Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
The Alpha Provider
-By Caleb Jones
A new buzz phrase has appeared lately and many of you have commented or emailed me about it; “Alpha Provider.” Many of you have asked what my opinion of this is, which is surprising, since I’ve been discussing and supporting the concept of a pair bonded Alpha Male who takes care of a woman for about, oh, seven years now.
But there’s a catch. We’ll get to that in a minute.
Just to show what other guys have been saying this, Chase has articles about it here and here. Return of Kings has an article about it here and Roosh has one here. I’m sure there are many more. As I’ve explained before, since guys in the PUA / manosphere realms are finally aging into their 30s and beyond, there is an increased interest in the topic of long-term pair bonding. (For the record, I know Chase and think he’s a really great guy. I have never directly communicated with Roosh, nor with most of the writers at RoK, though I do like some of them, particularly Aaron Clarey).
I have read all of these articles, and nitpick points aside I agree with their overall position. That is that eventually, when you get older, you’re going to want to settle down with a Special Lady™ in some form or fashion, and it’s very important to remain Alpha when you do so. Well, duh. I’ve been saying this for almost a decade, even when it wasn’t popular with a community that was mostly interested in getting laid and not much else. (Back in circa 2009-2011, I was repeatedly attacked in the PUA community for “focusing too much on relationships” instead of focusing on pickup and game.) I have also stated numerous times that a live-in OLTR, or variation thereof, is my eventual goal.
This wasn’t because I was smarter or more forward thinking than everyone else; it was because I entered into this world as a 35 year-old man who already had two kids. Therefore, my view of these things has always been a longer-term one as compared to some horny 24 year-old dude with no kids who’s just focused on banging chicks. As an older guy, even when I was in my hardcore banging chicks phase (an important phase to go through), I clearly understood that it was temporary and that I would be looking to pair bond again once it was over, and thus had to plan accordingly.
So clearly I agree with the overall concept. Where’s the problem then?
The problem is not what these articles say. What they say is fine. The problem is with what they imply or don’t say.
Live with a woman, have kids with a woman, and/or take care of a woman (if you can easily afford it)? Fine. But in all the articles on this topic I’ve seen, the strong implication is that the Alpha Provider:
1. Becomes legally married to his wife.
2. Is monogamous.
Now we have a problem.
As I’ve been saying for years and years, and backing up with numerous facts and statistics...
Pair bonding with a woman is fine. Loving a woman is fine. Living with a woman, as long as you take precautions, is fine. Having children with a woman and raising a family, as long as you take precautions, is fine. These are all wonderful things. I’ve done them myself and will likely do them again. Alpha Provider...fine.
However, as soon as you add absolute sexual monogamy to the mix, or corrupt, anti-man government into the mix via legal marriage, you’ve gone from Alpha Provider to Delusional Idiot. You have now set several nuclear-strength time bombs all over your life that will detonate at any time in the next 3-15 years. Then have fun with massive drama at best, huge legal problems and financial devastation at worst.
If you like drama or don’t mind drama, then by all means, ignore my advice, stop reading my stuff, get legally married, promise forever monogamy, expect it from her, and be Mr. Temporary Alpha Husband. You’ll be in NRE married / kids bliss for a few years (likely about three) and then it’s all going to blow up in your face when she catches you cheating and/or when she divorces your ass, either of which extremely likely because of the fact you’re an Alpha. As I’ve said before, submissive, pussy beta males actually have less-bad odds of making a long-term monogamous relationship/marriage work than you as an Alpha ever will.
If you don’t like drama and enjoy being happy, then if/when you become an Alpha Provider, follow the system I’ve described at this blog and in my books. Find woman qualified, sign an enforceable co-habitation agreement, move in with her, sign and file a parenting plan before she gets pregnant, don’t get legally married, keep your finances separate (though you can still take care of her if you wish) and keep things at least somewhat sexually open so you can discreetly get a little on the side. Then live your family man life and have your kids. Millions of men all over the Western world are quietly doing this right now. It works.
If you think that won’t work, please read this and this, and read this book and this one, along with various other articles I’ve written on this topic. If you read all the data I provide as well as all the proven principles and techniques men in these types of provider scenarios use, and you still think it doesn’t work, then you’re just being irrationally stubborn.
