[Nomad77]

There is an old saying: a man gets married hoping the woman won't change but she does. A woman gets married hoping the man will change but he doesn't.

If you are going to get married or get into a LTR relationship realize that the woman is going to be as good as she will ever be in that first few months. Then it's all downhill from there. So if you are not starting out with a really good woman and she starts degrading quickly, you won't have much of anything worth keeping soon. A lot of women really let themselves go once they feel they have locked a man down one way or other.

[Travesty]

(10-15-2014 10:19 AM)reco2100 Wrote:  

I agree I am in a 20 year marriage. And I can say that if I had to do it over again I would not do it. I had a moment of strong doubt before we got married. But went through with it anyway.

Now I have to live with the consequences. I have two awesome kids to show for it and many great memories. But it was still a mistake. I was too blue pill. And too much of a pussy at the time to follow through with the right decision.

Dont make this mistake. If you have any doubt. Take your time and explore that doubt. If you do not have doubt. Still take your time and test your resolve for moving forward. Force your girl to prove herself to you.

Do not make the mistake I made. There is no other thing I can tell anyone on this forum that is more important.

I really respect this wisdom.

Any older guy I talk to (50+ especially) says choosing a wife is the most important decision you will ever make.

I really think banging chicks is fun and all, but like most guys I do fantasize about a solid relationship that is built and grows with a family.

These lessons make me get stricter and stricter with who I mini-LTR with and God willing LTR with.

There is a very long checklist that must be met I feel like to have no regrets as a red pill man especially. Blue pill men roll with the punches and see everything as "luck" or "meant to happen" or "a good learning experience".

God bless them for being so optimistic.

[WestIndianArchie]

(10-16-2014 12:01 AM)Travesty444 Wrote:  

There is a very long checklist that must be met I feel like to have no regrets as a red pill man especially. Blue pill men roll with the punches and see everything as "luck" or "meant to happen" or "a good learning experience".

God bless them for being so optimistic.

In some sense, learning game, taking the red pill - is changing your mindset to one of a hot girl + logic.

WIA

[RUIN]

(10-15-2014 11:57 PM)Nomad77 Wrote:  

There is an old saying: a man gets married hoping the woman won't change but she does. A woman gets married hoping the man will change but he doesn't.

If you are going to get married or get into a LTR relationship realize that the woman is going to be as good as she will ever be in that first few months. Then it's all downhill from there. So if you are not starting out with a really good woman and she starts degrading quickly, you won't have much of anything worth keeping soon. A lot of women really let themselves go once they feel they have locked a man down one way or other.

You say she is as good as she will ever be in the first few months. does that take into account girls who you mould through one way or another?

Examples like dating a girl with potential but slightly chubby, then getting absolutely fit, or a girl who is sexually inexperienced but puts it on herself to learn more FOR YOU or the girl who has never had a serious boyfriend/partner and again takes it upon herself to become the best girlfriend FOR YOU.

and when I say FOR YOU what I mean is you maintain your frame and the standards that you hold her to and she willingly chooses to adhere to them. Such a change may be a long-term thing (12-18months) to get to the standards im referring to but would that be exempt?

[Nomad77]

@ruin It would but good luck with that: training women, especially American women.

[RUIN]

@nomad77 - oh I hear you on the American (although Australian woman like ive said before seems to take Ameri-quirks and blow it out of proportion) part. just wanted to see if that was the exception.

[Beyond Borders]

(10-16-2014 01:23 AM)Nomad77 Wrote:  

@ruin It would but good luck with that: training women, especially American women.

It's definitely doable. Most of the women I've been with have changed themselves significantly for me, and many were Americans. I believe there is a substantial life expectancy to these changes as well because I can still observe these changes in their lives years after we've broken up.

That said, I think it has to be more than just a "demanding" type of frame. You have to be a leader who can get people to come around to your way of thinking by convincing them that your approach is a more legitimate one. I also find that leading by example pays greater dividends than guilt-tripping or demanding she act a certain way, though you can still do a bit of the latter two in small doses.

