Skip to content

Just Be Yourself?

November 6, 2009
tags: , , ,
by

Truth: the Modern Demand
The value of honesty is a value that is held sacred in this age. The body, the mind, the spirit: none of these have been held sacred and all have been minutely examined. All is subjected to scrutiny in this age of inquiry, of freedom, of the Internet, of globalisation. All is naked to our gaze. The consequence of this is that perfection is difficult to expect and maintain therefore not required or demanded but the truthfulness of the image presented is.

We seek honesty as beautiful in and of itself.

Propaganda and its refutation is everywhere. We are confronted with images of products, people, ideas and corporations that are fake. Images that are shown to be fake. There is no luxury to hold illusions. We are confronted with the difficulty of constantly resolving that beliefs we have previously held to be true have been betrayed: this happens many times over our lifetimes.

lv-zinwoo-park-fake

Small communities which have been invested in the individual and with a relatively unified purpose have evolved to large, faceless sprawls. This means that the onus is on the individual to guarantee his or her interests are being met. Everyone else is attempting to sell them something divergent from their own agenda: the individual must remain suspicious and on their guard.

This is not an age in which we can trust, or approach doing so, with any ease. The worst of humanity is often bared before us, disseminated through our access to information or even our own life experiences. Yet, we are human: we need trust and we need some form of control in order to give that trust. Therefore, we find it in honesty.

If you give a person the openness and acceptance that allows for honesty, then you can regard it as a high betrayal should they violate it by hiding the truth. For what purpose do they hide what they feel, what they say, what they do? Do they not believe in your love? Do they not think of you? Do they not respect you as a human being?

Game as Dishonest
There is a visceral revulsion for the word ‘Game’ applied to the field of romance. It is clinical, superficial, violating the sanctity of love and, more importantly, essentially implying being manipulative and dishonest: playing with people’s feelings. That is the association people have with the word ‘Game’.

This association is also a ridiculous emotional reaction based on little digestion of the actual content of Game and how it is applied. Ladies and gentlemen, love is a Game I take with deadly seriousness. Talking about the Game of Love is akin to talking about the Game of War: we study the rules, the words, the actions. We try to understand how to best express and apply our intents from those that have come and erred before us. We attempt to steer clear of the mistakes others have made, emulate the successes others have had. We try to understand how to be the best lovers, the best warriors. How to recognise then ameliorate our weaknesses and develop our strengths. That you love someone and that your intention is to love them does not necessarily mean you know how to be loveable or, more importantly yet, best demonstrate your love itself; Game encapsulates the study of this.

It is learning the Art of Loving as well as the Art of War. Game on its own is a tool of self-development that essentially tells you this: it is okay to consciously act in order to enhance your sexual attractiveness. It does not do much for you in a vacuum where you do not constantly develop yourself overall: from your intellect to your spirituality to your contentment with and interest in a healthy, interesting, fulfilling and moral life. Critics often address it as such, disregarding the complexity of the human being applying it. Game is one of the tools that allows you to turn the uncut marble into a masterpiece; it does not work well without a solid, inner foundation.

Is Honesty the Best Policy?
Let me continue with my convenient metaphor. I have taken my tool of Game and I have taken this rock. I have then carved out a beautiful statue out of such a rock and you are stirred by it.

E-065K-2

ancientsculpturegallery.com/3065K.html

ancientsculpturegallery.com/213.html

ancientsculpturegallery.com/213.html

This statue is dishonest. This statue is not true to its original nature. This statue is attempting to be what it is not. It is giving the illusion of softness where it is hard. Yet, this statue is beautiful. Yet, you are not offended by this statue. You appreciate it: from your reaction to it to all the hard work, the finesse, the technique and the loving sweat that made it what it is. This statue is the ultimate positive expression of the human self: we see the potential for beauty and — not stopping there — we enact it as best as we can manage.

Honesty as Prophecy

Embracing honesty as a higher, indiscriminately preserved value can be very damaging. This especially applies to human beings. We are made of so many complex properties and interactions: we are a collection of tendencies rather than absolutes. That there is a fixed self of ours is a myth; we have a core of who we are that is only relatively unvaried with many outer aspects that are situational potentials. We often do not know what we are capable of, what our natures are and how life changes us.

There needs to be balance.

It is so easy to see the dark sides of each other: must we name it, comment on it, return with attention to it? Do we not realise that by calling the flaws in us ‘the truth’ we are stagnating in that flawed self? Do we not realise that by naming a quality a flaw, that is what it becomes? Do we not realise that each word we say is ‘the truth’ is often a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Honesty as Needed and Required
In a relationship, honesty is both called for and very healthy. The overarching principles that make it so helpful to relationships are easy to understand. It leads to less misunderstandings, less differing in mutual agendas and a stronger bond. Radiating honesty also sets you apart quite decidely.

The requirements for it vary. For me, I prefer a fairly high level of honesty because, without that level of emotional trust, I withdraw and find it difficult to express affection to the person in question, with eventual dissolution of that affection if it becomes a continuous problem. Conversely, I’m not sure what level of honesty I want or expect in return. That is a much more complex issue. I do know, however, that I don’t want the transfer of responsibility for someone else’s emotions or suffering that honesty can excuse. I do know that sometimes temporary illusions or exaggerations that perpetual, exacting and accurate honesty would destroy. Sometimes I want to speak in poetry, not cold and hard facts.

I do know that honesty in general — outside of intimate relationships — can be very socially inappropriate. I do know that I can’t be emotionally honest on demand; I need to be able to feel that it is safe to do so and that I am feeling intimate enough to be so revealing.

The Honest Ideal
The ideal is that you work so that there is nothing you should lie about or wish to hide. This ideal is impossible: we are not saints.

The question of when honesty is called for is very difficult. This is really dependent on both you, your partner and the nature of your relationship. The more clearly demarcated and segregated your gender roles, the less revealing you might be to each other. That is the way some men want it to be; they want the presentation of your most positive self to them. In return, you may conversely receive this as well.

Honesty as Fidelity
One aspect that I do think that is important in terms of honesty is this: being honest about being attracted to other people. While it may give a partner a twinge** of short-term pain, insecurity or anger, it is a very good preventative measure against your — initially minuscule — feelings for anyone else growing into anything that threatens your relationship.

(** it should only be a twinge if all is well.)

Honesty as Rationalisation
Being honest can be a shorthand for excusing behaviours that are hurtful or selfish in their nature. It can be used to insult or shame. It can be used to nag or fight. It can be used to express thinly disguised contempt. It can be used to provoke a reaction and to seek attention. It can be used to remain angry when it is not needed.

Think before you speak. Sometimes you do need to forget your immediate feeling and your immediate honest impulse. Sometimes you do need to overcome your own shortcomings and choose which of the complicated mesh of feelings you are going to express or, at least, choose which priority where your actions will originate from. If a loved one is in pain and acts reflexively to it, you need to be the one who remembers what is more important (your relationship) and despite your own honest feelings at the same time: fake it.

Janus of the Two Faces

Honestly? We women do it all the time. We can be boiling with anger. Yet, there is a smile and an attempt to coax peace or lightly dismissing the situation, because that is the winning strategy for us. It is the more important thing to do at the time. The angry feelings can be sorted through later, when it is safe and there is distance from them, when thoughtless things can be said and done. Conversely, we can even be amused or irritated at a bout of passive-aggressiveness. Yet, we can suppress that amusement to allow the passive-aggressor to be taken seriously which allows room for honestly and lovingly dealing with the issues behind it.

Women are often accused of back biting. What often happens is that we say the same thing but in different ways.

A woman without Game reacts without thinking or consideration, without long-term planning, without recalling her priorities.

sbpoet.com/2007/12/janus.html

sbpoet.com/2007/12/janus.html

So is your “honesty” reinforcing a cycle of bad behaviour and lack of self development? Are you using it to excuse statements which are designed to hurt?

On the other hand, are you hiding too much? Is it time to re-evaluate how fast and freely you play with the truth? Are you hiding things that are very important — to either one or both of you? This means the relationship is traversing troubled waters.

Be a person who is self-aware. Understand that the most entrenched liars have the following qualities. They do not:

Related:

67 Comments leave one →
  1. November 6, 2009 1:45 am

    Excellent piece, Bhetti, especially this:

    Be a person who is self-aware. Understand that the most entrenched liars have the following qualities. They do not:

    * know the truth, often because they lie to themselves.
    * realise or reflect on why they do what they do or say what they say.
    * stop to think of the eventual consequences.

    A relevant quote comes to mind:

    “Humans are born with a susceptibility to that most persistent and debilitating disease of intellect: self-deception. The best of all possible worlds and the worst get their dramatic coloration from it. As nearly as we can determine, there is no natural immunity. Constant alertness is required.”

    Frank Herbert’s writing is simply awesome.

  2. Derek permalink
    November 6, 2009 2:42 am

    stop this noise. you’re making mountains out of molehills. just be as physically attractive as you can possibly be and cultivate a personality reflective of the real you.

    you’re not all going to get the top notch men.

