Post: #26

^ Fantastic post, Spaniard88. You almost lost me at the part about calling guys who are unmarried and don't reproduce beta though - life has moved on and the rules have changed a tad.

In a beta/alpha-type conversation, I guess these "truisms" are to be expected.

A good post nonetheless.

To add to the thread, if I was married and being refused sex, I would have zero qualms with going outside the marriage, and I'm not the cheating type usually (at least not deliberately - sometimes shit just happens).

She can either play by my rules or deal with the consequences.

Another reason I better marry Asian. Shit is understood here.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #27

(05-03-2014 06:19 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  ^ Fantastic post, Spaniard88. You almost lost me at the part about calling guys who are unmarried and don't reproduce beta though - life has moved on and the rules have changed a tad.

In a beta/alpha-type conversation, I guess these "truisms" are to be expected.

A good post nonetheless.

Thank you.

It's ultimately a choice, and if a person makes that choice (versus having that choice imposed upon them by a lack of options), then that's a key nuance, of course.

(05-03-2014 06:19 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  To add to the thread, if I was married and being refused sex, I would have zero qualms with going outside the marriage, and I'm not the cheating type usually (at least not deliberately - sometimes shit just happens).

She can either play by my rules or deal with the consequences.

Haha, that's funny that you say that. Ideally, it wouldn't come to that, but I understand what you're saying. You know, when I was younger, I had a conversation with my father that went something like this (in Spanish, so I actually did, and do, use the formal "father," even though in English this may sound archaic):

Me: Father, marriage here (America) seems to put a man into a quandary. Suppose a man is married, and his woman denies him sex, which is apparently not uncommon here...what is a man to do? What would you have done, for example, if mother had denied you sex at some point?

Father: "What?" His gnarled hands slapped the table. He looked at me, incredulous, then said, "She wouldn't have eaten that day!" He paused, then continued, "We'd see who held out longer."

And that was the end of that conversation.

Post: #28

(05-03-2014 06:19 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Another reason I better marry Asian. Shit is understood here.

I missed that the first time I read your post, but I couldn't have said it better, man!

And yes, while you can find all kinds of girls here (in Asia (The Philippines, in my case)), if you're looking for quality girls, then you'll find them to be far more common here than in America, and the quality girls DEFINITELY "understand shit," as you put it. Understatement of the year, man.

But let's be fair, there's women in America who "understand shit" as well. They do exist, it's just that finding those girls in America is like looking for a needle in a haystack, a tattooed, entitled, loud, carousel-riding, obese haystack, lol!

Post: #29

(05-03-2014 06:14 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  If you are marrying any woman who is in any way accustomed to alphas, there is no hope.

Be alpha, that means, to start, marrying a virgin. If you're "marrying a woman who's accustomed to alphas," you're marrying someone else's leftovers, and that's beta, but there's a degree there, one or a few prior partners, depending on her age, might not be a huge issue, we're human, we make mistakes, and as long as she learned from the experience, it's possible things could be fine. Now, marrying a girl with double digit prior partners, that's beta.

Congratulations on expanding my point. Truth be told, women tend to fall into one of three categories. The first, are those that have become accustomed to Alpha Dick. Obviously, these women are in no way qualified for marriage within the current legal spectrum.

Then there are the other two categories, which are really subcategories of one larger category: women not accustomed to taking hard, alpha dick, right up the ass. These women are not accustomed to doing so for one of two reasons.

(1) Do to their upbringing, cultural influences and religious persuasion, they are downright frigid towards sex. These women are best avoided, because they will still retain guilty feelings towards sex, even once married. Good luck getting you dick sucked by one of these prudes.

These women would have made excellent wives before the modern male became exposed to modern media with its modern influences.

99% of us are looking for something that cannot be provided by a woman that sees sex as impure and will lie on her back like a fish and quite possibly give up on sex sooner or later because she's feels to uncomfortable with it to actually allow herself to experience pleasure.

(2) There may be a few gems out there who are not close minded prudes who know what they want in marriage and either marry you while they are young or have the self-control to stay pure until they marry you. I'd marry a woman like this, if I could confirm beyond a reasonable doubt that she truly falls into this category, which I won't be able to do, because women are excellent liars and have fooled many a beta into believing that they don't have the history that they do.