The Default Manosphere Advice
Let’s compare my advice to the typical advice given in this area. The default, Alpha Male 1.0, marriage 1.0, manosphere, PUA advice that is always given, or at least strongly implied, regarding Alpha Provider and settling down always boils down to this:
1. Heavily screen for a super submissive woman that hasn’t had sex with very many men yet.
2. Legally marry her, and get monogamous and have kids.
3. Be super Alpha and badass and always show her who’s boss.
4. Cross your fingers and hope it all works out.
Listen pal. If that method worked, you wouldn’t be seeing men all over the PUA and manosphere getting divorced left and right. If that was the secret sauce to making forever marriage work, divorce rates would be going down, when in fact, among people who still actually get married, divorce rates are skyrocketing in all age groups, all over the Western world.
Clearly this method doesn’t fucking work. If you follow this method, I’m going to bet real money that you’ll end up in divorce court in a few years fighting over your right to see your own kids. And I’ll be right.
A lot of you need to wake the fuck up. This is not 1952 any more. This right wing fantasy doesn’t exist (unless you want to move to the third world and stay there forever). I’m simply astounded that in the 2010s men are still falling for this “traditional marriage will work as long as you're Alpha” shit. Are there unusual exceptions to the rule? Of course. As always, the exceptions prove the rule and you have no idea if you're one of these exceptions on your wedding day.
There’s mountains of evidence of it not working staring you right in the face and you still choose to ignore it. Sad.
Does that mean my option is perfect? Of course not. There are no more perfect options for raising kids. Mine is simply the least bad one. Statistically speaking, you will probably still get divorced under my option as well. The difference is your sex life, your finances, and your custody of your kids will still be in your control within reason. That's Alpha. Promising her that you'll never fuck other women and letting her put a gun to your head in the form of legal marriage is not.
Alpha Provider is great, but you’ve got to do it under the model conducive to the real world and not some right wing guy-Disney fantasy.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.
Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
Seth 2016-05-05 08:43:13
I've essentially followed the default manosphere advice regarding the alpha provider role. Been married six years with a a kid. Guess what-I still want to see other women. The problem is that I live in the sexually repressed Bible Belt and desirable women seem to balk at the idea of me dating while married. The other night I met a woman and had drinks with her. Followed Black Dragon's first date podcast advice very closely. It was going great. Few drinks at a restaurant then I took her to a movie to touch her. We had to leave early because we were all over each other with heavy petting. We left with the intention of having sex but on the way to her place she changed her mind and asked me if this was just a one time thing and I framed myself as a guy dates a lot. She didn't go for it and we kissed goodnight. The next morning she busted me for being married-she found out online somehow. Haven't heard from her since. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's hard to be an alpha provider and I may eventually go through the divorce to get away from being an alpha provider if I want to have sex with other women.
KuiceKuice 2016-05-05 09:08:05
Kind of off topic, but still relevant to the blog as a whole. As a guy who over and over talks about how little money he spends to get laid, and how he doesn't "provide" for the women he bangs even though they are much younger... I'd be very curious to your personal response to the following article by WSPB. http://wallstreetplayboys.com/personal-finance-and-dating They are basically outlining how hot of a women you can get based on what type of money you spend and the experiences you provide. By their logic if you have 10 million in the bank but only spend 1K a month in a cheap town, you aren't getting any pussy.
Blackdragon 2016-05-05 10:01:53
Guess what-I still want to see other women.Of course you do. Because you're a human being acting like how human beings were designed.
So I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s hard to be an alpha provider and I may eventually go through the divorce to get away from being an alpha provider if I want to have sex with other women.It's tougher to acquire side-women when you're married, true. But there are many techniques that help with this. The easiest one is to focus on women under age 23, but there are others.
By their logic if you have 10 million in the bank but only spend 1K a month in a cheap town, you aren’t getting any pussy.I only just scanned the article but it's so far off into it's own head I couldn't stand it. We all live in our own little bubbles to a degree. If I worked on Wall Street and made $1 million a year I would probably think the same thing; that you can only get hot chicks if you throw down thousands of dollars. And hey, maybe that's true on Wall Street. It's incorrect most everywhere else, but I'd probably assume something like that anyway if I never ventured out of that bubble. Coincidentally, I've got a blog post coming next Thursday that goes over this topic in great detail.
Seth 2016-05-05 10:12:29
"The easiest one is to focus on women under age 23, but there are others." That gives me hope. The woman I described is 47 (gorgeous divorcee). I'm 29.
