A Sandwich Without the Bread

At some point I read a comment on a blog (which I can’t find now, but I’ll be happy to attribute it properly if somebody can point me in the right direction) describing the dilemma of the modern male.  Women insist that they want nice guys who respect them but instead go for assholes who don’t.  He compared this to the male aversion for obesity, explaining that it would confuse the hell out of women if we shoved ice cream and chocolate down their throats only to dump them for getting fat.

Indeed it would.  However, the analogy breaks down in that men aren’t particularly attracted to a woman’s propensity to stand up to them, whereas the male ability to contradict a woman’s expressed desires is central to her attraction for him.

Hence, my lack of disdain for the shit-test.  Women are women.  That’s that.

However, the confusion expressed in the comment does carry weight.  It’s not that shit-testing is necessarily evil, it’s just gotten way out of hand.

At Sunshine Mary’s blog, comments for a guest post by Deti partially evolved into a discussion on fitness testing (I still use the term “shit-test” because I’m a traditionalist).  Mary herself began with a question about shit-testing without realizing it:

You know, can someone help me understand something? This is a serious question, I’m not kidding around: why do women always strive so hard for the opposite of what they want? It’s like we all do it, me included (pre-red pill).

Rollo’s comment about women wanting to be objectified…yes! That is what pretty much all women want, at least by our own husband or another alpha-type man anyway. Yet look at the harpies on Elizabeth Esther’s blog shrieking about wanting men not to objectify women. And the silly men buzzing around her blog seem to believe her! They’ve actually joined in the Don’t objectify women chorus.

But secretly, I can almost guarantee you, each one of those women is just dying for a man to tell her to bend over so he can have a really good look. But no man will because they all think they’re supposed to treat women like…I don’t know, men I suppose. And . So sad.

Shortly thereafter, Donal answered:

It is the Curse of Eve again. Women “always strive so hard for the opposite of what they want” because deep down they need a man to correct their behavior. Women truly need men in a way that men don’t need women. Without men women would be lost, forever scrambling for what they think they want but really don’t, doomed by their requirement that they be led by men in order to be content and happy.

And shortly thereafter, I expanded on the nature of the shit-test:

I think women strive for what they don’t want because they instinctually [sic] know that somebody else is supposed to make most of those decisions for them.

If she declares “I want a man who gives me chocolate ice cream” and a guy gives her chocolate ice cream, that proves only that he can follow orders from her. If she makes the same chocolate ice cream declaration and some guy gives her skittles instead, it shows that he can lead her.

Women are (sort of) aware of their own worst tendencies. Being dishonest with men, and themselves, is the only way to find the men who can overcome them.

But Mary touches on the nature of the problem:

So…women strive for the opposite of what they want via feminism because they are essentially fitness testing man. This is one hell of a fitness test, though, because now it is nearly illegal for you to even try to pass it.

I’ve touched on some aspects of institutionalized shit-testing here.  However, Novaseeker describes a potential advantage to the extremes of feminism:

Right, but the guys who DO pass it are 100% guaranteed certain to pass hypergamy standards. So it’s an effective fitness test. It overscreens, which is a problem, but it does limit the pool to strictly hypergamously hot guys.

Indeed it does.

We have always had shit-tests, and their notable failures include Adam and Samson.  Women have always done this, and they always will.

But today’s shit-test is amplified three-fold.  It’s no longer just between a man and his girlfriend; today, it’s one man against the Feminine Imperative.  It definitely screens effectively for Alphas, but it may destroy our chances of developing Alphas + in the process.

First, there are the tangible ramifications that Mary describes.  The same bold request that might get an Alpha laid could cost a beta his job.  The inability to artfully handle the morning after a one-night stand could mean the difference between a “notch” and a costly rape accusation.  Failing shit-tests has caused military demotions (I’ve seen it happen), ostracism from churches and communities, and heaps of money in alimony and child-support.