If they change to please you AND because they come to believe what you expect is the right thing, the changes stick. I don't have decades of marriage experience to base this on, however, so perhaps take it with whatever grain of salt you will.

I'll also add that many American women are still dying for a man to lead them if you're up for the challenge. They may not realize it, but once they have it they seem to find it refreshing.

[RUIN]

(10-16-2014 02:25 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 01:23 AM)Nomad77 Wrote:  

@ruin It would but good luck with that: training women, especially American women.

It's definitely doable. Most of the women I've been with have changed themselves significantly for me, and many were Americans. I believe there is a substantial life expectancy to these changes as well because I can still observe these changes in their lives years after we've broken up.

That said, I think it has to be more than just a "demanding" type of frame. You have to be a leader who can get people to come around to your way of thinking by convincing them that your approach is a more legitimate one. I also find that leading by example pays greater dividends than guilt-tripping or demanding she act a certain way, though you can still do a bit of the latter two in small doses.

If they change to please you AND because they come to believe what you expect is the right thing, the changes stick. I don't have decades of marriage experience to base this on, however, so perhaps take it with whatever grain of salt you will.

I'll also add that many American women are still dying for a man to lead them if you're up for the challenge. They may not realize it, but once they have it they seem to find it refreshing.

I actually posed the question in the newbie thread about this particularly frame - simply because I am having a bit of a "hmmm" moment with some of my interactions. So defining what is demanding frame seems like its a fine line at times.

[iknowexactly]

Life is a trick designed to get you to have kids. The trick it plays on us is the cause of our existence. Your happiness is almost completely a side effect , a chance sunset in your days.
Still, my impression is my parents were pretty happy.

My alpha father on my mother and marriage.

"Your mother is a wonderful woman. She's happy when there's money, she's happy when there's no money."
On marriage: "If you get the right woman it's wonderful. "

He had been married to a nagging, vengeful bitch before my mother. The prior wife had found out about an affair of his and aborted their unborn child ( illegal at the time) as revenge.

I personally think after waking up alone most of the last 30 years it sucks. Just basic animal comfort, my fundamental biology, makes waking up and cuddling someone I trust seems worlds better to me than a silent "woman-free" apartment.

In a certain sense --FOR ME --everything but marriage is a game of hide-and-seek: who will move on first? Because almost all feminine women want to get married.
The idea of being sort of a Cold War spy always trying to get the milk for free and ultimately wanting to be alone may be built into some men, but I long for someone to feel I can trust. Really happy marriages may be in the minority, but it looks like a good place to be for me if I can get one.

The idea that something like marriage, practiced in every culture all through history as far as I know, is some kind of foolish mistake seem jejune to me.
Kids from stable marriages do markedly better than single parent homes kids on average.

[iknowexactly]

(10-15-2014 11:57 PM)Nomad77 Wrote:  

There is an old saying: a man gets married hoping the woman won't change but she does. A woman gets married hoping the man will change but he doesn't.

If you are going to get married or get into a LTR relationship realize that the woman is going to be as good as she will ever be in that first few months. Then it's all downhill from there. So if you are not starting out with a really good woman and she starts degrading quickly, you won't have much of anything worth keeping soon.

I think this is somewhat pessimistic, although it certainly works out like this in many cases.

The idea that there are very few or no women that can learn and adapt to your needs seems to me to be a distortion of reality. Especially if someone they value is telling them they need to do it.

Women are essentially conformist, if they social norm around them is go-girl defiance, they'll act like they. Then they've tolerated insane shit like the burkha for centuries in a society where men are brutal enough to enforce it, so they definitely can be trained.

[Chaos]

This is why you probably need to roll over a few LTR before you ultimately get married. You need to know what works in the long run, or more importantly what NOT works.

Personally I'm hard to satisfy and I'm founding me having a hard time locking me down to stuff. Doesn't matter if it's about girls or work.

I always prefer having all doors open, otherwise I'm feeling that I'm missing out on stuff.

