When Successful People Get Married
One of my favorite bloggers is Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert. While I sometimes disagree with his views, his blog is great for high I.Q. nerds (like me) who like to think out-of-the-box thoughts.
I still remember back around 2007 when found out he got married a year prior after being a bachelor his whole life. As usual when a wealthy, powerful, successful man delusionally surrenders to traditional monogamous marriage, I shook my head and mentally placed a few bets with myself on how long it would take him to either get divorced or get caught cheating.
I don’t remember exactly what my guess was. Think I guessed six years. I ended up being one year off. In one of his latest posts he revealed he got separated last year from the woman I’m sure he told all of his friends was Not Like The Restâ˘. I’m sure, back when he got married, he told everyone that This Would Work⢠because she went to college, or because he’s smart and Knows What He’s Doingâ˘, or because she hasn’t had sex with too many men before him, or one of the other many irrelevant, left-brain excuses smarter people use to defend long-term Disney monogamy.
Even when I got married as a rash, uninformed, 25 year-old beta male, I knew it was a long shot and that I was probably making a mistake. Even while I was married, I was never defending marriage and I was warning all of my unmarried buddies to stay unmarried. Experience over the last few years as Blackdragon has shown me that I was a very unusual exception to the rule in this regard. Recently-married people tend to be the strongest defenders of monogamy there are, though they usually end up cheating or divorced just like everyone else.
I am 100% confident that if I walked up to Adams a few years ago as he was preparing to get married to Ms. Not Like The Rest⢠and showed him all the facts, stats, science, and evidence that clearly show humans were never designed for long-term monogamy and usually end up getting divorced or cheating, he would react the typical way the typical NRE-filled, oneitis-infected, Societally Programmed, Disney-infested person usually does. In other words, he would say I was full of shit and likely would have attacked me personally.
Today he’s singing a very different tune:
In 2014, marriage is still the best economic arrangement for raising a family, but in most other senses it is like adding shit mustard to a shit sandwich. If an alien came to earth and wanted to find a way to make two people that love each other change their minds, I think he would make them live in the same house and have to coordinate every minute of their lives.
Yep. But again, if I had told him those exact same words a few years ago, he would have snorted and called me arrogant or bitter. Isn’t that interesting?
Note he still thinks that marriage is the best way to “raise a family”. Clearly he has not read my blog or my ebooks explaining why this is not the case any more and how to set up OLTRs or OLTR marriages while raising kids. But even if he did a few years ago, he would have just made some irrelevant, negative, personal observation about me that had nothing to do with marriage or monogamy and proceeded on his merry way.
He touches on some other realities I’ve already discussed that he would have ignored or scoffed at a few years ago:
A hundred years ago, if you and your wife enjoyed square dancing, you had everything in common. There weren’t any options to discuss. Those were simple times. But fast-forward to 2014 and every human wants to go a different direction. You want to take spin classes and I want to go golf. You want to do yoga and I want to go to the gun range. Every minute of every day involves one or both partners compromising. This is a first-world problem to be sure, but the effect is to rob you of your sensation of freedom.
Correct again. Traditional monogamous marriage was a workable arrangement back in the 1950s or the 1800s when human beings, particularly women, had no freedom to go out into the world and do whatever they wanted. These days, men and women alike can do whatever the hell they want, even well into “old age” of 50+. This is why now even old people are getting divorced in record numbers.
This reality alone renders long-term, cohabiting, absolute sexual monogamy as unsustainable. You, or more likely her, will eventually want something very different, and won’t see the point of constant compromise. Compromise being exactly what monogamy is, particularly for people who are higher energy, more successful, more dynamic, have bigger goals, or have higher sex drives. As I’ve said before, if two very low sex drive, very boring people get married, then they have a real shot at making lifetime monogamy work. But honestly, how many non-old, modern day couples do you know like that? Where both people are boring and have low sex drives?
Now that he’s a single man and is free once again, his happiness is soaring, which is typical once a man gets over the pain of his divorce or separation:
So there I was a year ago with a blank slate, no strings, and an option to create a life from scratch. It was a rare opportunity. The first principle I established for my engineered life involved recognizing that one person would never be the answer to all of my needs. So I looked at all the things I enjoy doing with other people and sought out the right people for those activities. The result is that no one is ever compromising. I only spend time with people who are doing what they want to do when they want to do it. And wow, does that make things nice…this past year was the most fun of my entire life. No other year comes close.
All you married guys, please take note about what Adams just said about getting divorced. The most fun of his entire life, and no other year comes close. I experienced a similar boost in happiness the year I got divorced. The act of splitting up the family isn’t fun and is quite painful, but that pain subsides quite quickly for a man, and soon you’ll be the happiest you’ve ever felt.