Second, men are no longer trained to handle them.  We used to have fathers setting examples for their sons, clubs and organizations where men could go to share their knowledge of women with other men without women putting in their two cents, and coaches and older brothers who could teach boys the difference between a shit-test and a genuine request for help.  I’ve never seen a world without feminism, but I suspect that often kids weren’t even necessarily taught these things, they just observed and emulated.  No such luck today.

Third, and most importantly, the modern West equates the Grand Shit-Test (feminism) with morality itself.  Silly rhymes about “what little girls” and “little boys are made of” have morphed into teaching styles and prescriptions for Ritalin.  Misogyny is everywhere, and it’s considered to be almost as evil as racism.  By nature men have brutalized and oppressed women for centuries, continue to do so today, and unless you man-up and fight current trends, you’re as much of a problem as any wife-beater.  Disrespecting women is downright wrong, and the only way to be morally enlightened (and legally safe) is to take feminine sensibilities into account during each and every interaction with women.

So what should be just a shit-test becomes a test of moral fitness.  If you want to be a moral man, you’re required to fail.

Therefore, should we be surprised that so many of today’s Alphas are barbarians?  In order to pass shit-tests, not only do you have to counteract her express wishes, you have to oppose morality itself.  Because shit-tests are tests of moral rectitude, the Alphas who pass them will often care nothing for either earthly or moral law.

And those who want to do the right thing will get nothing.

Men everywhere may want to tell Tracy to hold her own damn purse, but they don’t because they want to respect her.  What should be a test for weakness has become a test for goodness.

If you want to succeed, you have to reject one of the most fundamental moral codes you’ve been taught.  If you want to win, it’s best to care about nothing except getting laid.

And you will.

Like Mary said:

Talk about winning every battle but losing the war…

Sweetie, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

This entry was posted in Feminism, Game, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to A Sandwich Without the Bread

  1. Stingray says:

    On being objectified; yes we do. Hell yes. Here is where people get confused. We even like being objectified by betas (just not omegas). However, we then want the alphas to respect us. Getting actual respect from an alpha is . . . amazing. Since women can’t or won’t do what is necessary to actually garner this respect, they try to force it. In the process, they decrease the number of men they actually want to respect them.

    I have more thoughts, but they have disappeared in the process of getting my kids through school. I need to read it again! Also, your last link in the essay doesn’t go anywhere. FYI.

    • Martel says:

      And the problem is that we’re since young we’re told that objectifying women harms and demeans them, like it’s one small step away from causing a woman to sing “I Dreamed a Dream”. Therefore, defying “don’t objectify me” is no longer just passing a shit-test, it’s a request to be treated as a fellow human being, a plea for a man to not cause her genuine emotional damage.

      So decent guys won’t objectify her, even though that’s what she wants, and it’s what proves he’s got some cojones. Instead, he tries to do the “right thing” and displeases both himself and her.

      You also make a good point about getting respect from the Alpha. Kind of like chivalry, it only counts if it comes from a source of value. Unfortunately, if you aren’t already strong, “respect” and “chivalry” only serve to make you seem even weaker.

      And the link is fixed. Thanks!

      • Stingray says:

        “respect” and “chivalry” only serve to make you seem even weaker.

        Absolutely. A woman can only respect a man who is *higher* than she is. She wants chivalry from a source greater than her. What women do not seem to understand is that these things, from men, are not free. One cannot just be female and expect to be handed these things (when we are handed them for having a pair of boobs, this is when you hear of the creepy factor). If we have expectations from men, men have expectations from women. This is a good thing. There is not a woman alive who does not smile/giggle with delight upon receiving genuine praise from a high status man. Because, on some level, she knows she earned this high status praise. It’s intoxicating. Couple this with being objectified and you have an unbeatable combination. I have been married to my husband for more than 13 years and I still beam with happiness when he praises me, because he won’t unless I have done something praiseworthy.

        I wonder, do you mean understand the power that you can have over us, when you choose to?

      • Stingray says:

        “Choose to” may not be the correct turn of phrase, but know the power you all have the potential to possess.

      • Martel says:

        I’m not sure what you’re asking in your “power” question…

      • Stingray says:

        Argh, My editing skills have been terrible lately. I meant to say, do *men* understand the power you can have over us?

