they could reconcile and put it behind them, but he never apologised in private or in public and made very little effort to even talk to her. And then comes this, which just shows you how much he cares about his reputation, rather than her.’

Some suspect that, despite his tribute to his ‘lovely wife’ who is ‘the most wonderful woman in the world’ he might have his eye on a new conquest. That, at least, would explain why he was not at pains to put the marriage back together. True or not, this possibility was much aired over glasses of chilled champagne at last’s week society events, including the Serpentine summer party and the Spectator party. It might explain why Saatchi is taking this woefully public scandal so much in his stride.

Keep in mind that Alpha concerns a man's place in the socio-sexual hierarchy, not morality, behavior deemed socially desirable, or public approval.

Alpha

It's not so much the vanquishing of a home invader, but the nonchalance that qualifies this man.

An Oklahoma man who caught a burglar breaking into his home wasn't content to simply scare the criminal away; instead, the man bum-rushed the burglar, pinned him to the ground, hogtied him, and left him in the front yard for police to find because the homeowner was late for work.

The incident took place early Wednesday morning, when the homeowner and his nine-months-pregnant wife were awoken by the sound of shattering glass coming from their daughter's room.

"That folding chair was in her bedroom, shattered glass all over the place, and I said, 'A raccoon didn't do that.' And he was just like, 'Oh God,'" the man's wife, Denay Houston, told News 9.

The couple heard something in their garage, so Houston's husband went and waited patiently by their front-door for the burglar to emerge. “Then he bum-rushed him,” Houston said.

Houston's husband pinned the burglar, later identified as Robert Cole, to the ground and hog tied him, with Cole's hands and feet tied behind his back. “[My husband] was just like (nods head), kind of like the head nod, like, 'Okay, what's done is done,'" Houston said. "He's like a super-hero."

Houston's husband, whose name wasn't released, called 911 and then told Houston that he was going to work and that she should watch over the hog-tied criminal until police arrived.

I'm guessing his wife feels she's carrying high-quality progeny. It reminds me a little of my ex-Marine grandfather, then 73, who "counter-attacked" a 28-year old man with a gun who carjacked him in Virginia.  My grandfather slapped the gun to the side, broke his hand on the man's face by repeatedly punching him, and then shoved him in the car without the keys and locked it.  He managed to get out, but the police caught him.

My sensei, who the previous year had DESTROYED the #11-ranked point fighter in the country, met my grandfather at a party not long after, shook his non-broken hand, and told him that he was the toughest man the sensei, who had spent years doing full-contact fighting, had ever met.

My grandfather looked a little bewildered, shrugged, and said. "It was just a young black buck with a popgun.  Now Tarawa, that was tough."

It's all relative....

Killer Game

The badder the boy, the hotter he is:

Unfortunately, there are many misguided, if not downright reprehensible, people out there lamenting not the impact this murder case will have on their fantasy football team, but instead the incarceration of an updated version of OH AN HE SEXY.

I first came across someone noting not how terrible it is that a man is dead, or even that a promising career is likely over, but rather that hotness has been wasted when I saw this:

    Hernandez, you were so hot. WHY?????
    VF Castro (@VFdoesFootball) June 26, 2013

Perhaps that’s just a taste of what you can find in Miss Castro’s upcoming book, The Modern Girl’s Guide to the Gridiron. Because I guess women need gender-specific reading to understand the sports things because, like, there’s so much more than those cute tight pants and stuff.

But, hey, isolated ignorance, I thought. Later that day, though, comedian Neil Hamburger began retweeting more and more people who find murder not to be the biggest crime in all this. If you’ve ever wondered how serial killers and other prisoners can get letters from incredibly pathetic strangers promising marriage, this is how. It’s what Tommy Tomlinson wrote about regarding the beautiful women at Rae Carruth’s trial: “It reminded me again of the raw sexual power that a great athlete can have — even one charged with putting out a hit on his pregnant girlfriend.”

For being a detriment to every female who has worked so hard to break down stereotypes in the sports world, these folks deserve a public shaming. So come along as we put the microscope on some seriously misguided people whose parents have failed hard.

