Friday, August 19, 2011

Why Is The Male/Female Dynamic So Skewed?

I think the best starting point for this discussion is to imagine yourself (a man) being in a place surrounded by attractive women with none of them approaching you or giving you signals of interest. If this continues you will either say "screw it" and not bother trying at all, or you will start approaching the women yourself and try to make things happen that way.

In fact, this is the default situation for men in this society. Women (those who are at least somewhat attractive) will almost always do nothing to meet men, and men, faced with this reality, buck up and make almost all the effort to meet women.

Now look at this from the other side. If you're a woman who is at least somewhat attractive, men will approach you and make you dating/sexual offers on a pretty regular basis. So you will have no motivation to do anything proactively since opportunities are handed to you. And if you're in situations/places where men are not regularly approaching you and making you dating/sexual offers it's because you are preemptively rejecting them through your body language. After all, men are greatly encouraged to pursue women and when they don't it's because the women are standoffish to the point that the men don't even try.

The dynamic is self-reinforcing. Men pursue women because women do almost nothing to meet men or make it easy for them. And the women don't pursue because they don't want to labeled as easy and because they are accustomed to men doing the pursuing anyway. There are just too many men pursuing too much for this dynamic to ever change. If most men all of a sudden were to hold back then women will be forced to do more of their share. In fact, the more men chase, the more women can afford to do nothing, which men pick up on and which creates an even bigger push for men to pursue. It's basically a positive feedback, a self-sustaining system, which starts from something less extreme, but which gradually snowballs into the great imbalance that exists right now.

Think of it this way. Let's say I'm your business partner and you're more ambitious than I am. I can do less work and you will take up the slack, and the less work I do the more work you have to do to compensate because you want the business to succeed and you NEED me as your partner because I have something you want which you cannot produce yourself. This is the way it is with women. Women slack off when it comes to meeting men and men take up the slack because they WANT women and what they provide (female company and sex), and this is enforced by cultural norms. This culture tips the scale in the direction of men doing more and women doing less, which becomes the slippery slope which we now know as men doing too much and women doing too little, due to the effect of cultural conditioning and positive feedback which pulls even more men into the loop.

Here's a thought experiment. Imagine a hot woman who is used to being approached all the time by men and who never does any approaching herself. Imagine if this woman were suddenly placed in a culture where the reverse dynamic takes place, in which women habitually approach men and men rarely approach women. This women would suddenly find herself dateless, and unless she were to start approaching men herself she will remain so. In fact, you can bet that after enough time has passed this woman will eventually start approaching men herself. The dynamic is stacked against her and she has no other choice but to play along.

This hypothetical situation lends support to the positive feedback theory I mentioned. If there are enough people in an environment enforcing a certain dynamic, that dynamic will continue unhindered and draw in new enforcers (who will miss out if they don't play along). However, if there aren't enough people enforcing a certain dynamic then that dynamic will never take off and it will never become a noticeable part of the culture. Hence, to create a social dynamic (like the one I talk about), you need a minimum number of enforcers of that dynamic, and to diminish a dynamic you obviously need to remove the number of enforcers of that dynamic.

A culture can condition its citizens to be enforcers of a certain dynamic, and once a critical number of enforcers is reached that dynamic becomes self-perpetuating. It is only when the society-wide harm done by this dynamic becomes so intolerable (relative to any gains), that large numbers of people start to forcibly take themselves out of the loop. In other words, these people recognize that any gains they receive by enforcing the dynamic (playing along) are no longer worth the misery that goes with it. As a result, they stop being enforcers and the dynamic begins to shift.

Consequently, the only solution is for men to start collectively doing less where women are concerned, and start expecting women to be more proactive. This is one of those situations where a few independent minded individuals won't make any difference in the collective female behaviour. As such, the only real power an individual has is to refuse to play the game and to operate on the fringes of what works, such as by selecting only for those few females that aren't part of the collective bad batch.

But if we want women to start acting better as a whole, then men as a group have to start acting in accordance with that wish. In other words, we have to collectively exert selective pressure on women to force them to change, and if they don't, weed them out. And this in turn becomes selective pressure of the biological kind in which their "bad behaviour genes" don't make it to the next generation.


Anonymous said...

do we know for sure that women almost always do nothing to meet men? Women under age 40 usually give me the stone-face, but I can't extrapolate this to everyone else. It could easily be something in my posture, countenance, physical build, or social status, or lack of it that makes them totally passive.

are "alphas" approach machines, or do women suddenly become much more active when they identify what they perceive to be an alpha.

popular guys at house parties, rock stars, and other high social status men, tend to magically accumulate groupies, sycophants, toadies, etc, which affirms the theory that women will blatantly throw themselves at "attractive" men, even if they stone-face everyone else.

Dennis said...

I understand your point, but do you really think this is going to happen in our culture? Unless a man has a large social circle or a lot of social proof, meeting women is going to entail a lot of cold approaches. There's just no way around this outside of paying for pussy outright.

Collectively men are NOT going to stop approaching women or else we won't get laid. Do you really think even if men did, that this will force women's hand? I say fat chance. Women are too afraid and paranoid of men in general to be aggressive, not counting the fact that most of them aren't conditioned to be the aggressor anyway.

Let's be real. There is no solution for us except to travel or relocate to a different culture. Being celibate in the hopes of changing the terrain of this dating world is not an effective strategy.

John said...

I think there are very few places where women will throw themselves at men they perceive to be attractive. It can only be the culture of such an environment that permits such a thing to happen, where it does. I suppose husband hunters, gold diggers, status-seeking groupies fall into the category of women who will approach certain types of men, or at least make themselves very receptive to being approached by these men. But I have to insist that I only say this with any certainty about western Americanized women.