  3. November 6, 2009 4:37 am

    Do we not realise that by calling the flaws in us ‘the truth’ we are stagnating in that flawed self?

    This isn’t entirely correct. If you can define and understand a flaw, you can figure out how to work around it or better yet fix it entirely.

  4. November 6, 2009 11:23 am

    Bhetti your post is (once again) fantastic. I’m rolling over your thoughts in my head and when they have gelled I’ll make a more thoughtful comment.

  5. November 6, 2009 11:53 am

    Hope/aoefe: Thank you.

    Derek: Hypergamy aside… once you choose a man, I think, it’d be nice if you could think of him as the best man in the world. This is because he is yours and you are his. It shouldn’t be difficult to feel this way with a healthy level of affection and loyalty.

    Reflecting the real you is difficult when the ‘real you’ remains undefined. Some men talk about this lack of identity as a particular issue with younger women. Now on top of this: Attracting a man is all well and good but making each other happy is another issue.

    That said, not trying to tie women into knots over this in a trap of circular overanalytic or tortuous thinking (though a lot of us do enjoy it). It’s trying to pass on some things that have proven to help promote a happy and lasting couple e.g. talking about any attraction surfacing to others, burying immediate impulses although acknowledging their greater import with the air of calmness and honest reflection later and so on. Overall: it’s about recognising the short-term versus long-term effects of actions, as well as challenging the principalist moral mistake some may make which is assume that honesty is a good moral value in and of itself. I actually agree with that if you must have a principle but extremists inappropriately apply what honesty is composed of.

    PM/AF Tech:
    I can see the possibility of us debating this by abstractions for a while. Let me give you a concrete example of what I mean.

    Let us say a woman slept with a man on the first date. She goes by the principle that women who sleep with men on the first date are sluts. Once the hormone cloud is clear, she now believes she is flawed and she is a slut. She expects to be treated accordingly and behaves in such a way as to reinforce this inner belief in her. She acts from the frame that she is a slut needing redemption — redemption which she may not believe can occur — rather than the frame that she was really attracted to this man and he was the important exception and not the rule. Calling her flaw — a lack of self-control — the permanent truth has effectively made it become the permanent truth. Now, it is much easier for her to continue behaving as a slut and now rationalise it as moral behaviour then live with the guilt of redeeming herself.

    What I believe you may say is that she didn’t correctly understand and identify a flaw. This I agree with.

  6. November 6, 2009 1:39 pm

    It is so easy to see the dark sides of each other: must we name it, comment on it, return with attention to it? Do we not realise that by calling the flaws in us ‘the truth’ we are stagnating in that flawed self? Do we not realise that by naming a quality a flaw, that is what it becomes? Do we not realise that each word we say is ‘the truth’ is often a self-fulfilling prophecy?

    I keep going back to a theme of dark vs. light, negative vs. positive, hate vs. love, etc. In doing so I am placing a value judgment on something — making an idea into concrete reality in my own mind.

    My love is the one who gently reminds me to “focus on the light.” That is, by focusing my thought patterns on the positive, light and loving side, I can “transmute the darkness.” It is a great exercise, energetically and spiritually.

    We do not focus on the “flaws” in each other. They are surely seen, but because we are both in the light those flaws are transformed into a less negative quality. It is analogous to shining the light on a spot that was hiding in the shadows — though it appears dark at first, under the light it is colorful and even brilliant.

    Because we both have such a bright view of each other, we treat each other with kindness and love. Furthermore, we attempt to improve ourselves rather than focus on our own shortcomings and those of the other. We strive to “stay in the light.”

  7. DADT permalink
    November 6, 2009 1:54 pm

    Everyone puts their best face forward when trying to woo someone. After you get them, and especially after you live with them, we all tend to slack off and the “real” us emerges.

    That’s why attraction and romance wanes in marriages and live-in relationships after some time.

  8. Il Capo permalink
    November 6, 2009 4:39 pm

    Bhetti, I’m gonna need an executive summary on this one, too. I got lost around “… the statue is dishonest…”

  9. November 6, 2009 7:01 pm

    Love is patient, love is kind.
    It does not envy.
    Love is never boastful, nor conceited, nor rude;
    It is not self-seeking, nor easily angered.
    It keeps no record of wrongdoing.
    It does not delight in evil,
    But rejoices in the truth.
    It always protects, trusts, hopes, and preserves.
    There is nothing love cannot face;
    There is no limit to its faith, hope, and endurance.
    In a word, there are three things that last forever:
    Faith, hope, and love;
    But the greatest of them all is love.
    – 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

    Love is not a feeling – it’s an action. Yes our feelings wane, our actions shouldn’t. We need to wear/put on love at all times because our hearts can become cold easily and trusting in feelings only is detrimental to long term relationship success. The real trick is in choosing wisely who to love.

  10. November 6, 2009 9:20 pm

    CEO Il Capo: Are you kidding? That was clearly when the action was going to happen.

    Clearly I’ve lead you on and you now think I’m your little office slave girl. Well, sir. That executive summary was a one-off. I hope it was as good for you as it was for me and I do still respect you this morning.

    aoefe: I think your point acts in synchrony with DADT’s.

    CEO Il Capo: Well, okay. Here’s an executive summary of sorts.

    It’s trying to pass on some things that have proven to help promote a happy and lasting couple e.g. talking about any attraction surfacing to others, burying immediate impulses although acknowledging their greater import with the air of calmness and honest reflection later and so on. Overall: it’s about recognising the short-term versus long-term effects of actions, as well as challenging the principalist moral mistake some may make which is assume that honesty is a good moral value in and of itself. I actually agree with that if you must have a principle but extremists inappropriately apply what honesty is composed of.

    But this is just a copy and paste of a comment above. It doesn’t mean anything. You’re not getting any more from me.

    Your ways of gently saying ‘woman, you ramble on too much’ are adorable. I’ll maybe try to be concise in future. Just for you.

  11. Comment_Whatever permalink
    November 6, 2009 11:27 pm

    A female, living in ENGLAND had this to say:

    The value of honesty is a value that is held sacred in this age.

    I mean really! Do you TALK TO PEOPLE at all?

    Self-righteous conformity to the exact specifications ordered by society is VALUED. Violation of this is SEVERELY punished.

    The Truth of Society is MOST SACRED. But simply truth?

    Also, the value of indicting others as ‘sinful monsters’ for Crossing Against The Light, why yes, the English view that as a Sacred Truth as well. Sure, the finger pointer may be a thief, liar, child-molester, but did-ya see, did-ya see how Mr. X crossed against the light! Did-ya see it!

    All Truth in England is relative to Society. An upstanding citizen will find his running over of an annoying urchins feet ignored, a vile “Not-Right-Thinker” will be severely punished for Crossing Against The Light.

    All is subjected to scrutiny in this age of inquiry, of freedom, of the Internet, of globalisation. All is naked to our gaze.

    All that you wish to see. All that others wish to and are allowed to show.

    As a wise man once said, paraphrased:
    “It is still those in power who determine the questions the voters decide on. And it is very obvious that they will be very careful about which questions they ask.”

    Today, you have the choice of voting for one of two canidates selected by those in power. This is called “choice”.

    In England, Betty also has the choice of watching whichever government controlled TV station she wishes.

    On the Internet, you can view any site Google or Yahoo! have allowed their search engines to display.

    And so on.

  12. Comment_Whatever permalink
    November 6, 2009 11:49 pm

    Bhetti said:

    It is so easy to see the dark sides of each other: must we name it, comment on it, return with attention to it? Do we not realise that by calling the flaws in us ‘the truth’ we are stagnating in that flawed self? Do we not realise that by naming a quality a flaw, that is what it becomes? Do we not realise that each word we say is ‘the truth’ is often a self-fulfilling prophecy?

    Okay, this is somewhat a point. People should hardly ever accept any one failing as showing them who ‘they really are’. It’s stupid. Would you let one success ‘prove’ your wonderfulness forever?

    So yeah, that’s a good point. Also, you might lack understanding of the whole situation. Someone could have put a pill in your drink. Then your own mind dismantles your whole moral self over a lie.

  13. November 6, 2009 11:56 pm

    The right to vote does not have as much value as one would hope.

    I did agree that the truth was difficult to find with everyone trying to sell you on their agenda but the quest of finding it is something many seem to hold as sacred. We are still closer to disseminated knowledge than we have ever been and this is an age where questions are asked more than they have ever. In an age of suspicion and questioning, honesty is indeed what is valued.

    You’re correct about that being it only being valued in theory.

    Whether people actually wish to find the truth or are perfectly happy with simply making a lot of noise about asking questions, freedom of choice and transparency is another matter. Take for example the types excessively pleased with themselves simply because they’re not mainstream and not because they’ve looked at any real facts.

  14. Comment_Whatever permalink
    November 7, 2009 12:21 am

    Bhetti, I’d say suspicion is used to FEND OFF the truth.

    The ability to be clever with words is valued as well, putting on a good act. Fake Sincerity as it were. That’s the counterfeit honesty of this age. To be believablely earnest about something one believes only because it is popular, either for the masses or for splinter groups.