    Am I the only one who thinks Aaron Hernandez is still sexy even if he is a murderer?
    (@candymkvi) June 30, 2013

Nope. You have many terrible peers below.

    Leave Aaron Hernandez alone .. He's sexy as hell
    Steph (@StephMurillox3) July 01, 2013

The remarkable thing is that while Aaron Hernandez is a physical specimen, he is also a dull-eyed brute who looks as if he shambled out of a cave where he spent the afternoon raping bears.  Keep this in mind the next time a woman tells you that what women find attractive is a man who is a gentleman.

An appeal to logic

Susan Walsh makes a good case for women to reject a certain type of man if she's looking for a relationship, but her advice is rendered somewhat hollow by flying in the face of the realities of Game:

If your objective is a long-term relationship or marriage, the implication of these findings is clear. Reject any potential partner who has cultivated a habit of engaging in casual sex. (There really aren’t that many of them anyway.) Whether they were damaged goods before or after the sex is immaterial, as the negative psychological outcome is the same. And if they somehow can have casual sex without feelings of anxiety of regret? Those are the most unsuitable partners of all, as they lack the capacity for healthy emotional responses and relationships (see Dark Triad).

I'm not arguing with her reasoning in the slightest.  However, it nevertheless comes off as trying to convince freshman women to not order pizza late at night in the dorm room.  There isn't a college woman alive who doesn't know that scarfing pizza is going to make her pack on the pounds, and yet, there are observably few who are capable of resisting the temptation.

Alphas and Sigmas are intrinsically desirable to women and the unsuitable Dark Triad men are like walking, talking catnip to them.  It's fine to tell women to keep them at a distance, but that's not going to make them any less attractive late at night when the phone rings.  To a certain extent, this is like telling men who want to pursue relationships that they should simply pursue plainer women.  That might be true, but it's going to be a hard pill to swallow.

Alpha in action

Compare and contrast the way that Russell Brand handled a public disrespecting by two women and a delta male with the way a gamma would have handled it.

Comedian Russell Brand was invited to appear on MSNBC's Morning Joe yesterday, ostensibly to talk about his controversial world comedy tour Messiah Complex.

But instead, co-host Mika Brzezinski and panelists Katty Kay and Brian Shactman preferred to make jokes at Brand's expense, pretend they couldn't understand what he was saying, and refer to him in the third person even though he was sitting right there.

Oh, and at one point, start calling him by a different name.

At about the 5:30 mark, Brand decides he's had enough goofing around and seizes control of the show, demonstrating to the "journalists" how professionals conduct interviews and deliver news.

Remember, confrontation is the hallmark of the alpha male.  And even when he doesn't seek it out, as Brand quite clearly was not, he does not hesitate to embrace it if it comes his way.  Notice in particular the difference between the way the delta male curries favor with the English woman and the way Brand implicitly insults her by focusing his attention on the other, less-attractive woman.

Don't disrespect the alpha

It's a bad idea.  But even the smartest, most successful men can find themselves temporarily blinded by a ruthless gold digger:

Rupert Murdoch's wife Wendi Deng was ‘totally blindsided’ by his decision to sue for divorce, her friends have claimed. The 82-year-old tycoon is said to have gone to great lengths to be seen to be pursuing his normal schedule as recently as last Tuesday – when he was due to preside at a Los Angeles gala.

However, an acquaintance of the couple says that during Tuesday afternoon Mr Murdoch gave the first clue that ‘something was up’ when he abruptly cancelled his appearance to honour one of his oldest friends, Fox film studio chairman Jim Gianopulos.

Two days later a tersely worded document was filed at the New York State Supreme Court stating the power couple’s 14-year marriage had ‘broken down irretrievably’.

You have to read Wendy Deng's career to believe it.  First she parlays a middle-aged married man's attraction to her into a visa sponsor , then she seduces the husband and replaces the wife, obtaining a green card in the process.  Then she leaves the man, seduces the married Murdoch, and manages to convince him to marry her as well.

