2173. He Badgers You About Sexual History


Commenting at 2172 Her Highness Juju inspired another break in the mid-life dating series. This article responds to her, but I’ve made it relevant for all women.

That Horse is Dead responded to Juju with this sound reasoning:

“If a man ‘badgers you constantly’ to disclose your sexual history and you’ve made yourself clear that the topic is not up for discussion (no ring, no booty), I believe he disqualifies himself as Mr. Good Enough. Your actions speak to the fact that his accusations are unfounded especially when he can’t conquer you himself. He’s fishing for your weaknesses, so allow him to go fish somewhere else, preferably back into the parade of men you will never regret.”

To which I add a way out for Juju and all women badgered for any reason to go against their will. There comes a time when every man needs to be put in his place in the world of females.

Juju, you should make a decision. Are you tough enough to get your way and end his inquisition forever? If yes, then study and figure out how to make the following proposal fit your personality and character. Then do it with courage and determination knowing that you’re in the right. (Don’t consult with girlfriends first; prepare and do it all by yourself.)

In private, sit him down, stand over him, point your finger in his face, and proclaim with a stern face, emphatic words, but not angry voice. Both countenance and sounds he’s never heard from you, “It – is – none – of – your – business. My sexual history is exclusively my business.” (He should wonder why he deserves what he’s receiving. He feels relatively innocent but now knows better.)

Don’t complain, don’t explain further. Don’t let him initiate a dialogue. End the convo and do something else immediately. Let him stew on his own what he just saw and heard. (What he sees registers more impressively than what he hears.)

Now I know you intuitively object to doing such a thing. It strikes you as not feminine and perhaps outrageous. Perhaps so, but let me describe some of the LASTING benefits that flow out of the instinctive* side of human nature.

  1. He will be shocked and become more in awe of you and your internal strength. It earns respect.
  2. Should you marry, the influence of that moment will last forever. It earns respect. (A woman should restrict herself to about a half-dozen of such dramatic and purposely designed encounters in a lifetime marriage. More is to lose the beneficial effects.)
  3. Your emphatic verbalization will surprise him and turn him against earning or deserving it again. It earns respect.
  4. You will shape your relationship such that he either departs or stays welded for life to his fear of your anger which you just presented without anger. It earns respect and will keep him wary of his behaviors that may cause your anger.
  5. He will remember the look on your face, and every time he sees it in the future, you will have his undivided attention. (Unless you overuse it.)
  6. If your relationship breaks up, other guys will hear not about your sexual status as much as about your willingness to shake up their composure if they say wrong things, and not just about your history. Only guys who want you badly enough will man up, so half of your screening job is done. (Oh, you may miss out on a few dates, but those you do have should be with better quality—or at least more courageous—guys.)
  7. You set the stage for successfully negotiating to your favor just what submission means if you marry him.
  8. Out of those multiple infusions of respect, enduring love can grow. It’s the kind needed to sustain a couple after romantic love fades in a year or two.
  9. Men seek to marry a strong woman. You just made your foundation obvious and the word will spread. More importantly, you just made yourself a more courageous and probably a better woman.
  10. You make a significant investment in turning your relationship into one for the long term.

You accomplished all that by conquering your cautious intuition and mustering your hard-headed courage to put an end to badgering, which you neither deserve nor want to tolerate. Such a strong stand helps prepare you for other strong stands you will need as you pass through this ‘veil of tears’ (in Appalachian lingo).

You will learn from his reactions if he’s Mr. GoodEnough or not, which makes the final result the consequence of your actions.

——

* Instinctive as inherited at birth. Intuitive as from lessons learned in life.

 

67 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, How she wins

67 responses to “2173. He Badgers You About Sexual History

  1. This is the worst advice I’ve ever read.

    What ever happened to the idea of building a relationship on the idea of openess and honesty?
    Not to mention, any man who allows a woman to disrespect him in such a way and doesn’t immediately remove all trace of her from his life is a man without any self-respect.

    Sir ar10308,

    I admit it’s only on the surface but you seem to not have much respect for women. It suggests you may have less self-respect than required to make you more successful with the ladies.

    Also, as to “building a relationship on the idea of openness and honesty,” you may find more realistic answers in many blog articles. Search for ‘full disclosure’ may get you started.

    Guy

    • Tooconfused

      @Ar10803

      There was a man I once dated that sounds so much like you. Not only did he know that sex with me would not be easy and convenient but he knew not to even poke into my dating history.

      He was prideful but in all the wrong ways. He took rejection VERY personally, almost like an attack on his significance – but failed to realize a slight rejection from a woman means she wants to be chased. It means she’s playing hard to get, not that she thinks he’s a loser. Like you he immediately took it as a sign of “disrespect” if she did not respond to his advances right away. He was not bold enough to pursue women who’d constantly reject pushes for sex over a long period of time, but WAS bold enough to make initial moves. A mild high-earning paper shuffler beta male he was. During his youth he was rejected by pretty women. As he got older he compensated for this inferiority complex by avoiding better women and choosing to have complete control over women below his league. He values loyalty excessively over love. He needs a woman to pedestalize him during courtship, almost like he is the woman. Love is secondary to him. This does not benefit men in the long run, but I ain’t his mom. He can figure this out for himself 20 years down the line when he realizes that the girl who he thought was loyal is ready to rape him financially in divorce court.