[RUIN]

@iknowexactly - as a retrospective look at the last 30 years of relationships that saying does ring true especially if you have found yourself in the position where your partner at the time has abandoned all her charms and done a complete 180. the last bit has always confused me though; for one what attracted her to you in the first place was probably not (if we look at it from a RedPill view) the idea of changing you and if it were it can boil down to shit-tests carried on long after their use-by date.

I can believe women want to be trained/submit however I also believe that their will to submit correlates directly to the perceived SMV of the man they are with. Beta orbiters or just anyone looking to prop up her ego in general sabotage this as they can contribute to her perception of his SMV. for example if you have a girl who is a 7 with a guy who is perceived as a 9; if NO ONE tried hitting on her (in most cases avoided her) and her friends didn't disrespect him when she was away from him then her perception remains the same as long as HE continues doing and maintaining what he has been from the start. if you put polar opposites in check then she will believe she can do much better and I also believe she will become more resistant to submitting to him and eventually leave. and I just realized I probably said what has already been said a million times.

[iknowexactly]

(10-16-2014 03:19 AM)Chaos Wrote:  

This is why you probably need to roll over a few LTR before you ultimately get married. You need to know what works in the long run, or more importantly what NOT works.

.....
I always prefer having all doors open, otherwise I'm feeling that I'm missing out on stuff.

I think this is good and natural for a bright young person. For most people, thrill-seeking diminishes with age.

One big factor I've seen is as you meet more and more people, each new person is on average more and more like someone you've already known.

I've met several of the charming shallow stoner dealer, dabbler in the arts but not really determined to do anything-- but talented at making money; the chick that's super-hot but not particularly talented or sensitive, so her beauty has taken over her life due to a lack of anything else remarkable in it. Now she spends huge amounts of time fielding offers of luxury/sex and maintaining her genetic inheritance-- so she's pleasantly boring except as a decoration or sex toy--maybe.

When you meet a new example of one of these or dozens of other types you recognize them and their limitations increasingly quickly. And you start realizing your search to meet new people is, most of the time, going to just turn up more examples of types that you already know.

There are the exceptions: the creative, honest, developing, proactive standouts that you will benefit greatly from knowing. However, the catch is keeping these people in our lives is best done by developing yourself to the point you have something extraordinary to offer.

This isn't all bad as I make it sound here-- these diligent winners area blessing to know and when you meet them I make it a priority to be of value so they stay in my life.
Barflies lose out to these.

Developing deeper bonds with valuable people starts to become more appealing than wasting time in bars with other time wasters, after as you know which types have value and which don't ( for you.)

[iknowexactly]

(10-16-2014 03:26 AM)RUIN Wrote:  

@iknowexactly - as a retrospective look at the last 30 years of relationships that saying does ring true especially if you have found yourself in the position where your partner at the time has abandoned all her charms and done a complete 180.

It sounds to me like there's a bit of losing an illusion there--people's character doesn't change THAT much barring brain injury or substance addiction ( a form of the prior) . One bipolar girl I knew was an amazing fuck, she genuinely LOVED sex and it was a renewing experience for me. But her coldness and off and on niceness made her a poor long-term prospect. So I have a very favorable illusion at first that diminished.

Women losing their looks is a different thing, the only way I think I can stay in love with a severely aging woman is if she has given me kids and loyalty over time.

[Beyond Borders]

(10-16-2014 02:42 AM)RUIN Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 02:25 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 01:23 AM)Nomad77 Wrote:  

@ruin It would but good luck with that: training women, especially American women.

It's definitely doable. Most of the women I've been with have changed themselves significantly for me, and many were Americans. I believe there is a substantial life expectancy to these changes as well because I can still observe these changes in their lives years after we've broken up.

That said, I think it has to be more than just a "demanding" type of frame. You have to be a leader who can get people to come around to your way of thinking by convincing them that your approach is a more legitimate one. I also find that leading by example pays greater dividends than guilt-tripping or demanding she act a certain way, though you can still do a bit of the latter two in small doses.