    That said, Truth is separate from, and more important than, honesty. One can believe things without telling everyone and offering oneself up to public ridicule. People are under no obligation to make themselves targets for political correctness. Telling the lunatic feminist the truth may get you fired, but it’s not changing her opinion.

    Really, you can be Truthful in your own heart without telling everyone else.

  15. November 7, 2009 12:29 am

    Really, you can be Truthful in your own heart without telling everyone else.

    The crux of it. Beautifully worded.

  16. Il Capo permalink
    November 7, 2009 8:09 am

    Your ways of gently saying ‘woman, you ramble on too much’ are adorable.

    Finally! It’s not only you, though. You just happen to strike me as less defensive and more receptive.

  17. lovelysexybeauty permalink
    November 7, 2009 12:13 pm

    Deep post. The idea of honesty is really more fluid than we usually realize when we live our daily lives. You covered a lot of angles to this!

    Echo the idea that often we ourselves don’t realize the truth.
    The truth is fluid; things change, we change too. Things change moment to moment (emotions), not just over a long time.
    There is simply no way possible to tell everyone the full sum of all knowledge there is in our brains and in the world. So whatever we do tell is shaped by what we know, only.
    Communication is about getting the other person to “get” what we’re trying to say as much as possible. If we have to assume the “truth” of the other person’s brain, then how can we ever be sure we were successful?
    Sometimes honesty isn’t the best policy, do you really want to know why I am taking pain reliever medication?

    Willful dishonesty about certain facts is one thing. But when you look at etiquette, compassion, self-knowledge, communication… there are a lot of things about which you can’t always be sure the truth was told.

    I mean, I could tell a guy I meet for 5 minutes, “I barely know you… but if forced to make a choice based on 5 minutes no I don’t see myself married to you.” But after getting to know him over a month, I may see him as someone I like. This happens ALL THE TIME in my life. Things I believed later change.

  18. November 7, 2009 5:45 pm

    What I believe you may say is that she didn’t correctly understand and identify a flaw. This I agree with.

    That is what I would say. I would also say that the woman from your example wasn’t being dishonest with herself as much as she was deluding herself. Generally, dishonesty and delusion are considered to be slightly different. Also, there could be some excuse mongering if she’s trying to find an excuse to be a slut because she wants to be a slut.

    Something that would help with this would be a more precise definition of honesty. It felt like that some of things you talked about such as your statue example doesn’t have to do with honesty or dishonesty. For various reasons it doesn’t apply.

    Here’s a better example from my own life of how honesty starts getting fluid. If you follow my blog or have read my comments on other blogs you probably know how I’m a virgin (although that could easily change soon) and up until I started my experiment didn’t have any girlfriends, date or whatever you want to call it. The only reason you guys know any of this is because I tell you it. I don’t tell anyone this in real life since I don’t have the anonymity of the internet. As a result what I have come to realize is that people IRL think I’m successful with women. I have chosen not to shatter their beliefs by volunteering the truth to them. (In many cases there is no context why I would randomly volunteer such information.)

    Beyond that, if there is something that comes up that may have in some way revealed this truth I have always made sure that I didn’t. Even knowing this most anytime it came up I never technically lied. Here’s an example. I was having lunch with some of my coworkers. I got a call on my cell phone from my bank. I took the call and it ended a minute later. It was a woman on the other end of the call. I don’t know if any of my coworkers could actually tell if it was a woman on the other end, but one of them asked me if that was my girlfriend calling me. I answered truthfully that it wasn’t my girlfriend, but someone from my bank. Everything I said was true, but it gave the impression that I do or might have a girlfriend somewhere else.

    What has helped me with maintaining this belief in other people is their own lies or delusions. Many people believe that a man who is a virgin beyond the ages of 18-21 and/or has never had any relationship/going out experience with females is a complete and total loser to the point that such a man must be morbidly obese, unemployed or working a crappy job, living in their parent’s basement, unsuccessful in general, etc. Since this isn’t true about me, no one thinks that I can be anything other than successful with women (unless I tell them like I have done here).

    Is there really any dishonesty going on here on my part? I’m not the one believing in something that fails empirical analysis and has hard evidence disproving it (i.e. my entire life). I’m not going to volunteer this information about myself (and all of this will probably be moot soon), but without a direct question that isn’t dishonesty. If I volunteered this information to most people they would either assume I’m lying or that there is something so horrid about myself that I’m hiding so there is no benefit in volunteering this info. Clearly, it isn’t my job to correct everybody’s delusions, and in this case its impossible. Too many people are invested in the delusion of the virgin loser despite its failure to stand up to empirical analysis and hard evidence. I have been through attempts to correct people online about this, and usually they fall to the “40 year old virgin” movie defense despite the fact that it was fiction and self contradictory.

    How I am supposed to be honest here when most people don’t know what the reality of this situation is? They don’t know what being honest means in this context. Effectively there are no different than the insane person who sent me a hate email a couple of days ago claiming that I was a reptilian alien in command of the Illuminati and thus the world. When you deal with that level of delusion honesty doesn’t really have much meaning.

  19. November 7, 2009 6:05 pm

    How I am supposed to be honest here when most people don’t know what the reality of this situation is? They don’t know what being honest means in this context

    Brilliant.

  20. November 7, 2009 6:10 pm

    Brilliant.

    Brilliant in the manner I have justified my “deception” or something else?

  21. November 7, 2009 8:02 pm

    I felt it was an honest look at your truth. I don’t view it as deception – you’re honest/true to yourself and that’s what matters.

  22. Advocatus Diaboli permalink
    November 7, 2009 10:49 pm

    Bhetti,

    A woman talking about honesty is like a catholic priest talking about the evils of sexually abusing young boys.

  23. November 7, 2009 11:39 pm

    Lucifer, is that you? demoted from no. 1 devil to a devil’s shyster… how’d you screw up this time?

  24. November 8, 2009 1:44 am

    Pseudo-intellectual equivocating aside, it is not only common knowledge but scientific fact that women lie about themselves to men they find attractive. In my experience, the more attracted the woman is, the bigger the lies. (Saying she doesn’t believe in marriage, doesn’t want children, etc.)

    The more you lie, the more likely you are to get caught. The more you get caught, the less a man is going to trust you. By lying you are directly sabotaging your own efforts to make a man commit.

    Speaking personally I find it flattering to have a woman tell me anything she thinks I want to hear. (It implies that she doesn’t think her A game is enough and is grasping at straws to get me to like her.) However that doesn’t change the fact that it’s going to take me a lot longer to start trusting her.

  25. DADT permalink
    November 8, 2009 11:46 am

    Nobody is “just themself” when they first meet a person they are really attracted to. When they start living together is when people really become themselves and allow their partners to see them vegged out in front of the pc, unbathed, in their flannels, with unkempt eyebrows and munching on candle wax and Doritos.

    Oh, and did I forget to mention farting?

  26. November 8, 2009 12:35 pm

    PM/AF Tech: I’ve been using the word ‘honesty’ quite widely to explore different concepts, you’re right, and I’m afraid I’m not clear on a definition enough to give it to you. However, there is a link that I’ve linked to in my post, which is also at the end of this comment, that can serve as a working definition.

    In the example I gave you, I wasn’t saying she was being dishonest with herself. I was saying she was calling her flaw the truth, which made it so. This is exploring the concept that believing in something makes it the truth, if that makes sense.

    In terms of your example, there are two dimensions to look at. No doubt it is easier for you to say you’re not a virgin then that you are, leaving people’s assumptions unchallenged. You don’t want to say you’re a virgin: why? You have not tested this yourself, whether declaring your virginity status would automatically put a negative image upon yourself or compromise you socially. Is it a reasonable assumption that all non-Internet people are blindly judgemental about the status of male virginity? If you thought being a virgin was something to be proud of, rather than a flaw or perhaps something of no significance, then many more people would know about it. If you don’t fit the ‘virgin loser’ stereotype, then declaring your virginity status can challenge people’s beliefs about it. Do you believe the stereotype yourself? How much is the issue of men’s virginity underestimated because of men’s deception or ‘lack of correcting people’ around this? I’m not holding you responsible for this . When and if you do lose your virginity, I imagine it will probably be easier for you to ‘confess’ especially in the context of encouraging any other men who are having problems.

    Also, note that because you believe in the idea you can be naturally successful with women and because others believed you were naturally successful with women, it was easier to be successful with women (two in one!). How different would it be if all believed you were unsuccessful with women?

    Advocatus Diaboli:

    A human being talking about honesty is like a catholic priest talking about the evils of sexually abusing young boys.

    Hehe, fixed that for you. Actually, most Catholic priests don’t abuse young boys so I believe you’re inaccurate in that I’m being worse than that.

    How terrible am I?

    PA:
    ha. Well, I see it as a promotion.

    JD:

    The more you lie, the more likely you are to get caught. The more you get caught, the less a man is going to trust you. By lying you are directly sabotaging your own efforts to make a man commit.

    Quoted for truth.

    [Still, could you link me source for 'scientific evidence'? Plz plz plz.]