      Just to give you a visual picture. I work out 4x a week and do not eat dinner on the weekdays. I blow out my hair and wear make up. I do not do this to get guys to chase me. This is simply to feel good about myself. Looking “best I can” means people check me out and that means I feel good which means I do not crave food all the time. The cycle repeats. No I do not look like Lauren Bacall but when I do everything possible to look my best I turn heads of both sexes, as most women should be able to. Although I comment here and I may end up sounding like an aggressive louche with grammar problems in real life I say as little as possible without actually coming off as a mute.

      I remembered this one time in early courtship, after a long date, I ended up at this lesser beta’s apartment. He asked me to sleep on his couch so we could have brunch the next day. Playing submissive I slept on the couch with my clothes on after our date. I told him to get to his bedroom. At 4 am in the morning, I tip toed out of his apartment and called a cab. It was almost as though he was poaching me for what our near future relationship would look like. Dinner dates with me ending up at his apartment for you-know-what. Next day he texted and sounded desperate to meet again. I ignored it, if only temporarily. This was the pattern set up by all the women in his life before me. The long term relationship girls. Sex filled weekends, brunches, and texts to soothe her desire for commitment.

      My indirect way of leaving him and closing these dates earlier than he liked was letting him know “you ain’t gettin no carrot!” His indirect way of getting what he wanted? He stopped contacting me. In comes the warpig feminazi.

      Immediately after, a girl that he knew for years platonically, before he started pursuing me, well, they flew out of the country and went on vacation. Of course I knew by this point they were already sexually active. After 1-2 dates with him she agreed swiftly to go on a week long vacay with him. Typical round heel. It was almost like his revenge. Does he think I’m a dumb ass? Inside the mind of every man are those crevices of unconquered women. No matter how much sex he gets he does not forget the unconquered. There’s no such thing as men exacting revenge on unconquered women. Unconquered she holds all the cards- for life.

      So, why’s the other girl a warpig? Her personality is typically “feminazi” …. “I’m smarter than you” – she is sassy but not in that Lauren Bacall way – she is sassy in the Rosie O’Donnell way -beyond that she is 50 pounds overweight and barely takes care of herself. I do not exaggerate. Just ugly person all around. In and out. Alpha-like in behavior.

      He was Mr. GoodEnough. I saw so much potential in him. A woman can fall in love with anyone but the man has gotta have some balls. Our courtship? Short. Short, just like his patience. Just the way he lost interest in the chase soon after making shrewd calculations that would benefit only him.

      I want every girl that is reading this comment to know, if he’s worth marrying, he will not kick you to the curb if your style is swift. He will probably dump you for a tank-girl warpig. You benefit either way.

      Your Highness Tooconfused,
      You make a good story delightful to read. Thanks for adding to the readability and attractiveness of this blog.
      Guy

      • Loyalty over love? So you think a disloyal woman can show love?
        You’re a talking contradiction.

        Men do not “respect a woman’s strength” because they have none to offer on any level compared to a moderately mentally strong man.

        A woman’s past is important to determine how well she’ll pair bond. The more partners she’s had, the more likely it is that she’ll have more partners in the future regardless of whatever vows she makes, no matter how super-Alpha the guy to whom she makes them.

        Finally, the guy you dated could have done well with developing his Outcome Independence.

        • Tooconfused

          You immediately cut off all women who tell you it’s “none of your business” when you pry into her history and take it as a sign if disrespect. Don’t even mention “alphas” in your comment. What you describe is lesser beta-gamma behavior.

          Men do respect strong women. You’re a 100% wrong when you say men don’t respect strength in women. It’s just your perception that’s misguided you.

          A woman’s sexual past is none of your business until she is ready for it not to be. Until you conquer her she’s winning whether you discard her or not.

          Fella, get your head outta them manosphere and go find yourself a girl and don’t be so nosy. So long as you’re not ready to talk marriage the girl does not owe you one word.

          Go with the open, honest girls instead, just know it’s backwards of you to think you’re entitled to this kind of information. Heck take it to a lawyer and get her partners to sit with you and negotiate the specifics if you want. Don’t care pal.

          • For any kind of commitment then it’s only fair that a man know what he’s committing to. You wouldn’t buy a car or house without knowing the home or vehicle history. Same goes with committing to a relationship.

            It’s funny how angry women get when men start comparing their experiences and noticing how similar they are with other women.

            Men don’t want or need strong women. They much prefer Feminine and resilient women. Women make the mistake of assuming that the attractions of men are the same as women. Women want challenging, difficult men. A man wants a easy going woman. Women strive for drama and complication in a relationship. Men want peace and simplicity. Women are contentless and cannot maintain it. Men are naturally content.

            I’ve never gotten a date listening to a woman’s advice. I’ve gotten plenty while listening to men. I stick around the Manosphere for that reason alone.

            • lejubon

              Well said. I don’t pay too much attention to the manosphere because I feel like they promote hatred towards women. However the rest of what you said is spot on. If I stayed out the bed and respect myself, why would I take a woman that has 48284829 men under her belt and think she’s the best thing since sliced bread… ? Men have choices just like them….

              • The Manosphere is broad enough to find men who love women and men who hate them. It’s your choice who you read and who you don’t.