But here’s the sad part. Let’s see if Adams remembers all of this happiness and freedom the next time he gets oneitis for the next woman who is Not Like The Restâ˘. I hate to say it, but the odds of him getting monogamously married again at some point are high, despite his acknowledgement above.
He goes on:
Another thing I didn’t see coming is that there are now more single than married people in the United States. That snuck up on me. So loneliness is more of a choice than a necessity in 2014.
He really needs to read my blog. I reported this right here over two years ago. And it did not “sneak up on me.” I predicted exactly this way back in the 1990s. Fewer people will be married as time goes on. In a few decades, the percentage of monogamously married adults with lifetime monogamy expectations in their marriage will be around 20-25%. I don’t know exactly when this will happen, but it will happen. Just watch. If you’re reading this blog and others like it regularly, and getting it, you’re truly on the cutting edge of societal change.
Note again his Societal Programming, implying that if you’re not married you must be “lonely.” As I explained in my last podcast, do you really think a man with one or two regular MLTRs and one or two regular FBs is “lonely?” Really? I can’t speak for other poly guys, but there are times I’m looking to get away from my women for some alone time, as much as I love them…quite the opposite of “lonely.” (I happen to be writing this blog post during one of these solo getaways. I’m typing this on my laptop while camping alone, sitting on a cliff, overlooking a lush forest on a small mountain. It’s awesome.)
Anyway, Adams gives a similar prediction, though he’s placing a more specific time frame on it:
…it probably isn’t a coincidence that there are more single and divorced people than ever. Traditional marriage is the biggest obstacle to happiness in the United States. I give it twenty years before society acknowledges it to be a bad fit for modern times…Marriage is probably a great solution for 20% of the public. The rest of us need better systems.
I love to hear this stuff, but again I am saddened that A) if I had told him exactly this a few years ago he would have rolled his eyes and told me to fuck off, and B) the odds are overwhelming he’ll get monogamously married again someday. It’s a sad situation all around.
This is why I think that while traditional monogamous marriage will go away (or significantly reduce) someday, it will be longer than we expect. Even people who are intelligent enough to admit it doesn’t work are still going to be doing it, repeatedly, in large numbers. The hundreds-of-years-old Societal Programming and thousands-of-years-old obsolete biology are just too strong for people to just “wake up” and stop doing this.
Just to be clear, I’m not saying NEVER GET MARRIED. I’m saying if you do want to cohabit or raise kids with that special someone, do it in a way that makes sense within the realities of the modern era and how human beings actually work in real life rather than in fairy tales. This means:
1. Don’t get legally married. If you do, get an enforceable prenup well before you do it.
2. Sign and file a legally enforcable parenting plan before anyone gets pregnant.
3. Don’t get sexually monogamous. It’s an extremely short-sighted thing to do and you’ll deeply regret it later. Love your special lady all you want, but keep the relationship sexually open, within whatever ground rules you both agree to.
4. Keep your finances separate. No co-owned debts, assets, or leases. If you want to financially support a lower-income OLTR or OLTR wife, do so, but that doesn’t mean you have to have joint checking accounts or have both of your names on the mortgage or lease.
Change is slow. We are moving in the right direction though. At least that’s something.
Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.
Traditional marriage does not exist; it ended with no-fault (read “his-fault”) divorce. Every married man is such because his wife decided this morning that today is not the day she divorces his sorry ass.
If marriage is not essential for long-term survival, it will take its place beside the horse buggy and slide rule as a curious relic of a bygone age. If, on the other hand, the only alternative is extinction, marriage will be restored, on terms highly favorable to the male sex.
“If, on the other hand, the only alternative is extinction, marriage will be restored, on terms highly favorable to the male sex.”
That is the fundamental question. My disgust with Blackdragon is that he doesn’t even consider it. He’s like a delusional child oblivious to the fact that his poly / player philosophy may mean either the death of the white race or the human race or both.
Mandated lifetime monogamous marriage may be inevitable if white, European civilization is to survive.
Dave,
I would go further and say that that MARRIAGE IN THE 1ST WORLD, MORE SO IN THE WESTERN WORLD, AND IN PARTICULAR the USA DOES NOT EXIST. There are people like my parents who had their 50th wedding anniversary who live like it exists. There are people like my sister and brother-in-law who had their 20th Wedding anniversay who live like it exists too. Don’t forget that you can also rape your spouse since the same time that no fault divorce got instituted too meaning the late 1960s in the USA which was not legislated or judiciated on forone way or the other before hand in some states or what was legislated to say that you did have a right to sex from your spouse in other states.