John said...

Dennis, I'm not holding my breath. I don't think men are going to all of a sudden switch strategy like I described. But that's not the point of my post anyway. However, it is the solution, and although remote in probability it's a much more realistic one than just expecting women to change by themselves.

Who said anything about being celibate? Just work the fringes of what works. By fringe I mean working certain niches where you take yourself out of the mass approaching dog-eat-dog dating game with poor return on investment. Or forget the niche and just go to some foreign far away place where women are easier to meet anyway.

But here you have to focus on niches. I personally use the internet, since all public venues to meet women have become such shit. Sure it's a crappy alternative but out of all the crappy options it's the only one that works for me.

Anonymous said...

John, even the internet is a waste of time. In London there are less than a handful of women advertising on craigslist compared to 100s of men a day. And womnen get 100s of replies. I've heard that only 20% of those looking are women. The rest are men. Add to that the general 'culture of contempt' for men and there's no alternative but to go to another culture. Warren Farrell wrote that men who complain are laughed at, no wonder men keep quiet. I go to Colombia and plan to move there in the near future. I'm late 40s now It felt like I'd lost 20 years and being without a woman became normal. Northern Europe and NE Americas are the worst places.

Keith said...

That's just the way it has been since the dawn of time. Unfortunately the internet has made it so much worse, that now even the ugly fat chicks think they are entitled.

What I don't understand is why Toronto is THE WORSE PLACE IN THE WORLD FOR THIS SITUATION. Any man from any other city will tell you this much. And as someone who lives here, I would have to confirm this is true when you leave this city.

Robert Moses said...

Keith, in my opinion it is because Toronto just happens to be a perfect storm of a pre-strict culture (Toronto was known as Toronto the Good from the 1890s indicating a very "moral" mindset) to an economic powerhouse (with the fall of Montreal as the economic centre) in a short period of time. The city was known to be very conservative even up to the 1980s.

But because of economic change starting in the 80s to present, the city is a destination for many small town girls/women, who think they are a somebody here. Couple it with the foolish men who shower women with gifts, dinners, presents, etc. for their attention and you have very spoiled women in Toronto. Also, being PC has made the women think they are men, in some ways. I give new women to the city 6 months to 1 year before they become Torontonianized.

After that, a women gauges her worth in Toronto, by which I mean she her value as s business-partner-mate.

I have been saying this for years. I noticed it even back in 1992. I am 40 now, and the only friendly women I meet are fresh off the boat.

As for Toronto women, they want one thing and one thing only from men: MONEY. Forget about "game" its wealth that is the key.

The funny thing is even ugly/fat women get in on it.

What I find curious, is that I have never had to deal with the parents of a woman from Toronto. The woman is the parents. And Toronto women demand very much. Very, very much.

They are spoiled.

Anonymous said...

Toronto sucks for dating for an average man. I'm leaving soon so I feel sorry for those that have to stay for whatever reason.

The family law system is 100% against men so there is not much you can do as a man. Immigrants are having healthier families than the defunct white population here. I guess that is what happens when white women are taught that white men are terrible evil beasts of burden.

Anonymous said...

I'm a Toronto-based lawyer and by almost any woman's standards probably an 8-9/10 in terms of physical attractiveness. I'm well
off relative to others in my age bracket (i.e 25-30). I was much cruder and quite the ugly duckling in my younger years - a true beta. Where I am today, both in terms of physical attractiveness and social status, all derived from hard work and persistence over the years.

And guess what? I've reached the point where I'm boycotting Toronto women altogether. I no longer approach at all. Even if the girl is a 10 and you're sending positive signals my way, she better come up to me, because I simply refuse to do any work for women who ride almost entirely on their looks. I certainly don't ride on mine. Economically speaking it just isn't sound for me to approach in Toronto. These days I prefer getting straight to the point by using POF, FB and sometimes even Craigslist to get laid. I've had mixed results, but the end result is better than approaching out in public, whether it's cold approaching outside of a designated social venue or on the streets.

What really did it for me was a domestic assault case that I was handling, where the alleged victim complained to a female officer, and the female officer just took her at her word without following up on the investigation. Had this investigating female officer made one phone call before deciding to lay charges, the charges wouldn't have been laid in the first place. In other words, they were bogus charges and he was prematurely charged simply because he was a man. And of course I got him off the charges, while chastising the female officer for being willfully blind.

All my experiences have culminated in the belief that feminist extremism is indubitably entrenched in the Torontonian culture, compounded by the cliquish social circles that derive from the vast number of immigrants flocking to Toronto, and further compounded by our conservative British roots, and the calvanistic and puritanical history of Toronto.

The expectations that women have here are unrealistic, and I habitually have 5s and 6s futilely approaching me. I can't help but give them the could shoulder out of disdain, just like those b****es who never gave me the time of day when I was a textbook beta and instead opted to use me for their selfish purposes (e.g. validation) and then abruptly toss me aside like a used tampon.

The women here ask for too much and give too little in return. How can these women demand equality when it is to their benefit but not assume the responsibilities that flow with being treated as a true equal? As such, I never pay for women now when I take them out to venues like restaurants. I insist on going Dutch, because if she wants equality, then I'll show her what true equality means. The kicker is that I usually pay if the woman doesn't hail from Toronto, unless her mentality is akin to your typical Toronto woman. Even if I'm walking on a sidewalk and an attractive woman is passing me, I won't move out of the way for her - she better move out of my way.