Bill Cammack » husband

That’s Your Man’s Problem

Bill Cammack — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 10:24:46 +0000

I just watched this Paul Newman film that was released in 1967, called “Hombre”.

Skipping past the race-relation value of the film, while I was watching it, I was amazed (yet, not) about what they were asking Paul Newman’s character to do in the situation they were in.

Basically, some guy stole money from the people that raised Paul Newman’s character, like in a significant amount that it endangered their lives. This guy had that money and his wife on a stagecoach that Paul Newman happened to be on.

The stagecoach got robbed, and criminals stole the money from the dude that had stolen it from the people. They also took the dude’s wife.

Paul Newman got the money back that belonged to his people, but the criminals still had some other dude’s wife.

They sent one of the criminals to negotiate, who basically said (it was a Western, and they were in the desert) “Give us the money and give us your water, and we’ll give you some other guy’s wife back… If you don’t give us the money and water, we’ll kill the woman.”

Paul Newman’s reply was basically “**** you. Shoot her.”

A conversation ensued, after the criminal returned to his posse to relay the message, where this woman that was also on the stagecoach with them asked him something like “Money is more valuable to you than a woman’s life?”

I understood what she was saying, but she wasn’t looking at the big picture.

Focus On The Facts

The money in the saddlebags was going BACK to the people that it had been STOLEN FROM, who were ALL in danger of losing their lives because they weren’t going to be able to buy food or supplies in the wild west. Paul Newman was carrying ALL OF THEIR LIVES on his shoulder in those saddlebags.

What she didn’t want to address was that the people that Paul Newman was trying to save were equally valuable to the one female that he was NOT going to save by giving away those people’s money.

She also didn’t want to address the fact that the money had been STOLEN by the captive woman’s husband in the first place, which was why they were in that predicament.

She also didn’t want to address the fact that if Paul Newman hadn’t shot two of the robbers, their posse would have gotten away with the money AND the woman, AND left them in the desert with no water or horses, presumably to die of thirst.

Most importantly, and the focus of this article, is that NOBODY in the entire film wanted to address the fact that this was NOT. PAUL. NEWMAN’S. WOMAN.

Regardless of what happened to her, his life wasn’t going to be any different.

If he gave the money away, he saves some nobody’s life, so she can go off with her husband and do God knows what, to ZERO benefit to Paul Newman.

If he keeps the money, he gets to save the lives of the people that raised him.. A LOT of the people that raised, him, not just one person.

This is clearly a no-brainer… “**** you. Shoot her.”

Meanwhile (which is relevant to my eventual point), the husband tries to get slick.

Even though the criminals have his wife, and the money and water are their only bargaining chips, he gets the drop on everybody BUT Paul Newman and orders them to give him the money and the water because he’s breaking north (leaving).

Of course, he gets caught by Paul Newman, who offers him a 1-on-1 shootout, which this ***** of course, declines. He’s made to leave the money, leave the water, and LEAVE! :D hahaha SEEYA!

Now… Here comes the same chick, asking Paul Newman questions about “How do you expect him to live in the desert without any water? :O”

Another stupid question, because he was about to leave YOU, ME and all the rest of us HERE without ANY bargaining chips against the criminals, INCLUDING water, so **** him.

The husband ends up rejoining the group, and they’re trapped in a house with the criminals surrounding them and once again attempting to use this guy’s wife to barter for the money.

The robbers decide that it would be a good idea to take this guy’s wife to an open area and leave her there, tied to a tree stump or something, in the desert heat, with no water, until someone came down from the house and traded them the money and water for her life.

That’s Your Man’s Problem

This sparked a new round of conversation about “How can you NOT trade some MONEY away for a PERSON’S life? :O”

Now.. This conversation didn’t go the way it was supposed to go, and I understand why it didn’t, for the general welfare.

The back-story to this situation was that the people that had been robbed were “Indians” (which, of course, nobody’s an Indian here because this isn’t India and Christoper Columbus was LOST! :/), and Paul Newman was white, but had been raised by the Indians that had been robbed by the husband that was cold chillin’ in the house, safe, with everybody except his wife.

Therefore.. In 1967, it was important to get the point across to the movie-goers that people raised by Indians are taught proper morals and will do the right thing when the situation calls for it, and “Indians are people, just like us.”

So, I understand, artistically, why the proper conversation never occurred in “Hombre”, and I’m glad they wrote the script that way, and I’m sure a lot of people learned something from it, but here’s how the conversation would have actually gone:

Chick: You’re just going to leave her out there to die, instead of giving away the money that will save the people that sustained your life to this very day? :O

Paul Newman: There goes her husband right thurrr.. Let *THAT* mother****** go get her.

It was the husband’s fault that he stole the money. It was the husband’s fault that he brought it on a stagecoach. It was the husband’s fault that he brought HIS WIFE with him while transporting his stolen money. It was the husband who tried to leave with the money and water while holding the rest of the group at gunpoint. It was the husband that NEVER. *******. VOLUNTEERED to go save his own ******* WIFE when the criminals put her out on display to quickly die of dehydration.

THAT’S the bottom line of the discussion. I didn’t steal the money from the Indians.. HE did. If I hadn’t shot those two dudes, the money and water would be gone, so now, they’re both *MY* property and the money will be returned to the people from whom it was stolen, because I say so. This husband-dude put his own wife in danger by bringing her along with him during a criminal enterprise. He got her into this, so now it’s up to him to get her out of it. Period.

Of course, since they needed to prove a point for race relations in 1967, Paul Newman goes to save some other guy’s wife, gets in a gunfight with the criminals, kills both of them and dies in the process, thus proving that Indians can raise a white guy to have morals and compassion. Fortunately, he had already told this other dude in the group to return the money to the Indians, so we can assume he didn’t die for nothing and that they got their money back.

I personally found this situation amazing. I was like *WHEN* are these people going to complain to the thieving, flat-leaving husband that *HE* hasn’t lifted a finger to try to save his own wife, who’s currently tied to a log right there in front of his eyes? o_O

They didn’t even bother to film one single frame of that dude showing ANY concern for his wife’s situation or well-being. Not. One. Frame… They showed him caring about getting away with the money, though.

Real-World Application

Fast-Forwarding to the year 2011 AD, I still find it funny that people expect people with no vested interest in a situation to act more responsibly than people that are directly connected to and/or affected by that situation.

Let’s look at “cheating”, for instance… I find it completely amazing that a gal will be in a relationship with a guy, he hooks up with some other chick, and the girlfriend gets mad at…. drumoll… THE. OTHER. CHICK! :D hahaha That’s SOOOO STUPID! :D

First of all, that other chick didn’t make any agreements with you.. Your man did.

*HE’S* the one that swore up and down on a stack of bibles that he wasn’t going to hook up with anybody except you when you agreed to date him or marry him or become FWB or whatever… Shouldn’t you be mad AT HIM instead of some random chick that met a guy that may or may not have said he’s in a relationship before they got busy?

Why are you expecting someone with ZERO vested interest in your personal happiness to support your relationship? o_O .. How about the person that told you to your face that he was going to be ‘faithful’ to you?

I’m completely amazed. Don’t ask Paul Newman to go save somebody else’s wife.. That’s. Her. Man’s. Problem.

Her husband/boyfriend/whatever is the one that took on the responsibility for her well-being. She aligned herself WITH HIM for whatever reasons she had at the time. If she wanted to be under Paul Newman’s protection, she should have hooked up WITH HIM, but noooooo. :D

So, don’t expect other women to support YOUR relationship to some dude.. Especially women you don’t even know. That’s. Your. Man’s. Problem. He’s the one that signed the exclusive-sex contract with you, so if he hooks up with some other chick, take it up WITH HIM, not WITH HER.

This also applies to the club.

If you’re broke and you can’t afford to buy a drink, that’s YOUR MAN’S problem! :D

You’re providing value to him, so he needs to be providing value to you.

Random dudes that you don’t know from Adam and that you’re not hooking up with have no obligation to get you drunk offa their hard-earned money.

You can call them cheap or whatever, but it’s not THEM that’s begging.. it’s *YOU*!!! :D

If you want a drink at the restaurant, bring your money or offer to wash some dishes for them to earn your keep. If you can’t afford it and don’t feel like working, tell YOUR MAN that you’d like to party beyond your financial means and get HIM to hook you up.

Good For The Gander

Of course, the same advice goes for the fellaz.

If you make a deal with some chick and then she gives it up to the next man, get mad AT HER, not at him, because he didn’t promise you jack-**** as far as not screwing your woman. SHE promised you that she wouldn’t hook up with other guys, so talk to her about your breach of contract issues.

Also.. If you’re one of those guys that plays up to less-attractive women at the club to get them to buy you drinks for free, then you just might have to play your position and actually hook up with her if that’s how you’re livin’! :D haha You might have to put in some work or stay sober.. your choice! >:D

Off The Market

A lot of women run into this issue when they change their classification from “single” to “in a relationship”. They don’t become aware until after the fact that the only reason certain guys were doing things for them is that they were currently FWB or at least in the running to get some in the near future.

Once she selects a guy and claims she’s only going to hook up with him, some of her so-called “friends” become immediately unavailable.

If she needs to change a light bulb, she needs to tell HER MAN to do that for her. That’s HIS responsibility. Nobody else cares if she sits around in the dark.

If she had a bad day?.. Save it for David. That’s HER MAN’S JOB to listen to that stuff.

If she needs to get some…. well…. a brotha Might Could see what he can do about that! >:D

But Anyway… I think people need to focus more on the alliances and affiliations they make, so they have a more realistic understanding of what’s going to happen when they ask someone to do something for them.

In “Hombre” (putting aside the race-relations subtext of the script), the choice was clear.. One chick doesn’t get shot by dudes that shouldn’t shoot her anyway, or A LOT OF PEOPLE that raised Paul Newman’s character starve and die because that chick’s husband robbed them.

Real-World no-brainer.. “**** you. She’s nothing to me. Shoot her.”

As far as the conversation in the house? Another no-brainer.. “There goes her husband right there. Tell that ***** to go get his wife, whom he dragged into this situation in the first place by robbing people and then inviting her on the stagecoach with him as he was transporting the money, and whom he tried to flat-leave by breaking north with the money and the water when he knew damned well that the criminals were holding her hostage. I’ll cover him from here with the rifle.”