        I tend to think a lot of men do not, or that they underestimate it. I wasn’t asking you directly. Rather I was putting out there for thought. Women crave men, we just do. Many hate the fact that we crave you all and overcompensate for this. But, we need you all whether we will admit it or not.

        Men have the power, so many simply do not know how to wield it. The potential is great.

      • Martel says:

        Alphas understand it, betas are divided.

        Some betas have bought into the equalization lie and think that women hold all the cards. Other betas do recognize masculine power but think it’s immoral to exercise it.

        While still plugged-in, I had a fleeting moment in which I recognized the power of triangulation, i.e. playing women off each other. But then I stopped because I realized that doing so was making them uncomfortable and therefore WRONG.

        The Blue Pill is a weird sort of contradiction. On one hand, you’re supposed to treat women with the same “respect” as men. On the other hand, you’ve got to be extra sensitive and aware of their emotional needs.

  2. deti says:

    The contrast between alpha and beta has widened considerably. In order to get noticed a man literally has to break all the rules. He has to stand out with ever wilder and more outre clothing, language, look, appearance, and mannerisms.

    The alpha-est alphas are:

    — thugs, drug dealers, criminals (who break all the rules)
    — professional athletes, super wealthy men (who make their own rules)
    — famous actors and male porn stars (for whom there are no rules)

    • Martel says:

      Before masculinity was denigrated, even society’s betas were usually MEN. Feminism just made being a man seem immoral. Passing the shit-test requires being like you described.

      Part of the reason what women weren’t supposed to be in charge of this stuff is that what they like isn’t necessarily what’s best for them, which was my main point during my mini dust-up with Rollo a while back:


      Men’s opinions used to have more of an impact on female attraction, for female attraction left to its own devices inspires violence and disincentivizes the traits that get us nail clippers and paper towels.

      We need to change it back, desperately.

  3. M3 says:

    I’ve heard the reverse of this scenario by many of my guy friends and many women, about how i should have looked for a woman who wasn’t a looker, someone big boned, lacking, because then i would be assured that she would do everything and treat me like a king.

    And i would still get no boner.

    Getting a fat woman to do things for me is as meaningless to me as it would be for a woman to get ‘respect’ from a supplicating omega. Attraction triggers are what they are.

    But you’re right, women today have gone overboard in which stimuli they react too and only responding to the worst kind, whilst not taking into account good male behaviors that have a net benefit to relationships/society at large but do not produce instant tingles. Therefore, thugish tingles supercede gentleman tingles and a race to the bottom occurs.

    I’ve written about that, how if we look at urban america as a foreshadowing, women are literally breeding their society into the stone age reverting to arrgressive cavemanism.. one that will come due which might bring about real social consequences that put women in real fear of men and create a rape culture. But they’re choosing who they breed with so it’s not on me. Society will pay for it tho eventually.

    And i’ve also written about objectification.. it only counts when men do it. Only the male gaze is dangerous… when it comes from the unattractive. Stingray is right.. every woman who dresses up is consciously aware of her SMV when she is putting on the dress and lipstick and telling herself she is a ‘knockout’ in the mirror. They want the gaze, they want to outshine other women in the competition and they want the best male to recognize their mating worth.

    All talk of dressing up ‘to feel good’ or ‘because its fun’ is just hamsterization. You’re either looking good to keep the male gaze of your partner, or because you think you’re going to run into David Beckham just around the corner.

    • Martel says:

      I’m with you on the dominating ugly women thing. There’s an ego rush that used to last all of a few minutes (and now only lasts a few seconds) when I can get some unattractive woman to do whatever I want. And then I’m beyond bored.

      I know some guys get off on the power trip, but for me the power trip only means something when I can tell it’s hard to get that power.