Of course, locking down even the preferred category of woman would be a virtual impossibility for nearly everyone on the forum who gets laid regularly, because a woman who has held out sexually and remained pure long enough to be a virgin when she meets you is probably not going to have sex with you within three dates, something virtually all the membership here claims to not be willing to accept.

If she is really awesome marriage material, she's going to wait till her wedding night to get naked, something no one is going to be on board for here.

Of course, if she is lying, this would also significantly reduce the odds of it being obvious that she is lying.

So, we can conclude that getting married at all is a non-option for the modern man.

Quote:

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Getting married is the ultimate beta move.

No, marriage is locking down a beauty for yourself, legally, before everyone, staking your claim against all comers. It's, first, recognizing that she has the genes you want to combine with yours and pass down to your children, and then, acting on this and conquering her, protecting her, and then protecting the beautiful children she gives you. That's alpha. Remaining unmarried and leaving no heirs to carry on your legacy, that's the ultimate beta move.

If she isn't a virgin marrying her is not beautiful, regardless of you reasons, because you're a cuckold.

I see that you've adjusted the definition of alpha and beta to allow to follow that path of your choosing and still think of yourself as alpha, which you aren't.

Everything you described above is supremely beta. Sacrificing your well-being to further your family line and the human race is the absolute definitive definition of beta. You just don't like it that way because you get a buzz off of thinking about how alpha your ass is.

Historically beta was good. Beta has brought the human race to its current state of successful existence. Historically, there was little room for alphas. Betas were necessary to provide a much needed labour force. More alphas meant too many chiefs, not enough Indians.

Hell, I would have been a very happy beta if I wasn't born in the first century to remove all the rewards and legal protections that were set up to encourage beta behaviour. (For example, traditionally, men had 100% right to custody off all his wife's children from the time of their marriage if the marriage ended. The woman had no such right).

Since, it's irrelevant to your existence whether or not you provide heirs or not and it simply has no effect on you, (beyond the experience of raising them), because you're going to die some day, doing so is beta.

Being alpha is looking out for yourself, ensuring your own survival. Too many alphas will kill a society.

Quote:

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  While being a beta orbiter is pretty beta, it still isn't as beta as putting your physical, emotional and psychological well-being in the hands of a woman.

You're right, that's beta, but you're making the assumption that that describes all marriages.

It does.

Quote:If you're a masculine man marrying a feminine woman, she's putting her physical, emotional, and psychological well-being in your hands, not the other way around. Then it's your duty to not violate that trust by leading the two of you on life's journey in a masculine manner.

In theory sure, but if we are talking about the current legal circumstances in the Western world, the marriage is absolutely beta, because thanks to the family courts, she's not putting anything in your hands. A married woman in modern Western society hold all the strings. She needs to place absolutely no trust in you because getting married is in no way an act of submission or faith for a woman any more.

95% of the time, a divorce woman will leave a marriage with more than she brought into it.

The dude is the one who is placing his physical, psychological and emotional well-being in the hands of the woman, because she can use the courts and the authorities to deprive the man she marries of well-being in every sense of the word.

Quote:

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  What is that we do that causes women do be attracted to us? Women want what they can't have. When they have something locked down, it inevitably loses value in their eyes.

Regarding that statement...I would counter with this, feminine women don't "want what they can't have."

I can see that you're new here. This is the nature of women. Deal with it.

There are plenty of writers from centuries and millennium ago who describe women as I do. This is nothing new.

Women are emotionally incapable beings who need a society that restrict their ability to act out, because without fathers and husbands empowered to keep them feminine, they won't stay that way.

Quote:What they want is a masculine man to lead them. Masculinity is what creates attraction in a feminine woman and as long as you're masculine and behave in a masculine way, she'll stay attracted to you and follow you. If a man is not masculine (and this is more behavior than appearance, by the way), then he won't attract or maintain the attraction, loyalty, and obedience of a feminine woman.

In the sad vision of marriage that you're describing, there's two things at the root of those issues, one, a feminine man, and second, a masculine woman.