As far as women trying to juice guys for drinks at the bar, if you’re cold lampin’ with no visible means of purchasing anything, I hope you have a bus pass stashed somewhere on your person, because whether you get drunk right now or have to walk home later tonight… That’s YOUR MAN’S Problem! >:D
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

Why You Can’t Get A Boyfriend In NYC

Bill Cammack — Sat, 07 May 2011 15:22:55 +0000

Reader “Susan” left quite a lengthy comment on my post Women’s Guide To NYC Dating, so I decided to make my response to her its own post so we can all benefit from this discussion…

Hi Bill, well thanks for the long response.

Just to let you know, back in about February a few months after having moved (as a life-long new Yorker) to the midwest, I met a guy. Actually, I met a couple guys. Hell, I could have met more had I went out on the town a fraction as often as I did in New York. But the one I’m dating is a keeper. We quickly became boyfriend-girlfriend, and it’s WONDERFUL. Hell, I need to start practicing yoga to limber up. Every moment is wonderful, and we both acknowledge it. Easily. I trust, I give, I need, and I am trusted, given to and needed. We think it’s because we have ‘perspective’ as he says. He’s not that experienced, nor am I, even at my age. And this is the one thing I’ve always been looking for in a person. It’s hard to even explain, if I had more time…

I’m very happy for you, Susan. :) I hope you get to enjoy your relationship with this fellow for a very long time.

This is what happens when you move to the sticks. You automatically remove the rest of your competition. It’s much easier for ANYBODY to shine in an environment where they happen to be an anomaly.

That’s my point about dating in NYC for women. There are too many of y’all. There’s no reason to select one, because there are like eight other gals offering the exact same thing.. and then eight more next week.

This is one of the reasons why NYC is the “Neverland” of dating for the guys. Between new imports, tourists, and chicks that change neighborhoods and move near you, there’s a never-ending supply of females who provide essentially the exact same experience. There’s no reason for a guy to have a girlfriend when he knows 20 gals that don’t have a man and are dying to go out with him at the drop of a hat.

In the sticks, you have to get in where you fit in. If you don’t lock Betty-Sue down, the next man’s going to pull her and then you’re stuck with the same selection you had before the new gal arrived.

I’m not saying that to be funny.. it’s just the truth. It’s like how I can go anywhere in the country and chicks will fall all over me because I’m from NYC. It’s nothing I’m personally doing. I just made myself an anomaly because I’m different from their usual selection of guys.

I really want to respond to some of your points, many of which I disagree with on such a fundamental level that they’re difficult to explain, or perhaps, are difficult to be understood by those who have a different set of values, or lacking any knowledge of what theirs really are, or are too stuck in their own. But I will try- mostly for the lonely, strong goodhearted, New York women on here who keep plugging along in unhappiness and even misery!, and, most importantly perhaps- who have a new, revelatory inkling of something brighter, those women who have caught a sudden whiff of something being rotten in the state of New York.

I’m a fan of the lonely, strong, good-hearted New York women in this town.

I also realize that y’all have a tough row to hoe if you’re asking a guy to select you out of millions of other women that are bringing just about the exact same qualities to the table.

I’m looking forward to reading this, which I can say because I’m stopping along the way to type my responses so I can gain maximum personal enjoyment from your comments and reply as authentically as possible.

There’s so much I could say, and so little time. *sigh*

As is rather typical, women MAKE time for things that are important to them, which you obviously did with this reply. :)

This is why guys know that when we offer you an opportunity to get together and you act like you’re not interested or too busy, we need to focus our attention on women that are dying to spend time with us.

Your general argument about women being miserable being due to our own (assumed) unreasonably high expectations of men, is the expected one. It’s a common one on the internet. It reeks of bitterness, vanity and narcissism on the part of those arguing it.

This is interesting, Susan.

If I told you “Don’t walk out in the highway, because you’ll get run THE **** over”, would you call me bitter? :D

If I said (not meaning YOU in particular) “You’re sweating me more than I’m sweating you.. In fact, I can exchange you at any time for a gal I met on the subway this afternoon”, would that be Narcissistic or factual? o_O (assuming that I can actually do that)

It’s easy to dismiss information that you wish wasn’t true by attempting to color the other person’s perspective. Unfortunately, I know lots of guys that have ZERO intention of being “faithful” to chicks and lie to y’all’s faces and do whatever they want behind your backs. I also know guys that will tell you they’re NOT going to get involved with you in some sort of “relationship” and that you can KICK ROCKS because there are other women interested in spending time with them right now.

Those Prince Charmings exist here as well. Good luck getting your hands on one (again, not you.. I realize that you’ve moved out of town already and are in a happy relationship) with at least another 500,000 lonely, good-hearted New York City women that want him as much as you do.

It’s also misandrous. Men are not less capable of emotion, love or commitment than women. They are geared to protect us. Their hearts are not less developed or smaller than ours. They may work differently, but they are not less. I am so, SO, sooo tired of hearing that they are. I know in my soul now – or perhaps simply remember- that indeed it’s nothing but the ideological insistence of many embittered or small-minded, wounded men whose hearts are indeed, smaller, and not *all* men.

I like this comment, Susan. I’ve never heard it before.

I’ve never said that men are less capable of emotion. I’ve never written that men don’t love women. I know guys that are committed to their girlfriends and/or wives.

What I’m telling you is that while you’re playing the “relationship” game, guys are playing the “get laid” game.

Are there guys that want relationships? Yep. How long do you think they’re going to remain on the market in New York City? o_O

I could announce on Facebook that I’m looking for a girlfriend, and I guarantee you I’d have at least 6 offers within the first 30 minutes. I’m not actually going to DO that, because I take my online presence seriously, but the fact remains that if I put it out there that I was ready to retire from The Game, I would be approached by a gal that I find perfectly adequate for a relationship that very same day.

It’s not like guys like that stay available for months. It’s not like you’re going to meet one of them in a bar, because he’s told myriad women that he wants to be faithful to them and they said “No Thanks.. I’d Rather Play The Field”.

In fact.. **** 30 minutes. I know women right now that I could contact, wake up out of their sleep and tell them “I want you to be my girlfriend” and they would agree and the next FB status update I made would be announcing my new relationship.

I don’t have to get up from this computer. I don’t have to take any new women out to dinner. I don’t have to wait until the fourth date to hook up with them. I don’t have to eat Green Eggs and Ham.

The only guys that stay on the market are a) the guys whose standards are too high for what they’re personally bringing to the table, and b) guys who aren’t looking for a relationship AT ALL, but will lie to you about it in order to get you to give it up.

Moreover, it, this repellant new ideology, is an illogical premise. It simply makes no sense. No living organism accepts misery as a state of being without attempting as desperately as possible to struggle *away* from it. That’s what pain is- a signal our body is giving us to get away from something. An organism will adjust its tactics or expectations. A starving, sick bear will eat a dead fish. To think that all us women, some of us quite intelligent and accomplished (hence our coming or being here), are simply consistently, for years, clueless of where we stand in the pecking order, and pursue men who are ‘out of our league’ and then surprised at our resulting treatment which brings us misery by that ‘object’, yet continue to persist in this behavior is clearly irrational. Some women do this. They are damaged and deserve to be pull themselves or be pulled, from the dirt. But they are a minority. What I and others have been complaining about and seeking advice for is another issue. We are starving and are lucky to even find a dead fish..so perhaps we’re considering another migration pattern.

I’m not saying that smart women are dumb. :)

I’m saying that how viable you are as relationship material is directly proportional to how much competition you surround yourself with.

For instance.. Most places I go, I’m the only person that looks like me. That makes me an anomaly and makes it easier for me to meet women, because I’m different.

If I found some society, some country town or whatever, where a lot of the guys looked pretty similar to me, my visual advantage is GONE. That means that the only way I’d be able to differentiate myself from the crowd is by my personality, which is what I told women to do in my article.

Are my best girlfriends going to be selected for America’s Next Top Model?.. Nope! :D However.. *I* enjoy how they look well enough, and I LOVE. SPENDING. TIME. WITH. THEM. because of their unique personalities.

Could I spend time with better-looking airheards? I sure could. It would be a waste of my time, personally.

I’m not saying that y’all ENJOY your misery and you flock to it! :D You’re absolutely right that that would be irrational. I’m saying that unless y’all decide to open your ******* EYES and see that there’s a CEO-female sitting to your left in the subway car and a VICE-PRESIDENT-female sitting to your right, and a START-UP-ENTREPRENEUR-female sitting across the aisle from you, you’re not going to realize that you’re not as unique as you think you are and the odds are lower than you think that some guy’s going to consider entering an exclusive relationship with you.

He’ll put you on The Roster and hit it whenever he gets around to it, but an exclusive relationship is a tough row to hoe when you’re surrounded by women that are as attractive, talented, wealthy, ambitious and sexy as you are.

Further, it’s clearly a suspicious theory. Would it not be more comfortable to you, as a ‘player’ to believe that the complaining women are indeed less deserving of what they pursue, and thus should view the awful treatment they get (in their naivete, and sometimes pure-intentioned-ness) is due to their own folly? That women generally deserve less than what they intuitively need? Does this not naturally absolve you of guilt for your actions which perpetuate misery? This theory is a justification for lack of ethics and maturity. It also assumes that the pecking order is the same everywhere- it isn’t, and never is.

lolol First of all, I’m not a player. :) Women like me. There’s a difference.

I’m not “playing” at anything.

The term “player” is applied incorrectly as a blanket statement meaning “Guys that won’t conform to having only one girlfriend”. A player is a guy that approaches you specifically to swindle you out of something, which is usually either sex or money or money AND sex.

All I’m saying is that unless you can demonstrate to me some reason why I shouldn’t hook up with other chicks, that’s what I’m gonna do and you can kick rocks if you don’t like it.

That’s not playing. That’s the truth.

To address your point.. If I were a player, I would continue using the dirty, underhanded tactics that I know work on y’all females over and over and over and over and over, and I wouldn’t be writing blog posts so y’all might wake up and start to brainstorm some countermeasures.

In fact, y’all bore me to death with how easy it is to pull you with stuff like “I love you”, “I want to marry you”, “I’m divorcing my wife”, “I want you to star in my feature film”… *YAWN*

Going back to my highway analogy.. I see the cars and you don’t. You see an empty, 8-lane highway. You feel like you can walk out on the pavement, put down a blanket and have a picnic and you’ll never get run over.