                And yes, men should be able to make an informed choice about a woman just like a woman should be able to make one about a man.

              • Also, a lot of the anger and hatred comes from the fact that those men have been lied to by society broadly about how women really behave and what they are actually attracted to.

            • Miss Eliza

              ‘Men don’t want or need strong women. They much prefer Feminine and resilient women.’

              Oh dear; you certainly do have things confused! Feminine women DO tend to be mentally strong and resilient; exactly like your grandmothers’ generation was. Back then before women slept around, women were soft-hearted but hard-headed (i.e. strong) – as Guy’s posts describe. These days, since the rise of feminism, it’s the other way around – women are hard-hearted and SOFT-headed. So it’s actually *modern* women who are weak in character; women from bygone eras were strong in a feminine and subtle way – this is how I naturally am too. You have a lot to learn about healthy relationship behaviours with the type of woman you should be looking to marry but you won’t get it from the manosphere.

              • Then don’t use the word “Strength”. Strength is about how much force you can apply. Women can’t apply much force. And women interpret it as justification for being difficult, argumentative, hostile and man-like.
                Time for a new word, because women can’t handle “Strength”, one way or another.

              • Miss Eliza

                @ar10308

                I think this comment is going to appear in the wrong place but there doesn’t seem to be a reply button underneath your post for some reason.

                It’s Guy who used the word ‘strong’ in his blog and why shouldn’t he? It’s perfectly appropriate. There are quite a few definitions of ‘strength’ in the dictionary – it’s not only about the active application of force in the negative way that you describe but also:

                3.
                moral power, firmness, or courage. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/strength

                Of course women can have moral power, firmness and courage. Are you saying that women from bygone eras didn’t have any of those things? There are many examples of incredibly brave women in the pre-feminist era – what would you call someone like Elizabeth I?

                You appear to be responding to all our comments as if we’re arguing as feministic women, which is confusing. When you say “‘women’ interpret it as justification for being….” – you’re really meaning ‘feministic women’. Thus you and the audience of WWNH are talking at cross purposes. To sum up I see absolutely no need for any ‘new’ word to be introduced in the debate; ‘strong’ will do just fine.

              • Eric

                Ar:
                Wrong—masculine strength is one thing and feminine strength is another. The femihags and Gamers see it as simply a power struggle: but it works more like the strengths of two different poles on a magnet—both need their proper sphere of power to make the relationship function as a unity.

      • Milena

        My goodness, I didn’t know it was considered “feminine” and “lady-like” to be so freaking judgmental and call other women degrading names like “overweight feminazi warpig” and to get approval for that as well. My mistake, but I thought the concept of “femininity” included concepts such as generosity, seeing the good in others, being supportive and showing respect and consideration, and not only towards people who think like you.

        • For a long time I could not get my head around this ugly undercurrent I saw in many blogs about femininity (not all) where feminists are called fat, ugly, pigs, hags, etc., less traditionally masculine men are called beta, wimps or worse and just generally anyone who thinks or lives differently is called very ugly, degrading names. It just did not fit in my concept of feminine, lady-like manners.

          But now I’m starting to think the concept of ‘femininity’ used here and elsewhere is not so much about being a genuinely good person (also, why call it ‘feminine’ and limit it to women only?) than it is about displaying ‘qualities’ which are considered pleasing to a certain type of man, even if this includes using ugly and condescending language to bash anyone who somehow makes different choices than you, thinking that you know what’s going on in their heads and lives and forgoing all respect for human dignity. It seems incredibly hypocritical to me to tell men off for swearing because it offends your “feminine sensibilities” and then going around spewing insults and calling men wimps and women pigs.

          Your Highness Milena,
          You make excellent points. If I am guilty of what you describe, I desire to correct it immediately. Can you point to something written, or even an attitude I’ve reflected that meets your rightful objections?
          Guy

          • Milena

            Thank you for your reply. 🙂 I do not think you actively participate in what I mentioned, but I did not understand, for example, why you replied to the comment from Tooconfused above about a ‘lesser beta’ she once dated and the mean things she said about the next woman he dated that it was a good story delightful to read, which seemed to me an indirect approval of such language being used.

        • Meow Meow

          Hi Milena,
          I agree with your concept of femininity or as you say just ‘Being a Good Person”…I’ve read some of those writings you’re concerned about too (I don’t recall seeing name calling on this blog though) and am saddened by them. I have friends who are feminist, gay, all different ethnicities and guess what! Its a big world we live in and calling rude names and passing judgements is one of the least helpful things we can do. I think more in terms of bad person/good person…someone who perpetuates harm and meanness or someone who doesn’t. Keeps things simple on the individual level. As far as movements/societies go, poking holes and pointing out problems with certain ways of thought can be done without flaming whole groups which may include your friends and calling people (esp. my fellow women) “Hags” or “Fat warpigs” (Huh? What does weight have to do w/value anyway? My moms was ‘overweight’ and was a wonderful person!)

          I don’t think a lot of that particular name calling goes on here although the writer is pointing out the relationship/societal problems that can happen when feminism is applied to individual male-female dynamics.

          • Milena

            Hi Meow Meow. 🙂 In this comment I was referring to an earlier comment on this post by Tooconfused who told a story about a man she dated for a short time, and I did not like how she was judging him (e.g calling him ‘lesser beta’) and pretending to know what was in his head, plus calling the next woman he dated ugly names. I have to agree that on this blog you don’t often run into such things, which is one of the reasons why I stick around. I did come across ugly names being used a few times in the comments here, which is why I felt I needed to say something.