Let us also not forget that a higher percentage of women want to have sex with a man who is not their spouse than men who want to have sex with a wife who is not their spouse just because the man has status and has been vetted by another woman whereas men don’t think this way. . Fame adds to the army of women who want to sleep with Scott Adams too.Everything else you said is correct about no fault divorce.
That’s a great quote.
1. Of course I considered it. I considered it strongly, and sadly realized it isn’t going to happen. You or I can be disgusted all you want, but women and beta males have already won this battle. They have the numbers and the money, by far. Wish all you want, be mad all you want, it isn’t going to happen. Ride the wave or spend your life angry at the wave, the choice is yours.
2. Your concern over the “white race” is completely irrelevant to me. As long as mankind continues, which it will, I couldn’t care less what race it is. I will thrive regardless. And so could you if you decided to.
3. You forget that the “white European” culture you want to save so badly keep voting for people who think exactly the opposite of you. What does this tell you?
“To save marriage, we must save the culture that no longer believes in marriage!” How does this make sense?
4. Please tell me specifically how the lack of a legal procedure called “marriage” will end human beings’ existence on Earth, considering people can have and raise kids without that legal procedure. I can’t wait for your answer.
Fascinating stuff … I read Scott Adams’s last book and enjoyed it.
BD did you read it? Looks like I better check out his blog.
BD I think you do SA a disservice by assuming you know exactly how he would’ve responded to X, Y, or Z in the past.
But anyway, it’s great for men (who want to be alpha and free) to have your writing available, to wake them up and to illuminate reality accurately.
BD have you already posted about Clooney’s marriage?
It looks doomed simply by the fact that they both have serious globe-trotting careers going full blast, let alone any additional factors…
Come to think of it, having Scott Adams read your blog etc. might be great.
BD, have you made any effort to get SA to check out your blog?
I can think of at least two ways that marriage might be restored:
* The UK already allows Muslims to have their divorces handled in Sharia courts. What if a white man is served with divorce papers, and decides to convert to Islam? His ex-wife gets a suitcase to carry her clothes, he keeps everything else (including kids), and anyone who objects to this outcome is a “racist” or an “Islamophobe”.
* The burden of supporting millions of single mothers and imprisoning their feral offspring is more than a dwindling tax base of married men can support. The currency collapses, and millions of single women lose their welfare benefits and government jobs. Any man who still works can “adopt” a 12-year-old fatherless virgin and do as he pleases with her, the cops totally don’t care. After she has a few kids, he starts calling her his wife and expecting their daughters to remain chaste until they’re formally married.
No doubt your readers can imagine other scenarios.
No but it’s on my reading list, coming up shortly. He’s a contrarian thinker and I love those (obviously).
Why? He’s not irrational, so if he thought getting married was an idea doomed to fail he would have never done it. Thus if I had pointed this out to him, he likely would have scoffed. These things are not a stretch.
Thank you.
Nope. I’ll post about it right now:
Clooney is being stupid.
There you go.
He’s doing a serial monogamy marriage a la Tom Cruise. Nothing new. He’ll be divorced in a few years, but he probably doesn’t care.
Your first idea is very creative and I enjoyed it. It will never happen though. White leftist women are not going to sit idly by while an evil white male oppressor and supporter of the evil patriarchy divorces her and takes everything with her getting nothing, conversion to Islam or no.
Your second idea is Mad Max stuff, and with the rise of Asia/China the Mad Max scenario isn’t likely to happen on large scale, outside of a few third-world shitholes.
I really don’t care about “saving lifetime marriage to protect a leftist, socialist, feminist society that doesn’t want lifetime marriage any more.” Again, that position it makes no sense.
But if I did, the only scenario I would support would be if the government A) removed all laws regarding marriage, sex, and divorce, and B) stopped giving any “free” taxpayer money to anyone for any reason. Stick to building roads and 4 or 5 other basic functions and that’s it. Then let the the free market / free society figure out the details marriage, divorce, and child rearing for itself. I describe a variation of this here.
I’m not interested in the leftist answer of handing piles of “free” taxpayer cash to irresponsible people, nor am I for the right-wing answer of big government putting a gun to everyone’s head and forcing them to be married under whatever definition the corrupt politicians at the time arbitrarily decide.
“BD have you already posted about Clooneyâs marriage?”
“Nope. Iâll post about it right now:
Clooney is being stupid.
There you go.”
HA HA HA! Made me laugh out loud. Thanks for a good laugh BD!
Great start to my day this morning.