Then… You go out on the highway, get run the **** over, I tell you WHY you got run over, you tell me I’m bitter and then you put your blanket down on the highway again, which is why a lot of my friends ask me why I even BOTHER to try to enlighten y’all. :D

As far as what women deserve, that’s delegated on an individual basis, similar to how you figure out what men deserve.

If you go to McDonald’s and there are 5 Big Macs lined up next to each other on the shelf when you arrive, how do you know which one to select?… That’s right.. It doesn’t make a difference which one you select, because they’re all essentially the same is my point.

The dating downfall of the arrogant female is assuming that the woman right next to her isn’t as accomplished, DTF and arrogant as she is. Does one of the Big Macs have more lettuce than the others? Yep. Is one of them built a little better, and the others look sloppy next to it? Yep. Does that guarantee the best Big Mac that it’s going to be selected by the customer? Nope.

What if the customer decides to buy all five? o_O

As far as the pecking order, you’re right that it varies from location to location, even within NYC. That’s why it’s important to recognize where you are, so you can properly assess your chances of landing an exclusive relationship.

Mile Marker 5

I want to tell you something. I’ve thought a bit about this just the other day and this is what I came up with. I wonder if anyone here have perhaps come up with the same idea. Here it is: it should take a while to get to, as all the important things do. Humans write stories. We think in metaphor; we create symbols. When we fantasize, about Prince Charming or that dream of opening that cupcake store or that dream job, these ideas encapsulate much of who we are. They have spiritual value for us and play particular critical psychological AND social roles.

When us ‘deluded’ women fantasize about Prince Charming, we all fantasize about him in different ways. There has never been one Prince Charming for all women. Sure he is handsome, tall and charming..he usually has a horse and a kingdom. But not really. We don’t all *actually* see him with those traits or carrying all those things. Sometimes he appears when he need him to, because he is Prince Charming. He is the deep, deep desire of many women to know that there is someone who is not perfect or rich or handsome or can and will ‘rescue’ us, but that can make us happy- or content.

How we are and *if* we can be made happy at all is up to the mental and emotional state of the individual woman. But we can have our needs fulfilled and be happy, and we want this intuitively- as all humans do- and this is why Prince Charming was created by someone somewhere, and made known to everyone everywhere.

Prince Charming is an ideal, and a hope, and ideals carry us…they also reflect who we are and what we need, and what we should give.

That’s all well & good, however you’re overlooking the common denominator.. EXCLUSIVE. RELATIONSHIP.

Regardless of how y’all fantasize about whomever sweeping you off your feet and finding you special yadda yadda, it all comes down to whether he’ll give up his NATURAL RIGHT to hook up with any chick that wants to hook up with him and give YOU some kind of say over his personal sexual choices.

NONE OF Y’ALL fantasize about Prince Charming riding up on his horse or whatever, hitting it and quitting it.. and if any of y’all do, Google “Bill”, and I’ll see what I can do. >;)

All jokes aside, this is a very simple issue. “You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake.”.. In the context of this post, how unique you are is determined by the number of unique people that you’re directly in competition with. In the sticks, it’s not that many.

I love people from the sticks, and think they’re the most genuine people you will find, and people from big cities play too many games and are a hassle to deal with. You can go into one wine bar in NYC and see 20 attractive, well-dressed, highly-accomplished, highly-intelligent, single-with-nothing-better-to-do-with-their-time-than-mess-with-you females sitting around talking to each other with ZERO men in sight. How in the world is that supposed to inspire a guy to accept one girlfriend in an exclusive relationship when he has a good chance of meeting a totally fantastic woman later today or tomorrow?

I suppose that you fancy yourself a sort of cynical, streetwise, savvy ‘there’s no Santa claus’ naysayer- someone who knows *better* than many others. This is where your pride stems from. But this is not truth. This is lack of perspective.

In fact, I’m not proud of myself at all. I’ve done nothing. My looks were genetically handed down to me from my parents. I have natural charisma and talent and my mind was honed by attending the top schools available to me, including Hunter College Elementary School, Bronx High School of Science, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT, as it’s referred to in every movie you’ve ever seen about brainiacs.

http://alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack

I have nothing to be “proud” about. This is how my life went. I had nothing to do with it.

Similarly, women like me because I’m fly. I have nothing to do with that. It’s nothing to be proud of. It’s nothing I’m DOING TO y’all. It’s natural mass appeal. To be proud that chicks like me would be like being proud that I can drink NYC tap water. It’s no big deal.

All I’m saying here is that if you can play baseball, it’s easy for you to get on your little league team. It’s easy for you to get on your high school team. It’s easy to get on your college team, at least to ride the bench. When you want to enter the Major Leagues, there’s a major cutoff. They won’t even let you ride the bench unless you’re the best of the best. I’m not saying that NOBODY plays in the major leagues. I’m saying that people that compare favorably to their competition make it there. The more competition anyone has in anything, the less likely they are to get what they want.

Like.. Let’s say I wanted to get my Paul McCartney on and marry a rich chick. My odds on doing that are VERY. SLIM.

I don’t hang out with rich people. Rich people hang out with other rich people. Rich people introduce available rich women to available rich men that all hang out in The Hamptons, but apparently not Quogue, as tRHoNYC were bitchin’ and moanin’ about over the last couple of weeks.

If I took a stance of “I deserve to date a rich chick and become involved in an exclusive relationship with her so I can play XBOX and eat bon bons on the couch all day”, it would be A. TOUGH. ROW. TO. HOE. and it doesn’t make me a bitter or cynical person to state that about myself or anybody else that isn’t connected to that society.

Similarly.. Women that say they only want to date a certain type of guy are painting themselves into a corner, with the only WIN being found in their personalities. There’s a chick in this same subway car with a fatter ass than yours. There’s a chick that’s smarter than you. There’s a chick that’s prettier than you. It MIGHT be the same chick that has all those physical advantages over you. You are NOT going to “out-physical” millions of women that are readily available to NYC men. Even if you’re the best-looking chick, you might not be as DTF. You might be too busy with your career to spend a lot of time with the dude. Your odds of winning are extremely LOWWW unless you’re willing to accept whatever dudes happen to step to you or whatever raps you cultivate on your own.

On top of that, it’s the dudes with the Porsches and the million-dollar cribs that run top-of-the-line women in and out of there like Charlie Sheen, so how are you supposed to get him to give that up? o_O

For what? o_O

I’m just offering y’all helpful tips. If you’re stuck in a rut, try demonstrating more personality instead of wearing a shorter skirt.

Appreciating a worthy object of desire, i.e. beauty, is what we do as humans. To see beyond the exteriors into the beauty that hides, is what we need to do as humans more often. I believe in New York it’s almost nearly impossible because there is too much beauty in general, too much clutter. It’s a shame because it’s one of the most liberating experiences one can have.

Strangely enough, what you just said is what my entire article is about.

Bill, I understand you are saying that us women should not play out of our leagues. I explained above why some of that ideology is silly: because ‘leagues’ differ in different places and are the harshest and least balanced in NYC and L.A., because it assumes decency of treatment is only for the most beautiful, because we are geared as humans to want an ideal, and because it assumes that’s exactly what us women are doing when many of us clearly aren’t.

That’s not what I’m saying.

What I’m saying is “Recognize The Game”.

If I decide that I want to date Lindsay Lohan & Britney Spears simultaneously, that’s what I’m going to try to do. I don’t give a flying **** about leagues or any of that.

At the same time, I’m going to realize that my chances are slim to none… and Slim left town.

All this “blah blah my inner beauty” stuff isn’t going to get you a date. If it gets you a date, it’s not going to get you an exclusive boyfriend in a town with millions of other women with inner beauty just like yours.

Again.. The dudes that are looking for inner beauty find women like that very quickly, because y’all are practically littering the streets of Manhattan. You can always find packs of 4-5 women shuffling around town together because they have no men to spend time with. I’m sure all the gals in those packs are just as ambitious, internally beautiful and deserving as you are, so it just amazes me that women think they’ve got some kind of clear advantage in the dating field here.

As for “There’s someone for everyone”, I find it comedic that you say ‘history proves it’ when you actually give no evidence for it. I;’d need a graph or a multicolor pie chart based on a double blind study to agree. Evidence bolsters a theory; not historical events. Events are products of human behavior. Your argument is not even tenuous; simply because it’s like saying ‘history proved that Germans like killing Jews’. Actually, under certain sets of factors in certain environments, sets of *individuals* will commit genocide against other sets of individuals. That’s all that history has proved. It certainly doesn’t disregard individual psychology, pathology, free will or all the massive and gorgeous resistance that makes movies and novels. You’ve missed the point. The point is that, like gravity or evolution, the idea that there is someone for everyone can not *be* proven, but it could be attained in a perfect utopia where individuals made better decisions.

ok. :) You have a semantic point there. How does this work for you?…

In an environment where men outnumber women, there’s someone for everyone, because some guys are going to be desperate enough to tap the worst-looking female in the group, so all the ladies could get some.

In New York City, where there are at least tens of thousands of lonely women ambling aimlessly around town hoping and praying that they become involved in an exclusive relationship with a guy that meets X standards, there is *NOT* someone for everyone, because the top guys get several girls each and there’s no reason why they should even bother to feign exclusivity with ANY of them.

Bringing up Aborigines and lost Mayan civilizations will not help women get a date in New York City in the year 2011.

I think it’s unhealthy to send ANYONE into the world with the idea that they are going to get into some *perfect* relationship eventually because there simply *is* no perfect. Young girls should be taught the truth: that life is hard, and men can be douches just like women can, and some men are not perfect but wonderful, that if you are wonderful too, you are more likely to get wonderful back; and to be wonderful for the right reasons, so you have the strength to only accept the wonderful.

I agree with you ENTIRELY on this, Susan. 100%

The discussion of what you had to play with as a child is an irrelevant one. I played with my brother’s tinker toys and transformers; I threw dolls that friends of my parents (who never MADE me play with anything) to the ground and usually ignored them. I’m still quite feminine. That doesn’t mean anything, and it’s unfair to those little girls who genuinely enjoyed playing dress up and using easy bake ovens. Perhaps they learned to love cooking enough to become chefs or caiterers or to become great housewives. Good for all of them. Good for them.

It doesn’t matter that you don’t know how to change a diaper and that I knew how when I was 6 or that my boyfriend doesn’t know how to. What matters is a person’s character and their ability to give, to learn, to learn how.

