1799. Sex Difference Redux—Part 50: Conquest Changes Her Too

Two conquerors face off. From before their first date, he seeks to conquer her for sex. After a date or three at the latest, she seeks to conquer him for marriage. The winner becomes the major influence in their relationship.

A man leads two lives with every woman to whom he is attracted. He is one way before he conquers her. He changes after conquest (details at #1759) and shapes their relationship around ‘rights of conquest’ to which he is entitled by virtue of having earned it. (It’s his nature.)

The woman also changes after yielding sex the first time with a man. He exploits his conqueror’s rights and his attitude about subsequent sexual and relationship events surprises her. His unexpected change forces her to face the contradiction that he didn’t bond as she did. It forces her to change too but defensively.

His nature causes it. The ease with which she yields the first time tells him how assertively dominant he can be and how submissive he expects her to be. For practical purposes, it’s proportional. The easier she yields, the more submissive he expects her to be. The more assertively, reasonably, justifiably, and longer she defends herself and refuses his pleadings and threats, the less dominant he expects to be in her life. (She sends confounding and perhaps confusing messages but the overall reception by him is to consider her expectations superior to his conquering spirit.)

To delay his conquest, she repeatedly denies going beyond foreplay that she can handle. She teaches him to romance her, show affection, please her, and show habitual intimacy. Thus, she sets faithful and admirable examples, and he becomes an ardent fan of hers—provided he’s after her and not just after sex. (If he doesn’t act in adaptive ways to honor her expectations, he won’t honor her hopes and dreams later in life. The differences qualify or disqualify him as her potential mate; she need only decide which.)

After conquest, he assumes control of their sexual agenda. Some women ignore or rebel and try to work it backwards. They yield easily and provide sex aplenty in order to keep him around. Then, after marriage, they try to manipulate him by withholding sex. They make three mistakes: 1) Sex before marriage does not bond or hold him. 2) She is justified and expected to protect her assets just as he protects his freedom, so she’s free to hold out for marriage. 3) Manipulation breaks a man’s bond.

Sex after marriage is totally his due, because he gave up his freedom for her in exchange for frequent and convenient sex-on-demand. If she expects greater respect than having husband always demanding sex, she needs to earn more unconditional respect before conquest. What she earns then lingers within him, while the respect she earns after conquest is very conditional and easily fades (again, it’s the male nature.)

Males insist on sex without marriage, because impatience and reluctance to yield their independence flood the conquering spirit. By yielding too early, women go along to get along. Thus, they add strength and right-mindedness to masculine domination. Manly behavior is thus made easier and womanly behavior more submissive.

Women that yield easy sex trap themselves on this multiple lane highway of pain and misery: Hook up, link up, shack up, marry up, muck up, ‘fess up, split up, pay up, and end up looking to start over with knock up somewhere along the way. The path is direct; ignore the female strength of refusing sex to gain a better life and expect misery to follow.

A man’s admiration and unconditional respect for a female as a distinctly different sexual person stops growing after she first yields sex to him. The longer and more successfully she holds out for marriage before sex, the more admiration and lasting respect she earns from him.

Female misery for capturing a husband starts with yielding before he becomes devoted to her. Who does what after that is moot. Women still lose and click and drag themselves into the recycle bin, from which many never escape. (Of course men threaten to dump a woman if she does not submit. Extortion comes easily to men when pursuing an unconquered sex target. His threats, however, confirm that he’s only after sex and not her. Holding out during a long courtship is how she determines whether his true intentions aim for her or just for sex.)

Because sex bonds women, they mistakenly assume that it bonds men. His devotion to a woman developed through a sex-free courtship bonds a man, and marriage seals the deal. In the final analysis, men do whatever women require in order for men to have frequent and convenient access to sex.


Filed under sex differences

3 responses to “1799. Sex Difference Redux—Part 50: Conquest Changes Her Too

  1. Oh, Sir Guy, thank you once again for such an elaborate post. You definitely hit the spot with this one! So so refreshing!
    Have a nice day!

  2. laura

    “A man’s admiration and unconditional respect for a female as a distinctly different sexual person stops growing after she first yields sex to him. The longer and more successfully she holds out for marriage before sex, the more admiration and lasting respect she earns from him.”

    I kind of wish I read this a few years ago, when I was in highschool. I’m not Catholic (or any other religion actually) and therefore don’t plan on getting married but I do want a man for life.

    I went through a lot of issues in highschool and made my rounds with several different guys before I met my now-boyfriend. We’ve been together for 4 years, but we were good friends for 3 years prior to us dating. During our friendship, we fooled around and had sex, and we both fooled around with other people also.

    So we did have sex first but our relationship is great. We’re both much more mature, in our early 20s, and have been together for about four years. Unfortunately because we were friends first, he DOES know my promiscuous past, but he also knows I’m wayyyyy different now. We’re both 100% devoted and loyal and love each other very much. We plan on staying together for life, with or without marriage (due to both of us not associating with any religion), we want kids, and we’re working on a business together also. But are we doomed…? Sometimes I wish I could go back and change things, because if I was single now, I would do things very differently. However my situation has worked our favourably, yet sometimes I still worry that he doesn’t respect me as much as he would have had I “waited” longer.

    Your Highness Laura,

    Welcome aboard. It’s a great day when another pretty woman joins us on this cruise to WhatWomenNeverHear.

    As a guy once said, “Don’t look back. ‘They’ may be gaining on you. Don’t let your past haunt you. Just compensate when apppropriate and look back no more.

    Why would you be doomed? Only if YOU think so!

    As to having kids with no marriage, I’m morally opposed but that shouldn’t bother you. However, the bonds of matrimony strengthen the dependability of parents just when they need it most. It’s a bonding glue like nothing else. So, I recommend it especially if you have no religious connections.


    • Anne

      Formal marriage makes a man stand up in front of all his friends and family – with everyone he respects looking on – and say that he will be faithful to you forever. I know Guy cautions against valuing words over actions, but I think those particular words in front of that particular group of people is a “serious action” on the part of a man. (Why do so many men feel sick before their wedding? I think its because the event is a Big Deal to them. They do take it seriously.)

      So – religion completely aside – I see only good that can come from people (and men in particular) declaring their allegiance to each other formally, publicly, and while dressed up in “business best” or even better clothes. Let it be the biggest and best business deal of your life & treat it with all the solemnity of signing a huge contract to merge your small business (analogous to yourself) with the most amazing big company you can imagine and covet merging with (analogous to your future-spouse). 🙂

      Your Highness Anne,
      Nicely encouraged.

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s