“If marriage is not essential for long-term survival, it will take its place beside the horse buggy and slide rule as a curious relic of a bygone age.”
I suspect that this is the case. In the coming decades, we will have the ability to produce highly intelligent, healthy, and beautiful offspring through genetic screening during in vitro. This will allow the higher orders to produce children not likely to fall by the wayside if their parents fail to maintain a hard monogamous marriage. The lower orders will continue their current slide into irresponsible illegitimacy indefinitely. It will turn out that monogamous marriage was useful at emotionally safe guarding the rearing of people of middle level intelligence. The coming eras will see upper and middle class people of greater intelligence and greater talent who need no such emotional safe guarding to succeed in life and people from the underclass who have neither the ability or the desire to practice hard monogamy.
Also, the anti-white zeitgeist is not going to allow white men to declare they are Muslim and go to Sharia court in the event of a divorce. The laws will insist that they still have to go to mainstream divorce courts and the immigrant descended Muslims will show that their militant Islam is often a mask for simple ethnoracial nationalism and refuse to help aforementioned convert. A white man could convert earlier but I imagine that the laws will be changed to say if he suddenly converts his wife can frivorce him right than and there and he still has to go to mainstream divorce court. (Though if she stayed with him after the conversion and perhaps converted herself than perhaps she really would be stuck with Sharia courts adjudicating a divorce.)
A lot of the men who insist that monogamous marriage is necessary for civilization are simply betas dressing their emotional desires for Disney monogamy in some dire concern for civilization.
“All you married guys, please take note about what Adams just said about getting divorced. The most fun of his entire life, and no other year comes close. I experienced a similar boost in happiness the year I got divorced. The act of splitting up the family isnât fun and is quite painful, but that pain subsides quite quickly for a man, and soon youâll be the happiest youâve ever felt.”
The reason this is the “happiest” period is because of the severe ego deficit you experience toward the end of the marriage. I.e. you don’t get this high without getting married in the first place, and then feeling like shit toward the end, only to then feel relief.
[blockquote]
But hereâs the sad part. Letâs see if Adams remembers all of this happiness and freedom the next time he gets oneitis for the next woman who is Not Like The Restâ˘. I hate to say it, but the odds of him getting monogamously married again at some point are high, despite his acknowledgement above.
[/blockquote]
I don’t understand this at all. I know it happens, but it makes no sense to me how a guy could get married, realize it’s not as great as he thought, get divorced and then go back for seconds.
I remember how I felt when I got married. All your trademarked statements applied. I knew the odds, but we were different…
Now it just seems like the second time around a guy would realize that he’s feeling all the same emotions and making all the same rationalizations he did the first time (with the possible addition of “I learned what to do/not to do during marriage 1”) and that if it didn’t work then, why would he expect it to work the second time?
What does a guy have to do to guard against that? I haven’t even come close to being that much in love with anyone in the 5+ years since getting separated/divorced, but if I did, would I have enough awareness to avoid making a mistake? Or am I just as likely as George Clooney to do something stupid when I should really know better?
Jon, you’re just as likely to do it again, should you feel strongly enough that you have no other option, i.e. marriage is your only move. Despite what most people desperately want to believe, a human is a reactionary biological machine who operates on base emotion. So your reaction, if the feelings were strong enough, would be to marry again. This applies to everyone.
Jon, one more thing: you say it makes no sense, but we see it all the time. People drink to much, have an awful hangover, and then do it again. They eat too much food and overeat in the future. This is how humans operate: we are consuming machines (consumption doesn’t just apply to food, it’s mental as well) who can’t do anything else. It’s the way were are.
A Muslim man is entitled to Muslim marriage. There will be a few videos of family judges getting their heads sliced off, politicians will insist that the killings have nothing to do with Islam, and white women will stop filing for divorce. If a woman does file, no lawyer or judge will go near her.
Take away the EBT cards, and large parts of America become third-world shithole in a matter of days. You think Janet Yellen can print money faster than stores can raise prices?
Scott Adams is completely and utterley immersed in the Blue Pill Feminist Culture. While he probably read some concepts as apparent in his cartoons, he refuses to acknowledge them properly.
Quote from his blog on feminism:
“Quote:
So in my view, feminists are too conservative. They should be asking for superior rights, not equal rights. I think everyone reading this blog agrees with the feminist goals of, for example, equal pay for equal work, and the idea that women should be able to walk down the street without feeling threatened. Off hand, I can’t think of any feminist goal that is unreasonable. There are real questions on how one measures pay gaps and whatnot, and how one approaches a particular problem, but those are details. Feminists have done a great service for humanity by aggressively improving the situation for women. I’m a fan of their work.”