Blackdragon 2016-05-05 10:33:57
The woman I described is 47 (gorgeous divorcee). I’m 29.Uh, yeah. WAY too old for a side-woman if you're married (unless she is also married, then it works well). A woman that age will consider you being married a slap in the face. A 20 year-old will barely care. Over-33 women are difficult enough. Over-33 women as side-women when you're married are damn near impossible.
Anon. 2016-05-05 13:18:24
http://wallstreetplayboys.com/personal-finance-and-datingIn the very first paragraph, they start with the assumption that the reader is at the median in status, looks and game, the only variable being money. Obviously being above average in the aforementioned departments helps a lot.
Duke 2016-05-05 14:41:24
I agree with the article, but as I expressed in a comment on the blog post last week, you have the upper hand because you have already been there done that. Men who want children that have not tried TMM at least once will invariably be compelled to do it no matter what you or anybody else says. Other things that you suggest are not a realistic possibility for the average guy who wants to marry or cohabitate with an attractive woman who has no kids. I have witnessed this myself with some male family members who happen to be brothers and fit your alpha 1.0 model; they even have status as entrepreneurs and future millionaires (through inheritance, if not by their own merit) who own their own business. One moved in with a chick when he was 24, and she was a six at best 27 who had a six year old kid. The other brother was 27 who moved in with a woman slightly younger who also had a 5 year old kid and is probably a six at best from her body, but the face is iffy. Whether they went this route to have the upper hand over their women or because they couldn't find attractive women who would only accept moving in is something I don't know and don't plan on asking them, but I assume it might be a little of both. My point is that as man you can pick an average looking women with no kids or a somewhat attractive single mother (hopefully with only one child) who is "damaged goods" and subsequently of "lesser value." Less desirable people undeniably make better relationship/marriage partners be it a beta male or a lesser attractive woman. Or you could double down and try to get to what the manospere preaches which is more or less a "low partner count," attractive woman, with traditional values, and definitely no kids. The trouble with the second option is that these "high value" girls either require all of the things you speak out against or the man feels he "owes" it to her since she has ticked off the pertinent boxes and thus needs to be rewarded. This is why a significant number of men would rather have a horrible marriage and divorce after a few years than have a woman lower smv and have a lower risk marriage that "works" and lasts considerably long enough to at least raise children to adulthood.
sign an enforceable co-habitation agreementIt seems that you stopped mentioning enforceable prenup and have moved on to this. I'm really skeptical of prenups and this new option you suggest is equally suspect. Most judges sympathize with women, and will do what they deem to be in the best interest of the children, which usually amounts to the law transferring wealth from the man to the main care taker of the children who oftentimes get sole custody of said children. Judges will not leave the woman destitute, especially if she wasn't working throughout the cohabitation if she even agrees to cohabitation in the first place. The man would be better off getting married but hiding any wealth he may have in trusts, LLC's, or somewhere else where people usually hide wealth. He should also not buy a house, but rent so that he could have leverage after the split. He would agree to pay the rent if he is allowed to see his kids, although she could decline this and sue for a child support if the man is high income enough.
file a parenting plan before she gets pregnantThis is also something that I have researched. In my state, people can not draw up a parenting plan with unborn children.
don’t get legally marriedAs I mentioned earlier really hot women will typically not agree to this when they have tons of men who would jump at the chance to sign a marriage certificate to "express" their love.
keep your finances separatePretty much same as above. How many hot women will agree to this when they have a never ending line of simps that are more than willing to have joint bank accounts/credit cards without complaint. You have mentioned that you have had multiple marriage proposals and the women in your life might be eager to accept your terms, but how many other men can say the same?
Blackdragon 2016-05-05 15:05:55
Men who want children that have not tried TMM at least once will invariably be compelled to do it no matter what you or anybody else says.Yes. And these men are either idiots or secretly enjoy drama. This is one of the many reasons I stopped giving a shit about these men a long time ago.
My point is that as man you can pick an average looking women with no kids or a somewhat attractive single mother (hopefully with only one child) who is “damaged goods” and subsequently of “lesser value.”Jesus, what a horribly incorrect belief you have. Why can't you have a hot woman with no kids? I date/fuck those all the time. So do many other men I know.
Less desirable people undeniably make better relationship/marriage partners be it a beta male or a lesser attractive woman.My god you're wrong. I really hope you don't actually believe this garbage.