“I wasn’t set up for that life. I don’t think it’s fun. I was playing baseball and football while your baby doll was wetting itself and you were being set up.”

I am glad you know what you’re not set up for, my hope would be that things in your world fall right and that everyone is ok with how they do.

Another interesting point that I’m glad you brought up.

I’m very happy that women like to cook and clean too, because SOMEBODY’S gotta do it.

I recognize WHY society does that to y’all. It’s necessary that someone has the skills to raise and nurture children or the society goes straight downhill.

What I’m saying is that by training girls to do that and not training boys to do that, you end up with a necessarily skewed group of adults. Go ask the guys that you know what they would do if they had a son.. would they give him a baby doll to play with? An oven? A tea-party set? See what they tell you. >:D

Then.. You have shows like “Teen Mom” on MTV where the chicks are always surprised that their boyfriends REFUSE to change diapers or whatever. Who wants to do THAT? \o/ haha That’s why y’all have to be brainwashed, or else there would be two adults standing around drawing straws about who was going to change the baby.

My point is that the education/brainwashing isn’t global in this issue. If boys were equally stressed to play with dolls and kitchen utensils, it would make sense to expect them to be happy about doing chores like that when the time arose.

I’m also not saying that brainwashing MAKES women feminine. I wish it did, because a lot of New York females could stand a whole bunch of extra femininity. Every time the Southern Ladies come to visit, y’all pale in comparison.

I am not glad over the derision seeping out of your words. No woman has been set up. Women are not victims (that you think we are is sad for you, not for us). We work out of our own intuition and needs, and sometimes they’re babydolls who’ve wet themselves and sometimes we get bored and walk away and sometimes we change the diaper and sometimes we don’t play with dolls but mostly tinker toys and we change our brother’s diapers because we’re envious that our mom knows how and we don’t. Sometimes we grow up to be great moms and sometimes we don’t and it’s all okay because none of use have been set up. We make choices and we have enough of them in our society to take responsibility for them.

I wish their was some specificity to what this so-called ‘dream’ of ours is. Perhaps you don’t know what it’s like to be trusted or loved, or perhaps you don’t believe there are enough people out there with enough maturity, character and values to ever be monogamous and content. Perhaps you are incapable of it, but there certainly are enough good men out there to make most of us happy at least, even if ta bunch of them have to lose 100 lbs, start putting on makeup and cooking for some bald, short average guy. I’m pretty sure us humans can work it out…nah- to be honest, only some of us can. But those SOME are the most deserving anyway.

As I mentioned about your Prince Charming chapter, There *IS* specificity to your collective dream. It’s to be the property of a man and to have him simultaneously be your property.

I’m very clear on what you’re trying to do. :) The only reason for y’all to call someone your boyfriend or husband is so you can claim some kind of superior relationship to him over other women.

It doesn’t matter what FLAVOR the dream comes in.. It’s the same dream. Self-validation through acceptance by another.

The evidence of that dream is that if your so-called boyfriend or husband screws some other chick, you’re going to cry about it and break up with him. Why break up with him when he was exercising his free will? o_O

Because it flies in the face of your control over him is why. Therefore, the illusion of control is at the core of your fantasy to be someone’s girlfriend.

I, on the other hand, recognize that I don’t have any control at all over any females at all on this entire planet. If they like me and want to give me some, that’s fantastic! :D If they’re not interested, I’m either going to attempt to make them physically interested in me or let it slide.

It’s not my problem if a chick I’m messing with has a so-called boyfriend or any other type of relationship because she’s going to do whatever she wants to do, exercising her own free will, whether that’s to my benefit or not.

This is the difference between us that you detest. I’m not playing your game, and you’re hoping I’m the only one that feels and thinks this way…

Mile Marker 10

“I’m not making this stuff up myself. This isn’t fiction. I’m not speculating. I’m talking about what people have actually said and done, or what I’VE actually said and done.”

Anecdotal evidence is laughable in a court of logicians.

No intelligent, logical woman with good values doesn’t know what some men are thinking, lol. But an intelligent, logical woman with good values knows what to kick to the curb and when. We *also*, importantly, know that it’s not a terrible thing because there are good men out there, you know, the ones that sometimes daydream about that porn they saw while you’re PMSing and talking about your father’s death those years back, but that stop and realize that you’re talking, and begin listening, and hold you in their arms even if they’re not in the mood. Many men do this, and many of them do this often, and many of them don’t consider it a burden, and many even may want to talk about their father’s death too one day and be held in your arms too…and maybe that’s why they are do understanding to you to begin with?? Maybe it’s because some people have a capacity, and others don’t.

Agreed. Some guys genuinely want to be there for you in that fashion. Other guys do it because they know they’re not going to get laid without it. Other guys bounce if any topic other than sex comes up.

Young women are not making good decisions in terms of their dating choices anymore, but unfortunately alot of them are hopeless due to what they see out there in terms of men’s behavior. It’s a circle, a back and forth thing.

Doesn’t it make sense then to post about topics I post about so these same young women might be able to read a debate that might open their minds and eyes to situations they’re currently in?

“If the only examples you have of what men think is buying y’all flowers and candy and saying we’re wrong when we know we’re right, you’ll never be able to understand why a relationship went south or never got started at all.”

lol You’re totally right here!!! Because if this is actually what women expect, it’s something called narcissism. It’s a pathology, a psychiatric condition. Perhaps though, this is the way that you view it through the lens of your own narcissism, your own colossal and neverending needs? Perchance?

hmm.. Not sure that narcissism has anything to do with this one.

All I know is that there are lots of simple and basic tricks that mean nothing at all, yet come in handy for pacifying women that have found something to complain about, regardless of how perfectly legitimate and correct y’all’s complaints are.

If a chick is riffin’ with a dude and then he brings her flowers and she STFU and sexes him, it has nothing to do with my personal narcissism, just like it’s not my fault that y’all love to stop and stare into shoe store windows.

“I would say that if you detect a “mocking and derisive tone” in what I have to say about “women’s needs”, it’s because y’all bore me to death with how easily you’re led to do whatever men want with some simple, meaningless words.”

Ahhh! Now you’re one to something, I love this. lol. Truly, not all women are this weak and dumb. Also, not all women assume that men are constantly lying about everything.

“I don’t have to love you at all, but if I say it, you’ll believe it, because you want to believe it, because you were trained to believe it from when you were a little girl….that y’all fall for like dominoes, every single day.”

Ok, now this is just weird. What woman actually believes a guy loves her when she barely knows him or he hasn’t committed to her first?? That’s just too bizarre to even contend with. You must be attracting the most pathetic, naive, or damaged young women in the whole city if that’s the case. Tsk tsk. What’s even sadder, actually, is that you seem to want to justify these women’s messed-upness by interpreting it as being a result of us being ‘trained’ to expect love everywhere immediately from any guy that comes along. I think it’s more likely that they’re just desperate for any affection from a man in this city, which as sad as *that* is, they still are certainly complicit in that guy’s absence the next morning, lol.

ok.. Let’s use your terminology. :) When you used to live here, you not only had to contend with the top women in the world, like brainiac Google Vice Presidents, but desperados that are willing to give away what you’re trying to get paid for at half price or no price at all.

The only reason a guy has to commit to you is so you’ll sex him. He can get everything else from you by just hanging out with you and not offering you a title. When you’re surrounded by thousands of women that are willing to sex him off the bat, what incentive does he have to give that up?

Unfortunately, you hear this a lot from women. Y’all snap all over “easy” women, but who do you think is getting all the dates? o_O

Y’all wonder why you have three degrees and make beaucoup ducats and then the dude you wanted was spotted at a club with this chick that flips burgers at Wendy’s and wears $19 stretch jeans from Conway’s.

Decrease your competition, Increase your opportunities to WIN! :D

It really IS that simple.

“What a guy thinks of you doesn’t actually matter at all. … Once you realize this, it doesn’t lead to your thinking that you don’t need a man, but it’s a healthier foundation for you to stand on and SELECT a man to be with that recognizes you and appreciates you for the qualities you’re bringing to the table.”

Well I must say, I think this is a bit unbalanced, typical of modern liberal feminist thought that I find so repugnant, ideological, socially damaging and inherently illogical. If the man has good character and you want a good relationship, OF COURSE what he thinks of you matters- not because you’re desperate to please everyone like someone with low self esteem but because that’s the mutual aspect of a good relationship. It matters what you think of him and it matters what he thinks of you. All this separateness is no foundation for a good relationship, it’s good for the independent type of people who should have separate lives. But I will reiterate, what he thinks should only matter to a woman AFTER she’s appropriately judged his character and has known alot about him for a while.

Another semantic issue. I was talking about how we can tell you you look like you lost weight and you feel slim and we can turn around and tell you you look like you gained weight and you feel fat and self-conscious.

I agree with what you wrote, however, about healthy relationships being based upon mutual admiration, love & respect.

“There’s nothing to pulling women, because y’all fall for the same tricks every day.”

Lol at “y’all”. This is hilarious. I have a little story for you. An old roommate of mine, a nice little plain looking guy with woman troubles, got me interested in the Pick Up Artist on VH1- at first for my feminist radar, secondly because it was fascinating as a social experiment. I then read ‘The Game’ by Neil Strauss. I got so far into this as to email with the author a bit. Want to know what I learned from both that book, the show and what apparently many other men have said to me too? Throughout the entire book, where the narrator must have bedded gosh- hundreds of women- from psychology students to porn stars, not one- not a single ONE- of these descriptions of these women were the type of chick I’d hang with. As an ex- New York club chick, I can tell you I’ve seen alot of this. And I can tell the women who are high quality types from the marginally attractive, semi-educated nutcases with low self-esteem and not much to say about anything, in a New york minute. I know the models from the art students and the bulimics from the biology PhDs from good families. Is this misogynist of me? Or is it just truth that in every group of people, like all the people of the planet, some people are just *better* than others? Hmm, an interesting thought but. Anyway, EVERY SINGLE woman was either very young and working through esteem issues, or just plain messed up, and the only chick this guy fell for in this book was ‘high quality’. The articulate supersmart ultracool famous rocker chick.

The point is, the girls falling for this are either 1. naive and very young (shame on you) 2. vulnerable in some way due to self esteem issues from whatever in their lives (shame on you) 3. just dumb (shame on you) or 4. know exactly what they’re doing and are ok with a one night stand where they dont have to feel guilty for wanting and having because that guy is ‘just a jerk’.