    Like to think that there’s no point in a relationship based on deception. Men are so different, women are so different: you will find your match and demonstrate your uniqueness the more honest you are. I apply it to the workplace, breaking the social niceties now and then: it’s risky but you only know you have been true to yourself if you’re both loved and hated.

    I find I have to think carefully and do ‘confessions’ (not to a catholic priest, to the partner) in order to really be honest. If you do it of your own volition, all the better.
    I really like this link, which I’d linked in my post above about how to actually go about the overarching principles of being an honest person:
    http://jonathanemason.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/honesty/

  27. November 8, 2009 12:45 pm

    Based on that definition in the link above, the aspect of truthfulness I may have more quibbles with the ethics and implications of being sincere. As well as arguing that true self-awareness is good, but involves recognising that your self is both greatly varied and complex and the concept of labelling one’s self as flawed problematic.

    PM/AF Tech may have more quibbles with the ethics and implications of being forthright.

  28. November 8, 2009 12:52 pm

    @JD I wonder what the breakdown is by type of lie in those studies. Based on other studies about female aggressiveness and competition (more familiar with those than with the honesty studies), I would guess women tend to lie more because of two things:

    1) lying about how they truly feel: if a woman doesn’t feel well or is mad, she will often put on a happy face and say everything is fine. Or if a woman is mad at something that another woman did to her, instead of calling her out as a b*tch for social harmony she will act like it’s OK. Sort of more social status mongering stuff
    2) lying to be polite: if a woman is bluntly honest, she is called a b*tch. If a woman tells a man that she’s not interested because she thinks he’s looks fat and pimply, that is less socially acceptable than her trying to be polite and say that she has a boyfriend. If her friend asks her if she should lose weight, it is TOTALLY unacceptable in most cases for her to tell her that yes she’s fat. So some women will say no no… you’re fine the way you are.

    Neither of the above excuse lying in my opinion, and are just the lazy shortcut route to being sweet and polite. There are more honest yet socially acceptable ways to call out someone who is being a b*tch to you, or reject a man you are repulsed by, or tell a girl that yes she should lose weight in your opinion. I won’t drag out this comment but let me know if you want examples of honest yet polite ways I would answer these – I try not to be a lazy girl, I try to have GirlGame. :-)

    Now, lying outright about things like not wanting marriage, etc. For one, for whatever reason there’s this idea out there that men get scared off if a woman shows too much interest in marriage. So some lazy women, instead of trying to think of subtle yet honest answers, might claim they are not interested. Or, they may be feeling desperate and at that moment (which may last months by the way), they don’t want marriage. And later realize that no, they do.

    In that case, men do the same thing. Many men, in the heat of lust of passion or whatever, will say that they want to spend the rest of their lives with a woman. Once the heat cools down, all of a sudden they are not sure. What liars! :-)

    Bhetti covered a lot of these in her post, especially the idea of smoothing social interaction and not knowing the truth about ourselves.

    Related to this…

    @DADT But shouldn’t most people be aware that they are only seeing one “slice” of a person’s full life when dating them?

    I assume that most men are total slobs at home and do things like turn their clothes inside out and rewear. I assume most women use hair products, skin care, make-up, etc. Same thing with bodily functions that are done in private, out of courtesy for others.

    It’s better for everyone to be realistic. Some people have bad hygiene, or feel that dressing stylishly should only be for the public sphere. (Personally I think it’s better to have good habits and look your best 24-7, but that’s just one opinion).

    Just anecdotally, it seems like most men do try to find out what a woman looks like in her off hours. In traditional cultures, they’ll have a female relative spend the night with her… or they’ll have her stay with his parents. In the West, lots of people go on trips together, sleep over, and things like that. I think this is when men and even women find out if they can live with the off hours of a person.

    @Pro-Male/Anti-Fem
    Personally, I think it is amazing that you are a virgin :-) I took a quick look at your site and am not familiar for whether it’s by choice (religious or self-control reasons). But a man who proves you can be normal and exercise self-control is amazing. I wish more men were like you… Oh well. We can’t have it all.

  29. November 8, 2009 1:01 pm

    @JD Thanks, but is there something more in depth and comprehensive than just a quick snippet article on eating? Done not by the researcher of the study, but someone else?

    Especially if there are multiple studies on more than just eating, but also on things like social dynamics, mate selection, etc. when lying.

    Also, how did they address alternative theories for the behavior? I helped professors doing research as an undergrad and you HAVE to address alternative explanation and also start out by citing other studies that brought you to that point.

    I suspect the author was trying to s*x up the study on eating for a mass audience, and put in context of what the greater indication MIGHT be.

    Lastly that study was done in 1987. I think the author clearly said she brings up this study to help her undergrad. students understand things like body image. It’s for a starter intro. to understanding body image, not to understanding honesty.

  30. November 8, 2009 1:13 pm

    I found an article about a study saying men lie more (didn’t search research databases, it’s been a while since I was looking at that type of research!).

    Men lie six times a day and twice as often as women, study finds

    This says men lie about height, while women about weight, as an example. Your citation would support this.

    Mass media articles usually focus on just one study, and on the s*xy parts. Just saying that we all have to be careful to take a pop culture article as revealing the grand truth about human nature.

    This article cites a few different studies:

    Do Men Lie More Than Women?

    I’m sure there are more and better ones out there, but this could go on all day :-)

  31. November 8, 2009 1:31 pm

    the first article considers the experiment from both contexts. Saying that women “use light eating as a way of presenting one’s self as attractive and desirable” but then blaming the behavior on “the consistent pressures on women, and even girls, to present themselves as thin”.

    So it’s a little of both.

  32. Abject Man permalink
    November 8, 2009 1:31 pm

    A couple of meandering thoughts this post triggered. Probably will not make sense to most. Skip it if it doesn’t, no need to respond.

    Love is not a feeling – it’s an action. Yes our feelings wane, our actions shouldn’t. We need to wear/put on love at all times because our hearts can become cold easily and trusting in feelings only is detrimental to long term relationship success. The real trick is in choosing wisely who to love.

    Elegant words, aoefe. One caveat, though: doesn’t the last sentence cancel out the previous ones? If love is so dependent on the object who must first qualify as “lovable,” what exactly does love do for that object? Not that we have infinite resources for everyone, but where exactly does love enter the picture when its entirely predicated on the object?

    Perhaps love is like bank credit: you can only get it when you demonstrate that you’re financially well off and don’t actually need it.

    The saddest thing about this — at least for an old fashion fellow like me — is to see the way women fully capable of loving keep punishing themselves by keeping their ability to love to themselves, never experiencing what love can do to their loved ones — assuming those loved ones know how to appreciate this, of course.

    (The deepest hurt for humans is not really not being loved. It is the rejection of their love. Grandpa used to say, “if a friend turns his back on you, ask not what have I done to him; ask what favor have I done him.” Similar logic here. If you want people to run away from you, ask them to let you love them; if you want them to come to you, create the situation that they’ll be eager to give their love to you. This may well be one of the underlying dynamics of Game.)

    About the “Self.” Just like the statement “real men don’t beat their chest” is a subtle form of chest-beating on the part of men who don’t feel a need to demonstrate their prowess (since powerful men who have absolutely no need for this are generally the ones who hire other men to do the chest beating, … after a the beating up of other men for them), “just be yourself” is just a bohemian way of constructing a Self, an activity which is a primary requirement in bourgeois existence.

    A French historian once said (I paraphrase) in ancient times the body was viewed as the cage of the soul (self); today, the soul (self) has become the cage of the body.

    The Self is almost like a little receiver planted in your neck in the bourgeois Matrix. Its purpose is to track you down, monitor you, see that you conduct yourself in a manner that is agreeable to “civilized” existence. Traditional societies (the kind to which the Corinthians passage quoted above was preached) never prioritized the Self as such. Perhaps love — as Christians once understood it — wasn’t something to be directed to only those worthy of love (or else, Mother Theresa seriously screwed up her life). It was more like an unwritten code that everyone was expected to adhere to, so that Selves didn’t destroy each other (including themselves, as they do when they drown in an Ocean of Desire while imagining the One and Only Lovable One).

    Love, as they understood it, may well not be possible any more!

    Perhaps, one day (if you excuse the extravagance, when Nietzsche’s “übermensch” arrives, in dove steps) we will get rid of the Self, once again. Until then, Love may well be doomed to remain an emotion, a neuro-chemical reaction modulated only by carefully crafted packages called Selves (through watching “What Not To Wear,” by reading “Game” sites, by going full monty hipster to “Be Yourself,” to create a collage of “I don’t care” signifiers on your body, etc.), a Self that has to be maintained meticulously, while the Selves know full well that otherwise love will NOT be patient, will NOT be kind, WILL envy, BE boastful, conceited, rude, etc… — you get my drift.