It seems that you stopped mentioning enforceable prenup and have moved on to this.Incorrect. I still talk about prenups. I said that no legal marriage is better than a legal marriage with a prenup. I've said this many times. It's nothing new.
I’m really skeptical of prenups and this new option you suggest is equally suspect.Marriage with an enforcable prenup is less bad than marriage with no prenup. True or false? Living with a woman with an enforceable co-habitation agreement less bad than having no signed agreement at all. True or false? Thus my point. As I keep repeating, there are no "good" options here, just degrees of bad. Your goal is to minimize the bad, not look for the good, because there is no good for men wanting to settle down in the modern era.
Most judges sympathize with women, and will do what they deem to be in the best interest of the children, which usually amounts to the law transferring wealth from the man to the main care taker of the children who oftentimes get sole custody of said children.This only occurs when the women challenge prenups, and based on my research, this only occurs in places where prenups are not enforceable or with very, very wealthy men. The odds of it happening to the typical guy in an enforceable prenup area are low.
The man would be better off getting married but hiding any wealth he may have in trusts, LLC’s, or somewhere else where people usually hide wealth. He should also not buy a house, but rent so that he could have leverage after the split.Correct, but doesn't mean he should get legally married too. He shouldn't Nor does it men if he gets legally married he shouldn't sign an enforceable prenup too. He should.
This is also something that I have researched. In my state, people can not draw up a parenting plan with unborn children.Great. Move to somewhere better. I did.
How many hot women will agree to this when they have a never ending line of simps that are more than willing to have joint bank accounts/credit cards without complaint.A hot woman who already has oneitis for you wont suddenly dump your ass for this reason alone. I know many men who have hot women in arrangements like this. But they didn't discuss this stuff on the first date. They discussed it when she was already head over heels in love and ready to move in with him. Relationship technique is critical, as always.
You have mentioned that you have had multiple marriage proposals and the women in your life might be eager to accept your terms, but how many other men can say the same?Very few, since most men choose to be either betas or pro-monogamy Alpha Male 1.0s, which was your point at the beginning of your comment. That's their choice. I chose differently. You can be the type of man you want, if you're willing to put in the time and the work. If you're not willing to this, then you're fucked no matter what. That's how life works.
Duke 2016-05-05 15:42:27
Jesus, what a horribly incorrect belief you have. Why can’t you have a hot woman with no kids? I date/fuck those all the time. So do many other men I know.You said it, for fucking/dating. The topic is alpha providing, assuming marriage and monogamy as per manoshere.
My god you’re wrong. I really hope you don’t actually believe this garbage.Of course I don't personally believe it, but those are the options that I believe 95 percent of the men who want TMM have. Anyway, keep doing what you're doing and try to get that five percent who you think can be "converted." And keep making all that money you evil capitalist. *wink*
Blackdragon 2016-05-05 15:46:18
You said it, for fucking/dating. The topic is alpha providing, assuming marriage and monogamy as per manoshere.I know many men who have live-in OLTRs (or very close to it) with women who are super hot. And I mean SUPER hot. One of the hottest women I've ever met is in one right now. And none of these men are rich.
Of course I don’t personally believe itYou stated it like you did. The bottom line is that if you criticize my suggestions, that's fine and I encourage that, but then you need to specifically lay out YOUR suggestions so we can examine them as well. The Duke system seems to be: 1. Find an average-looking girl. 2. Legally marry her and don't sign a prenup. 3. Hide your assets offshore or using corporate shells. 4. Have kids. That's a terrible system. Far worse than mine.
Duke 2016-05-05 16:13:32
You stated it like you did.I'm sure I did. I'd like to think that I'm so good at knowing where people are coming from that I can think like them at times. "1. Find an average-looking girl. 2. Legally marry her and don’t sign a prenup. 3. Hide your assets offshore or using corporate shells. 4. Have kids. That’s a terrible system. Far worse than mine." Maybe I wasn't clear. If she is average or has a kid, you will be more easily able to forgo marriage. She will agree to that because of her lower smv, as she will not feel as if she can demand marriage. If she is hot your average man will not be able to resist not marrying her. I said this in my post, I don't why you're misunderstanding me. This is not a system (much less a system I endorse), but merely how I have observed the males deal with women and having kids/cohabitating.