I don’t buy that the MAJORIY OF ALL WOMEN are falling for the ‘game’. Certainly not the high quality ones.

This is what I was talking about just above. You’re projecting your concept of “better than” onto the guy who’s doing the selecting.

You’re also projecting your concept of “high quality”.

To lots of guys, “high quality” means a nice ass and the desire to let us get up on it one time for the people.

To lots of guys, “high quality” means she might not be the best-looking, but she’s pleasant to spend time with and doesn’t cause drama.

To lots of guys, “high quality” means she’s broke as a joke, but she’s pretty & sexy and enjoys spending time with us.

To lots of women, “high quality” means “We can do the same things a man can do”, which nobody cares about.

If you’re rich and you look busted on a date, you’re not getting asked back out again.

If you’re intelligent and all you want to talk about is the stock market, you’re not getting asked back out again.

If you live in The Hamptons and you bitch and moan because some guy wants to take you out a date in Quogue, you’re not getting asked back out again.

If you’re a CEO of a company and you FREAK OUT when a guy accidentally or purposefully touches your shoulder, you’re not getting asked back out again.

Women who consider themselves High Quality are merely dismissing their obvious competition, which is Low Quality women that guys find just as viable to date, hook up with and enter relationships with as HQ women.

I’m serious. Did I? you know when I did? About twice when I first started dating and my brother had just died. Have I since then? Nope.

Coincidence? I think not.

So alot of this game is based on sound behavioral principles…women, the more time and effort invested, the more women will give back, sooner. But at the end of the day, it’s either taking advantage of the weak and it’s not the best women who are going along with it..because the ones who know their worth are not going to go have some fun with *you*, they’re going to go have fun with a perfect 10. I know I did once or twice! ;) And you must know this.

High Quality Woman + No Ass + Not DTF = LOSE

Low Quality Woman + Do Fries Go With That Shake? o_O + DTF = WIN

The qualities that you’re focusing on to determine the value of a woman are the qualities that women use to determine whom they’re going to invite to their dinner party.

Those qualities have nothing to do with how men select women to date, EXCEPT for the guys that are looking for one fantastic woman to hook up with, and as I said in the beginning, those guys go on and off the market in a split second, so good luck with that.

Mile Marker 15

“Some women object to even CALLING dating “a game”, but it most definitely is.”

At first, it is a bit of a game, and games are fun and healthy, and provide a playing ground for important psychological needs and abilities- as long as no cheating is involved. The real trouble begins where people haven’t agreed as to what the rules are, and it may be argued that in fact, due to the very nature of dating (ie. people who barely know eachother getting to know eachother) the rules can not BE known as they havent been discused first and people seem to all have different sets of rules today. And so precisely because of this, we are more ethically indebted to eachother to be more upfront and honest about things.

Further there is no way that as you get into ‘I genuinely like you’ and ‘let’s be exclusive’ territory there should be games. Perhaps little things, a bit of jealousy or showing off here and there, but there should be more giving than manipulation. The problem is that some people are too damaged to ever really be normal. *sigh*

The way I see it.. Unless people are willing to be absolutely authentic with each other, games are being played.

I agree with you that in a perfect world, people would meet each other, decide they like each other, map out ground rules, and authentically move forward together.

“…stages of “Don’t want to look like a slut” and “What will he think of me?” and “I don’t want to be judged” and “Where is this relationship going?” and “Are we exclusive”, blah blah blah.. ”

See that’s the problem. It’s supposed to be easy. Too many women don’t get it. The guy is supposed to be the one putting forward where things are going without you asking. The point at which I feel I really have a burning desire or feel I just have to ask, is the point at which I’m gone. Because the ENTIRE MEANING AND POINT of a relationship doesn’t exist. I don’t get to feel secure, or cared about, or special, or needed, or that the man is there and wants to be with me in the way I need him to be. SO WHY BE THERE?

WHY THE HELL DIDN’T SHE LEAVE ALREADY?

Guys are always telling y’all where this relationship’s going. It’s usually going right where it currently is.

A guy should know that if he’s not making sure that his girlfriend knows (or at least, believes, because he said so) that he intends to be with her for a long-ass time, they’re leaving the door open for the next man to borrow his chick.

If he’s not helping her to stay, he’s helping her to leave.

“Meanwhile, we just watch y’all run around in unnecessary circles until you finally calm down and get with the program that you always wanted from the first time you felt attracted to us.”

Why I’m sure you know, because you know *all* women right? I totally felt attracted to a guy because he’s a player? Because he’s so sexually experienced that I can get chlamydia? Or worry about getting it? Um no, sorry I had a good father and I haven’t been abused so um. Nope. *buzzer* Wrong. That woman isn’t happy, or she wouldn’t have been running around in circles as you say. She’s doing so because she’s drawn into a sad, pathetic pattern where she wants *him* but also wants more of him that he can give, and she simply can’t leave, who knows why.

..and no, it’s not society telling us to be prudes but that we really want only random sex with hotties. Women need bonding more often than men do, that’s all. We want *more* of the man than his penis. We want more of his penis more often. It’s evolution. Some men can give us this, some can’t. Why waste my time with hot chlamydia man?

Agreed with you on avoiding STDs by not “getting around”.

Having said that…

Unhappy, Sad, Pathetic, Desperate, No Earning Potential Woman + Cute Face + Nice Ass + DTF = WIN

High Quality is determined by the choosER, not the choosEE.

“Lying to you would make you feel better, yet send you out into the world similarly ill- equipped to deal with your next relationship.”

But see. The problem is that I think you and I are at full poles apart from eachother in terms of what’s going on. There are good women out there who are desperate for a simple, even short term exclusive relationship in NYC and can’t find it, and it’s not society but their own deepseated needs, and it’s breaking their hearts, esp. as they begin aging. *THAT’s the problem- But you on your end, seem to keep trying to tell us that wake up to a harsh, pathetic reality and only expect the very least from the smallest people, and that it’s OKAY. It’s tearing society apart, or at least is on its way to do that unless more women stand up and state their needs and fess up to their misery and set some boundaries for acceptable behavior and that we actually need men.

oh.. I see what you’re saying here. You have an excellent point, but you only got half of the message.

I’m absolutely sympathetic to the plight of NYC females. Entirely.

The first half of my point is that dating in NYC SUCKS for women.
The second half of my point is that if y’all don’t realize how badly it sucks, you’re never going to work hard enough to give yourselves a viable chance of achieving your desired outcome.

I’m not saying “This is your life.. Live with it!”. I’m saying “This is your life.. DO something about it!”.

You’ve seen that video footage of kids throwing rocks at tanks. If you believe the tank is going to be “hurt” by you throwing rocks at it, you’ll keep throwing rocks and never achieve anything. If you’re made to understand that you can’t hurt a metal tank with a rock, you’re either going to stop throwing rocks or you’re going to START throwing them with a new purpose. You’re now throwing rocks to say “**** YOU!!!” to the tank operators inside. You know you’re not going to hurt them, but you can show them your bravery and disrespect them by standing up to them.

My point is that if women don’t WAKE UP, the future’s absolutely predictable. If y’all keep thinking that you’re “High Quality” in your own minds, which translates to nothing of value in a guy’s mind, AND doesn’t make you MORE HQ than the other women surrounding you at the cocktail hour for the business conference you attended in Switzerland, you’re going to keep taking shorts and wondering why you never stopped the tank with your rocks.

In a town FULL of attractive women, nobody’s going to select you because you’re attractive.
In a town FULL of women that make money, nobody’s going to select you because you make X per year.
In a town FULL of women with PhDs, nobody’s going to select you because you have a Bachelor’s Degree.
In a fown FULL of female CEOs, nobody’s going to select you because you’re a Vice President.

The *ONLY* way to distinguish yourself here is via personality. Period.

If you want to find a boyfriend in NYC, you have to be proactive about it. Let guys know who you are, what you want, and why we should give it to you.

I think there’s an in between here? Like maybe, let people be players, but leave the rest alone to work through the sometimes imperfections of real and healthy relationships?

“As far as NYC being a hellhole for women who are looking to get involved in a monogamous LTR, I say it’s better to recognize that, feel sour about it briefly, then put together a gameplan to get what you want out of life,”

The trouble, Bill, is that part of what some of us want out of life- and many of us women will recognize this- is that part of what we need is not to get more out of life but to give something to it.

“..instead of hoping against hope that something’s going to change when every woman in the same subway car with you is trying to achieve the same thing you are, and guys know that we can take our time choosing or never choose at all.”

It’s just the numbers. (And the fashion industry skewing up guys’ expectations). Water seeks its own level and good people will find good people. Relationshippers will find relationshippers. But not in New York. And thank god in the heavens or Buddha or Ganesh or whoever that there are much better places than New York. And they are everywhere.

After all the time I just spent writing this stuff, I really, REALLY, *REALLY* dread asking you to ELABORATE on your concept “Part of what we need is not to get more out of life but to give something to it”.

That’s, unfortunately, an interesting statement that I’m *HOPING* you have a BRIEF explanation of… o_O

oh one last thing. The chick from that book I mentioned, The Game? She left the guy in the end for a way hotter, attractive fellow musician.

Take that for what it’s worth….maybe gaming works in some ways but not others, which the author makes pretty clear, and there are more than example of this in the book: it gets you women sexually, but not for the long term (if that’s what you want). The Game doesn’t work in the heart. Which really, is what alot of us, not just women, and sometimes even players with all the options in the world, really want.

From your point of view, she left the guy for a way hotter, attractive fellow musician.

From my point of view, dude got to screw her a gajillion times and now he’s free of her with no financial burden (read: Child Support).

As far as The Game working “in the heart”, sure it does. It depends on how you apply it and what your goals are.

Some guys use game to trick women into doing stuff they otherwise wouldn’t have done.

Other guys use game to get past unnecessary roadblocks, which ends up CREATING the relationship between them instead of falsifying and eventually destroying it.

Anyway.. This was good fun, Susan. Thanks for the exercise. :)

I wish you the best of luck in the sticks, so you don’t have to come back here complaining that guys from The Midwest are JERKS!!! :D haha

Cheers!
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

How To Starting Dating Again

Bill Cammack — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:57:18 +0000

Now that Valentine’s Day, 2011 is over and you just found out that you’re not your significant other‘s primary relationship, you’re probably thinking about bouncing… breaking up with that person.. ending your relationship and starting all over…

We’ve already talked about how to get over your ex-boyfriend and how to get over your ex-girlfriend, but those are emotional considerations.