    An age that needs to make the Self its center of attention to monitor the societal complex can only propagate the slogan “Be Yourself” to dupe the masses into voluteering intelligence about themselves to each other so that the masses do their own monitoring of each other in a docile way. Such a system deserves nothing less than confusing it by faking Selves since it constantly classifies those very Selves to ascribe to them various degrees of desirability in order to grant them access to sources that human bodies need. The age of the Self can only hinge on making everyone’s most private details fully transparent which can only inevitably lead to resistence on the part of human bodies that will then create a social network of the most duplicitious and deceptive selves.

    There is no way out of the Self in the bourgeois order. Be wise, stop volunteering intelligence to others. Not even on a “need to know” basis. Instead, be an artful dandy. This isn’t love, of course, but as I said above, in such an age, love may well be impossible.

  33. DADT permalink
    November 8, 2009 1:51 pm

    I’ve had experiences where men pretended to be vegans while they were around me just to impress me. And little white lies about how much they earn, how many women they’ve been with (they lessened the numbers because they know I’m cautious, conservative and don’t wanna get sick)… so many things.

    Can’t trust dudes!

  34. СОФИЯ/sofia permalink
    November 8, 2009 2:17 pm

    I’ve had men to lie me about everything under the sun, including one who claimed to be Jewish, one who claimed to be formerly homeless, one who lied about having an alternate place to stay when he was stranded in the city one night, etc. etc. Arguing about which gender lies more is dumb, everyone knows it’s men. No, but really, lying is just a HUMAN thing not specific to either/or gender.

  35. November 8, 2009 4:47 pm

    No doubt it is easier for you to say you’re not a virgin then that you are, leaving people’s assumptions unchallenged. You don’t want to say you’re a virgin: why? You have not tested this yourself, whether declaring your virginity status would automatically put a negative image upon yourself or compromise you socially. Is it a reasonable assumption that all non-Internet people are blindly judgemental about the status of male virginity?

    This isn’t a case of internet people vs. real life people. While I am open about my virginity on the internet or more specifically with this identity on the internet, it’s because there is real value in volunteering this knowledge. In the roissysphere and the MRAsphere there are lots of men asking real questions about whether women are really worth it. Being open about my virginity and lack of relationship life has a real purpose in showing other men that there is more to life than chasing women. I get a lot of emails from men (mainly in their 20s) who are trying to figure this out. It’s very important that I contribute my life as an example of why you can live not just a good life, but a superior life, without having to worry about women. There are many men who have learned to take women off a pedestal thanks to my example.

    Even on the internet I have encountered many people who could not be convinced that (male) virgins are losers despite the hard evidence of my own life. If you take a look at the responses to my science fiction (either comments or all of the blogs that were written about it) article on the Spearhead, one thing that was used against my was the fact that I was open about my virginity. And it was done mainly by women. Yes, this is absolute proof that they were all full of crap, but it didn’t change their beliefs.

    I have debated people that believe the myth of the loser male virgin. I have gotten nowhere. Usually, it ends up with them accusing me of lying (either about being a virgin or being successful), saying something along the lines of I won the lottery so otherwise it would be obvious that I’m a loser, or that I’m the result of a unique set of circumstances which do not apply to anyone else so an “exception” can be made for me (to the point of one commenter on my blog claiming that I found a better path to true masculinity that no one else knows), etc. In the end, I have gotten nowhere on this.

    If you thought being a virgin was something to be proud of, rather than a flaw or perhaps something of no significance, then many more people would know about it.

    It really is of no significance to me, but that doesn’t change what other people want to believe about it. I have the same problem regardless of that.

    If you don’t fit the ‘virgin loser’ stereotype, then declaring your virginity status can challenge people’s beliefs about it. Do you believe the stereotype yourself? How much is the issue of men’s virginity underestimated because of men’s deception or ‘lack of correcting people’ around this?

    While there may be some truth to the this, the fact is that if I can’t convince people on the internet, real life is hopeless. Too many people way too much invested in this myth to change their beliefs. Guys like Roosh, Chuck Ross, and Obsidian have not been able to depedestal women in their own minds so they fight tooth and nail for this myth (even despite knowing game). Women don’t want to lose their own power so they fight for this myth even harder than guys like Roosh, Chuck Ross, and Obsidian do. Again, I have to point to how my virginity was used as a weapon against me by women on my science fiction article at the Spearhead for the best example.

    The problem isn’t one of my beliefs or the beliefs of male virgins unless they have internalized the idea that they are a loser because they are a virgin.

    When and if you do lose your virginity, I imagine it will probably be easier for you to ‘confess’ especially in the context of encouraging any other men who are having problems.

    Confess in what context? Men who are having problems with what?

    How different would it be if all believed you were unsuccessful with women?

    I would have more time to do things I wanted to do.

    PM/AF Tech may have more quibbles with the ethics and implications of being forthright.

    I do. I don’t really see how its dishonest to not volunteer information especially where there is no context to do so. I’m not going to tell my boss at work that I’m a virgin because that would be silly. Even volunteering information can leave things out. If I volunteered that I don’t have a girlfriend, that easily turns into I don’t have a girlfriend RIGHT NOW, not that I have never had a girlfriend.

    In the end talking about my virginity in the MRAsphere and the roissysphere has real benefits (even if they aren’t for myself). Talking about my virginity in real life has no benefit. The best case scenario is that nothing is different than before I revealed this fact so what is the point of doing so?

  36. СОФИЯ/sofia permalink
    November 8, 2009 4:57 pm

    Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Tech,

    For the record, I was dating a male virgin, until I er, um, took his virginity. But I never thought he was a loser, and only found out post-facto that he was a virgin. He is in his 20s. There is nothing wrong with him. In fact, I think he is funny, charming, and wildly intelligent*; he just hadn’t found the right woman yet. I felt very, very touched that I got to be the one to do it, and it was a refreshing change from some of the past guys I had dated.

    I think it’s great that you don’t need sex to validate yourself!

    *Edit: Also very handsome.

  37. November 8, 2009 5:00 pm

    Personally, I think it is amazing that you are a virgin :-) I took a quick look at your site and am not familiar for whether it’s by choice (religious or self-control reasons). But a man who proves you can be normal and exercise self-control is amazing. I wish more men were like you… Oh well. We can’t have it all.

    It’s not for religious reasons even though I still claim to be a Roman Catholic (despite not have gone to church in a long time). Until I started my experiment a few weeks ago, I don’t know if you could call it self control either. Basically, I always struck out when it came to women throughout high school and college so by either late college or early grad school I decided that women weren’t worth it and spent my time on bigger and better things.

    At this point it is self control since I had the opportunity to lose my virginity with a very willing woman this weekend and didn’t because I wanted to be sure she was STD free first. Most likely I will lose my virginity a bit later.

    There are plenty of people who would argue I’m not normal for various reasons.

  38. November 8, 2009 5:15 pm

    PM/AF Tech: We do agree on that being honest isn’t always appropriate nor always ethical, both addressing it and looking at it from different angles.

    As far as the examples of you being (on the Internet) attacked based on your virginity. They’d already decided you were a loser and were looking for reasons for it, ‘virgin’ was just one of many ways to go about it. Although it does say quite a lot about them and their ideas about virginity as well.

    The experience you’d had with it is unfortunate. We girls have discussed our ideas on virginity before (unfortunately I can’t link you to that interesting discussion: some posts have ‘limited time only’ status). To summarise, I certainly idealised it when deeply immersed in my Abrahamic beliefs as a youngster in both men/women — beliefs now largely absent in the spheres and circles you seem to move in — and it is a state to provoke admiration if it is by choice rather than something a man actually wishes to remedy and has angst about. Still, even then, a man being a virgin with angst about it does not mean he’s an out and out loser; as well as women’s attraction triggers being completely and deliberately misrepresented these days and also — despite his angst about his virginity — it also could mean he is selective about where he… um… places his valuable zucchini.

    It’s very important that I contribute my life as an example of why you can live not just a good life, but a superior life, without having to worry about women.

    From what I understand, talking about your virginity in real life would occur if you felt you could achieve the same thing as you did on the Internet with it. That was what I was trying to scope out with the ‘confess’ing allusion. (being uncomfortable with the word ‘confess’ as if it’s something wrong, which it isn’t.)

  39. November 8, 2009 5:35 pm

    Abject Man I can see how you believed my statement was contradictory. What I was going for was more a caution to ensure some measure of compatibility prior to making a committment to love another. It’s not easy, in fact terribly difficult, to love with actions not feelings. How much harder would it be if we didn’t ensure the basic character of our partner was positive? I think too many people rush head long to ‘love’, just because it feels good. They make decisions to last a life time while still in lustful stages. Beginning love is simply a chemical reaction and can easily override rational thought – I’m advocating for deep, conscious awareness prior to promising love forever.

    You may be right about our day and age – perhaps it’s impossible to seek anything besides our own personal satisfaction. I’ve been single a long time (by choice) and see no signs of this changing. My singleness has borne many positives, including being open to discover new ways of thinking. The discussion on this thread alone causes me to think harder than real life circumstances do. I’m appreciative.

  40. November 8, 2009 6:01 pm

    Abject Man: To summarise you, the theory is that in order to love one must be Self-less. While the concept of non-existence of selfhood is somewhat incomprehensible to me, the idea does resonate with me in terms of the change from loyalty and love for the community to loyalty to the individual self.