If they change to please you AND because they come to believe what you expect is the right thing, the changes stick. I don't have decades of marriage experience to base this on, however, so perhaps take it with whatever grain of salt you will.

I'll also add that many American women are still dying for a man to lead them if you're up for the challenge. They may not realize it, but once they have it they seem to find it refreshing.

I actually posed the question in the newbie thread about this particularly frame - simply because I am having a bit of a "hmmm" moment with some of my interactions. So defining what is demanding frame seems like its a fine line at times.

There's a quote you've probably heard before. I googled it and came up with J.K. Rowling as the source, which is a bit disappointing - I could have sworn I heard a similar thing written elsewhere. Either way, it still stands true.

"If you want to see the true measure of a man, watch how he treats his inferiors, not his equals."

I've long felt this applies to male/female relationships as well.

Inferior is a word with strong negative connotations, but in this usage it really just means "subordinate." In a healthy relationship, the man is the leader, and his woman "ranks lower" and follows his lead.

But as a leader, you can be a lead with games, negativity, badgering, and aggression. Or you can lead with inspiration, encouragement, positive guidance, and appropriate example.

In my own opinion, not only does the latter choice preserve your moral integrity (and perhaps sanity) but it's more effective in the long run.

[RUIN]

Agreed, I wouldn't have picked JK Rowling for such a quote. But stranger things happen at sea.

As far as leading in a morally wholesome sense I think a big factor is the woman involved. While I won't stoop to a low level jus to try and prove who's boss (I don't think it works anyway) I think being inspiring and encouraging is only worthwhile to those who will benefit from it. For instance I will not continue to try and help someone at the gym if they insist on ignoring advice, continuing their habit and complaining about the result. Fat acceptance I see as a classic example of too much energy in the wrong aspect for those who warp it to justify their continued habits and existence an therefore - I do not try and help them. Those women I posted about seemed so sure of their own position yet complain they are single (girl #1 was particularly perplexed as to the nature of her spinsterhood)

[RUIN]

Something I have learned about that is people do not change merely their perspective. What I describe is a façade at first then their true self comes out.

[Nomad77]

The primary problem with long-term relationships and marriage:

You buy a car what happens the moment after you buy it? It's starts to degrade. You buy a house, same thing. Life is always moving towards a state of increased entropy (disorder): 2nd law of thermodynamics. We can attempt to "maintain" things and depending on the "thing" the amount required can be a little or a lot - same with women. Ultimately long-term relationships fail not only because they are fighting entropy but also because we, as human, is unable to value anything without contrast. If there was no Night, the concept of Day would not exist. Take a great woman and see her every day and pretty soon you can't see what was so great about her anymore. The more we are exposed to anything the less valuable it becomes to us because we take it for granted. Only when we are deprived of something do we truly appreciate it. And that is the inherent paradox of a long-term relationship. We never get enough of break from each other nor do we have another person to compare with which would allow us to really appreciate each other. Long-term relationships in their current models do not provide any contrast thus promoting a lack of appreciation and ultimately discontent.

We do have a natural need for affection and to be loved and it is important to our emotional well being but just being with someone does not mean that you will get that. The only thing worse than feeling alone is feeling alone with someone next to you.

[RUIN]

By that logic how does one explain the occasion when you buy say a vehicle and maintain it and look after it. It decreases in value to others but still holds the sentimental value to you? Granted more and more input may be required to keep it in the same condition.

[Nomad77]

@ruin Sentimental value is a product of memories and the interesting thing about memories is that we tend to forget the bad ones. Plus the human mind is a powerful thing, it can create any reality we wish, if only in our minds. Try looking up and meeting any of your old girlfriends that you have such wonderful sentimental memories of and watch how quickly they are ruined - pun intended

[amity]

@Nomad77 This is very true, it's rare to meet an old girlfriend to discover that she has improved or even remained at the same level she was when with you. And yet those old memories are very powerful, burned into our conscienceness, particularly any powerful sexual experiences you had with a girl. Overcoming those thoughts and not letting them affect and erode your current day experiences takes a considerable act of will, but it's an essential part of becoming a red pill man.