Getting back in the game might be a bigger leap than you imagined, so let’s discuss a few issues…

Hooking Up

There are lots of benefits to having one boyfriend or girlfriend. One of them is that you definitely know where your sex is coming from (Though, I know quite a few women that would beg to differ with that remark).

You know what it’s going to be like. You know how good or bad it’s going to be. You know what physical shape your SO is in. You know what they like. You know what they do to you. You know how they respond when you do things to them. You know whether they run their mouths incessantly, like they think they’re in a softcore porno or whether they STFU. You know whether them move a lot or lay there like the proverbial dead fish. You know what their fetishes are. You know what their safewords are…

Once you exit that relationship, all bets are off. You could meet the FOYINEST chick in history and she could turn out to be the wackest lay ever. :( Look how Prince had to kick Kim Kardashian off the stage! :D haha You can have all the ass you want, but if you’re not gonna DO anything with it, get the **** off the stage! :D

Mentality

Even though your SO might not be the sharpest pencil in the box, you’re pretty used to them right now. Their weirdness is predictable.

When you start dating again, you’re exposing yourself to people of questionable mental condition. You never know how much baggage they’re bringing to this relationship from the ones they’ve had before. You never know how much trauma they’re still carrying around from their upbringing, either at home, or because they didn’t have good relationships and friendships while they were in school growing up.

The things you detest right now about your SO might be a walk in the park, compared to the new people you meet.

Unfortunately, most people’s styles of dating involve hiding their eccentric qualities until AFTER you get involved with them, so it’s going to be quite a while before you find out who you’re ACTUALLY dating.

False Advertising

It’s come to my attention recently that there’s a massive amount of false advertising that goes on when it comes to online dating.

I talked about this a couple of years ago, in “It’s All In The Game (Online Dating)”, but I’m now aware that the situation is worse than I thought.

In that post, I was responding to a gal who had said that guys were claiming they were 6 feet tall in their dating profiles, and then when she met them, they weren’t anywhere near that height. I explained to her that it’s all in the game.. If they don’t say they’re tall, she might not go out with them at all. If they lie about it, they still get a chance to try to pull her once she meets them and finds out they’re not who they said they were.

It’s better to be in the game than on the sidelines, so the height lie is worth it.

However… I’ve now been informed that guys are using egregiously ancient pictures of themselves from back when they used to look completely different. I’ve seen this behavior from women, forever, but it makes sense from their side because guys are so visually-oriented as far as attraction. If a chick doesn’t have the right look, a guy isn’t trying to talk to her at all.

I didn’t imagine that guys are employing the same strategies. :/ I mean.. How are you going to send a chick a picture of when you were in shape, and show up to the date fat & nasty? o_O I mean.. What’s that supposed to get you? Is she supposed to FORGET that she was previously messaging and texting with someone that she thought looked good? :D

Is she supposed to want to hook up with a guy merely because of what he says, his physical appearance having no bearing on the situation, whatsoever?… GEEEEEEEEEET the **** outta here! :D

The only counter to False Advertising is to either request NEW pictures of whomever you want to talk to.. haha I guess you’d have to have them take a picture, holding up yesterday’s newspaper or something! :D .. or to meet up with the person ASAP, before getting too text-y with them and working yourself up into wanting to meet someone who, physically, no longer actually exists.

The Roster

Women re-entering the dating game need to recognize that unless a guy doesn’t know any chicks at all, y’all go onto The Roster, and not directly to the head of the class, as far as dating him.

For myriad reasons, some biological and some mental, guys in general find it easier to date multiple women than women find it to date multiple men.

This can be confusing to women, because their relationship to a guy can be fantastic, loving, caring, interesting, exciting, mentally stimulating, and otherwise absolutely perfect as far as she’s concerned, but he still won’t commit to her or call her his girlfriend.

This is because he’s willing to put you on the roster, but he’s not willing to fire the rest of the team for you. If you watch baseball, teams don’t have only one pitcher. They have several. Amongst that group, they have starters and they have closers. Different people are relied upon for different things. Unless a guy’s willing to rely on you for EVERYTHING he wants, there’s no reason for him to commit to you.

As perfect as your relationship is to him, he has the same perfect relationship to other women and he enjoys all of youse. Sometimes, he enjoys all of you in the same way and sometimes for different qualities that each of you brings to the table.

A guy that has several fantastic relationships has no reason to select one and eject the others until and unless one gal clearly outshines the rest of his favorites and he feels like he would be satisfied with “just” her instead of the other billion women on this planet that might be down with the program.

So.. Reentering the dating game doesn’t put you back amongst a group of suitors looking to woo you immediately into another relationship. If guys are still in the game when you break up with your SO, you’re going to have to work your way up from the bottom, not start from the top.

Finances

Assuming that a guy wants to date a woman that’s approximately his age… He’s going to have to deal with the difference between broke chicks and women with careers.

Most likely, when he kicked it to his ex, she was willing to let certain behaviors, lifestyles and ways of being of his SLIDE because she was destitute and interested in living off of his money. Fast-Forward a few years, where now he’s meeting women at after-work Happy Hours ‘n such, and now he’s dealing with women that already have their own money.

This means she’s not going to be impressed with him taking her to the movies. She can take her own ass to the movies, and pay for her girlfriends as well. He’s no longer going to be the best-dressed guy she knows. Now, she’s in the corporate world, and is around guys that dress up every day, instead of guys from around the way that dress up two nights a week to go clubbing and otherwise look like bums all the time.

Since she’s stepped up her game, she has more guys than you kickin’ it to her and she’s not as likely to go for your “I’m tha shiznit, so take it or leave it” style that worked for you when you were the only guy she knew that had a car.

Also.. Since you’re getting back in the game, you’re most likely going to be paying for the dates, which are going to become increasingly expensive as women a) get older, and b) have more sophisticated guys taking them out that you need to defeat in competition to pull her.

Essentially, unless she’s STILL broke, you’re going to have to stop relying on your gimmicks and actually talk to her. Get to know her. You’re going to have to pull her by your personality because your cars, money and house just got your foot in the door for her to listen to your sap rap at all so you can throw your hat in the ring with the other fellaz.

Unfortunately.. After spending several years with a chick that you pulled WITHOUT having to talk to her, your skillz MIGHT COULD be rather dusty, so good luck with that! :D

Depreciation

Back in the day, you were a hot property. The more clothes you took off, the more likely you were to get a rap.

If you’re not staying on top of your gym game, that might work fine, so long as you stay with the same BF/GF. Once you start dating again, you’re heading down the river in a boat with no paddles, Capicse? :D

I’m talking about men as well as women. The older women get and the more money they generate on their own, the more they trend towards how men choose women, looks and fun.

If you’re a guy looking to get back in the game and you haven’t been keeping your physique well-tuned and in tip-top shape, you’re going to be at a disadvantage, competing with the younger guys now that MILFS and Cougars are in style.

Back in the day, you had older chicks all to yourselves. Now that they’ve become a valid fetish category, you have guys 10-20 years younger than theses ladies tryin’na tap that. So you not only have to look better than dudes y’all’s age.. You have to strive for Sugar Mama status.

Anyway… Getting dates and hookups and relationships is much easier for attractive people to achieve than unattractive people. Utilize the mirror. If chicks thought you looked like El Debarge back in the day, but now, they regularly mistake you for Anthony Anderson or Drew Carey, it’s gonna be a tough row to hoe from here on out.

Career Daters

When you get into a relationship for several months or years and then return to the dating game, it’s important for you to realize that not everybody’s taking the same trip you are.

Sure, there are some people that just exited relationships like you did and are looking to get back into one ASAP.

OTOH, there are lots of people that are career daters. They happen to be “single” now because they feel like it, and not because they haven’t found “The One” yet.

In fact, they’ve found several “One”s, or Mr. or Mrs. Right Now’s. They may meet them every week.

Coming from a relationship with someone that was actually interested in only dating one person (unless, of course, the relationship ended because you finally figured out that YOU were the only one dating ONE person, hehe), you’re going to have to get back used to people that will tell you whatever they need to to hook up with you, even though they have no intention of following through with any of the dreams they’re selling you.

One of the worst things you can do is tell a career dater that you’re fresh out of a relationship and blah blah blah. That’s bait for a shark. Don’t do it. :D They’re going to smile in your face and tell you everything’s going to be better….. and just lay down right here…..

Baggage

As upset as you are that your relationship ended, you might find yourself dating someone who’s even MORE UPSET that THEIR relationship ended and they’re not dealing with it very well.

You may be required to carry the baggage that they brought from the previous relationship.. ESPECIALLY if they got cheated on last time. You’re going to have to suffer through “Guilty Until Proven Innocent”. You’re going to have to figure out and then defuse whatever people did to them in the past just so you can get back to square one and start your relationship fresh.

It could be even worse if they’ve gone all the way through the entire process of messing around, dating, hooking up, getting engaged, getting married and getting divorced already. Sometimes, that shakes people’s belief in the system they’ve been fed since they were small children. As much as they’d like to take that same journey with you, minus the divorce part, their heart just isn’t in it.

Hopefully, they’ll figure this out about themselves before you get overly interested in a continuing relationship with them.

Still worse are the people that want to act out NOW that they’ve been cheated on or whatever. You really don’t want to get involved with someone that’s looking to do the same thing to someone else that was already done to them.

Two wrongs doesn’t make a right, but sometimes, it just feels good. >:D

Gloom & Doom

It’s not all Gloom & Doom, however. :D

The good thing is that a lot of your friends are married or currently in long-term relationships and they’ll have friends that you can meet that they’ve already vetted. They’re going to know who’s still looking for someone to settle down with and who’s incessantly playing the field.

Another good thing is that this is your chance to learn about yourself. Take some time to figure out what worked for you in your previous relationship and what didn’t work. Figure out how that relationship changed you, who you are now as a person, and what you want from your next relationship.

Decide whether the qualities you utilized to select your ex are the same ones you’d like to use this time around. Decide whether you’re willing to give everything you gave to the previous relationship or whether you’re bringing a different set of qualities to the table this time.