    Religions do not advocate indiscriminate love (I understand religion and the times where religion dominated are not necessarily the same thing, but it is useful as a point of which to address your point). Always, they must prove themselves worthy. However, in the religious context, the criteria for worthiness is how well they adhere to the religious rules or commandments. If they have met these, then loving them is indeed encouraged according to need, rather than personal preference.

  41. November 8, 2009 7:19 pm

    ladies, stay away from the spearhead site for a few hours. There is some type of virus over there.

  42. November 8, 2009 7:53 pm

    We do agree on that being honest isn’t always appropriate nor always ethical, both addressing it and looking at it from different angles.

    Right. From my POV I don’t consider randomly volunteering information having to do with honesty or dishonesty.

    As far as the examples of you being (on the Internet) attacked based on your virginity. They’d already decided you were a loser and were looking for reasons for it, ‘virgin’ was just one of many ways to go about it.

    Fair enough. I was called a bunch of related things too such as having a small dick (or no dick), morbidly obese, etc. Beyond that there was crazier things like being a “baby killer” presumably because I have said that I work in the American defense and security field and that my dad beat my mom (I have no idea where that came from) and that I was going to shoot my “female boss” the next day (that would be an interesting feat considering my boss is a guy). However, nothing was used as much as loser virgin, and related things like small dick. In fact, “small dick” may have beaten out “loser virgin”, but those are related.

    In the end my point was that this reflects how a lot of women think of male virginity. Even if 90% of the female population disagrees it doesn’t matter since this is a case of one bad apple ruins the bunch. Women who may not have a strong opinion on this one way or another will go to the side claiming male virgins are losers because of female groupthink (as well as other reasons).

    I’m not angry about this since if this was causing me a real problem I could just shut down my internet browser. Most likely, this will be moot soon.

    I certainly idealised it when deeply immersed in my Abrahamic beliefs as a youngster in both men/women — beliefs now largely absent in the spheres and circles you seem to move in

    Yes, those types of beliefs are completely absent. The only place where I could find such virginity is good belief in North America is ultra-conservative religious communities. And despite being fairly conservative myself, I would look like a progressive radical compared to them. Plus, the fact that I’m 31 and not married would be a problem for them.

    I’m at least nominally a Roman Catholic and despite the conservatism of the Catholic Church sexual conservatism is nowhere to be found. I can tell you stories about how a RCC priest admitted that he wouldn’t tell unmarried adults not to have sex. He would tell teenagers to not have sex but not adults. Or I could tell you stories about couples getting married in a Catholic Church that had their newborn baby baptized immediately after the wedding.

    It’s not just the RCC either. Other conservative churches such as the Southern Baptists are the same way. I’m not even going to talk about the more liberal churches. My point in bringing all of this up is that for all intents are purposes outside of a extreme religious conversion (and even then there could still be problems) that there is no place where virginity is admired.

    One of the women I saw this weekend is pretty conservative herself. As you can read on my blog that didn’t stop her from be willing to put out on what is essentially the “first date”. The only reason why it didn’t happen is because I put a stop to it. I had suspected when I first met her the week before that I could have had sex with her then (although I’m not sure if that would have really happened).

    The point is here in North America sexual conservatism is completely dead so male virginity is considered a joke beyond a certain age, somewhere between 18 and the early 20s depending on who you ask, if not completely dangerous.

    and it is a state to provoke admiration if it is by choice rather than something a man actually wishes to remedy and has angst about.

    Yes, but in many cases people will claim that you aren’t choosing virginity even if you are.

    From what I understand, talking about your virginity in real life would occur if you felt you could achieve the same thing as you did on the Internet with it.

    That is correct with the caveat that I would have to weigh it against any possible negative social effects to myself if I did talk about my virginity in real life. There’s no equivalent to closing your web browser in real life.

    On top of that this could all be moot in some ways in the next couple of weeks.

  43. November 8, 2009 7:59 pm

    For the record, I was dating a male virgin, until I er, um, took his virginity. But I never thought he was a loser, and only found out post-facto that he was a virgin. He is in his 20s. There is nothing wrong with him.

    What if he was in his early 30s?

    The real problem is that for every one of you, Sofia, there are like 10000 women who disagree with you. Many of them may not really believe male virgins are losers but will talk/act like they do due to female groupthink and being worried that they would lose their power over men if they disagreed.

    How did you know he was a virgin? Did he tell you? I do have two potential candidates right now and I’m certain they don’t think I’m a virgin. I have been doing some “research” and practicing a few things so that when things get to the point of sex I have some idea of what I’m doing. I have no illusions that I’m going to make myself an expert just through “research”, but its better than nothing.

  44. November 8, 2009 8:42 pm

    Anti fem techI have been doing some “research” and practicing a few things so that when things get to the point of sex I have some idea of what I’m doing.

    Ohhhh do tell, tech, do tell.

    Anti fem tech I have no illusions that I’m going to make myself an expert just through “research”, but its better than nothing.

    As a woman, I’ve got to respect you for that. There are plenty of men with lots of experience who have no idea. That’s why when word gets out that a guy is “talented” he can literally have his pick amongst the women folk.

    The real problem is that for every one of you, Sofia, there are like 10000 women who disagree with you

    Sadly this is true, but I’m with Sophia on this. Nothing like something that is new a shiny

    Although I’ve never known a woman who had the option of being the first to be sad about it. In the two instances that I can recall, the women were very happy, excited even.

    With a man like you, there is no worry of STDs possible crazy ex girlfriends. What joy would it be to know that you’re the first to tech him everything.

    *Sigh*

    I recall the excitement of my first boyfriend when he found out that I was “brand new”. He was bouncing off the walls with joy. He liked how he could walk down the street with me and no other guy could point to me saying “I hit that”.

  45. Abject Man permalink
    November 8, 2009 8:54 pm

    Actually, Bhetti, I was not talking about Self-less loving, or indiscriminate loving. I was making a sociological observation.

    If you use the word self in a generic meaning, then it would be absurd to assume that in any age people did not have selves, or were racing to sacrifice themselves for others.

    What would be the point of having norms, laws (religious or otherwise) that did not discriminate, on the basis of principles, what is acceptable/desirable versus what is considered detrimental to human existence (at least within the framework of that community), and reward or punish individuals accordingly?

    I’m using the word Self nominalistically to denote the function it assumed in modern society.

    When I questioned predicating love on the desirability of the object, I didn’t have presence/absence of criteria applied to individuals’ behavior.

    Let me put it this way.

    The modern day order — the egalitarian consumerist one — managed to create an autistic individualism that reduces human connectedness to pretty much either an illusion (oppressive brainwashing) or merely reducible to a neurochemical activity (devoid of any particular value, in terms of either short-term or long term survival). The purpose? Well, it suits the oligarchical elitist order’s agenda. A traditional society that is not terribly interested in power hungry managerial elites’ opinions on how it should run its affairs will naturally resist their social engineering. So far as its fabric remains intact, a rigidly centralized rule cannot be created. The only effective method to deal with this resistance is the time-honored Divide and Rule. So, the organic connections (starting from the family around which everything else is organized in concentric circles) is destroyed and replaced by new “connections” one of whose most recent faddish example could be, say, “online dating”. We may wrack our brains all we want to strategize for it, and some of us may even manage to come up with a technique or two that may help them get lucky once or twice, but we all know how shallow it is inherently, how devoid of real human interactive content.

    So how are individuals supposed to be channelized into these media to “connect” with each other? Well, they have to present a Persona. Watch the word. The idea behind it is the same as we have all come to hate (I presume) belonging to feminists: “you can be anything you want.” I.e. you can construct any persona you want. Quite a few of us ordinary fools who have not yet sold our souls to the devil reacted to this negatively, naively falling for the supposed alternative of “being yourself.” But, as your post also touches in detail, that too is riddled with pitfalls. We all have realized, after all, that the Self that is supposed to “Be Himself/Herself” also has to be constructed — at least just to look natural in order not to compromise the intelligence operation.

    Humans have not been forced to connect to each other in such ridiculous fashion for millenia. They were always required to conform to norms (of dressing, behavior, education, etc.) but it was never part of a Regime of Self Creation. It was part of helping the individuals become integrated into adulthood. It just so happens that throughout those periods, they still managed to find spouses, but it happened through courtship.

    (Side Note: It never fails to amaze me how people use the phrase “arranged marrige.” All marriages are arranged marriages, one doesn’t wake up one day standing next to a stranger saying to himself “oops, I’m getting married.” Just that these days we have the tremendous optimism that the boy and the girl are all the community needed to arrange the marriage. Along with, that is, the script writers of umpteen movies, writers of countless romance novels, songwriters, online discussion forums, etc. etc. All of which, of course, are of negligible impact compared to the fast beating hearts of the darling lovers.)

    In all former, traditional types of societies, the self seemed to have formed invisibly, in the background, since the norm wasn’t “what dashing Self do we fashion or fabricate for you?” but “what is your competence level in manning an adult slot in our community?”