Yeah – feminists have not gone far enough – right Dilbert.
Or another here:
“Quote:
My point in all of this is that feminism is sexist by design. It has to be that way to be politically effective. You need a big, bad enemy because without it you can’t generate the kind of change you need. I don’t disagree with the strategy because it works, and historically it was in the service of a good cause.
But the long term risk with any good cause is that it can accidentally evolve into the evil it was designed to thwart. I think we are at or near that turning point with feminism.”
While he certainly enjoys being in his new situation – he is in top form now aged over 50, he has likely little problems attracting pretty young women just using his fame, wealth and new excellent physical condition and thus looks. (Pic of him after a recent charity run.)
But that is not equal to Red Pill – I am sure he has read Manosphere stuff, but seems to reject it completely. As long as he does not marry or be in a committed LTR, then he will be fine able to “enjoy” the fruits of his fame – never touching the brutal ground of the Blue Pill world again (in which he is completely immersed and frankly hopelessly so).
Abosolutely correct and great point.
The issue of future technology never enters into these discussions and it should. People don’t realize how different life will be 40 years from now with the new technologies we’ll have at our fingertips that seem like Star Trek fantasy to us now.
Exactly.
Correct, but it’s not just betas. There are a lot of manosphere Alpha Male 1.0s who think women should shut up, stop being “sluts”, and do what they’re told, i.e. don’t fuck any other men except me while I go fuck other women on the side. A lovely fantasy to be sure, but again, it’s not going to happen in the Western world of real life. That ship sailed a very long time ago and isn’t coming back.
Because men, like women, assume the reason for a marriage (or relationship) not working is because they married the wrong person, not utilized the wrong system.
When you change the system, that’s when your life improves. When you keep swapping people around using the same system, nothing ever changes. It’s true in business as it is in relationships.
1. I consider that a good thing. Things can only get better in the US after they get worse. A horrible depression like that will wake people up to better systems than Bush-Obamaism.
2. It would become a third-world shithole in some parts of the country. Other parts of the country would adjust to the new conditions and be just fine after a brief adjustment period. Human beings are clever, but only when they are forced to be. America prior to 1913 and Hong Kong prior to the 1990s did very, very well with little or no welfare state.
I think you’re being a little too extreme but you are more or less correct on his worldview. I’m quite sure if I described the concept of an OLTR to him he would roll his eyes.
He’ll get monogamously married again at some point. Men always do. Just watch.
“Oh the humanity!” [cue footage of the Hindenburg disaster]
I know Blackdragon that you are an advocate of OLTRs and I probably favor the Manosphere Marriage 1.0 option with some guys being able to pull off even threesome or acceptance of women for their “occasional transgressions”.
However both with those kind of LTRs as well as your proposed universal OLTRs – you are forgetting one thing: It works only for rather high value men – Alphas, Sigmas, guys with Game and wealthy or famous men. All the rest – which will be the wide majority – will be left in the dust, as women in a world of completely unfettered hypergamy and State-financial-aid will prefer to live in dozens with a billionaire Alpha than to be married to a boring or poor Beta.
The current goal of our social engineering elite is a Brave New World society and yes creating humans artificially has likely already been done in black-ops laboratories. Nonetheless the ruling party always excludes themselves from wide application of those technologies (they want to remain wild) just as they are impervious to most effects of feminism and live and marry similar to as they did 150 years ago.
The wide social engineering is only for the peasants below. OLTRs would never come about for the entire population as most men would not be able to pull it off. A strange kind of Polyamory – yes, but those LTRs are terrible usually with the least attractive men and women banding together to get a few scraps of sex for exchange of plenty of Beta-provisioning.
For the wide psychological stability and thus ensured stable survival of civilization the family unit is the best way to go forward. In that system all men have a chance of being paired with a woman – and yes in a very chaste system it would be hard for cads to enjoy in hedonism. But guess what – it would be back to 1890 where those men either resorted to prostitutes or had the funds to keep a mistress. The only thing that would have to be restrained is female hypergamy, which makes sense in primitive mankind where humans live in groups of 50, but works counterproductive towards civilization-building. I for one would prefer to explore the universe in a galactic civilization than to return to caves.
Incorrect. A beta male is capable of an OLTR marriage; a marriage where he supports his dominant, bitchy wife like the submissive man he is, but both he and his wife are allowed to “get a little on the side” when needed, within whatever ground rules they negotiate (which, in a beta’s case, will probably favor the female, but at least it’s not monogamy, which is unsustainable).