What's fascinating is that all she had to do was behave like a respectful wife to one of the most powerful men on the planet, but she couldn't hide her contempt for his inability to see her as she was long enough to see him to his grave.  Instead, she did the one thing she couldn't do - challenge the alpha - and Murdoch promptly did what alphas do to challengers and crushed her.

It's a remarkable sum of stupidities.  Murdoch had to know her history and should have known she was a pure platinum gold digger. Deng had to know that however old and tired Murdoch is, he didn't become rich and powerful by being the pushover his behavior had led her to conclude he was.  It merely goes to show that the vagaries of intersexual relations trump success, wealth, and intelligence.

Alpha != winner

It should always be kept in mind that success with women is not necessarily synonymous with success in all aspects of life:

A drunken driver was having sex when he lost control of his car Monday night and crashed the vehicle, ejecting his naked female companion onto a New Mexico roadway, police report.

According to cops, Luis Briones, 25, ran a red light and slammed his Ford Explorer into another car on an Albuquerque street. The impact of the collision forced Natasha Carroll, 21, from Briones’s SUV. With a bloodied Carroll lying in the road, Briones got back into his vehicle and attempted to flee the accident scene, witnesses told Albuquerque Police Department officers. After one witness confiscated his keys, Briones “then jumped into a bush, landing and attempting to hide in a cactus.”

Carroll suffered facial lacerations in the crash and was transported to an area hospital, where she was reported to be in stable condition. The plastered Briones, cops reported, reeked of booze and was extremely belligerent post-arrest. He allegedly spit on officers, threatened them, and “refused to keep his pants on.”

This is why it is necessary to differentiate between the sexually dominant and the socially dominant.  Getting a 21 year-old woman to have sex with you while you are driving is pretty dominant.  Trying to hide in a cactus and refusing to keep your pants on, not so much.

All that story needs to make it perfect, in my opinion, is to learn that it was a first date....

Socio-Sexual Hierarchy: the collective terms

A Pride of Alphas
An Enigma of Sigmas
A Wing of Betas
A Force of Deltas
A Creep of Gammas
A Stalking of Omegas
A Mince of Lambdas

Of course, the list above refers to the Socio-Sexual Hierarchy.  We still need terms to distinguish Roissy's binary sexual hierarchy. 

A Conceit of ALPHAS (Alphas and Sigmas)
An Orbit of BETAS (Betas, Deltas, Gammas, Omegas)

Game and the Old Testament

BM wonders about this passage from 2 Samuel:

And as the ark of the Lord came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the Lord; and she despised him in her heart. Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself! And David said unto Michal, It was before the Lord, which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the Lord, over Israel: therefore will I play before the Lord. And I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in mine own sight: and of the maidservants which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour. Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
 - 2 Samuel 6:16, 20-23.

Both men and women are hierarchical herd animals, but women tend to be more focused on status within the hierarchy, especially as it is denoted by external markers of that status. From Michal's perspective, David was behaving in a foolish manner unworthy of a king.  Because his external behavior was incongruent with his high-status position, she did not respect him for either his position or his accomplishments, but despised him instead.  Notice that all of his past achievements and all of her affection for him meant absolutely nothing in that moment; because he played the fool, once, in public, that is enough to completely destroy her regard for him.

Take note of that, men.  Screw up in her singular opinion just one time in public and that can be all she wrote for your wife's regard for you, at least in the short term.

There is, of course, an element of jealousy here as well. Michal complains specifically about "the handmaids of his servants", which tells us that they probably didn't mind the sight of the handsome young king capering about in his uncovered glory at all.  It is telling that she doesn't bring up the priests, the soldiers, the old men, the widows, the beggars, or anyone else who has seen David leaping and dancing.  No, it's what we can safely assume to be the positive response of the pretty young women that set her off.

This is a lesson for both men and women. Michal can't help that she doesn't like his behavior, but she has three choices. She could keep her mouth shut, she could fawn on him in the manner we presume the handmaids did, or she can resort to the role of the Mommy-fuhrer.  Being filled with jealousy and despising him in her heart, she unwisely resorts to the latter. This is a terrible idea in general, and it is spectacularly stupid in the case of a charismatic alpha who is not only a popular leader of men, but a superlative killer as well. Her response is a textbook example of how a woman should NEVER behave when she thinks her man has made a fool of himself in public.