I know many men who have live-in OLTRs (or very close to it) with women who are super hot. And I mean SUPER hot. One of the hottest women I’ve ever met is in one right now. And none of these men are rich.Yup, you're preaching to choir. Most men don't believe that there is an alternate reality to life, unless they themselves have lived it. I was just reading your book the other day, where you mocked risk averse betas that say stuff like "she will never let me do/get away with that." It never ceases to amaze me that betas not only tend to ask for permission, but they also don't know they actually have the option of walking away from or saying no to women. smh
Duke 2016-05-05 16:48:55
I have observed the males deal with women and having kids/cohabitating.That should read males in my life.
The bottom line is that if you criticize my suggestions, that’s fine and I encourage that, but then you need to specifically lay out YOUR suggestions so we can examine them as well.Not sure how I can lay out my suggestions. I've believed in polyamory for about five years, but when I didn't, marrying/cohabitating with a plain girl so she wouldn't cheat (and be a better partner eg. low maintenance) and fucking hot girls on the side was my plan. In a way it still is. My thinking is that I would be utilizing her to bare my children so presenting a plain girl as my mate in public is not really that important of a factor to me. I can see how this is not the norm, as men usually want to be proud of their wife and pass on "superior" genes from the mother. But recently my thinking is more on the not marrying side so this topic has started to mean less and less to me, as attempting to raise children in this culture is not very appealing. When you have a shitty option versus a less shitty option, staying single seems to be the way to go.
joelsuf 2016-05-05 17:33:27
1. Heavily screen for a super submissive woman that hasn’t had sex with very many men yet. 2. Legally marry her, and get monogamous and have kids. 3. Be super Alpha and badass and always show her who’s boss. 4. Cross your fingers and hope it all works out.Even this is not too common among the manosphere anymore. Most manosphere philosophy seems to lean towards being a player/casual dater for life (which is what I do) or strict MGTOW. The latter has gained a TON of traction in the last five years more than anything PUAs have done in their boom period. Its scary to see how much strict MGTOW has been growing. While the manosphere do still preach ownership of chicks, many kinda know that they aren't good enough for that so they wind up becoming Elliot Rodger clones (but NEVER admitting it, although some do admit it and those circles are pretty hilarious as well as unsettling). The manosphere (and ESPECIALLY strict MGTOW) is also obsessed with bodybuilding (and bodybuilders) more than chicks, I wonder why that is...?
Blackdragon 2016-05-05 18:25:07
If she is average or has a kid, you will be more easily able to forgo marriage.Incorrect and KJ. (Unless you're talking about ultra-high 10s, celebrities, the top 1% of women. But none of us will be banging these women anyway.)
This is not a system (much less a system I endorse), but merely how I have observed the males deal with women and having kids/cohabitating.You don't need to explain this. Everyone here, myself included, well knows how beta males behave. This is not a blog for them, thus irrelevant to the discussion.
attempting to raise children in this culture is not very appealing.I agree. More now than 19 years ago when I first had mine. If my two kids had never been born and I was still childless at my current age, I would refrain from having children completely. Way too much work, way too much money, way too much sacrifice, and the culture isn't conducive for healthy kids anyway. But like you said, 90%+ of men are going to ignore that advice. SP and OBW are too powerful.
Most manosphere philosophy seems to lean towards being a player/casual dater for life (which is what I do) or strict MGTOW. The latter has gained a TON of traction in the last five years more than anything PUAs have done in their boom period. Its scary to see how much strict MGTOW has been growing.No. MGTOW is still nothing compared to PUA at its height. The largest MGTOW forum even went belly-up just last year. As I've said before, anti-sex MGTOW will always appeal to an angry minority, but it's too fundamentally anti-male to ever catch on. Men crave sex, and the vast majority of men desire companionship eventually.
hey hey 2016-05-06 00:51:09
@Duke: Cohabitating with an average woman or getting into a marriage with one? I pity these guys. It is boring enough to be fucking the same hot girl and living with her your entire life, imagine doing that with an average woman. How miserable is that? And bear your children? Come on have some self respect. All that in the name of pair bonding and not dying alone? That's BS!
Lawyer´s apprentice 2016-05-06 02:07:00
You might want to make a specific post about how to know your arrangement is enforceable and how to make sure. Or have you already? I bet most people who have failed & paid at it were sure the stuff was 100% enforceable when they signed.
Frank 2016-05-06 04:13:03
Whats your opinion on marrying, when in a relationship with a woman with more income? (Living in a state where you will probably have the better in case of a divorce.)