What you’re talking about are MLTRs (like I have) and harems (like Hugh Hefner has). Yes, those kinds of things will indeed be reserved for men who choose to become Alphas. But those aren’t OLTRs.
I am a libertarian and completely opposed to any state financial aid to women of any kind, beyond perhaps that only available at the local (municipal) level with strict restrictions and time limits. So if you think women living off the government teet is a bad thing for society, I wholeheartedly agree with you. (Not that I care about society any more, since society has made its choice, but that’s another topic.)
100% and completely agree. A family unit where mom and dad can go get their sexual needs discreetly met on the side, and where dad doesn’t have a legal gun to his head if/when mom decides to leave him.
I am not anti-family. I’m not even anti-marriage. I am anti-monogamy and anti-alimony. Make sure you understand the difference.
I actually agree with Heartiste on OLTRs:
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/09/17/the-ugly-reality-of-open-relationships/
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/polyamory-is-disguised-polygamy/
MLTRs is just a soft harem or highly r-selected Lover-type created Game that classifies you readily as the exciting Player. Some Pro-PUAs are even teaching that specifically.
The problem with this is that women take way more damage when having sex with Alphas they are attracted to. Yes – they may live with a Beta or Omega and be somewhat content if they can get some Alpha dick on the side, but that is far from ideal for them. It is not positive for the Beta and the woman actually would prefer to live with the Alpha, but can only get the occasional fling from him if she is moderately attractive.
Besides – the sexual market place is just different for both sexes – especially in the West and with the aid of the Internet. An ugly fat 3-4 can get 500 notches or more per year – and the majority of them can be at least physically attractive. Even the best Players would be hard-pressed to replicate that. Some women may be similar to men in that regard and not be left bitter and jaded by promiscuity, but I estimate that less than 1% of women are built that way.
The other 99% would prefer to be with an Alpha in a LTR. If they cannot get that – yes then open cuckoldry and living with a Beta with Alpha dick on the side – seems to be the targeted new norm for our feminist indoctrination. I would not call that happy living for the Beta male. Invite her for lunch, listen to her emotional stories, pay for lunch and see how she gets picked up by an Alpha for fucking afterwards. Sounds like a good deal for the average Beta.
And frankly I get what you are proposing, but it is more in the line of an Alpha who is indifferent about the fact that his harem is having sex with other men.
I personally have a LTR with whom I do threesomes and she accepts other “pussies that I pet from time to time”, but I don’t believe that most men could pull this off.
Just as the Player/Lover in the PUA philosophy is a way of life, but they have no illusions about the fact that their life-style can never be replicated by the majority of men. And frankly neither can your proposed way of life. Which is fine of course – but advocating it for the entire gamut of society is just not founded in reality.
This would only work in an engineered & totally controlled Brave New World society and I am sure that you would not like to live in such a world either.
Zelcorpion: If you think I’m going to tolerate paying for sex by lowering myself to hookers or financially providing for a “mistress” just so you can resurrect the cult of virginity, you’ve lost your fucking mind! Our sexually liberated culture must be preserved, not eliminated. You’re not going to convince people to become Puritans again! Never!
And can you explain why everyone can’t lead this lifestyle? I see no reason why open relationships can’t be the norm.
Zelscorpion, I get the feeling you’re just going to repeat yourself regardless of the points I make, so this will be my last response to you unless you have anything new. I’ll try to make it a good one.
1. Heartiste, like most Alpha Male 1.0s, is mistaking MLTRs for OLTRs. These are two completely different things as I have clearly and repeatedly stated. He’s attacking true polyamory (MLTRs). I’m talking about a committed, long-term marriage within a family unit of one man and one woman, both of whom are allowed to play around on the side if needed. That’s an OLTR, not MLTR, and not polyamory. He, and you, are comparing apples to oranges.
2. Long-term monogamy doesn’t work no matter what laws you pass or enforce. Women are going to repeatedly “cheat” on beta males regardless of what system you choose, be it your Marriage 1.0 or my OLTRs. My system is superior, because A) it’s honest, with less drama and conflict, and B) it doesn’t require big government in our bedrooms.
In other words, betas are ALWAYS going to get the raw end of the deal no matter what system society chooses. That’s the price you pay for choosing to be a beta, and never forget, a beta can CHOOSE to become an Alpha whenever he wants. I did.
3. Read excuse number 17 right here. Disney monogamy (your Marraige 1.0) will ALWAYS be practiced by a significant portion of the population even if the entire world becomes completely Blackdragonized. The world you fear of 5% of men getting all the pussy while the other 95% wallow in loneliness with zero sex isn’t ever going to happen. (Nor would I want it to happen, because again, I am pro-family.)