    (These distinctions are fuzzy, I know, but it is a number of fuzzy differences in emphases like these put together that distinguishes different social orders.)

    It is in this difference in social contexts that the word love seems to take on different meanings. In the former one, love is not expected to bring with it high affective states or deep emotional turbulances. Rather, it is almost as part of say learning manners and ethical conduct. Not something to obsess with from only specific individuals, but something that binds communities together.

    Understood in this sense, love is not the essential *reward* to use to elicit desirable behavior. Traditional communities expect you to adhere to their norms, period. No negotiations. Love, on the other hand, even if you’re fallen — assuming you show repentence — is still to be extended to you since love is not understood as an intense emotion, nor the litmus test of a person’s eligibility for family formation.

    (This is totally alien to us moderns, I know. I’m only trying to puncture the matrix, how it pathologizes anything that doesn’t fit into its modernist mold.)

    These days, love is all about romance since we have individualism. All other forms of personal connectedness (but primarily the family since we know that it was invented by Patriarchy to exploit women and forcefully extract sex from her) should get out of the way. Nothing should subordinate erotic love, everything should be subservient to it. Which is inevitable since we enlightened ones now know that individuals are universes unto themselves, every Self is a unique adventure hopefully to connect to another Self any day Real Soon Now when stars align, and if they share enough many common features, they will have cosmic orgasms.

    I don’t have enough time to elaborate this, but perhaps you, being a smart cookie, see where I’m heading. It’s as if a whole invisible layer of social normativity has been destroyed that was the life support system of humans in connecting to each other in favor of isolated individuals now spending inordinate amounts of time on the Internet to find…, ahem, their Truth.

    P.S. I might have given the impression that I’m personally devoutly religious. I’m not. I’m only wise enough to know that there’s not a single tribe on this planet that does not have a religion, and that it is a very vital layer of social organization, even if Man made.

  46. November 8, 2009 10:29 pm

    Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Tech, you said that in grad school you decided that women weren’t worth it but now you’ve got a woman that’s interested and said you may decide to lose it later. So what makes this new women different from every other women you’ve ever met, other than the fact that she wants to fuck you and the others didn’t?

  47. November 8, 2009 10:38 pm

    Ohhhh do tell, tech, do tell.

    This might be a bit of a letdown for you, chic noir. I more focused on basics right now. I don’t know if I can do a “turn her into multi-orgasmic mush who can’t do anything except beg for my zucchini without at least experiencing basic sex. I’m willing to learn that, but I need to do the steps in between step 1 and step 30. I’m more concerned about making sure I am adept at putting on a condom so I don’t end up like that one scene in the 40 year old virgin.

    Remember I have never done this before.

    Although I’ve never known a woman who had the option of being the first to be sad about it. In the two instances that I can recall, the women were very happy, excited even.

    A lot of the problems of people’s views of male virgins are more “political” than anything else.

    I recall the excitement of my first boyfriend when he found out that I was “brand new”. He was bouncing off the walls with joy. He liked how he could walk down the street with me and no other guy could point to me saying “I hit that”.

    It’s different for men and women.

  48. November 8, 2009 10:54 pm

    Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Tech, you said that in grad school you decided that women weren’t worth it but now you’ve got a woman that’s interested and said you may decide to lose it later. So what makes this new women different from every other women you’ve ever met, other than the fact that she wants to fuck you and the others didn’t?

    A few weeks ago as a result of my science fiction article, someone posted a comment about how guys like me and Roissy got women and lots of them. That could have been interpreted that the commenter believed I was wildly successful with women or that “guys like me” were. Either way it made me think about whether I really was successful with women now or not but didn’t know since I wasn’t trying. I noticed that in real life I seemed to communicate the idea I was successful with women. That’s what people who know me in real life seem to believe. I decided to run an experiment to see if this was true.

    This experiment does have a time limit (not sure what that limit is, but it does exist). I still know that women aren’t worth it. As I do this experiment already I have to make sure I don’t end up with a woman trying to impregnate herself with one of my used condoms or that I don’t end up having sex with a walking petri dish. On top of that The Fifth Horseman has astutely pointed out how increased game is going to lead feminists to increase the false rape industry. Governments are pushing to have treat non-martial relationships like marriage. More and more women are becoming walking petri dishes.

    Things with women are only going to get more dangerous whether its to your health or wallet or freedom. This experiment will be a temporary thing in my life.

  49. November 9, 2009 12:32 am

    While I agree that men have a lot of grievances with the way society has treated them (historically) but I think you and a lot of MRA’s are being way too paranoid.

    There isn’t any way I can say this without coming across as insulting so I’m just going to say it. Your attitude (on top of being illogical) reeks of cognitive dissonance and catastrophizing.

  50. November 9, 2009 1:49 am

    JD, most of my haters do a better job than that.

  51. November 9, 2009 3:14 am

    Which seems like a waste of time since you’re already doing a better job than any of them ever could.

    When you say that women are turning into walking walking petri dishes you’ve completely lost your sense of perspective.

  52. November 9, 2009 3:20 am

    I still know that women aren’t worth it.

    Pro-male you had me through a lot of your discussion but lost me completely when you started woman bashing. I’d advise against breaking your sexual fast at this point in time, it will be too confusing for you in my opinion. I don’t think men who wait are losers. I do think men who have painted all women with one brush are.

  53. November 9, 2009 3:35 am

    Which seems like a waste of time

    You seem to enjoy wasting your time then.

    When you say that women are turning into walking walking petri dishes

    Why is it these things always turn into a battle over the English language? I said and I quote, “more and more women are turning into walking petri dishes”. Notice the lack of the words all or most in there. All I said was that there was an increase going on that meant a man has to be more careful about sex. Combine this female hypergamic behavior and the alphas that get around and you get some STD problems. This isn’t controversial.

  54. November 9, 2009 3:54 am

    Pro-male you had me through a lot of your discussion but lost me completely when you started woman bashing.

    I did no such thing.

    Aoefe, if you are wondering why many women are throwing their hands up in the air and saying forget it, this behavior is a good example. Anytime an individual woman’s or a group of women’s bad and/or dangerous behavior gets pointed out, other women rush to their defense regardless of how silly or evil it makes them look.

    There is something called a cost benefit analysis. The cost of dealing with women continues to go up due to divorce, false rape charges, false child abuse charges, sexual harassment law, STD’s getting passed around, etc. Eventually men reach their limit since the costs outweigh the benefits. Thus we have the marriage strike, men who have realized that the costs of marriage are too high with little to no benefit and ghosts who simply have nothing to do with women relationship wise because the costs are too high and the benefits aren’t there. Every man’s limit is different.

    I can already hear your response, Aoefe, that you aren’t like that. And you and the other GirlGame women aren’t, but this problem has long since passed critical mass particularly with the legal system being hideously anti-male. Unfortunately, I don’t have the power to deal with this in anything resembling a perfect way for each individual woman’s true nature. It would be better for everyone if I did.

    I’d advise against breaking your sexual fast at this point in time, it will be too confusing for you in my opinion.

    I have no idea what you mean here.

  55. November 9, 2009 4:06 am

    The second paragraph should say “why many men are throwing their hands up in the air”.

  56. November 9, 2009 4:30 am

    And another thing. If I’m such a woman basher, then why am I trying to do some “research” and learn about sex before I have it? Sure I don’t want to be fumbling around, but if I really wanted to use either of my current two women simply as life size masturbation aids. I don’t expect to be able to give women high levels of pleasure without having plenty of sex, but I’m doing something.

  57. lovelysexybeauty permalink
    November 9, 2009 12:19 pm

    PM/AF – if I knew you in real life, I would probably say “You just haven’t met the right woman yet.” :-) I think it’s good you are trying to learn, and that you are being cautious. And that you haven’t put your entire self-worth on women. But I also hope you always keep looking for those exception cases… Whenever you are ready for it. You might just like what you find

  58. gunslingergregi permalink
    November 9, 2009 4:52 pm

    ”””””’Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Tech permalink
    And another thing. If I’m such a woman basher, then why am I trying to do some “research” and learn about sex before I have it? Sure I don’t want to be fumbling around, but if I really wanted to use either of my current two women simply as life size masturbation aids. I don’t expect to be able to give women high levels of pleasure without having plenty of sex, but I’m doing something.
    ”””””””

    Ya might be making a mountain out of a molehill on this one dude. Your best research is gonna be while having sex. Making shit up as you go and being creative. The first time ain’t like your popping your cherry like a woman. You just had sex. You can do it again. Not a one time deal. Your dick doesn’t change after your first. You don’t lose something you can’t get back. You can keep doing it and get better at it if you want. Your acting like the first time has to be perfect. It probably won’t be no matter how much you read up. You stick the dick in pump a certain amount of times and cum. Not rocket science. You can perfect the art as you go. Now it is probably better to have sex the first time with someone you love but you can always do that later and having experience at sex as a man will probably help with that love part anyway.