    • That Horse Is Dead

      Sir ar10308,

      Honest exchange or full disclosure is damaging to a budding relationship. Consider post 2149 and read Sir Guy’s responses in the comments section. It sounds like you may be fishing in a pool of women not acquainted with WWNH. If you ever expect to find the woman you seek, you must become the man she seeks and how will you learn this unless she expresses her boundaries to you? Manosphere teaching will attract the boundary-less woman who adapts to whatever you want her to be in the moment; and then she will change to her true colors after the altar. In other words, you will not keep the woman you marry. A quality, faithful woman who will be good to you as a lifetime partner and mother of your children will show you who she is — and protect her modesty and sexual assets. Only Mr. Good Enough will stick around to find out more. The rest of the men will move along to easier targets. Now, isn’t this what you want in your wife?

      • Manosphere teaching can be used to bed lots of sluts or can be used to attract your one true wife. Men in the ‘Sphere have done both. You have to dial the Game to your situation. The Manosphere isn’t just Mystery and wearing fuzzy hats.

        Personally, I’ve dated several women who are virgins and they were still attracted to many of the same qualities that more promiscuous girls were.

        • That Horse Is Dead

          Again, you are likely fishing in a pond of women not acquainted with WWNH. Virginal status has nothing to do with feminist influence in her thinking.

          • These girls were anti-feminist in word and deed. WWNH doesn’t seem to counteract Feminism in deed.

            Sir ar10308,

            You don’t research both sides before you try to argue, because you’re not debating intellectually. Here’s an excellent example. You say, “WWNH doesn’t seem to counteract Feminism in deed.”

            You clearly have not read the 25 articles titled “Dark Side of Feminism” or 55 other articles with “Feminism” or “feminist” in the title. None endorses the injection of Feminism into the social and domestic arenas. Ever learn what CONTENT means?

            Stick around. The ladies enjoy themselves chewing up your adultolescent rantings. It’s so easy.

            Guy

            • That Horse Is Dead

              You seem intent on being right and not open to new ideas, and I suspect quite young without life throwing you a few curve balls as of yet. Let me know in 20 years how that works for you.

              • You seem intent on telling me about experiences I’ve had were you weren’t present with you people you’ve never met.

        • Tooconfused

          Pal are you kidding me? All my girlfriends read Chateau Heartiste. I don’t even think Roissy actually writes the blog anymore, but oh well. We still read it.

          The Atlantic ran a story on game blogs. The cult of game is seeping into pop culture.

          My point. Game blogs are unsustainable in the long run. More women will latch on.

          Second point. You are entitled to near virgins or virgins. No one said you aren’t. You’re not entitled to disclosure.

          You mention you’d bolt on a chick who won’t disclose her history. And……? What’s that? I hear crickets.

          If you disappear you assume this is our loss. Again you cannot avenge a woman who you haven’t conquered. You dump her pre-conquest and she is stil winning.

          Also, why in the world would you ever ask a girl? It’s your job to find out. If you can’t even manage to sniff her out then what exactly have been learning from all these manosphere blogs?

          • Pop culture has been talking about Game decades, just subversively.

            Time is on the side of men. The longer a woman waits to settle on a partner the less time she has to birth children. And the other bottom line is that more and more men are waking to the scam of marriage 2.0. So unless a man wants kids, he should never marry.

            I did clarify to point out that a woman’s history disclosure is only of she wants commitment. I’ll add that her history isn’t relevant otherwise, especially in a FWB scenario. But most women eventually want commitment even when they say they don’t.

            • Miss Kitty

              well sir. MOST MEN WANT KIDS..
              and IF you are one of those men who have been around, what kind of women would want YOU.. since YOU may have kids from all over the country–(condoms aren’t perfect)

    • Eric

      Ar:
      A woman’s sexual history is, at bottom, absolutely irrelevant to how she functions in a relationship with a real man who respects women. It has to do with how grounded she is in her femininity and how sucessful she is in overcoming the femihag-inspired hatred of men—which Game contributes to largely by accepting all the feminist stereotypes of men and acting on them.

      I know of a woman who was once a prostitute and today she’s about the most loyal and loving wife you could imagine.

      • I’m glad for your one-case. But here’s how things break down on a larger scale:

        http://freenortherner.com/2013/06/21/sexonomics-odds-of-divorce/

        Turns out that the higher partner count, the higher chance of divorce. So past behavior seems to be quite a predictor of the future behavior.

      • lejubon

        It varies Eric. I know a woman named Shelly Lubben that was in porn for a few years and got married. Healthy marriage also. It’s not about a man can’t handle it. Everyone is different. A man is not less of a man because he doesn’t want her. That’s just like saying a woman isn’t a “real woman” because she doesn’t want a ex felon,drug dealer,etc. People have deal breakers. The world is HUGE. If people can stay true to themselves, they can find what they want/need in a man/woman.Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhoneAt Apr 9, 2015, 7:00:47 PM, What Women Never Hear wrote: a:hover {color:red;} a { text-decoration:none;color:#0088cc;}

        a.primaryactionlink:link, a.primaryactionlink:visited {background-color:#2585B2;color:#fff;} a.primaryactionlink:hover, a.primaryactionlink:active {background-color:#11729E;color:#fff;}

        WordPress.com Eric commented: “Ar: A woman’s sexual history is, at bottom, absolutely irrelevant to how she functions in a relationship with a real man who respects women. It has to do with how grounded she is in her femininity and how sucessful she is in overcoming the femihag-ins”

        • Eric

          Free Norterner’s statistics are correct, but it doesn’t take into account the fact that the present culture encourages BOTH easy sex and easy divorce among. Cheap sex and divorce are not natural female behaviors.