In fact, starting all over is your chance to reinvent yourself and do things totally differently. You can make better decisions based on the experience with relationships that you have now.

You’re older, wiser, and hopefully BETTER-LOOKING!!! :D hehe Now’s your opportunity to chart the course for the rest of your life, and the sky’s the limit! >:D
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

Relationship Compressors vs Limiters

Bill Cammack — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:55:16 +0000

I’ve been gettin’ my music thing on pretty heavily recently.

I didn’t think I was going to derive any good dating topics from studying mix engineering, but I most definitely did! >:D

I’ve been looking for a long time for a good analogy that explains the type of relationships that some of y’all are in, where you think you have say in things, but you really don’t.

The way I’m going to do that is by talking about two pieces of musical equipment that do the exact same thing, but in significantly different ways.

Volume

Let’s say you’re recording a vocal (someone singing). That person might sound quiet at times and loud at other times, during the same line of a song, or even during the same WORD in a line.

That might be useful if you don’t have much instrumentation behind them and the volume changes express certain feelings. It ISN’T useful if you have to keep their voices at a certain level to remain above the background music. Sometimes, they will be heard, and sometimes, they won’t.

You can’t just turn up the volume so their most quiet words can be heard, because the parts where they get louder will jump up over the mix in an unrealistic fashion that ruins the listener’s immersion, and probably their ears, if they’re using headphones.

One way around this is to “ride the faders”, meaning that you listen to the entire song and change the volume of their vocal to compensate for how they recorded it. An easier way is to run that channel through a compressor.

Compressors

Basically, what a compressor does is it only gives you back a lesser percentage of what you give it.

Let’s say that volume ranged from 0 – 10. Without compression, if you speak (or sing) at level 5, you’re perceived at level 5. If you speak at level 9, you hear 9. At level 10, you hear 10.

Let’s say you put a compressor on that channel, set the threshold (volume where it begins compressing the signal) at 0 and set the ratio at 2:1. If you speak at 2, you’re heard at 1. At 4, you’re heard as 2. At 10, you’re heard at 5. For every two decibels of volume you give the compressor, it gives you one back.

The value of this is that it automatically decreases the range of fluctuation in the volume of that channel. Assuming that the loudest that vocalist could get is 10, the loudest you’ll ever perceive them is 5, which is much easier to sit into a mix. You could make it even easier by using 4:1 compression, meaning that when that person perceives themselves on level 8, you’re hearing them on level 2.

I’ll be getting to how this is relevant to dating in a minute. >:D

Limiters

Limiters do the exact same thing that compressors do if you’re able turn the ratio on the compressor up extremely high.

Let’s say a limiter is a compressor with a ratio of 1000/1. This means that your vocalist’s 1-10 volume range will always be perceived as less than or equal to wherever the threshold was set.

Limiters are used to make sure that regardless of what happens, the sound never gets louder than X. If the threshold is set to 6, at 1, the sound is heard as 1. At 3, heard as 3. At 5, heard as 5. At 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10, heard as 6.

Let’s say we make the threshold 8. So long as the vocalist stays between 0 and 8, they get back what they gave out. There’s no compression on them before 8. Whatever they do, however, including bringing other people to yell into the mic with them or breaking out a bullhorn to amplify their voices, they will NEVER be heard louder than 8… unless the mix engineer raises the threshold to 9 or 10 or removes the limiter from that channel entirely…

Relationships

I’ve really wanted to explain this properly for a long time, because I’m not a “compromise” type of person. I’m excellent at doing what *I* want to do, and horrible at doing something someone else wants me to do that I don’t give a flying **** about.

What I realized about myself is that anything I do for someone is, in fact, a gift that I’m giving them. It’s not something I’m compelled to do for some externally-based reason.

I don’t have a job. I’m a freelance video editor. I do the jobs I feel like doing, and I don’t do the jobs I don’t feel like doing. I don’t answer my phone. I don’t check my voicemail. The people that want to hire me know to email me.

I don’t have one girlfriend. I get in where I fit in. We’re hooking up, or we’re not. If I show up somewhere, it’s because I felt like it, not because I can be coerced by threat of a sex embargo if some chick doesn’t like what I did or said.

Basically.. My doing what *I* want to do will ALWAYS be more important to me than doing what YOU want me to do. This means that regardless of what you THINK is going on in the relationship, I control the compressor and/or limiter on the reality of the situation.

I’m not saying this is a one-sided concept. I get compressed and limited every single day. Women have compressors and limiters up the wazoo! :D It’s completely ridiculous how many invisible walls pop up in front of me when I’m interacting with chicks, most of which, they’re doing to themselves and it has nothing to do with me.

“I don’t want to look like a ho!”
“I don’t want to eat in front of guys!”
“I only do that after you call me your girlfriend!”

BLAH, BLAH, BLAHBLAHBLAH, all this nonsense that The Kid has to circumnavigate just to get a chick to BE HERSELF and do what’s ovbious that she WANTS TO DO! :D .. So, the concept DEFINITELY works in both directions as far as compressing and limiting relationships.

What This Has To Do With You

I’ve wanted to explain this for a long time because people keep claiming they have free reign in their relationships, when they most obviously DO NOT! :D

I wanted to find a way to tell them that they’re only free to a certain point, and then the door slams shut on them. Some people are the compressors and have freedom to do whatever they like, without getting shut down by their SO. Some people are in actual, authentic two-way perfectly free relationships. Some people are being compressed and/or limited, and they don’t even know it.

Compression would be the more obvious of the two. When people interact, they’re usually discussing frivolous, unimportant issues. “Where are we going to eat, tonight?”. “Which movie do you want to see?”. “What time do you want to leave to go snowboarding?”. If you get a lot of static and ‘direction’ and potentially CORRECTION during discussion like this, you’re being compressed. Your SO is telling you that your ideas aren’t as good, so here’s the right way to do things, try to learn it for next time, so I don’t have to compress you again about the same issue.

If you don’t get resistance to your concepts, you may very well be in a free relationship. Unfortunately, a free relationship looks EXACTLY like a limited relationship until you hit the limiter. The limiter usually kicks in when there’s an IMPORTANT decision to be made, such as “Let’s get married” or “Let’s have a baby” or “Let’s have MORE babies! :D”.

So long as your ideas have no real effect on your SO, you never hit the limiter. You get to run around telling your friends that you’re in an equal relationship and y’all make decisions together, when, in fact, your SO’s making all the decisions by allowing your concepts to pass without being vetoed.

Examples

A guy is being compressed when he’s scared to death to look at other girls when his girlfriend is with him. When she’s not there, he’s all about checkin’ out some ass, but all eyes are on her as soon as she arrives. Compressed.

A gal is being limited when a guy’s willing to come to her crib and hit it on the regular, but refuses to a) go anywhere with her in public, and/or b) admit to anybody he knows that he’s messing with her. If she presses him to make people aware that they’re involved.. or, even worse, decides to announce it HERSELF! :O .. She ‘might could’ get dumped, because his reputation is more important to him than hooking up with her.

A guy is being limited when he can’t stand the concept of not having sex with this one particular chick. It’s not something she’s doing to him. He’s doing it to himself. No matter how much he swears up and down that he’s not going to XYZ, the bottom line is that if it seems like she’s going to stop producing, he’s going to do WHATEVER. HE. HAS. TO. DO. to make sure he still has physical access to her.

Unfortunately, dudes like this often rebel against the facts and akk tha FOO instead of calming down and accepting the current circumstance of their lives. It’s bad enough that THEY KNOW they’re whipped. It would be worse for the viewing public to know that, so they try to act braver than they are when it comes to other chicks. Behind closed doors, it’s all about “Yes Dear”, “Right Away, Dear”, “Coming Right Up, Dear”… Limited.

A gal is being compressed when her guy is always trying to tell her what to do, what to wear, what NOT to wear, how she should have her hair, who she’s allowed to talk to, who she’s allowed to be friends with, what time she needs to be home, what time dinner needs to be served, how she should behave, which fork to eat with, how much alcohol to drink…

Limitations

Like Clint Eastwood said.. “A man’s got to know his limitations”.

Some men & women actually are experiencing free relationships.

They really can disappear for an entire week without contacting their SO and still have a relationship to come back to.

They really can have sex with other people, threaten their SO with violence or actually put their hands on them, withhold sex from them indefinitely, and do anything else they can possibly think of, and not have a single worry in the world that the other person might end the relationship or impose sanctions on them that make any difference at all in their lives.

Everybody else’s relationships are regulated by the limiter, whether they realize it or not.

I was having some laughs with some guys and somebody brought up the line from the Chris Rock routine where he says something to the effect of “I would never hit a woman… BUT I’LL SHAKE THE **** OUT OF HER! >:D”.. The importance of that line being that SOMETHING will be done to get her to stop trippin’ out, even though it won’t be punching her in the face.

Apparently, this was the first time in life that one of the guys there had heard that, so while everybody else was laughing, he was obviously imagining a scenario in his mind of that actually happening. He looked dazed and confused for a while, and then he says something like “oh.. I could NEVER shake MY wife! :O”. Limited.

In fact, he CAN shake his wife. He’s physically capable of it. He’s not WILLING to even CONSIDER shaking his wife, because he doesn’t want the cascade of consequences that comes with that, such as her leaving him, amongst other things. He’s not scared of HER.. He’s afraid of what he would lose if he did that.

I happen to have met his wife, and she’s a charming and lovely woman, and I can’t see any reason why he SHOULD have to shake her. That’s not what he was thinking about either, that she’s too nice of a person to shake.

In fact, were she not that type of person (which is purely hypothetical, because he probably wouldn’t be with her if she were like this), and she got in an argument and slapped the BEJESUS out of him, he’d probably just take it. He’d take that and anything else she decided to do to him because he’s mentally restricted from physically stopping her from acting stupid.

There’s nothing wrong with that way of being.. Some people actually call that “civilized”. Whatever you call it, it’s a limitation. He’s not free to do ANYTHING in his relationship, because there will be consequences and repercussions.

Perhaps, in that same hypothetical, she’s limited as well. He might be willing to take one beatdown, but not two. o_O He might decide to leave HER because she’s not who he thought she was when they decided to share life together. So, while she THOUGHT she could lay hands on him with nothing happening to her, she was actually experiencing an illusion of freedom.