A marriage between a masculine man ad a feminine woman is certainly ideal, but sadly, there is no such thing as a feminine woman any more in North America and Western Europe, if we ignore women from religious cults, like all those Mormons in Utah. Any women exposed to Western culture is not going to be feminine at all. Sorry.

Whether the want it or not at a particular time, women had power made available to them that they can reach out and grasp at any given moment.

Modern women in the West have been taught that they are men's equals in all ways and it does not occur to them that they can be wrong and a man right.

Marriages always have conflicts, but where the man is not empowered to lead, the woman will, because today, she has the married man over a barrel.

She can at any time use the nuclear option (divorce) to take much of what her husband has worked hard to achieve.

This is why you see modern men constantly backing down.



Are there exceptions? Certainly.

But at the present time, if you marry in the West, to assume that you are going to be one of the exceptions is simply foolhardy.

If you are already married and it is working out, congratulations, you got lucky and dodged a major bullet.

That being said, for those that must marry, and appreciation of game is certainly your best shot at a successful marriage. But just remember, if you drop your guard even once, she'll never let you bring it up again.



This is stupid anyway. If you can't be happy single, you definitely aren't going to be any happier in a marriage. In either case, just don't get married. You can have a great life without it and with none of the risk, which are plentiful if you do get married.

Post: #30

(05-03-2014 07:53 AM)Suits Wrote:  Are there exceptions? Certainly. But at the present time, if you marry in the West, to assume that you are going to be one of the exceptions is simply foolhardy.

You're painting things with an extremely broad brush.

What is "the West"? One could say that "the West" is the Anglo-American Empire. This empire conquered continental Europe first in 1945 and then in 1991, but there are indeed pockets of resistance.

If you go to Portugal or Southern Italy, you can still find old-fashioned young couples where the man aspires to be a dominant patriarch who sires an army of children, and where the woman submits. They usually meet in their teen years, the relationship is approved of by both their families, and sex before engagement is out of question. A friend of mine in Portugal met his future wife at 16, got engaged at 21 (which means he waited 5 years for sex), and married at 27. She worships him and treats him like a king. I don't think his marriage is such a bad deal.

What about divorce? Not an option for these old-fashioned couples. After boy meets girl and both their families approve of the relationship, the two families become entangled and intertwined, the two fathers becomes friends, they do business, etc. The woman cannot even consider divorce, because that would bring shame to her father, and her father would disown her. Moreover, her brothers may have business ventures with her husband.

I know families like that, but not in the U.S., not in England, not in Scandinavia. In such families, the man is a patriarch, women are viewed as cute but clueless and in need of adult male supervision at all times, and families entangle themselves, so that social circles are merged, and the cost of divorce is destitution and being ostracized by friends and family. What about Daddy Government? Well, traditionalist countries in Southern Europe are kind of broke, so forget about the woman being saved by the welfare state.

Marrying and having a family is by itself neither alpha nor beta. If your wife and daughters fear and respect you, if your sons admire you and want to be like you, then you're an alpha patriarch. If your wife and daughters see you as an ATM machine unworthy of respect, if your sons think you're a tool and openly disrespect you, then you're a beta provider doormat, a mere sperm donor and cash machine.

Post: #31

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Of course, locking down even the preferred category of woman would be a virtual impossibility for nearly everyone on the forum who gets laid regularly, because a woman who has held out sexually and remained pure long enough to be a virgin when she meets you is probably not going to have sex with you within three dates, something virtually all the membership here claims to not be willing to accept.

Most virgins will put out by the third date, sooner if the attraction is high enough, both in America and in most countries the members of this forum are exposed to abroad. She has to lose it to someone, why not you? If you're ever in doubt, just go for it, man. After that, it's up to you where you want to take the relationship, but most virgins do put out by the third date, or earlier.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  If she is really awesome marriage material, she's going to wait till her wedding night to get naked, something no one is going to be on board for here.

Yeah, she'll wait, lol, if you're not man enough to take it sooner.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  So, we can conclude that getting married at all is a non-option for the modern man.

Look harder, or look abroad in a more traditional country. When you find the right girl and conquer her, it's worth it.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  If she isn't a virgin marrying her is not beautiful, regardless of you reasons, because you're a cuckold.