        • Eric

          Lejubon:
          I think if a woman is continuing in that kind of behavior, yes a man should see that as a deal-breaker. But the past is irrelevant—the case I cited the girl gave up prostitution, devoted herself to one man and went to drug rehab before they were married.

    • It’s the worst advice from the perspective of the guy. Just as telling a man to dress up and drop hints he’s a millionaire is the worst advice from the perspective of a club girl. From the perspective of a woman who has a prior partner count (as in, more than 0) but wants to find a decent man, it’s good advice, especially for early days and especially if her partner won’t stop asking, but also won’t leave over her silence. She doesn’t have to go into prior relationships until she’s sure she wants something long term with the man she’s talking to — after all, telling every guy she goes on a few dates with or courts is paramount to airing dirty laundry. She doesn’t have to intentionally put herself in a situation where the guy can use her ex-bf Gary as leverage — after all, if a guy only wants sex from her, then he will be more likely to increase the pressure if he finds out Gary had her as well. And she doesn’t have to tell the truth if pressed anyway — after all, if her partner count is over 0 but under “the entire village”, then the truth may not come out for weeks, years, ever.

      Is it nice? No. Is it setting the foundations for a trusting, bonded, lifelong relationship? Probably not. Is it necessary for a woman with a low partner count she’s comfortable with? Probably not. Will it happen? Yes. Will it help some women pin down the sort of guy they want? Probably so. Are these women going to adapt their strategies to make life easier for the men who want to bed or date them? Absolutely not. It’s unfair, but it’s life.

      Your Highness Superslaviswife,
      Welcome aboard. It’s a great day when another pretty woman joins us on this cruise to WhatWomenNeverHear. And thanks for a significant contribution.
      Guy

  2. lejubon

    I think this is one of the best websites ever. The wisdom is incredible. However I must disagree with this one. I will be 29 at the end if this month. I think female sexual history should be mentioned. I turn down women all the time. People give into their desires all the time. Diseases are rampant these days and increasing. If I’m marrying someone, all cards should be on the table. I’m a virgin. I understand that wome raped, sexually abused, etc… If my future wife is a virgin, that’s cool, if not that’s cool also. But I refuse to take a woman that has been with 3-20 football teams. I saw something recently on return of kings. The article was about how rich guys/Arab princes pay women 20-40 grand to have sex with them. No condom. These men piss and crap on these women. Deception is very high these days as well. Don’t play the good girl in front of me and then your some rich men prostitute.

    Men have choices with who they lay with also. If a man doesn’t want a woman because she has a high partner count, he doesn’t have to take her. What if the man a woman wanted to marry was a secret rapists/serial killer/ or a drug dealer??

    Sir Lejubon,

    You disagreement is acknowledged.

    As a first time responder, your explanation is insensitive and unattractive for a predominantly female audience of readers. It explains your sexual history.

    Guy

    • lejubon

      Because I mentioned something about return of kings doesn’t mean I’m a huge fan of the manosphere. It’s one example. As I said before I have no problem getting women. I actually stopped going on Return of Kings because it promotes hatred of women. I love women. Their the half of society. You should reread my entire comment instead of having selective viewing. I’ve literally ended relationships with males because they view women as a commodity. I’m just simple traditional and seek a traditional/feminine woman. My parents have been together for 41 years married 39.

      • Cinnamon

        Lejubon,

        Sorry for lumping you in with ar10308. You’re right – the fact that you read ROK does not mean you embrace the Manosphere and it’s rejection of masculinity.

        If you seek a traditional, feminine woman, what do you bring to the table in return?

  3. Cinnamon

    Sir Guy,

    Lejubon and ar10308 have been conditioned by reading in the Manosphere to approach women as commodities, very similar to how one might purchase an automobile. They want to know facts and draw absolute inferences based only on those facts. One example is that it is generally held in the Manosphere that if a woman is over 30 and unmarried there is categorically something “wrong with” her. Another example is that all women are fundamentally untrustworthy and will remain so, even if you marry one. Many Christians in the Manosphere promote these views (I’m sorry to say). So it’s a very rigid set of beliefs which goes contrary to scripture, and they will try to push it on you, and most will ridicule you with ad hominems if you resist.

    At the core of their thinking is a lack of unconditional respect for the female gender. These men are better off remaining single (and seeking their emotional nourishment from each other instead of from a woman in marriage) so long as they maintain the view that women are commodities not human beings each with a unique personality, made in the image and likeness of the creator. As you have mentioned many times, applying the principles you teach here at WWNH minimizes risk but does not eliminate it.