David's response is also illuminating. He not only rejects her attempt to control him, but he recognizes that her failure to understand the purpose underlying his actions renders her categorically unfit to be a wife to a king who fears and abases himself before the Lord. The clear implication of the final verse should put fear into the heart of every woman who thinks to exert herd control over her husband via shame: "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death."

David doesn't divorce Michal, but he sexually rejects her as a wife from that moment forward.  Not because she was jealous or because she thought he looked foolish while dancing, (he actually agrees with her in that regard given how he describes himself as base in his own sight), but due to her complete failure to understand who and what he is, her inability to comprehend his values, and her lack of respect for him as a man and a king. She has everything backwards.  She thinks his dancing before the Lord makes him inglorious and unworthy of his position, whereas he knows that because he is a king, he can behave in an even more vile manner and merit honor for it.

This is a strong Alpha move. David doesn't hesitate or equivocate, he doesn't attempt to explain himself or defend himself. He simply acts. He doesn't try to fix the situation because there is nothing to fix: she has, of her own will, disqualified herself as being worthy of his wife and queen. David's action illuminates the bright dividing line between ALPHA and BETA. ALPHAS qualify women.  BETAS attempt to qualify themselves to women.  And ALPHAS, being secure in their self-belief, do not tolerate women attempting to qualify them.  The mere attempt to do so is sufficient to intrinsically disqualify the woman.

A man answers to God. He does not answer to his wife. The wise man will listen to his wife and consider her advice. But he will not answer to her.  He has a purpose in life that goes beyond pleasing her.

This passage from 2 Samuel is an ancient illustration of an observable modern reality and explains why women tend to respond so positively to douchebags with Game while despising men of quality who lack it.  Women tend to focus on attitude and external status markers; they often fail to grasp that the markers can be misleading and that the value they nominally represent only exists insofar as a marker truly indicates something of substance supporting it.  While this tendency can certainly be surmounted, that can't happen so long as its existence is denied.

Thrift Shop and Game

The amusing and popular song by Macklemore is a veritable primer of Game.  It begins with irrational confidence: "Walk up to the club like, 'What up, I got a big cock!'"  Key word: like.  Whether he does or not is irrelevant, it's the being pumped up that allows him to successfully imitate the alphas, to such an extent that even the brothers who would normally disdain their Caucasian competition are forced to acknowledge him as their superior in style: "Damn! That's a cold ass honkey."

The language throughout is masculine.  The Thrift Shopper is not self-pitying, he's not lamenting his lack of money, indeed, he is triumphant over even the smallest victories, the most insignificant come-ups. Contrast with this the sad, pathetic figure of the gamma who has a good job, a house, and a nice car and still feels the deck stacked against him.  He's not shopping, he's "digging, he's "hunting", he is a literal man of action.

The peacocking aspect should be sufficiently obvious as to require no explication.

The Thrift Shopper is centered on himself and confident that others envy him.  He doesn't compare himself to those around him, but to the iconic John Wayne, and not to his own disadvantage either. It's not the clothes that make him cool, he is what makes the clothes cool.

I could take some Pro Wings, make them cool, sell those
The sneaker heads be like "Aw, he got the Velcros"

He even AMOGs the more fortunate who are foolish enough to spend $50 on a Gucci t-shirt and expect to derive some advantage from that.  He knows that distinguishing himself from the crowd is more important than having the right, most fashionable stuff.  And while those lower on the socio-sexual hierarchy will complain that he is a clown and has no rational basis for his superior attitude, the women will not care, but will flock to him.

And it inadvertently reveals the secret of what women actually mean when they advise: "Be Yourself" in order to attract women.  They're not lying, they are simply not being sufficiently clear due to their inability to fully understand what it is that appeals to them. What actually attracts them is not a man being himself, but rather believing in himself.

What the specific belief happens to be is almost irrelevant. 