A cuckold refers to a husband with an adulterous wife (who, if you extend it further, ends up raising another man's children), not a guy who marries a girl who has had one (or many) sexual partners (unless she's pregnant at the time, but that wasn't part of the discussion).

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  I see that you've adjusted the definition of alpha and beta to allow to follow that path of your choosing and still think of yourself as alpha, which you aren't.

I didn't adjust it because of me, I just didn't want to be so rigid. If a guy meets an amazing woman who made a mistake, I mean, it happens, sometimes girls trust the wrong guy. I know because I've been that wrong guy before, lol. I'm just saying, it's not black and white, there's shades of gray. That said, a girl with double digit prior partner count is NOT a shade of gray, but virginity is also not the be-all, end-all, although it's a MAJOR plus.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Historically beta was good. Beta has brought the human race to its current state of successful existence. Historically, there was little room for alphas. Betas were necessary to provide a much needed labour force. More alphas meant too many chiefs, not enough Indians.

Not true, "a man's home is his castle." Every man can be an alpha in his home, and the more alphas, the stronger a society is. There's plenty of room for alphas, historically, and now. In fact, betas are the ones who don't get space (or any other resource) when there's a shortage, lol.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Since, it's irrelevant to your existence whether or not you provide heirs or not and it simply has no effect on you, (beyond the experience of raising them), because you're going to die some day, doing so is beta.

We all have to die, but we also have a shot at a kind of immortality, through our children. Our consciousness may perish, but our genetic code, that which is us, has a shot at immortality, and that's worth striving for.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Being alpha is looking out for yourself, ensuring your own survival.

That's a part of it, but in this day and age, for most of us, our personal survival isn't at risk, but our genes' survival is, and what better way to ensure our genes' survival than to marry a healthy woman and have healthy children? The old option of fathering as many children as possible isn't practically viable anymore, and if you're not raising those children, it's morally reprehensible as well.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  Too many alphas will kill a society.

No. On the contrary, it will strengthen it. All of us can be alphas in our own homes. In Rome, it was even legally enforced, the Pater Familias, as they used to call it, and the Roman Empire was a strong society, one of the strongest in human history. BUT, I wouldn't look to the state for the source of your "alpha-ness," I would look between your legs.

(05-02-2014 06:30 PM)Suits Wrote:  A marriage between a masculine man ad a feminine woman is certainly ideal, but sadly, there is no such thing as a feminine woman any more in North America and Western Europe, if we ignore women from religious cults, like all those Mormons in Utah. Any women exposed to Western culture is not going to be feminine at all. Sorry.

Whether the want it or not at a particular time, women had power made available to them that they can reach out and grasp at any given moment.

Modern women in the West have been taught that they are men's equals in all ways and it does not occur to them that they can be wrong and a man right.

Marriages always have conflicts, but where the man is not empowered to lead, the woman will, because today, she has the married man over a barrel.

She can at any time use the nuclear option (divorce) to take much of what her husband has worked hard to achieve.

This is why you see modern men constantly backing down.

Men in many of the more modern countries are marrying masculine women and they are adopting feminine behaviors. That's why they are "backing down." So find a feminine woman and adopt masculine behaviors (don't look to the state for your masculinity, that's not masculine, lol).

(05-03-2014 07:53 AM)Suits Wrote:  This is stupid anyway. If you can't be happy single, you definitely aren't going to be any happier in a marriage. In either case, just don't get married. You can have a great life without it and with none of the risk, which are plentiful if you do get married.

You're right, if you're not happy single, marriage won't make you any happier. I agree with you, marriage to an American woman is usually a bad bet. So look harder, OR look abroad, as many of us have done.

Or don't marry. Don't have children. Commit genetic suicide. Bang sluts forever, or become celibate, whatever makes you happy. And in your old age, when your body has betrayed you and you're weak and alone in a nursing home because all your loved ones are dead and you chose not to have children or a younger wife to care for you, with some large man roughly yanking you around, scrubbing your filth and your sense of decency off with it, less loved than a mangy, starving dog in an alley, I hope you'll be happy with the results of your decisions.

It'll be so alpha.

Post: #32

(05-03-2014 05:35 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(12-23-2012 11:27 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  Most of my married friends have experienced the massive drop-off, and none of them are soft, beta types.