    Your Highness Cinnamon,
    I’m beginning to get an unfriendly picture of the Manosphere, one of self-induced homoeroticism as opposed to homosexualism.
    Guy

    • As opposed to being conditioned by the rest of society that allows women to enact their imperative completely unimpeded and without regard to the consequences?

      • flowers_in_a_coffee_cup

        @ ar10308

        your webpage seems to contradict what you are saying here. I am curious to know what side are you on?

        The farthest reachest of the Earth are cold and desolate; here I thrive

        https://ar10308.wordpress.com/

        Your Highness Flowers-in-a-cup,

        I noticed the same thing. One item cites ten kinds of women that men should not marry, all supposedly based on the Bible and written by a pastor.

        It’s a ruse to support the manosphere. They pass around talking points not unlike politicians do in DC every day. Because a woman has a fault that can be cited in the Bible as imperfect—such as older than the man, grass widow, unwilling to have babies, or not Christian—she’s disqualified for manly respect and thus marriage.

        Manosphere advocates ignore the biblical injunctions that promote the opposite, such as faith, hope, love, charity, and working to convert the unsaved. It’s all conceived and motivated in the effort to blame women for both social and domestic ills. It’s women’s fault; men are ready to teach women differently.

        However, boiled down to the essence, it’s a typical adolescent tactic brought into adulthood. They never fully developed themselves to overcome fear of responsibility for someone else. They seek to find significance among men who condemn the thought that women are capable of making men better than men can develop themselves. Such men self-position mental ice-packs designed to cool the heat they feel for enabling Feminism to emasculate them.

        They’ve found a way to escape their own conscience for not manning up to what they know they should be doing, which is earning satisfaction by accomplishing things on behalf of others for whom they accept responsibility.

        Let me know if describing their motivations crossed the line into name calling. I don’t want to do that.

        Guy

        • Eric

          Sir Guy:
          I think that describes the majority of them most accurately.
          The sad part is that there are a lot of men who’ve been badly treated by women and are vulnerable to those kinds of teachings (I know, I was there once myself). The problem is that much of the Manosphere fails to recognize that the cultural norms of today are contrary to both nature and history—what they should be doing is reforming women instead of playing along with them.

        • flowers_in_a_coffee_cup

          WOW! Loved what you said! No, sir no name calling on your part nor Sir Eric’s, however I noticed on AR’s site there was several names *implied.* I was tempted to post it yesterday, but wanted to give everyone a chance to read what he says, digest what he thinks, as he seems to believe in this application to apply certain parts of the bible to all women… (excuse the French here but damn it) I know I fall short daily but don’t need his kind to point it out to me beating me over the head with it all the while standing there indignantly and righteously gaslighting me. It just feels that way and I have had enough of that garage to last a lifetime!

          I have a friend who tells me she cannot come back here. She says your post make her feel bad about herself but only SHE can decide to make that internal change…you only limit yourself if you say you can’t or won’t. I know I can take what you say personally as well but I do try very hard to graph it to my life to make adjustments then make improvements on becoming a better female. I know of these sites they speak of…Roosh, return of kings,…something with the French word house in it…. I do read them from time to time but can only take so much of it…. I use read them to make sure I am NOT that way….and it would seem, I am so far away from that type of woman that it makes me proud of myself that I have come so far after being changed for the worst. I say that because recently I threw a bottle of water in a man’s face. He was using his words to assault and insult me….I should have tossed the bottle at him as well….but turned and walked away. I was speaking about it yesterday over lunch and it still hurts and makes me angry to think on, but I know in my heart I did the right thing!! So before I get to misty eyed over here…. Thank you, you most excellent, Sir Guy for your wisdom to gently and courage me daily. I owe you and another gentleman my undying gratitude and devoted admiration and this cannot be expressed with enough words as they fail me… ..my feelings overtake me.…. I will continue to appreciate your alpha male direction. Both of you are incredibly, and largely significant to my small unimportant life….. *tears streaming*

      • Cinnamon

        Leaving behind blue pill views of gender relations only to replace them with Manosphere beliefs is like running into Freddie Krueger’s house to escape from Dracula.

    • Eric

      Sir Guy:
      I have noticed that same thing. There is a strong undercurrent of homoeroticism in the Manosphere.

    • Eric

      Miss Cinnamon:
      That is a very accurate description of what is taught in the Manosphere. Actually Game and Feminism are mutually dependent on each other: Game can’t function except in the context of competition between the sexes. Hence, both hate the idea of compatibility, which should be the goal.

    • lejubon

      I wrote a lot. You have chosen to take out wh

      Sir Lejubon,
      You pulling our leg? That’s two unfinished comments. Watcha mean, sir?
      Guy

    • Miss Kitty

      it sounds like a RENT A CAR commercial i’ve seen the other day.. about a man who couldn’t make up his mind about what car he wanted to rent

  4. justmy2cents

    You’ve explained the effects of doing such thing on men, but what about in women? Would it not make her lose respect for her man?

    Your Highness Justmy2cents,

    Are you presuming that a woman would badger a man about his sexual history? If yes, then consider this.

    • He’d tell her nothing.

    Unless he holds her in contempt for defusing his conquering spirit by refusing his conquering attempts. Then, he might unload and brag about sexual exploits. If so, he lacks both self-respect and respect for both women and her. His self-image is full of thoughts about how inferior he is to other men, and he takes it out on women. He feels a sense of self-admiration to brag about it. He’s not aware but likely doesn’t care how insulting it is to a woman. He’s driven by his low status among men.