An easy ALPHA/BETA test

Athol's advice also lends itself to a simple and basic relationship metric:

OMG it’s been a full three minutes. Where’s wifey? Something terrible must have happened to her. She’s not in the kitchen. She’s not in the bedroom. Shit. Wifey…. She’s not in the bathroom either… oh! Oh! There’s wifey! She’s in the laundry. Hi wifey. Watcha doin’? Hi. What’s all this stuff? Can I help? Hi. Kiss me. Kiss me. Kiss me. Oh wifey your kisses are magical! Anyway, there’s something in my pants I need you to attend to.

So stop it. Stop chasing your wife through the house like a toddler. She’ll be right back. Just because you can’t see her, doesn’t mean she doesn’t exist.

STOP IT. JUST DON’T DO IT.

If she complains that you're smothering her: BETA

If she complains that you ignore her and spend all your time [fill in the blank]: ALPHA

It's not entirely true, of course, but it's a potentially useful rule of thumb. And while both are potentially problems, the fact that they require such different solutions should indicate the importance of correctly marking where you stand.

A portrait in Alpha

To say nothing of some exquisitely dreadful dialogue.  Frankly, I don't know how the producers of the 50 Shades of Gray movie have any choice but fire whomever they hired to play the male lead and go with Charles Dance instead.


It's that "Well, I did," that gets me every time.

This is sexy

If you are a young man seeking to understand why women don't find you as sexually appealing as you would like to be, keep in mind that the image below presently represents the ultimate in sex appeal to young women:

This is the ultimate hotness.  This is to what, if you decide to focus your efforts on maximizing your appeal to the fair sex, you must aspire.  So start working on those stupid tattoos, that incipient gut, and that soft-bodied, marshmallow physique, and don't forget the trendy hairstyle to match the sullen pout!

It is not, I admit, what most young women will tell you is of particular appeal to them when asked.  They'll usually say something about a sense of humor, about chivalrous behavior, and about being a gentleman.  But actions speak louder than words.  This is what makes them scream.  This is what makes them wet.  This is what women under the age of 25 dream of penetrating them; this is what they fantasize about.

And yet, you worry that being a jerk will turn them off?  You fear that focusing on your mission and not giving a damn what anyone thinks will leave you loveless and alone?  My young friend, the evidence suggests your concerns are not only misplaced, but wildly, even ludicrously, incorrect.

Depravity and dominance

This news certainly puts an appallingly sinister new spin on one of my favorite videos:

Ian Watkins, 35, of Pontypridd, appeared before Cardiff magistrates facing six charges relating to sexual offences against two young children.  He faces a charge of conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child under 13 and four offences relating to possession and distribution of indecent images of children.... A 24-year-old woman has been charged with the same offences as Mr Watkins, while a 20-year-old woman is charged with five of the same offences but not conspiracy to rape.

Setting aside all the caveats about innocent until proven guilty and so forth, as well as the usual moral posturing, what I find interesting about this is not that a reasonably successful male rock star should prove to be a complete sexual deviant, but rather, the way in which a presumably dominant man is able to coerce women into his moral degeneracy.

It's not unusual for a liberal woman to become more conservative as a result of marrying a Republican husband and it's almost a cliche for a good conservative girl to become a bad girl as a result of involvement with a bad boy.  But, if we assume that this conspiracy was both real and driven by the dark desires of the man in question, it is remarkable that female malleability should be observed to extend even to the outer limits of depravity.

Will you cheat?

Or will your partner cheat?  A neuroeconomist presents a scientific test:

My recent appearance on the Dr. Phil show prodded me to develop some simple tests for infidelity that expose the impact of this soup of chemicals. While there is no perfect test for whether a man will cheat, I will give you a list of things to look at. Most are subtle and below our conscious awareness. If enough of these factors line up, it might be time to worry.

Let's see how we do here.

1.  Resting heart rate.  +1
2.  Testosterone.  +2
3.  Movie/kids/dogs +1
4.  Public flirt +1
5.  Family +1

It would appear I'm just below the chemical cheating threshold and am therefore a reliable marital bet.  Science said so.