Blackdragon 2016-05-06 12:32:04
You might want to make a specific post about how to know your arrangement is enforceable and how to make sure.I cover that in more detail in my books, but I overview aspects of it here. I have to be careful about rendering what could be considered legal advice, since A) I'm not an attorney and thus not qualified and B) different states, provinces, and countries are so different when it comes to these laws.
Whats your opinion on marrying, when in a relationship with a woman with more income? (Living in a state where you will probably have the better in case of a divorce.)It's one of the most un-Alpha things you can do. Details right here.
Duke 2016-05-06 14:23:19
@Duke: Cohabitating with an average woman or getting into a marriage with one? I pity these guys. It is boring enough to be fucking the same hot girl and living with her your entire life, imagine doing that with an average woman. How miserable is that? And bear your children? Come on have some self respect. All that in the name of pair bonding and not dying alone? That’s BS!@ Hey, hey Exactly, marriage will be boring eventually with any woman so why do guys keep talking about doing it? Self respect? Is buying big houses and having expensive car payments to maintain hot women having self respect? Doesn't sound like it to me. The only way I would give a woman a middle class lifestyle is if I were secretly a millionaire, but even then I have my doubts. Eternal bachelorhood is the only way to go.
hey hey 2016-05-07 03:31:18
My point is that as man you can pick an average looking women with no kids or a somewhat attractive single mother (hopefully with only one child) who is “damaged goods” and subsequently of “lesser value.” Less desirable people undeniably make better relationship/marriage partners be it a beta male or a lesser attractive woman. Or you could double down and try to get to what the manospere preaches which is more or less a “low partner count,” attractive woman, with traditional values, and definitely no kids.It was my reply to your point above.
wolfofgeorgestreet 2016-05-07 09:16:37
No. MGTOW is still nothing compared to PUA at its height. The largest MGTOW forum even went belly-up just last year. As I’ve said before, anti-sex MGTOW will always appeal to an angry minority, but it’s too fundamentally anti-male to ever catch on. Men crave sex, and the vast majority of men desire companionship eventually.You are correct that MGTOW hasn't reached the height that PUA did, not even close, that's because there's a delay. The first phase is guys desperately seeking out information for what works, trying it etc. But the competition is becoming fierce, eventually many realize they don't have the looks, money or status to compete at this level, and they start to drop out. MGTOW is picking up steam, it's overtaken PUA in Canada, Has just overtaken PUA in Australia. USA will be next, the focus is just on Trump at the moment, so it's seen a down tick as focus from those guys is on Trump. MGTOW will reach the height of PUA within 5 years in Australia and Canada, and US in 10. Proof, Canada: Australia: That's because thousands of men are finally realizing that alot of PUA stuff is mostly garbage. As for being married or in a live in OLTR and doing the whole hot young side girl thing properly while still maintaining good relations with your wife/OLTR. Honestly, you'd better be wealthy. It's a costly hobby. I really don't see how the average guy can do it. Actually having experience doing it myself for a long time, I know it simply wouldn't be possible unless I had alot of disposable income to play with.
Blackdragon 2016-05-07 10:49:48
I know it simply wouldn’t be possible unless I had alot of disposable income to play with.No. I know or have spoken to tons of men with average incomes doing this just fine. (Of course making more money helps; it helps in all areas of life, not just with an OLTR.)