    Guy

  5. justmy2cents

    PS. Perhaps the tone in your responses is what was addressed in article 2162.

    ‘It suggests you may have less self-respect than required to make you more successful with the ladies’, ‘It explains your sexual history.’

  6. Tooconfused

    AR10308

    Why have been giving us lectures on game, red pill info., and manosphere tactics?

    I just don’t get it. We’re not leftists who watch GIRLS obsessively. Some of us have grown up with ROISSY and Dave Chappelle. You’re trying to exert influence over a crowd who have already discussed your statistics and read your links. Are you joking with that divorce link? We use google too.

    Radical feminism was planned and it benefits the elite. We know! Trust us we know all about 1-2-3rd wave feminism. You know what’s gonna happen in a short bit? Society will retract back to its conservative ways to create the illusion that we’ve finally woken up to red pill reality. Then? We’re going to advance even further into leftist politics. It’s all a show to give us piece of mind, the illusion that society isn’t that “radical”.

    Remember the 20’s, 1920’s?? Women were more liberal. They had to work cause men were away at war. Then in the later 40’s and 50’s we saw the housewife archetypes again. Then the radical 60’s. Back and forth, except the “forth” goes farther. Swinging between conservatism to liberalism like a pendulum. Now we’re here. 2015. A dating market so warped everything is going in reverse.

    I know you are proud of having taken the “red pill” but you need to find another blog to practice your sermons. Nobody here understands why you’re trying to convince a group of women what men are really like. We know. We have experienced it in real life. Please, relax!

  7. That Horse Is Dead

    Sir Guy,

    If this isn’t an indication that you’re making an impact I don’t know what is. You can expect more of this to come because the chatter has begun…new level, new Devil.

    Men are never more handsome than when they give women a path to victory. Did I tell you how wonderful you are today? Bravo.

    Your Highness That Horse is Dead,
    You make me want to comb, spray, and pat my non-existent hair.
    Guy

  8. JuJu

    Just want to thank you, Handsome Sir Guy, and the ever-lovely Lady That Horse is Dead, for your brilliant insight, both here and on the earlier post. In my situation I’d actually gotten to the point where I felt like I had done things I hadn’t after his asking so much (I dumped him, I had to). It is strange the places the mind will go, and as a man thinketh so he is. And after reading many of the comments on this post I am so grateful to be out of the manosphere loop and plugged in here. I will be working on the ‘courage’ part. It’s hard for me to find the balance between strong and feminine. I don’t want to come off as pushy or aggressive, but when it comes to sex, I think ‘put in place’ is our only way to get respect. Thanks again you all!

    • Cinnamon

      Juju,

      I know exactly what you mean about it behind hard to find the balance. I find that re-reading the articles in the CONTENT section of this blog on a regular basis is very helpful. You need to be reminded again and again how to do it unti it becomes an ingrained habit.

  9. Andromeda

    Hello Sir Guy,

    A man might back off during courtship if she says that her sexual history is not his business. But sometime later on, may be after marriage, this thought might be stuck in his head “she told me its none of my business .. which makes me think there is something she is hiding from me .. so she was probably sexually active … else she could have just chose to say she did not have any sexual partners”. Can telling him that its not his business cause problems sometime during their married life?

    Your Highness Andromeda,

    Sure the risk is always there. But what pressures are likely to make it rise into an issue?

    • Everyone has something to hide, but few people let it bother them to the point of inquisition without good reason.

    • Without some reason, he’s not likely to “think there is something she is hiding from me?” If he previously honors her desire for silence based on his respect, love, and desire to mate with her, he would most likely follow the male nature and keep his decisions intact. Men aren’t usually that flighty just to suddenly sense someone they respect is hiding something that could have vital impact on him.

    • Unless some stimulation comes along, such as she does something related to cheating that raises his suspicion. He might then wonder about her past.

    • Then, he faces the decision to continue suspecting or judge her on her other behaviors. Or, inquire or really push for resolution in his mind or dissolution of marriage because of what? Suspicion? Inability to confirm what she MAY be hiding? No longer able to believe her?

    • Of course, suspicion triggers an endless string of what-ifs. But wives usually know better than to trigger suspicion.

    While it’s possible, I don’t think it’s a big worry at all. Men and women are just greatly different. It’s not faulty, but you’re trying to think how a man thinks by thinking how a woman thinks. Very common but it can also be discouraging.

    Guy

  10. A.GuyMaligned

    Ladies,

    I’m proud of the way you disposed of two manospherians with womanly STRENGTH. You MANHANDLED them into retreat and reconsideration or extinction (at least not back yet).

    Today’s article may tickle memories of their own upbringing. I’ve been working on it for several weeks, and it fell into place on the perfect day in the schedule.

    As expected, Eric’s chivalry shined too.

    Guy

  11. Lyndeeloo

    Sir Guy, Eric, and the ladies of WWNH:

    I’m sitting in front of my computer, cheering you on! What a conversation!

    This is brilliant: “Game and Feminism are mutually dependent on each other.” I’ve never put it into words, but this is it! Neither is the cure for the other. Absolutely brilliant!

    Sir Guy, what would be some examples of situations that might warrant the stern, standing-up-for-oneself that you described in this post? It can be so easy to overreact to things. If a woman should limit herself to a half dozen such stands, she needs to develop her self-control (I know I have to work on this), so what kinds of circumstances call for such a strong reaction?

    Your Highness Lyndeeloo,

    Examples for stern lecture?

    First, you need to decide what you absolutely, positively, posilutely, absitively will not tolerate in your husband. Write them down in your journal and swear that you’d rather be single than put up with it.

    Then, you take the stern lecture route on first offense and on the second you walk out. Now, that may seem unacceptable but you either want to end his bad behavior before its habitual, or you will live in misery the rest of your marriage. These first two are incidents that warrant female dominance, and only the stern lecture method is likely effective. You have to get a strangle hold on his heart and keep it there till death do you part.

    I’ll presume and recommend these to every mature wife determined to fulfill her girlhood hopes and dreams. Neither is natural but from lessons learned and are therefore reasonably easy to give up. Give him the lecture:

    • First time he loses money gambling other than penny-ante playing with the boys. Say, “Gambling will not be part of my life, marriage, or relationship with you. It’s over forever, or I’m gone.” Be prepared and then walk out on incident #2.

    • First time he comes home late and drunk. Say, “Carousing will not be part of my life, marriage, or relationship with you. It’s over forever, or I’m gone.” Be prepared to walk out on time #2.

    • Of course, never explain further and don’t complain otherwise.
    Silence becomes golden as he stews over his options. If you try dialogue, how you feel otherwise merely gives him ammo to reduce respect for you for not standing by your guns and keep your self-respect.

    Other situations should be in your journal but not necessarily opened for lecture on first event. Perhaps later as situations worsen. Work out solutions if you can. Your an expert, remember? For example:

    • Mother-in-law interferes in wife’s home. (Watch the Lou Gehrig story, Pride of the Yankees. Lou needed a lecture, but they overcame.)

    • He’s too tight with housekeeping/family money.

    • He handles all finances but refuses to account to you.

    • He spends excessive time, money, energy on guy things. CAUTION: your definition of excessive will be arguable and may offend, so tippy toe is in order. Not about what he does but ‘excessive’; seek balance more in your favor first.

    • He goes unemployed and gives up. (Before a lecture, however, work on this. Forget empathy and sympathy and get him to accomplishing anything and everything to please you until it starts to please him. If his spirits don’t rise, after months of accomplishments, then lecture may be in order.)

    Make sense for a brave woman with feminine strength? (There’s that non-existent quality in women again.)

    Guy

    • Lyndeeloo

      Dear Sir Guy,

      Yes, that makes sense! This is very helpful. I’m so grateful for the wealth of information on your blog. It has helped me more than you’ll ever know.

      Lyndeeloo

    • Sarina

      Sir Guy, why are you this amazing? See, as a woman, I’ve thought of a few vices that I couldn’t tolerate, but since I see female friends putting up with all sort of disrespect to keep a guy, I was tempted to become more open and accept things that would bother me. Big mistake, if I try to ignore what I hate in a man, it will blow up in his face later for keeping this inside and not being honest with him. He needs to know my standards, this a wonderful reply. I’ve been noticing these gems of replies in various comments.

      Your Highness Sarina,
      Your wisdom sparkles.
      Guy

  12. A.GuyMaligned

    Sir ar10308,

    You say, “Best form of birth control is a fake name.”

    And I say, best expression of cowardice, sincerest lack of self-respect, and strongest insult of the male gender is to use fake name for birth control.

    Guy

    • Cinnamon

      Sir Guy,

      Ar10308 expresses typical Manosphere views with the above comment. Another quote which typifies the Manosphere mindset is his earlier comment, “Manosphere teaching can be used to bed lots of sluts or can be used to attract your one true wife.”

      The bedrock principle of WWNH in my view is the notion that “if you want a better man, become a better woman,” which raises a very compelling question:

      What does a man who thinks like ar10308 have to offer a woman of quality for purposes of either for dating or marriage? The answer is obvious – absolutely nothing.

  13. SouthernBelle

    Sir
    I’m
    Not sure where best to ask this question but I think here as a man’s inquiry into her sexual history is similar to a woman’s inquiry into his relationship history. Could you provide some insight and guidance to the ladies on inquiring of his past relationships. Part of me says the past and past and it’s irrelevant to the present for him proving himself worthy to me. But another part of me says one’s history reveals their true character and this is critical to know prior to marriage. If he discloses his history (or parts of his history) should I just leave it at what he chooses to disclose and decide if I can live with his version of events? Curiosity is a tough thing to tame!

    Your Highness Southernbelle,

    “But another part of me says one’s history reveals their true character and this is critical to know prior to marriage.”

    I’m unsure your statement is accurate. So, it makes me favor forgetting his past with women. What you hear about his character my be accurate if you get it from his previous gals, but not from him.

    Regardless of what you hear from him, it will have a very different impact on you than your history will impact him. No where near the same effect.

    If you both exchange your histories, you will be the biggest loser.

    Guy

    • Magnolia

      Hello Southern Belle,
      I would leave it alone. Men typically lie or at least conceal their history in order to protect their interests. They are not transparent like women are.

      Also, if you start asking a lot, you open the door for him to ask you. You don’t want to put yourself in a defensive position.

      Magnolia

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