Please go back and read this. Then think about what you just wrote. Think about it some more.

By definition, ALL those friends are soft, beta types. Do you see it? If a guy can't get sex out of his wife, he's beta. That's about as beta as a person can get, man. We all have a role to play, and they're soft, beta types, deep down. They may have nice jobs, they may have ripped abs (or not), they may be leaders in their fields, but that's just the exterior, inside, they're still soft, beta types. Why? Because they're the kind of men whose willpower is so weak that they married women with more willpower than them. There's no other way to break this to you.

They deserve their fates. They deserve their terrified midnight jack-off sessions with their eyes darting to the side constantly, their necks developing a crimp, in fear of awakening the hairy, slumbering she-beast that lies next to them with the mattress-springs' creaky vibrations, they deserve their motel hookers, they deserve their divorces, they deserve the weak, confused children they'll create, and they deserve the broken, unfulfilled lives they'll ultimately lead.

Learn from their mistakes, and when/if you do marry, marry a woman that respects your masculine authority on an instinctual level, a level that marriage and childbirth will only affect in a positive manner.

I take it you've never been married or lived with a woman for a few years.

It's easy to hate on these so called "betas", but imagine that you're married and your wife's sex drive pretty much disappears after having a child due to hormonal changes, for example. The same woman who respected "your masculine authority on an instinctual level" just doesn't want to have sex anymore. That's it, you're fucked. No matter how "alpha" you are, your options in this situation are getting an expensive divorce, finding sex elsewhere or jerking off.

Also, the same guy can be "alpha" and "beta" in different situations. Today you fuck somebody's wife, a few years from now you're married and somebody else fucks your wife. This shit happens, and being "alpha" doesn't protect you from it.

The way to avoid it completely is to not get married.

Post: #33

Quote:Or don't marry. Don't have children. Commit genetic suicide. Bang sluts forever, or become celibate, whatever makes you happy. And in your old age, when your body has betrayed you and you're weak and alone in a nursing home because all your loved ones are dead and you chose not to have children or a younger wife to care for you, with some large man roughly yanking you around, scrubbing your filth and your sense of decency off with it, less loved than a mangy, starving dog in an alley, I hope you'll be happy with the results of your decisions.

It'll be so alpha.

I liked that alot, and its very true. Having already been in that situation, there is nothing like having a woman who loves you and actually cares about your wellbeing nearby to take care of things. I say this alot because its true, I wouldn't be here today if my wife weren't around the last time I was in the hospital.

Something you horny buggers seem to forget on your quest for Alpha, sex gets boring, period. If you can't get your wife to have sex with you, you have more problems in your life then just her.

Now for those married guys like myself who get sex whenever we want it, its boring as hell. Actually the last thing on my agenda is sex, I'd much rather she leave me alone for a week or two and not bug me about sex. I appreciate that she's on call whenever I'm in the mood but since I get it so much, I don't need it at all.
It's like money, when I was broke, money and good jobs were the only things on my mind. Now that I have a bit of money and loads of job availabililty, I'd rather concentrate on foreign trade and opening businesses. Infact, I want to work as little as possible (currently 3 days a week). It's no different for sex. Most of the time I will wake up at night or in the morning with a set of b00bs shoved in my face. For p00sy beggars, there is nothing else to focus on except sex. For 'successful' married guys, sex is the LAST THING on our lists. Most of my friends are married and we all meet to talk business, play games and dole out extra work to one another. When I'm with them, they'd rather talk politics, cars or money then some b1tch's t1ts and arse.

I would say that married men are actually far more productive than single guys. I sure as hell wouldn't want a single guy in charge of my life, he'd sell you down the river for a sniff of snatch during a dry spell. If there isn't more to your life then making it to the next snatch, why were you born a human and not a rabbit.

Quick personal ancedote: (the story of Alexander)
We have a network of mostly married (wealthy/successful) guys that get together every now and then for gaming or food or whatever. Anyway, the network is such that any time someone needs a job or a business lead, he only has to ask around and he gets it. The only sticking point is that you hang out with the other guys once in awhile in your free time... not every week but when we plan a get together and you RSVP, you'd better be there.