Detachment is a DHV

Stingray explains:

Clinical detachment seems much more like criticism to woman. Cold detachment, given that it is so blunt, reacts extremely poorly with the solipsistic woman. One can only approach it with the same cold bluntness and if this is not something that a woman is good at, then it can be quite difficult to read.

This observation on her part may help explain why ALPHA frame tends to require a level of indifference.  Cold detachment is a relative DHV because the woman being subjected to it has a tendency to interpret it as the detached man holding a position of authority over her.  Whether she responds obediently or in a rebellious manner to that perceived authority, she is responding to it, and therefore cannot easily dismiss the man as one of the masculine masses unworthy of her attention.

It also offers an explanation for why warming to a woman often causes her to abruptly lose interest.  Unless the man has displayed other DHV or otherwise maintained his authority, ceasing to be coldly detached also eliminates his perceived authority and therefore his high value.  Conclusion: a man should not cease to be emotionally detached in a relationship with a woman until he has demonstrated sufficient additional high value or established additional authority that will persist regardless of the state of his emotional involvement with her.

Alpha Mail: be careful what you chase

You just might catch it:

I see you sometimes answer reader questions at Alpha Game. I'm kind of desperate as my marriage is possibly falling apart after only X months. I know you are very busy but if you are willing to read this and give me some feedback I would really appreciate it. 

I am from a very conservative Christian background and never departed from this. My husband had a much more wild life with drugs, music, traveling, and it sounds like a significant number of sexual partners. He is definitely on the Alpha side of the spectrum. When he met me he wasn't living as a Christian. ....  Unfortunately settled down life with me turned out to not make him as happy as he expected. I seemed to be more in love and attracted to him after the wedding while he became disappointed and unhappy. He started spending most of his time away from me, quit bible study, and attends church less often. He started seeming distant and irritable. He wouldn't really talk to me so one day I went through his things. I found something he'd written saying he found married life boring and he was thinking about having an affair....  I don't have any evidence that he actually has, but he now keeps all his devices locked. 

Making matters worse, we have some significant differences of opinion on major issues we can't agree on. I made one fatal mistake of disagreeing with him in public and had no idea the extent it would embarass and upset him. I apologized but its been tough to recover from. I try to be submissive, but some of his decisions are hard for me to cope with. He really wanted me to change jobs for a position I felt I would be miserable in and I didn't do it. These things made him feel that I don't respect him, which is not the case at all. 

I would try to have talks about our relationship, but I would inevitably get emotional and start crying. He has no tolerance for this and usually just turns on the TV or just leaves the house. He also said it made him not attracted to me being depressed and complaining, and he didn't want to be around me or have sex with me.  Seeing my "talks" were disasters, I left him alone and focused on trying to be a good wife. I did my best to act cheerful, give him space, and worked on improving my homemaking and cooking skills. I tried not to complain when he missed church or important family events.

These are issues I am willing to look at to work on. However, I wonder if it is the right approach or maybe this all has less to do with me and more to do with him. I really have not changed significantly in my behavior/priorities/physical appearance from before we were married and he was obsessed with me as the most amazing woman ever. And sometimes when I try to be really submissive/bend over backwards for him he seems annoyed not pleased.

This is an excellent example of one of the less common outcomes of Alpha chasing.  Even if a woman manages to catch the Alpha and secure a commitment from him, he's not necessarily going to stay domesticated simply because he put a ring on it.  Second, it is an illustration of the high risks of missionary dating.  There can be a confusion between the relationship with the other individual and the relationship with God, and therefore, when the former goes south, the latter will tend to do so as well.

The first thing this woman has to realize is that most of her husband's issues have absolutely nothing to do with her.  They have to do with an Alpha feeling trapped by the situation in which he put himself.  Marriage is exceedingly difficult for Alphas, because unlike most other men, they actually love their single lives.  When a man's identity is tied up, at least in part, in his ability to score women, marriage can feel as if he is killing a part of himself and he may find it difficult to figure out who Mr. Married Ex-Alpha is.  It was hard for me; in some ways, it hurt worse than any breakup I'd ever had because I was not only breaking up with part of myself, but an aspect of my identity that I quite liked.  Fortunately, my fiance understood and was sympathetic, which made it easier on me because it made me feel as if the sacrifice was both worthwhile and appreciated.