4. I personally know at least three co-habiting OLTR couples, two of which have kids, where the man is a beta. While I will again qualify that a beta-OLTR has a different flavor than the type of OLTR I recommend, beta males are indeed capable of OLTR marriages and can do them. If you refuse to believe this, you’re more than welcome to think whatever you like, but you’re wrong. And again, I’m talking here about OLTRs, not MLTRs and not polyamory.
Good discussion!
Heartiste is an angry loser who somehow equates his lack of success with women to the collapse of Western civilization. I would be reluctant to advertise my agreement with him on anything.
Look – I respect your stuff and we are both Red Pill – maybe you Black Pill. We may differ on individual perceptions of what is preferable for the wide majority of people.
We can agree to disagree. I don’t think that knowing female nature – even your OLTR with a Beta will work.
Instead what would be better is Red Pill and Game being taught at school, media & academia so that most men become Sigmas or Alphas – or at least a lot more masculine. Apart from that women should get the same kind of teaching – meaning telling them the truth – they are more happy with a different life-choice: Getting the highest quality man in her prime, having a kid and going to study and work in her late 20s (in reality most women should not work considering what kind of work they do – they should do charity work if they are bored – and men should earn enough to support a family incl. children).
I get your point – monogamy runs counter to our basic sex drives, but females are usually serial monogamists and in 99% of cases engage in extra-sexual-activity, when not being overly attracted to their Beta-husbands. That is by the way the current propaganda-shtick pushed by the media – open cuckoldry. And women even at ages of 40 can get way more quality dick than their Beta husbands – for short term mating that is.
Remember – currently feminism is allowed to run amok and one of the tenets is to restrict our sexuality to the max while liberating female drives completely. As far as short-term-mating is concerned – women will always out-fuck even the best players and not even Brad Pitt or Leonardo DiCaprio could compete with them.
So – in short let’s agree to disagree.
I remember reading in a biography of Lord Byron that when he went to live in Italy (about 200 years ago, I guess) it was perfectly accepted that marriage was just a meaningless social convention, and everybody was openly getting some on the side.
I don’t have much to back this up but I have a strong feeling that this whole “strict lifetime monogamy” expectation that people have is a sort of historical anomaly and that a lot of cultures at a lot of times have been much looser in their idea of family structures.
Roissy points out here: http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/how-much-can-game-do/ that with solid game, everyone from Greater Alphas to average Betas could get great sexual satisfaction. Further, if prostitution were legalized/decriminalized virtually all men would have decent options open to them.
Keep in mind that Roissy/Heartiste has very little real life experience with women – he’s pretty much just a clueless chump living in his own world, cherry picking studies and dreaming shit up.
I guess for all you Game-deniers out there you do not really exist until you step into the limelight with your name (and promptly lose your job to the Feminazis in the corporate or political world). It is not a coincidence that only those guys have stepped forward who were either independently wealthy or had a career apart from the PC-culture-dictatorship.
Dream on buddy- his words speak of too much experience and there have been guys who met him in DC in person, though Roissy is not leading the blog on his own now.
This is exactly the position that is so hotly disputed nowadays. The evidence seems to be piling up that female nature is to maintain multiple *concurrent* sexual relationships. And this means balanced relationships, not those of the manosphere alpha fux / beta bux variety or whatever. Many ideas discussed on this blog seem to implicitly acknowledge this.
Great post! I have no desire to get married, but at some point want a committed relationship with children.
Never commented before, but seemed appropriate after reading the above blog post today.
Â
A year ago, at age 33, I made the transition to a Blackdragon style open marriage. For a couple years prior to that, I had read books and experimented with polyamory. It failed despite all the time we spent on âopen and honestâ communication. Neither of us were happy. While I could do fine with multiple âloves,â she couldnât tolerate it emotionally. We spent too much time discussing her feelings and insecurities, etc. wondering if I would leave her for another woman that I was seeing. It was unbelievable how much âworkâ this would take with little reward. I realized I didnât have the time for multiple MLTRs, plus my OLTR and kids, hobbies, work, etc. I couldnât tolerate coming home to an emotional rollercoaster for a wife any longer and only saw divorce and splitting the family as my option to continue getting different/new women. I donât remember how I stumbled upon your website, but Iâm very glad I did.