[RUIN]

@nomad - nice pun

I agree that sentimental value is like almost any emotion; not good when making decisions.

That being said if a guy were in his 50's and wanted to settle (assuming he does it smart) would you agree that the wealth of experience allows him to be lax if he so chooses? For example if you strive your whole life to become wealthy, succeed (like Scrooge McDuck style) if you make a frivolous purchase assuming you do it smart are you not entitled to that sort of thing?

I agree with everything you're saying, I also think that if you've done things right by the age bracket we are talking about (40-50+) letting someone in your life will not have the ability to affect you in a negative way so you could let your guard down.

[Ingeniare]

I’m new to red pill/manosphere, and what has struck me through my readings has been the intense focus on the differences between male and female. Of course, in so many ways we oppose and balance, ying yang etc.

But in so many ways are we not the same? Are we not all human? Born naked and screaming into this world, trying to find our way through hopes and fears, and in the blink of an eye all the vigour and beauty of youth is lost.

For a moment I will consider the strength of my pride, anger, lust, joy, trust, jealousy etc. These things I ‘feel’. Modern society would have me believe that it is unnatural for me to consider my emotions, for me to let them have bearing. It seems that my emotions should be considered less powerful and hold less meaning than a females. This is wrong. I will not degrade this aspect of my humanity and I will respect the strength of my emotions. To a lot of men who have suffered through the oppression of modern society, this will probably make me sound queer or melodramatic. Is it melodramatic to want what is inside you to be just as valid as what is inside every other naked screaming human? I don’t believe so.

This is what I remind myself of when relationships turn to shit. That I am human. That she is human. That inside both of us there is pride, anger, lust, joy, trust, jealousy etc. That the strength, and value, of what is inside her, is no more, or no less, than what is inside me. I think of how fucked up I am. I think of the rage, the fear, the shame, the indifference, the spite inside me. Then I consider the unlikelihood that she is not exactly the same, that we are both human.

This is not a blanket excuse for all the shitty behaviour out there. But for those of us who have high standards for ourselves, we should realise that people make mistakes. Being perfect isn’t easy. Not for a man, not for women. Sometimes, with a bit of self-reflection, it is possible to forgive others. Ha! Now I sound like a bible basher.

In conclusion, I have given relationships second chances. Some turned out good, some turned out bad, but in the end, it was not my behaviour that was regrettable.

[Nomad77]

A relationship is like buying a stock. It goes up, it goes down, it stays the same. At any given moment you can sell it/end the relationship. The hard part comes in knowing when to hold on and when to let go. Sometimes a problem is temporary in nature, so holding on is the wise decision. Sometimes it's permanent, so you have to decide if it's something you can live with.

A lot of people are in long-term relationships not because they are happy but because they simply don't know what else to do with their life. In the end happiness is relative to our other perceive alternatives. If we think we have none then we will be happy. If you believe you cannot go out there and find a better woman then guess what? You are going to be happy with the one you have because you are going to justify whatever shit you have to put up with.

Here is what I can tell you about relationships. All relationships, like everything in life, has an arc. At some point it will peak and from there is can only decline. The longer you want the relationship to last the more you should try and push that peak out, in other words take things slow. If you do everything you can with a woman in one month where can you go from there but down? And that's the problem with relationships today. If we are banging in one day then we are pretty much hitting the peak of our relationship arc within a month max. So how can the relationship last for much longer then? Back in the old days when relationships were actually working we had the concepts of bases and those bases took weeks if not months to hit. Now just like everything else we want to consume the whole cake at one time. Well, you can't have your cake and eat all of it too

[RUIN]

Then the argument of abstaining from banging (can't say it didn't work - it totally did) makes me ask the question of delayed ratios. So if having sex on the first night, then peaking at the 1 month mark starts the decline what's to say that the relationships of the generation before and before that were also doomed to fail.....they just didn't live long enough to see it end?

I'm actually pretty interested in the replies especially yours Nomad, while I pretty much agree with what you're saying I keep wondering whether it can be extended as well.