Also, Alphas are really, really bad at dealing with marital conflict.  This is because they have virtually no skill or experience at managing conflict from their previous intersexual relationships, no matter how many they have had.  The problem here is that marriage eliminates the Alpha's primary tactic for addressing conflict, which is "my way or the highway".  What are totally legitimate, if harsh, reasons to end an STR become simply ludicrous in a marriage.  For example, when single, I trashed women for reasons that, in retrospect, are astonishingly trivial.  Wanted to change plans?  Gone.  Said something arguably disrespectful in public?  Done.  Took a call from an orbiter when I was over?  Adios.  No tolerance, no warnings, no hesitation.  The Alpha - or Sigma, as the case may be - is accustomed to acting from a mentality of abundance, and it doesn't matter if things don't work out with one girl because there are thousands more on the girl tree, just waiting to be plucked.  It's not surprising that it's been hard for this woman to recover from only one instance of public disrespect, because as an Alpha, his natural instinct was to end his relationship with her over it.

Needless to say, this is a tremendously unproductive atttitude to take into a marriage.  A woman has to be very low-conflict, low-maintenance, and risk-acceptant to have any chance of staying successfully married to an Alpha.  There is no taming the Alpha, he has to decide to domesticate himself in the interest of the marriage, and the more the pressure on him increases, the more he feels the temptation to get the hell out.  And don't be naive, emotional withdrawal is a form of pressure too.

My advice is for this woman to understand that she may have married unwisely, to realize that the situation is ultimately out of her hands, and to accept that she needs to allow her husband to decide if he is willing to make the sacrifice required to domesticate himself or not.  Clearly a part of him wants to or he would not have pursued her and made the various changes to his life that he did.  Most likely, he had overly romantic and hopelessly naive views about what marriage would be like, and only now is he comparing the reality of it with the reality of his single life.  Idealized marriage looks considerably better in comparison with the vicissitudes of the single life than does the real thing.

She can't get into the self-protective emotional withdrawal game, however tempting that might be, because no woman can possibly out-indifferent an unhappy Alpha.  That's just throwing in the towel and waiting for him to pull the trigger.  She is doing the right thing by focusing on the things she can control, by being a good wife, acting cheerful, being respectful, and giving him space.  Since the respect issue appears to be a major one, I would encourage her to even make a gesture or two in that direction, perhaps by asking him if he would still like her to change jobs and then following through on it if he does.  It's a lot easier to subsequently change jobs than change marriages, after all.  She should also find ways to tell him how much she respects him, how much she admires him, and how much she likes him, every single day.  Even if that praise concerns a small and stupid thing.  Above all, she needs to be more pleasant than what he knows his various other options to be.

And above all, I'd encourage her to keep the Apostle Paul's admonition concerning the unequally yoked in mind.

"To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.  And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.  But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?"

- 1st Corinthians 7:12-16

So if he has an affair or if he decides to leave, she must let him go.  If she loves him, that's simply what she has to do.  She can only fight for her marriage by not fighting.  To even have a chance of assisting in the self-domestication of a wavering Alpha, a woman must practice wu-wei, she must live without control.  That is difficult for any woman, but then, no one ever said living with an Alpha would be easy and that's the challenge she chose.  The wedding ring isn't magical, and neither wifely threats nor the full force of the family courts will suffice to break the will of a man who would rather die a painful death than live life under the thumb of a woman.  Such men have to be convinced, not coerced, to enter into mutually beneficial relationships.  The good news is that somehow, she convinced him once, so it is possible for her to convince him again.  The art of marriage is continuing to convince the other individual, every single day, that they want to be with you tomorrow.

The good news is that it gets easier over time.  The first year of a marriage is the hardest on an Alpha, and so long as the marriage survives and his wife remains amiable and attractive, he can actually turn out to prove unexpectedly loyal.  Ironically, the challenge may eventually become a question of whether the wife will remain attracted to a husband who is no longer the wild, untamed man to whom she was initially drawn.