Â
Ever since I explained and implemented âFBs only policy,â everything has been great. Iâm happy, sheâs happy. She has even more increased libido. We have sex with each other daily or more. I hook up with an FB when I feel like it. I have a fairly high success rate on my day ones and after my last barrage I laid two out of the three women that I met on day two. My wife has accepted and encourages the FB side project. I had nothing to lose when I told her I was throwing poly out the window and trying the FB instead. And now seeing how easy it is to meet younger women and give them great sex (Yes, BD is right about this, orgasms ARE key. My wife and I already had terrific sex so I was way ahead in this dept), itâs fairly easy to keep going. I can now relax and focus on the areas of my life that are most important. And when I get the itch or meet a girl at the store, then I take advantage of the groundwork already laid.
Â
I have to acknowledge that my wife is what BD has labeled a âdoll,â which has no doubt helped things go more smoothly. Sheâs not too smart, but not dumb. Naturally more submissive, supportive of my endeavors. Doesnât spend much money since sheâs an ISTJ.
Â
While I could have been happy divorcing and playing the MLTR field for as long as possible, weighing all the pros/ cons of divorce for me in my situation, the open OLTR/FB has worked brilliantly. I’m an ISTP- I must have autonomy but appreciate things that work. This works. Iâm a better father, husband, a better man. I actually appreciate my wife more now than before. And not just because she likes upholding her reputation of being better in bed than my younger FBs  : P hahahaÂ
Â
The OLTR/FB can work for married men. And the info BD sells is worth it–even if it fails you can use it in your future relationships.
Â
I wish guys on the fence the best. Gotta make a choice either way. And thanks BD.
There still seems to be a bit of a stigma though for guys who remain unmarried the more the creep up in age. For instance, as a 35 year old single guy who is loving life, my family still gives me the sad “Don’t worry you’ll find someone one day,” whenever I tell them I’m not in a serious relationship; as if they think there is something wrong with me. They don’t see to get that being single makes me happy.
Kind of reminds me of a good rant that Lewis Black does regarding a very similar situation he gets as well. I managed to find the ending clip of his rant here:
Thanks for your story, suppressor. My email is full of success stories like yours, but sadly most guys want to keep this stuff private.
OLTRs work. They work as long as you put in the time to do them correctly. People who say OLTRs can’t work are folks who have never tried one or have attempted one incorrectly.
Great job.
@ Rancor
“The evidence seems to be piling up that female nature is to maintain multiple *concurrent* sexual relationships.”
Interesting. It seems very unlikely, as the risk of being subjected to violence or even death would be far to great for a woman playing such a game.
Could you elaborate on this and/or direct me to some of the discussions?
That’s exactly it and I experience the same. “Why don’t you settle down and be more unhappy like we are?” I talk a lot about that in my book.
@Bellum
The rough argument is that humanity’s distant ancestors believed in partible paternity, the idea that a child can have more than one father. With this understanding of reproduction it would make perfect sense for a woman to want multiple partners, since then she wouldn’t be dependent on just one man to care for her and her child. Men would also be happy, since by sharing the parenting load they would be freed up to pursue other women.
Of course at some point people somehow figured out that every child actually has exactly one father. Societies had to be restructured to account for this new knowledge, and the formal monogamous marriage was born. The resulting conflict between human basic nature and human socialization then became the primary source of the complexities we see today.
A variant of these ideas was popularized in the book “Sex at Dawn,” which despite a reputation for bad science makes a set of undeniably compelling points.
The greatest appeal of the theory is that a lot of mysterious facts suddenly become obvious, from the popularity of gangbang porn to the general unhappiness and frustration women quickly feel in monogamous marriages. And it also provides a framework to support BD’s recommendations on organizing and managing relationships.
@ Rancor
Thank your for replying. That’s an interesting theory.
My first instinct was to dismiss it as it seems very unnatural, but then I thought it over.
It would be logical for male sexual nature to have distinct sexual strategies for distinct situations, to pacify the tribe.
Men polygamy versus men > women -> polyandry.
Men and free women -> polygamy, men and slave women -> polyandry.
The same could then be true for women.
* Men polygamy.
Sorry about that.
Hi Blackdragon.
Quick question.
“showed him all the facts, stats, science, and evidence that clearly show humans were never designed for long-term monogamy and usually end up getting divorced or cheating”
Did you write one post/book/post on another forum/whatever explaining this in full detail or will I have to read your whole website (which I’m eventually going to do but I would need righ now to get through this as fast as possible).
Free ebook on it right here. Though that ebook is a little dated so some of the stats are a little out of date now.
Suppressor is an Alpha 1 , beating his chest to be an alpha 2 , surprised you don’t see that BD? Let me take out his girl for a couple good FB sessions and his beta traits would come out of the closet . His wife/ FB/OLTR is playing the submissive card for child protection , and planning , and when she gets the advantage she will have his balls in her purse . Surprised you didn’t see that ?