  59. gunslingergregi permalink
    November 9, 2009 4:58 pm

    Or you could not have sex and practice intimacy with the chicks you have if your forbidden from the sexytime. Just touch them and caress kiss get them hot to where the cheeks are red and there begging for dick and walk out if ya really feel the need to get back at woman. That will insure that they will remember that for life. Eaither way. he he he

  60. November 9, 2009 7:13 pm

    Your comment that “women aren’t worth it” is not only a sweeping generalization but a misogynistic one.

    I can agree that marriage isn’t worth it and I can respect someone that thinks that dating isn’t their cup of tea, but when you write off an entire gender that’s when you’ve left the realm of “risks/rewards” and entered the realm of sexism.

    and back to your comment that “more and more women are turning into walking petri dishes”

    I see you making shaming remarks about sexually active women getting STDs, but I don’t see you making any remarks about the men they’re getting them from.

  61. November 9, 2009 8:05 pm

    PM/AF Tech:

    From my POV I don’t consider randomly volunteering information having to do with honesty or dishonesty.

    It is human nature to make assumptions unless you correct them, human nature to become comfortable in stereotypes unless you challenge them. Honesty is investing in trust between human beings: being accurate about things even at a cost to yourself is honest. Being forthright is not randomly volunteering information, it is doing so when it is clear there is a mistaken impression, that it is relevant or that you could get away with not correcting it at an advantage to yourself (or even: for some worn out/apathetic/masochistic individuals, allowing a disadvantageous impression to remain unchallenged).

    Sorry, I can feel my own ideas about moral values creeping into the discussion. I’m no saint. Still, it’s quite clear — as a general principle — there’s a difference in the level of trust another human being allocates to you if you volunteer information that may be detrimental to you without prompting. They perceive you as more honest, more truthful. It is relevant to what the average human being understands as honesty.

    However, it isn’t true in the case of the ‘I’m a virgin’ challenge, because being forthright in this case means you are more likely to be viewed as dishonest in some way because of the sheer extent of their assumptions. The immediate reaction is: ‘What fatal flaw is he hiding?!?!’ or ‘You’re lying! No way!’

    I do think it’s very relevant to a discussion of honesty as applied to everyday human interaction and everyday human understanding.

    Anyway: I don’t have the impression that you have any grudges against women. The impression I do get is the level of complete disassociation with them; they’re separate and alien from you. But this is the Internet and I don’t know you as a person. I will tell you that I want sex for you to be very enjoyable and something you really desire rather than an experiment. If you want a woman sexually, you’ll touch her the way she is meant to be touched. You’ll linger where you’re supposed to linger.

    I don’t know what research you’ve done and please tell me more about it. I think I can contribute in a way, because I’m somewhat an expert on being a virgin but not utterly clueless.

    Note what PUAs tend to emphasise (and what they can ironically lose to a somewhat distressing extent as time goes on — some start treating sex like a drug, they need higher highs — hotter chicks, kinkier practices), the enjoyment of being with someone new and discovering them newly. Take your time to experiment — don’t ask her whether she’s enjoying it but experiment slowly so that you can recognise the clues. Draw it out, don’t rush it.

    Sexual discovery can be an amazing experience. Let her want you and be just out of reach until she is begging for it. Let her do the work for you. Let her make herself worthy and chase you. Let her try and seduce the virginity out of you, without her knowing that’s the challenge you’re teasing her into. You won’t need research because she will be all over you. You don’t care whether you’re a virgin or not; be persuaded by a woman that you should have sex with her. You’re right: Don’t bother if you’re not convinced. Don’t bother if you don’t want it. Don’t bother if you don’t trust her. Don’t bother if it doesn’t feel right to you and in line with the way you’ve chosen to lead your life.

    Be convinced by what’s going to happen. Every time you say ‘the point is going to be moot’: are you giving an inward satisfied smirk, are you full of anticipation and thinking ‘finally’ or does it leave you cold or ambivalent? Is there a relief about it — like being a virgin is some sort of social pressure that you are finally ridding yourself of due to its inconvenience? That doesn’t convince me as a reason, but…

    what difference would it make? Having sex with a woman, then going back to celibacy? Isn’t it the same, anyway, aside from that moment of sex? Or is there this worry that it may change something important to you and how you view yourself right now?

    Anyway, you may be a virgin but you won’t be completely nil on sexual experience, would you? Or am I making assumptions ;)

    Clearly trying to have a closer look at your psychic landscape here. Probably will know you better than the woman you’re going to have the intimate experience of sex with: what a thought that is.

  62. November 9, 2009 10:21 pm

    a sweeping generalization but a misogynistic one.

    If you want to create strawmen go someplace else.

    I see you making shaming remarks about sexually active women getting STDs, but I don’t see you making any remarks about the men they’re getting them from.

    That was outside the context of the discussion since I’m not bisexual, but since you whined about it…Yes, there are plenty of men, particularly alphas, who are becoming walking petri dishes.

    I love this idea that a man such as myself taking his health seriously is anti-woman. I could just jump into sex without looking and blame women if I get an STD, but I prefer to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MY OWN HEALTH. If you have a problem with that, screw you (actually not).

  63. November 10, 2009 12:03 am

    Bhetti, if any of this gets too personal for public view on GirlGame (I see how that might be a possibility) then you can email at antifeministtech@gmail.com.

    It is human nature to make assumptions unless you correct them, human nature to become comfortable in stereotypes unless you challenge them.

    And I have to admit I use that to my advantage in people not knowing that I’m a virgin.

    Sorry, I can feel my own ideas about moral values creeping into the discussion. I’m no saint. Still, it’s quite clear — as a general principle — there’s a difference in the level of trust another human being allocates to you if you volunteer information that may be detrimental to you without prompting. They perceive you as more honest, more truthful. It is relevant to what the average human being understands as honesty.

    However, it isn’t true in the case of the ‘I’m a virgin’ challenge, because being forthright in this case means you are more likely to be viewed as dishonest in some way because of the sheer extent of their assumptions. The immediate reaction is: ‘What fatal flaw is he hiding?!?!’ or ‘You’re lying! No way!’

    I have no disagreement with any of this.

    Anyway: I don’t have the impression that you have any grudges against women.

    Bhetti, THANK YOU. I really appreciate this given how much flak I have been given in the last few days for various things (here on GG and elsewhere) particularly for things I never said.

    The impression I do get is the level of complete disassociation with them; they’re separate and alien from you.

    It’s more complicated than that, but there are elements of disassociation and women being alien in there.

    I will tell you that I want sex for you to be very enjoyable and something you really desire rather than an experiment.

    I suspect you don’t mean being horny by this? The experiment isn’t sex. It’s whether women are attracted to me.

    I don’t know what research you’ve done and please tell me more about it. I think I can contribute in a way, because I’m somewhat an expert on being a virgin but not utterly clueless.

    It’s more along the lines of the basics such as putting on a condom. What I’m trying to do more than anything else right now is not get lost. I don’t want to be asking, “where am I supposed to be putting my zucchini again?”

    I had sex ed back in high school. It’s not like I forgot it all, but if I did forget something I wouldn’t know that I forgot it. Until now I haven’t had any context to use that male-female section of that knowledge.

    Note what PUAs tend to emphasise (and what they can ironically lose to a somewhat distressing extent as time goes on — some start treating sex like a drug, they need higher highs — hotter chicks, kinkier practices)

    I never described it in these terms, but I have talked extensively about PUAs being too invested in women and making it the only part of their life to the point where women can control them. I have no interest in becoming a PUA. I don’t want to be Roissy Jr.

    Let her want you and be just out of reach until she is begging for it. Let her do the work for you. Let her make herself worthy and chase you. Let her try and seduce the virginity out of you, without her knowing that’s the challenge you’re teasing her into.

    I have sort of already done that as detailed on my blog.

    Every time you say ‘the point is going to be moot’

    I mean that being “dishonest” about my virginity will be moot when I’m not longer a virgin. Or even the proxies like do I have a girlfriend?

    Is there a relief about it — like being a virgin is some sort of social pressure that you are finally ridding yourself of due to its inconvenience?

    If I was worried about social pressure, there would a million things in addition to virginity that I would be doing differently.

    what difference would it make? Having sex with a woman, then going back to celibacy? Isn’t it the same, anyway, aside from that moment of sex?

    I would know two things, what it feels like to have sex, and that there are women that would choose of their own free will to have sex with me.

    Or is there this worry that it may change something important to you and how you view yourself right now?

    I don’t think it will change a thing (outside of things like ending up with an STD if that happened).

    Anyway, you may be a virgin but you won’t be completely nil on sexual experience, would you? Or am I making assumptions ;)

    Let me put it this way. Before I started this experiment I had done absolutely nothing. I had not even kissed a girl/woman. You name it; I hadn’t done it. Yes, we are talking about a big fat zero on sexual experience even with the most generous definition.

    Probably will know you better than the woman you’re going to have the intimate experience of sex with: what a thought that is.

    It sounds like that’s going to be true. LMAO

Trackbacks

  1. Girl Game on the fallacy of “Just Be Yourself” « PUA For LTR
  2. Get Freedom …by Getting Under Your Man « lifeinlonglegs

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers

%d bloggers like this: