[Barron]

I fully believe that having a 'provider' mindset is a cancer of the character (introduced by feminist conditioning). The only person you have to provide for is yourself.

The provider mindset is directly linked to the 'nice guy' in that both are attempting to woo a woman by accommodating her. They don't mean the same thing but both share similar behaviors when in the presence of women. The guy with game but still has some provider instinct in him will get a lot further than the nice guy. Being completely free of any desire to accommodate a female is the real test of character. Accommodating a girl you haven't fucked yet ultimately means sacrificing your frame. - nothing makes a pussy dryer.

When you are liberated of any desire to be a provider to a woman it means that you are directing the interaction 100%, your frame is the dominant one. Everything is on your terms which is what she needs to experience in order to feel comfortable enough to get naked. When you accommodate you are introducing a subterfuge to the interaction. Girls pick up on this immediately and feel pedastolized, lowering your value.

Since university started back up I've been happier than ever to be back at school, I put in a shit ton of work over the summer and learned the above just recently. Cursing in my responses to professor's in class, ignoring girls attempts to get my attention and then jabbing in them in the ribs when they're not looking, getting rid of all social media accounts so that girls are forced to come to me, everything is on my terms and it has enriched my interactions 10 fold.

Transitioning into a 'lover' mindset is the red pill of happiness and it makes me smile.

[Dantes]

(09-19-2014 11:27 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

I fully believe that having a 'provider' mindset is a cancer of the character (introduced by feminist conditioning). The only person you have to provide for is yourself.

The provider mindset is directly linked to the 'nice guy' in that both are attempting to woo a woman by accommodating her. They don't mean the same thing but both share similar behaviors when in the presence of women. The guy with game but still has some provider instinct in him will get a lot further than the nice guy. Being completely free of any desire to accommodate a female is the real test of character. Accommodating a girl you haven't fucked yet ultimately means sacrificing your frame. - nothing makes a pussy dryer.

When you are liberated of any desire to be a provider to a woman it means that you are directing the interaction 100%, your frame is the dominant one. Everything is on your terms which is what she needs to experience in order to feel comfortable enough to get naked. When you accommodate you are introducing a subterfuge to the interaction. Girls pick up on this immediately and feel pedastolized, lowering your value.

Since university started back up I've been happier than ever to be back at school, I put in a shit ton of work over the summer and learned the above just recently. Cursing in my responses to professor's in class, ignoring girls attempts to get my attention and then jabbing in them in the ribs when they're not looking, getting rid of all social media accounts so that girls are forced to come to me, everything is on my terms and it has enriched my interactions 10 fold.

Transitioning into a 'lover' mindset is the red pill of happiness and it makes me smile.

This may very well be the case in our time. However, in our fathers' and grandfathers' time, providing for a wife and family was considered masculine and one's duty. If you were unable or unwilling to provide in such a manner, your value was questioned by society. The most successful and alpha man took pride in providing for his wife and family. It is a strange twist in our times, that the strong alpha trait of providing is now in question. I am interested to hear from the husbands and fathers on this forum as to how they view their masculinity in the context of being a provider.

[MY DETROIT PLAYAS]

Great points!!!

If you come into the interaction with a supplicating frame, then that is what she will grow to expect from you

It also blurs the lines on whether she really likes you for you, or rather what she can get you to do for her

It's cool to give her a glimpse behind the curtain, but we have to resist the urge to go the extra mile, until we know she is willing to invest in interaction in the first place.

[mauro000]

(09-19-2014 11:38 AM)Dantes Wrote:  

(09-19-2014 11:27 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

I fully believe that having a 'provider' mindset is a cancer of the character (introduced by feminist conditioning). The only person you have to provide for is yourself.

The provider mindset is directly linked to the 'nice guy' in that both are attempting to woo a woman by accommodating her. They don't mean the same thing but both share similar behaviors when in the presence of women. The guy with game but still has some provider instinct in him will get a lot further than the nice guy. Being completely free of any desire to accommodate a female is the real test of character. Accommodating a girl you haven't fucked yet ultimately means sacrificing your frame. - nothing makes a pussy dryer.

When you are liberated of any desire to be a provider to a woman it means that you are directing the interaction 100%, your frame is the dominant one. Everything is on your terms which is what she needs to experience in order to feel comfortable enough to get naked. When you accommodate you are introducing a subterfuge to the interaction. Girls pick up on this immediately and feel pedastolized, lowering your value.

Since university started back up I've been happier than ever to be back at school, I put in a shit ton of work over the summer and learned the above just recently. Cursing in my responses to professor's in class, ignoring girls attempts to get my attention and then jabbing in them in the ribs when they're not looking, getting rid of all social media accounts so that girls are forced to come to me, everything is on my terms and it has enriched my interactions 10 fold.

Transitioning into a 'lover' mindset is the red pill of happiness and it makes me smile.

This may very well be the case in our time. However, in our fathers' and grandfathers' time, providing for a wife and family was considered masculine and one's duty. If you were unable or unwilling to provide in such a manner, your value was questioned by society. The most successful and alpha man took pride in providing for his wife and family. It is a strange twist in our times, that the strong alpha trait of providing is now in question. I am interested to hear from the husbands and fathers on this forum as to how they view their masculinity in the context of being a provider.

I believe providing for the female is ONLY acceptable when the relationship is consolidated. When the girl gives you pussy, you give her a 'treat' as reward, but not before unless you want to friendzone yourself.

[polar]

So for an example, you go out for drinks or chore, you don't explicitly offer to pay, you let her pay for herself if she makes the motions?

Some specific examples of yours would be helpful to cross from theory into application.

[MY DETROIT PLAYAS]

If I invite out for drinks etc, I pay no questions asked...

Think the OP is expressing the popular belief that in order to have success with any given woman, you need to avoid being the 'nice guy' who goes all out to appease a chick barely knows

Sounds like OP is steering the interaction, being decisive. Letting his intentions be known.

You can be courteous and kind without being a pushover.

[BadWolf]

Would argue the opposite. I am happiest in full provider mode.

[LemonDrink]

On the subject on provider (or accommodator), what about being a 'nice guy' to men, is that a healthy trait?

[Vaun]

Provider to yourself first, before you want to wife up "because every man is supposed to", and give it all away. Because be certain, that when you do decide to provide, you legally elect to give away everything you earn and have saved.

[Noir]

The responsibility of being a provider has been replaced by the welfare state, as women no longer need a patriarch to provide the basic elements of survival; food, shelter etc.

Taking a look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, we can see that 'safety' and most of the physiological (minus sex) are covered for a woman in 21st century Western societies.



This is where I come in and 'provide' the rest of the pyramid. Love/belonging, most of it dependant on how much she deserves. Esteem based on how I want her to feel and this leads to self-actualization.

The ones who are aware of this and don't fuck with me and treat me nicely, get rewarded and they are the 'keepers' as they are aware of the 'transactions' at play.

A lot of guys confuse lover and provider dichotomies by being absolute where-as it is akin to a Venn diagram. We are a team; where do we intersect and what is missing. Financially, sure, I must be strong and I work towards it, for myself, not her.

I am a provider of good emotions and positive lessons. I don't stress over minor things, as for paying the bill etc. as I always know what I will do based on whether she deserves it. I always do things out of principle and they are aware of this. If I don't pay, she knows shes fucking up and she has got to fix her behaviour.

One thing I learned from HH's posts is to do things for yourself and because it is normal and your lifestyle, not to accommodate women's ideas of what is correct, to 'pass her tests'. Instead, my behaviour has tests for them.

I provide good emotions and feelings and make them crave my presence. I don't provide cash, I provide a lifestyle but her behaviour will determine what parts of those lifestyle I share; pre-selection and her awareness of my other girls makes her work for it.

Fuck being a nice guy and fuck being a dick. Have integrity and standards and don't step down when you want something or afraid to call shit when you see it. There is a difference and people tend to polarize all of this way too much.

[Windom Earle]

(09-19-2014 11:44 AM)MY DETROIT PLAYAS Wrote:  

Great points!!!

If you come into the interaction with a supplicating frame, then that is what she will grow to expect from you

It also blurs the lines on whether she really likes you for you, or rather what she can get you to do for her

It's cool to give her a glimpse behind the curtain, but we have to resist the urge to go the extra mile, until we know she is willing to invest in interaction in the first place.

Apologies for derailing, but is this ever the case?

In my experience, even the most seemingly loyal girl is only as loyal as the benefits you can (or can't) provide her. This may be tied in to your own particular inherent qualities/attributes as a man (essentially who you are as an individual), but I am yet to see or hear a story in recent times that demonstrates a union based and sustained upon nothing more than personal attributes, rather than resources, whether that be emotional (i.e. game) or financial/tactile or a varying combination of the two.

[BadWolf]

Windom: I would argue that your experience is limited to Westernized women. You need to travel abroad a bit to get an understanding of what's out there. It's like saying, in my experience, I have only eaten chocolate chip cookies so thus all cookies must be chocolate chip right? You can't really demonize girls for seeking out the best providers they can without equally demonizing men for seeking the hottest tail they can lockdown. I think its human nature to seek out a good deal. While at the same time, I think current trends in the West and the rest of the 1st world are very anti-commitment and anti-marriage which is really sad. I even find it infecting men's forums. While its ok to opt out of marriage to local women, don't be so quick to throw away opportunities from better quality foreign women.

I'm a provider for my wife and it makes me happy. Actually I lose that role while living back here in Canada with my folks and I honestly feel like less of a man for it. I'm in my comfort zone when I see my wife happy and know that I'm the main breadwinner... I think its a natural state of mind for men to be in and the secret is to lockdown a quality woman who believes in loyalty over all else. My wife believes in loyalty or death and really, what's not to respect about that? There is one out there for you and if you like, I can show you the way.

[BDawg]

Practical Female Psychology for the Practical Man was cited in the Paul Janka ROK article.

"In a nutshell, the Female Basic Conflict is:

• The need to manipulate a man into the role of her Provider .
• Automatic contempt and a lowering of her sexual attraction towards a man who lets her do so"

[polymath]

I like the idea of taking care of my parents. They have done a lot for me. Sometimes they suck, but so does everyone you know for many years.

Women, on the other hand.....especially in the USA, they try to take advantage of men.

[Anthony A. King]

I agree. what i've observed is that Betas tend to be 'k' selected in the dating market (protector/provider) and 'r' selected in long-term relationships (egalitarian,-romanticized-"lover").

Alphas tend to be the opposite which is the correct strategy: 'r' selected in the dating market but 'k' (in this I mean more of a traditional patriarch, i.e. "a man is the king of his castle") selected in long-term relationships.

If an aspiring alpha wants to be successful then he should become 'r' selected when dating and 'k' selected when in LTRs (if you are looking to commit of course).

[Ingocnito]

(09-19-2014 11:44 AM)MY DETROIT PLAYAS Wrote:  

Great points!!!

If you come into the interaction with a supplicating frame, then that is what she will grow to expect from you

It also blurs the lines on whether she really likes you for you, or rather what she can get you to do for her

It's cool to give her a glimpse behind the curtain, but we have to resist the urge to go the extra mile, until we know she is willing to invest in interaction in the first place.

I think you can even amplify this idea as even spending just 1 too many nights a week with a girl early on, or always going to her place for her convenience, even if just for sex, will eventually land you a higher rank in the provider role... which IMO is another step closer to beta-provider.

Woman have a switch with men too. One where they like part of you for sex, maybe even the best sex they've had... but after long enough, even if you've kept it fresh and interesting for many months, they'll try to force some level of provider-hood upon you and flip that switch. Frame aside, this is a key decision point in future relations with said woman.

[Dalaran1991]

The message is well taken, but I think we should remain flexible enough when dealing with new cultures.

One blog post from Roosh (cant find it now) strikes me as very thought provoking. He was gaming in some FSU country. The girl was very warm and asked him to buy a drink. He did the usual come back "Do you want me to just write you a check" and she turned cold.

Later his wing who got laid that night broke it to him that the girl was down to fuck, but he acted like an asshole. In a FSU country the girls are actually very poor and cannot afford to buy themselves a drink. So are a lot of the guys. Being able to provide for a girl there is considered a +, like it was back in our time.

Roosh himself said "I could game her with my wits and humors or I could game her with a drink, in the end its all the same".

That said never let yourself be mined, and dont do that for your average US broad. But keep your mind open when going to a different context.