Well I met this guy named Alex and he had just recently been dumped by his girl. I introduced him to game and he really got into it. He was going out on multiple dates a week with women. His problem was that he was here on a tourist visa and he let b1tches and the pursuit of pvssy get in his way at the job. He stopped coming to the get togethers and on multiple occassions ditched us for some new pvssy. Eventually he was fired from his job for skipping work to hangout with girls, then kicked out of his apartment and later booted from the country (here you need a job for a visa). If he had kept it to one or two b1tches and focused more on his job, making money and networking, he'd still be here and probably be very well off. Now he's back in America scrounging for both money AND women.

I suppose I feel partly responsible for this but I did warn him not to spend too much time with women. Life is not about how much sex you can get, your first priority should be money.

Post: #34

(05-04-2014 08:56 PM)BadWolf Wrote:  I would say that married men are actually far more productive than single guys. I sure as hell wouldn't want a single guy in charge of my life, he'
d sell you down the river for a sniff of snatch during a dry spell. If there isn't more to your life then making it to the next snatch, why were you born a human and not a rabbit.

I am single, but I prefer to work with/for married people who have kids - the more kids the better. The reason for that is simple: work/life balance. As a general rule, a family man with kids has too many things going on in his life to be a slave driver boss at work.

Post: #35

(05-03-2014 08:31 AM)Icarus Wrote:  

(05-03-2014 07:53 AM)Suits Wrote:  Are there exceptions? Certainly. But at the present time, if you marry in the West, to assume that you are going to be one of the exceptions is simply foolhardy.

You're painting things with an extremely broad brush.

What is "the West"? One could say that "the West" is the Anglo-American Empire. This empire conquered continental Europe first in 1945 and then in 1991, but there are indeed pockets of resistance.

If you go to Portugal or Southern Italy, you can still find old-fashioned young couples where the man aspires to be a dominant patriarch who sires an army of children, and where the woman submits. They usually meet in their teen years, the relationship is approved of by both their families, and sex before engagement is out of question. A friend of mine in Portugal met his future wife at 16, got engaged at 21 (which means he waited 5 years for sex), and married at 27. She worships him and treats him like a king. I don't think his marriage is such a bad deal.

What about divorce? Not an option for these old-fashioned couples. After boy meets girl and both their families approve of the relationship, the two families become entangled and intertwined, the two fathers becomes friends, they do business, etc. The woman cannot even consider divorce, because that would bring shame to her father, and her father would disown her. Moreover, her brothers may have business ventures with her husband.

I know families like that, but not in the U.S., not in England, not in Scandinavia. In such families, the man is a patriarch, women are viewed as cute but clueless and in need of adult male supervision at all times, and families entangle themselves, so that social circles are merged, and the cost of divorce is destitution and being ostracized by friends and family. What about Daddy Government? Well, traditionalist countries in Southern Europe are kind of broke, so forget about the woman being saved by the welfare state.

Marrying and having a family is by itself neither alpha nor beta. If your wife and daughters fear and respect you, if your sons admire you and want to be like you, then you're an alpha patriarch. If your wife and daughters see you as an ATM machine unworthy of respect, if your sons think you're a tool and openly disrespect you, then you're a beta provider doormat, a mere sperm donor and cash machine.

The blue print of civilization.

Post: #36

(05-04-2014 09:01 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

(05-04-2014 08:56 PM)BadWolf Wrote:  I would say that married men are actually far more productive than single guys. I sure as hell wouldn't want a single guy in charge of my life, he'
d sell you down the river for a sniff of snatch during a dry spell. If there isn't more to your life then making it to the next snatch, why were you born a human and not a rabbit.

I am single, but I prefer to work with/for married people who have kids - the more kids the better. The reason for that is simple: work/life balance. As a general rule, a family man with kids has too many things going on in his life to be a slave driver boss at work.

There are not many of today's huge companies that were started or grown by married men.

Married men are probably more stable, but they certainly lack the willingness to take on risk.

Post: #37

(05-03-2014 04:56 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(05-03-2014 03:31 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  

(12-23-2012 08:53 PM)RawGod Wrote:  Who wants to be in the position of being married 5+ years, fucking the same woman over and over, and having to "bring the alpha" in and out of the bedroom to keep her faithful? I'd rather be chasing new women.

But I guess some folks are wired differently, I'm just not big on pair bonding.

I'd rather be chasing status and money while fucking the same pussy.

New women will come as a bonus.

If your bitch is not faithful, you picked the wrong one.

Are you certain that this is the right forum for you?

Of course not. I am married.

Post: #38

(05-05-2014 01:52 AM)berserk Wrote:  

(05-04-2014 09:01 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

(05-04-2014 08:56 PM)BadWolf Wrote:  I would say that married men are actually far more productive than single guys. I sure as hell wouldn't want a single guy in charge of my life, he'
d sell you down the river for a sniff of snatch during a dry spell. If there isn't more to your life then making it to the next snatch, why were you born a human and not a rabbit.

I am single, but I prefer to work with/for married people who have kids - the more kids the better. The reason for that is simple: work/life balance. As a general rule, a family man with kids has too many things going on in his life to be a slave driver boss at work.

There are not many of today's huge companies that were started or grown by married men.

Married men are probably more stable, but they certainly lack the willingness to take on risk.

This is a strange generalisation.

How is being married correlates with unwillingness to take risks? And how it correlates with stability?

Post: #39

(05-03-2014 10:59 AM)Brodiaga Wrote:  I take it you've never been married or lived with a woman for a few years.

It's easy to hate on these so called "betas", but imagine that you're married and your wife's sex drive pretty much disappears after having a child due to hormonal changes, for example. The same woman who respected "your masculine authority on an instinctual level" just doesn't want to have sex anymore. That's it, you're fucked. No matter how "alpha" you are, your options in this situation are getting an expensive divorce, finding sex elsewhere or jerking off.

Also, the same guy can be "alpha" and "beta" in different situations. Today you fuck somebody's wife, a few years from now you're married and somebody else fucks your wife. This shit happens, and being "alpha" doesn't protect you from it.

The way to avoid it completely is to not get married.

I take it you've never had sex with women who had kids and divorced/didnt want sex....with their husbands/boyfriends.

It is well known both a man and a woman can lose attraction for one another after having a child and will seek sexual pleasure elsewhere. They dont lose the need for sex, just with the person they're with.

Post: #40

(05-05-2014 04:10 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  This is a strange generalisation.

How is being married correlates with unwillingness to take risks? And how it correlates with stability?

The biggest gamblers are usually men with little to lose. Relatively young men with no family and no spouse usually have less to lose than older, married men with families to think about and provide for. This is part of why, historically, such men have been over-represented in relatively high risk occupations/endeavours (ex: combat troops, explorers, conquistadors, etc).

Post: #41

It's been about four years since we last visited the topic. Thought I'd give this thread a bump for those that have joined the forum since then.

Post: #42

(05-05-2014 12:04 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 04:10 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  This is a strange generalisation.

How is being married correlates with unwillingness to take risks? And how it correlates with stability?

The biggest gamblers are usually men with little to lose. Relatively young men with no family and no spouse usually have less to lose than older, married men with families to think about and provide for. This is part of why, historically, such men have been over-represented in relatively high risk occupations/endeavours (ex: combat troops, explorers, conquistadors, etc).

It's super important for guys in their 20's to understand that if they have the opportunity to make plays where if they win, they win a lot, but if they lose, they just go back to zero, then those plays can be solid moves. They're moves that that same man won't have the ability to make once a family comes into play.

It also applies in regards to women. It pays off to be bold, and this is why as we age we have to keep the excess regularity, the accepting of things, at bay, if we want to stay on top of things. Pun intended.

A quote from Niccolo Machiavelli:

Quote:“I conclude therefore that, fortune being changeful and mankind steadfast in their ways, so long as the two are in agreement men are successful, but unsuccessful when they fall out. For my part I consider that it is better to be adventurous than cautious, because fortune is a woman, and if you wish to keep her under it is necessary to beat and ill-use her; and it is seen that she allows herself to be mastered by the adventurous rather than by those who go to work more coldly. She is, therefore, always, woman-like, a lover of young men, because they are less cautious, more violent, and with more audacity command her.”

^^ That's some ageless truth right there.

Post: #43

I wonder how much sex married men had back in the day when sex was only socially acceptable when it was had within the context of marriage and children, women's natural tendency to want children was nurtured rather than aborted, men married virgins who were young, and when the state didn't legally hamstring men's natural authority over their own wives, the equivalent of tying both arms behind his back and giving him charlie horses in both legs were he in a cage match and having him hope his opponent didn't like to fight dirty.

G

Post: #44

I applaud this recent thread of bumping classic high-value threads. Here's to more of this.

Post: #45

How far back are you wondering? Before condoms?

Post: #46

(09-24-2018 10:48 PM)Geomann180 Wrote:  I wonder how much sex married men had back in the day

I would guess, as much as they wanted. Women just did it out of a sense of obligation regardless of whether they were in the mood or not and guys didn't really care if she was into it. Today women feel far less obligation to go through the motions like that.

Post: #47

This is why no one but those who are passionately in love with each other should marry.

Because otherwise the chances of the woman denying her Husband sex and defrauding him of his conjugal rights go up.

Women who marry men they are not into and routinely deny him sex by their actions show their contempt for the institution of wedlock and the marriage bed. They undermine one of the building blocks of society and commit a form of adultery by definition.

Both Husband and Wife must be married to someone they are deeply attracted to and cannot keep their hands to themselves.

Post: #48

That's the thing. A woman's attraction is not a fixed on/off. It changes over time. She probably was really into her husband around the time of the honeymoon. After the kids, suddenly the hormones change and she's not. Is she defrauding him in a premeditated way or just playing out the cruel trick of her biological programming? Note that I'm talking young women here, not women who rode the carousel and are feeling baby rabies. Young women who are still clinging to naive prince charming ideals.

Biology only favors temporary passion as a means to very definitive end for the couple in question. After the kids then nature declares it mission accomplished and it's a business partnership at best. Fighting that is like swimming upstream.

Post: #49

Let me turn this around a bit:

"In fact, 66 percent of (married women) would rather read a book, watch a movie or take a nap than sleep with a spouse."

==> 66 percent of men are absolutely clueless in bed, have let themselves go completely, developed beer guts and bad breath, and ask for permission to fuck their wife.

I'm sure if the vets like Kaotic here get married I'll hear about how his wife fantasize about fucking him all night long after he comes back from that Harley ride.

Not blaming men but using this BS shitlib to trash an institution like marriage is retarded. We know better than that.

Post: #50

(12-23-2012 11:27 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  Most of my married friends have experienced the massive drop-off, and none of them are soft, beta types. Before they married, they ran through tons of pussy. They loved fucking, and got chicks to do freaky shit with them (not necessarily rimming though...HA HA!). ALL of them suffered through dry spells that went for several weeks to months. All tried to get at their wives, but at some point gave up because they got tired of being rejected. My own cousin went through it with his first wife, who didn't like his work situation (he was a film maker and ran his own artist management company). When things got tight for him, she wasn't supportive, and the first thing that goes is the sex. Before they were married, it was sex at the drop of the hat. She even overlapped with another chick he was banging, and they KNEW about each other. Once married, when they aren't right emotionally for whatever reason, you get NO affection. And there will always be something that they're upset about. All of these guys were used to getting steady sex, but then had to settle for scraps that she decided to throw out of occasional pity.

Here is the thing... a woman's sex drive is biologically designed to try and keep a man around. If she doesn't have to do shit to keep you around then her sex drive is going to be near zero. We have destroyed traditional masculinity and stacked the laws against it so heavily that most guys are both clueless and afraid to be men.

The other thing is that if you are married, you can't fail shit tests. These shit tests are actually a power struggle. If you fail shit tests consistently, then she is going to lose attraction.

I've been married twice. The first time I did it wrong because I was young and didn't understand. I had almost an entire year with no sex. I read books, I listened to therapists... I did everything the culture tells you to do and none of it worked. When I finally got pissed off and decided to leave... I stopped failing shit tests and started giving them. It was too late to save the marriage, but the sex came back and actually improved.

My point is this guys... when you read articles like this, take it with a grain of salt, because remember most males in the West have been raised to be docile pussies. Also... Western women are absolute shit. This poll would be completely different in another culture.