Duke 2016-05-07 12:47:01
MGTOW is gaining lots of traction. Whether it will have an impact remains a mystery. The average frustrated chump is going from red pill rage to PUA to realizing how much of an uphill battle it is and giving up to sex negative MGTOW then to the final stage which is MGTOW indifference or complete monk mode where he no longer cares if he gets laid and is content if it happens only every once in a while. Regarding marriage, one issue that has been neglected, and probably rightfully so, is the political, socio-economic, and racial components to it. Roissy and Roosh started to devolve into this sphere around five years ago, whereas BD perhaps wisely has sidestepped the issue. The maonosphere generally has consisted primarily of white beta men who aspire to tradcon values and have madonna/whore complexes. This is bad enough but you also have the creeping issue of cultural Marxism whereby whites are systematically being brought down globally as well as nationally to the level that minorities have always occupied. Minorities presumably have a leg up on this race to the bottom as they have had at least two generations where single motherhood is in the sixty or seventy percentile, substantially higher than the average of forty percent for the country as a whole. Males that grew up in the tougher neighborhoods naturally adapted and most grew to be more or less alpha due the extraneous circumstances. This is why if you've spent any considerable amount of time in working class neighborhoods you would quickly catch on that marriage is pretty much non-existent. Most black or Hispanic males are not going to worry about how to find a good bride to be happy or other such nonsense, he simply moves in with her if he wants to before or after getting her pregnant and puts up with her as long as he can before she starts acting up then he goes on to the next one. White males have not yet acquired the fortitude to deal with females in this way. That lifestyle is barbaric to them and therefore want nothing to do with it. They rather get married for ten years or so, buy a house, pop out a couple of kids and get divorced in a civilized manner. This is what has been driving white people to strive to be in the middle class. They want to differentiate themselves from minorities, and the only way they can do this is by driving all the prices up to deter undesirables from encroaching en masse. This approach is starting to fall apart at the seams and the desperation is palpable. Single white women, at least in my city are running around with Hispanic and black men in shameless manner and their numbers in terms of being unwed mothers is rising. I personally don't have a problem with this but gauging by what I've read on Roissy and Roosh, and even comments on this blog demonstrate an uncomfortable sentiment. From this thread: https://blackdragonblog.com/2015/12/10/being-married-is-very-expensive/#comments
Regarding your big house, I think you are worse off now. Why? Because your big house was undoubtedly in a white neighborhood. That is an intangible that does not have monetary value. Living in a homogenous peaceful white area (with some high earning Asians thrown in) is a luxury in this day and age. The Left (with complicity from Republicans) has destroyed white middle and lower class areas through non-Euro immigration and with Section 8 housing. I would much rather deal with lower disposable income but live in a “whitetopia” then live in a cheaper house which will undoubtedly be racially mixed, closer to black or hispanic enclaves and higher in crime or crime risk. Plus square footage and acreage are nice things in and of themselves; ie “having space”. I would want a big multi acre house with minimum 4000 square feet in an all white neighborhood even if I were a single man. That to me is “freedom”.
joelsuf 2016-05-07 14:44:51
complete monk mode where he no longer cares if he gets laid and is content if it happens only every once in a while.TBH this is pretty much the only good thing about MGTOW. I care nothing for material wealth. As long as everything is on maintenance mode I'm good. It is surprisingly easy to afford an apartment, a car, car insurance (although I don't have car insurance as a form of civil disobedience these days) and a gym membership. That's all I really need and I'll still be able to travel a few times a year. IMO having a life where you are not attempting to keep up with the Joneses (in any aspect) is a form of civil disobedience nowadays. BUT this is only an option for those with good mental health (Alpha 2s only). If you are Alpha 1 or under and you are still obsessed with making sure you are not gay compared to other alpha 1s and betas by getting laid, then yeah you need to get that out of your system. BD even has a post about it.
The average frustrated chump is going from red pill rage to PUA to realizing how much of an uphill battle it is and giving up to sex negative MGTOW then to the final stageMany don't get to that final stage, and prefer to be sex negative MGTOW. Some are even stuck at PUAism. That's where their red pill rage is from. I see the transition more like this: Blue pill/white knight -> PUAism -> Red Pill rage/sex negative MGTOW. As BD said a lot of the manosphere likes being pissy and mad. I will admit to being one of them, I've been working on it for years, trying to undo my bitter cynicism and on an even deeper level, my existential depression and nihilism.
The maonosphere generally has consisted primarily of white beta men who aspire to tradcon values and have madonna/whore complexes.With the tradcon values, I see it the same way as I see left-wingers: They only THINK they know what they want, but they need to be careful what they wish for. A lot of manosphere boys are think they want everything to return to the middle ages but if that were to happen they would be the first to be ignored/killed. Just like SJW Millennials think that Bernie Sanders is gonna save the world by giving everyone free stuff but at the same time being able to reach into the pockets of pretty much anyone who is employed the people who put him there included. Both groups, being slaves to dramatic stimulation, attach so much meaning to these things (Validation for the Manosphere and "justice" for SJWs) that they have virtually zero concept of personal happiness. I've spoken to proponents of both groups irl at my college campus. They told me literally that they have NO hobbies or passions other than social issues. This frightens me, it shows me that collective thinking mired in agenda will soon not only be the norm, but it will be determined the ONLY way of analyzing stuff. I'm still at the phase where I make fun of it, but in 15-20 years time I'll start panicking. Hopefully, I'll be living off the grid by then. The manosphere boy could get laid by several hot chicks tomorrow and not only would he not be able to perform (cuz he wouldn't be able to get aroused cuz his major source of stimulation is e-drama and validation) he would probably still be depressed and mad at chicks the day after. The SJW could get all the privileges and justice that they want and tomorrow they would STILL be mad at some other group and still demand for a different form of hugbox for a different mental illness that they made up.
