I recently wrote two myTakes:
- Why Men are Sometimes Justified in Avoiding Monogamy
- Niceness Might Not be Sufficient but it is Necessary
In short, I concluded that there are many machiavellian dating strategies that women employ, e.g. 'make him wait' only serves to sexually reward players in the short-term and trap the good men into relationships long-term. What's more, women are using the excuse that 'nice guys' are (a) manipulative and (b) not attractive in other regards not to sleep with them but these are plainly false and generalisations. This is why I refer to such men as 'good men' (i.e. men with GENUINELY positive personality traits that can be attractive in other regards) rather than 'nice guys' because the latter has all kinds of ideological baggage that feminists have attached to the word. Good men are ONLY benevolent because they value the benevolency in and of itself. Furthermore, they would not expect a woman to date based on their benevolence alone AND they typically date with and sleep with girls that are in their own league of attractiveness. In spite of these cold truths, realistically it is men with sociopathic tendencies that are preferred simply because mose women are emotionally unstable.
Essentially the way things are are as I explained in the comment section of a previous myTake:
There are good-men into their thirties who maintained their integrity throughout their twenties and did not act like assholes just to get romantic and sexual experience with women. In spite of making an active effort to respectfully meet and attract women that were roughly the same age, the same attractiveness and shared many of the same commonalities, they were unsuccessful. Now that they are in their thirties, they do NOT want to nose dive into a long-term committed relationship with a manipulative, scheming woman that has been around the block a few times and with whom they share very little emotional or physical chemistry with. This is especially not the case if they are going to wind up 10, or 15 years down the road with two kids, a mortgage and the emotional baggage of insecurities arising from their own sexual inadequacy.
This raises the question - how can a woman go about her dating life ethically and find a good man that actually respects her in a western dating world that is not innocent where most people lose their virginities at young ages? The short answer is, 'make the player wait, reward the good man' - which is actually the REVERSE of most female dating logic. But it actually makes the most sense for everyone: the woman, because she will not feel 'used and abused' by the player; the good man - because more sexual experience will put him on an even playing field when he DOES decide to settle down with a woman (or differences in sexual experience may not bother him. Finally, even the player benefits in the long run (if not the short run) because the player WILL lose his sexual market value (as a man, typically this is when you hit forty) which is why he needs to learn how to commit at some point. Some of you may be thinking that women should be free to do as they please. I agree, but men are also free to pass judgement, there. Men are also free to explain how this dating game really is a lose lose situation. In this light, I assert that there IS such a thing as ethical mating strategy, even if such a view is controversial (especially among women).
A woman only has two ethical options when it comes to standards:
- NON-hypergamous promiscuity
This means she can sleep around but within her own league. No cherry picking attractive, high status men with rolexes and nice cars. Eventually this woman will settle down later in life, and will probably choose more meaningful factors into consideration for her monogamous partner.
- Demisexuality
This means she does not sleep around, ever, and prefers to develop an emotional connection within a long-term relationship before she has sex with her partner. In her lifetime she will typically only have one or two sexual partners. personality and an emotional connection are ALWAYS more important factors in her romantic decision-making than looks, money, status or raw sex appeal.
The worst type of woman is hypergamous, promiscuous and uses her sexual advantage to manipulate men. Worse still, she sleeps around neither for sexual gratification, or even for the validation of being accompanied by a high status man. She is essentially just a gold-digger and wants money and what other privileges she can get from sex.
Somewhere in the middle of the ethical and non-ethical extremes would be:
- The girl dates above her league like you described in the text but she genuinely enjoys the sexual gratification and being absorbing the awesome chill nature of attractive laid-back men. Eventually she will settle down for a relationship although she may be a lot more sexually experienced than the male she partners, even though they are roughly belonging to the same league. He may feel inadequate as a result and over time, he may feel a little inwardly resentful about the short-straw the harsh reality of polygynous dating has delivered. However, this girl also has a super-cool fun personality, is awesome in bed and makes up for the sexual inadequacies the man has about himself and the girl's past history.
- The girl has incredibly prudish ideas about sexuality. she rarely, if ever dates or has sex with men, because she has over-estimated her league and clings on to very conservative ideas regarding sex. she is sexually inexperienced and after years of being single, she eventually settles down, begrudgingly for a man that is actually in the same league as her. This man will probably have a similar level of sexual experience so will not feel bitter in this regard but he may find it difficult to relate to this woman who is emotionally closed off and dislikes sex.
Overall: women are free to do what they want, but other people are free to pass judgement and show the toxic effects of female mating strategy with sound reasoning and logical arguments.
Most Helpful Guy