Hitting The Limiter

There are two people affected when somebody hits the limiter. The limitEE realizes that their relationship is actually different from what they thought it was this whole time, and the limitER now has to deal with someone that’s suddenly become aware that their power in this relationship was only loaned to them by you.

If you set the limit high enough, it won’t happen at all. Even if they hit the limit once or twice, they might not understand what it was. An example of this would be when a gal wants to escalate the relationship, and the guy keeps putting it off. Sometimes, that means he’s honestly not ready yet to break out the girlfriend, fiancee or wife titles. Other times, that means he’s just stalling as long as he can before she INSISTS on a title, at which time he has to inform her that he’s he’s not interested in committing to her at all, which means she’s likely to bounce from the relationship.

Compression is different, because there are constant reminders of what the limiter doesn’t like or doesn’t want the limitee to do. That’s more of a “You’re still letting them do THAT to you? o_O” situation. That’s when there’s a buildup, until the limitee decides they’ve had “all they can stands… and they can’t stands no more!” and ejects.

The potentially saddest part about hitting the limiter is the ensuing discussion about compromise. In music, you use a limiter instead of a compressor to say “You can DEFINITELY NOT get any louder than this, or something bad will happen to my mix”. With a compressor, there’s room for potential compromise. If the vocalist brings another singer along, increasing the volume entering the channel to 20 from their individual maximum of 10, if they’re being compressed at a 2:1 ratio from a threshold of 0, their voices combined are heard as volume level 10. OTOH, if the vocalist was being limited at 7, they can bring as many people as they want and get as loud as they want and they’ll never achieve a volume louder than 7.

That’s what’s sad.. When people think they can negotiate their way to an 8 or a 9, because all the way from 0 to 7, they felt like they were an equal partner in making policy. They thought their opinions actually counted, when, in fact, those things only happened because the limiter agreed with what they said, or he or she didn’t deem the issue important enough to veto.

Some people never get it and keep trying to negotiate. Others understand what happened and are left with the choice to stay in a relationship that they know is limited, or bounce and have no relationship at all.

Neither choice is fun, but it sometimes becomes necessary to decide what you really want for yourself. In fact, some people never even understand what they’re doing in relationships until they hit the limiter and are forced to recognize the reality of their current situation. If they wanted more kids, they’re gonna have to have them with somebody else. If they wanted to get married, they’re gonna have to do that with somebody else. If they wanted to move to Arkansas….. They’re gonna have to do THAT with somebody else! :D

Realizing that you’re limited in your relationship brings up important questions, such as “Do I want to go along with this?” and “How long do I think I can keep this up?”. Ultimately, it comes down to the type of person you are. Do you want to do what YOU want to do? or do you want to do what someone else dictates to you to do?

If you can roll with the limits, good for you! :D If you can’t, you’re better off single until you become involved with someone you’re on the same page with… or, at least someone who imposes limitations that you can stand. :D
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

Don’t Tell The Waitress What’s In The Soup

Bill Cammack — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 00:20:06 +0000

I’m watching this “reality” show and there’s this lady on it who’s married to a sports star. Almost the ENTIRE THEME to the ENTIRE SHOW is that male sports stars cheat on their main women with, basically, any chick that throws some at them.

Not only has infidelity been discussed at length in every single episode, but this particular woman is currently upset with her man over him having cheated on her in the past. She’s so upset with him, in fact, that she’s not hooking up with him at all at this point. She tells her girlfriends that, for her, sex is about emotion, and if she’s not feeling her husband in that way, she doesn’t want to have sex with him.

So she goes to a party and spots this gal that she considers a “groupie” (a chick that makes herself available for sex to sports players, rock stars, etc). Somehow, she’s aware that this groupie had been spotted talking to her husband. She decides it would be a good idea for her to walk over there and introduce herself to this groupie and explain to her who she was.

This was *NOT* a good idea.

Who’s Better? Who’s Best?

IF the woman in question is, in fact, a groupie, that means that she’s privy to information that you (the wife) are not allowed to receive. There are ALL. KINDS. OF. THINGS. that you don’t know about that this person you’re about to approach has heard, seen & done that give her an incredible advantage over you if you try to compare yourself to her.

I understand why the wife felt superior. I understand what she THOUGHT was going to happen when she stepped to the groupie. She expected the groupie to defer to her as the top dog when it comes to her husband. That’s basically like trying to tell the waitress in a restaurant what’s in the soup she brought you. You know what you ordered, but she’s the one that actually went to get your food from the kitchen. She has a MUCH BETTER IDEA of what you’re actually eating than you do.

So the wife walks over to the groupie and asks her if she knows [Husband's Name]. The groupie says “Yes. I met him recently”. The wife says “That’s my husband” and is standing there as if she expects the groupie to scamper away like a roach when you turn on the lights.

The groupie doesn’t flinch or seem amused, and says “He didn’t tell me he was married”.

Quit While You’re Behind

This has to be a major deflation for the wife, being that she thought she was informing this other woman of her oh-so important position and her husband hadn’t bothered to mention her at all. In fact, lots of times, when guys go to talk to other women, they remove their wedding rings anyway so the topic doesn’t come up by accident.

Not that this would EVER have happened to me, were I a female.. but if it had, I would have exited right there. I would have walked away. No good is going to come of continuing a conversation after you announce something you think is important to someone and it’s not important to them at all.

Of course, that’s not what happened. The wife remains in the pocket, talking about blah blah blah and showing the groupie her wedding ring. The groupie remains unamused.

The wife says something like “I KNOW you were talking to my husband”, to which the groupie replies “Do you think I was the ONLY girl your man was talking to?” hahahaha STILL, this chick doesn’t learn her lesson and remains in the pocket, trying to get some respect she’s never going to receive.

In later conversations (not the same day) between the same two women, the groupie tells the wife “Your man doesn’t give a **** about you!” and “Your man told me that you’re a business arrangement”.

What’s The Problem?

The reason this happened to her is that she’s playing The Wife Game all by herself. In fact, she’s not even playing that game very well. When she told her girlfriends that she hadn’t hooked up with her husband since June (no telling what month it was at that point), they freaked out on her. One gal asked her directly “What do you expect him to do? Use his hand?” and the wife shrugged her shoulders, like as if to say “That’s HIS problem”.

No.. In Fact.. It’s *YOUR* problem.

He doesn’t HAVE any problems because he’s rich and famous and has groupies throwing sex at him that you don’t feel like giving up. You can’t deprive HIM of having sex. You can only deprive yourself.

This is why the groupie that you recognize by face has never heard of you before. This is why she knows of many more women besides herself that “your” man has been talking to. This is why she knows (even if though hearsay from other groupies and other players that she knows personally) more about what your man has been doing than you do. This is why she feels comfortable telling you that your man called you a business arrangement. This is why she asked to speak to you on the side, instead of in front of your girlfriends, so you wouldn’t be EMBARRASSED when she told you the small amount of information she elected to divulge about what you consider to be your personal business.

Think about it.. If you’re sitting down with your girlfriends and telling them you haven’t performed any of your wifely duties in the bedroom in months, what makes you think he’s not telling his boys that? What makes you think he’s not telling the groupies that? What if these women aren’t groupies at all, but in fact women that he’s cultivating friendships and/or romantic relationships with? What if you’re talking to your future replacement and she knows it and you don’t?

Perception Of Leverage

Waving a ring in some woman’s face doesn’t get you more knowledge than she has. It doesn’t suddenly make you privy to what your man’s doing when you’re not around. It also doesn’t compel her to inform you about anything she knows. She could easily keep it to herself and think “Look at this fool, trying to make a scene, when I could call her man on the phone right now”, or even worse, “Look at this fool, trying to make a scene, while her man’s at the hotel with my homegirl”.

Of course, there are lots of other problems with this dumb-ass (yet, typical) scenario, such as This Is A Free Country, and you can’t tell a grown-ass woman that she can’t talk to a grown-ass man and you can’t forbid him to speak to her either. I mean, you can SAY it, but your words don’t carry any weight. They don’t have to do what you told them.

Also.. What would have happened if the “groupie” would have told the wife “**** You. I’m gonna do what I want with your man anytime he requests it”? Nothing. Nothing at all would have happened. Would the wife have punched her in the face? Would she have thrown a drink on her? Nope. She would have stood there looking stupid and wondering why she didn’t have an intelligent response to what she just heard.

What was she going to do to her husband? Nothing. She’s already not giving him sex. That was her ace in the hole. She has nothing left to threaten him with. How’s she supposed to stop him from doing whatever he feels like doing?

Authentic Influence

I suppose my point is that your influence over another person is based on your actual relationship to him or her. It’s not based on whatever title you currently hold.

If you’re lucky, the title is a representation of your SO’s real, honest, authentic commitment to you. If that’s the case, you don’t have to go announcing to so-called nobodies that you’re someone’s wife or husband. What are you concerned about?.. Unless you don’t trust your mate. o_O

I recognize that in this particular case, her husband had already admitted that he cheated on her. Shouldn’t that make her LESS confident that her ring means something instead of MORE confident to the point that she feels she can wave it at a groupie like a magic wand and make her disappear?.. Or at least make the groupie stop doing whatever she might be doing with her husband?

In fact, she was talking to the wrong person. The groupie doesn’t have any deals with her. Her husband does. If he vetoes the action, nothing happens. Period. Creating a showdown with a gal he may or may not be banging and then having her calmly inform you that she’s nowhere near the ONLY chick your husband kicks it with, AND that he sees you as a business arrangement is not only an incredibly bad idea, but I would think, for the wife, would be a deflating and ultimately depressing experience.
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

Bill Cammack » husband

That’s Your Man’s Problem

Focus On The Facts

That’s Your Man’s Problem

Real-World Application

Good For The Gander

Off The Market

Related Posts

Why You Can’t Get A Boyfriend In NYC

Mile Marker 5

Mile Marker 10

Mile Marker 15

Related Posts

How To Starting Dating Again

Hooking Up

Mentality

False Advertising

The Roster

Finances

Depreciation

Career Daters

Baggage

Gloom & Doom

Related Posts

Relationship Compressors vs Limiters

Volume

Compressors

Limiters

Relationships

What This Has To Do With You

Examples

Limitations

Hitting The Limiter

Related Posts

Don’t Tell The Waitress What’s In The Soup

Who’s Better? Who’s Best?

Quit While You’re Behind

What’s The Problem?

Perception Of Leverage

Authentic Influence

Related Posts