  4. Stingray says:

    All talk of dressing up ‘to feel good’ or ‘because its fun’ is just hamsterization

    Kinda. It’s true in the sense that we “feel good” and it’s “fun” because men are looking at us. If men didn’t look there would be no good feeling or fun. They would just be clothes. When I put on a pretty dress and some high heels with lipstick and eye makeup, I feel great. I feel pretty. i don’t feel pretty because my kids tell me so, or that the dress is flowing just right. I feel pretty because my husband finds me attractive and because I get approving looks from Men. 99.9% of women know and understand this in the pit of their stomach, they just can’t or won’t acknowledge it. I know a lot of women will tell you that they honestly do NOT care what men (in general) think of them. This is patently untrue. We care an enormous amount what you all think. We just don’t want too (sometimes. The nice thing is, once one understands what is going on, many of us don’t mind it at all. We come to embrace it).

    • Martel says:

      I’m not sure who’s right here. Little girls like playing “dress-up”, and women in countries like Saudi Arabia get all decked out under their hijabs that are only seen by their women friends when there are no men around.

      Is that because they’re fantasizing about how much a man would like seeing them that way? Is the little girl getting “warmed up” for feelings that will be entirely focused on men later in life?

      Or is the desire to look pretty an instinct in and of itself?

      Considering how much fun women find it to try on new clothes and shop, I’m inclined towards the latter.

      But I could be dead wrong.

      • anonymous says:

        I’ve heard that Victoria’s Secret does a HUGE business in Saudi Arabia and similar places.

        They’ve got to wear something UNDER the burkha, after all…

  5. M3 says:

    Ya, i probably could have phrased that better.

    What i meant by it was everytime i’ve argued with a woman about dressing up in a way that has revealing or flashy attire that catches my eye (and by proxy most male eyes) as being rooted in the biology of peacocking or mate attraction even on a subconcious level, i get such massive pushback, especially from feminist types who will bark at me that they’re not dressing for men (or intersexual competition either i suppose) and that they are just dressing that way because… well just because.

    • Stingray says:


      Maybe it is instinctive. A couple of things to consider. Little girls, often times, dress up to hear from Daddy how beautiful they are. They do ask their mothers as well, but daddy is a big focus. Often little girls are dressed prettily by their mothers since infancy and have always heard their fathers praise and crave more. An anecdote: I was a tomboy as a child. My parents didn’t have a lot of money and I wore all of my older brothers hand-me-downs. I hated dresses and would often flat out refuse to wear them. My hair was kept short because it hurt too much to brush and I was often mistaken for being a boy. I was NOT pretty. I remember asking my father one day if I was pretty. It was painful to think, even though I had no desire to try, that I wasn’t pretty and that others thought I was male. I have no idea if it was instinctual or learned on my part, but it was important to me.

      Those women in hijabs, while dressing just around other women, are competing with those other women . . . for men. Now, I fully admit that I could very well be putting a western spin on a nonwestern culture and I could be completely wrong. Somehow, I don’t think the female competition in a cultural thing.

    • Stingray says:

      Oops, I replied in the wrong place.

    • Martel says:

      Guys don’t like rough sports just because chicks dig dudes who are rough–that’s just a positive side effect. Still, enjoying banging heads with other guys is an inherently male trait.

      So I think the women who respond that way are partly right, but mainly dead wrong. It may or may not be that they dress that way just for guys, but it is a uniquely feminine trait to want to do it.

      Either way, their “pushback” is a vehement denial of their feminine nature.

  6. Stingray says:

    their “pushback” is a vehement denial of their feminine nature.

    Absolutely. It can all get so confusing, too. To have one’s nature fight so vehemently against the herd is difficult. I know men go through the same thing in a different way, but I cannot understand it in the same manner, obviously.

  7. Off-topic, what do you make of this video?

  8. Pingback: Why Romance Died | Alpha Is Assumed

  9. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/05/15 | Free Northerner

  10. Adriana says:

    What about this:
    What if I am fed up with shallow Alphas, and don’t mind just normal men who are not success obsessed? I am more than fed up. Not everyone is craving for perfection and coldness-wake up immaturities..
    Tough in today’s society.
    There is lack of men who don’t advertise themselves and chasing only looks. (not that I am missing looks..)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s