Blackdragon 2016-05-07 16:15:48
MGTOW is gaining lots of traction.Of course MGTOW is increasing. As Western civ slowly collapses, as the number of betas increase, the number of MGTOWs will also increase. Yep. It will still never become even close to a mainstream thing. Men like sex.
This is bad enough but you also have the creeping issue of cultural Marxism whereby whites are systematically being brought down globally as well as nationally to the level that minorities have always occupied.The problem is that most of those same whites support this garbage. As I've said many times, minorities didn't do it; Western whites did this to themselves.
wolfofgeorgestreet 2016-05-08 02:14:10
Blue pill/white knight -> PUAism -> Red Pill rage/sex negative MGTOWYeah, that's the general progression.
It will still never become even close to a mainstream thing. Men like sex.Eh. There's a whole bunch of MGTOW guys that just use prostitutes and encourage others to do the same. Whether that's entirely 'MGTOW' or not by strict definition is a whole other matter. Likewise there are guys that do the whole sex/love tourism thing in places like the Philippines or South America every 6 months but are MGTOW when at home. How long until realistic sex bots or realistic VR sex? That'll be the next thing, then we'll see 80% of the male population become MGTOW. Obviously the OLTR/open marriage and a side girl (or 2) is the best long term model, but it requires ALOT of work to maintain, and you're constantly competing, which might become tiresome for many.
Blackdragon 2016-05-08 11:38:56
There’s a whole bunch of MGTOW guys that just use prostitutes and encourage others to do the same. Whether that’s entirely ‘MGTOW’ or not by strict definition is a whole other matter. Likewise there are guys that do the whole sex/love tourism thing in places like the Philippines or South America every 6 months but are MGTOW when at home.Yeah neither of those are what I mean when I say MGTOW. I do agree that use of women like hookers, sugar babies, and sex tourism is probably increasing in many parts of the collapsing Western world and will continue to do so.
How long until realistic sex bots or realistic VR sex? That’ll be the next thing, then we’ll see 80% of the male population become MGTOW.I completely agree and I've said that many times. Not sure about the 80% figure but yeah, it's going to be sky high. And it's going to happen in our lifetime. However, that's still not "MGTOW" since most of that 80% are going to be normal, everyday guys, not PUA red pill rage monsters. This sex robot thing will be huge. It will be the largest shift in sexual power from one sex to the other since the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Women are going to freak.
Vitriol 2016-05-08 12:02:55
There’s a whole bunch of MGTOW guys that just use prostitutes and encourage others to do the same. Whether that’s entirely ‘MGTOW’ or not by strict definition is a whole other matter. Likewise there are guys that do the whole sex/love tourism thing in places like the Philippines or South America every 6 months but are MGTOW when at home.I'll never understand the guys who think it's a problematic development that sex is becoming more transactional rather than based on obsolete courtship rituals that basically don't work anymore when it comes to sex (every guy has had the "it was nice meeting you" ending to a date where he goes home with blue balls even after doing everything right). Most guys that actually complain about this are: PUA content generators who need guys to keep doing something that DOES NOT work most of the time so they can sell more books, seminars, and other information. Tradcons/Right Wing political types who think Jesus cries when men do not engage women through traditional courtship rituals and start families. Guys who have built internet personas around arguing with feminists and others to give guys who are dinosaurs a reason to pat themselves on the back and tell themselves that the "right" way to do things was the way that baby boomers did them in the 50s-70s. I could give a flying fuck about any of those three types because they generally have some kind of bullshit information floating around the internet in terms of what will actually get guys pussy. They're dependent on keeping guys in the dark and generating internet rage about a "correct" way to get laid that doesn't actually work most of the time. Most guys who have figured out a way to get pussy consistently that doesn't depend on buying PUA or political books are going to spend their money on pussy rather than this bullshit that's floating around the internet, so naturally, if you want to see why this development in human interaction is a "problem" just follow the money. Who would've thought... most guys actually would rather get laid than worry about some "Correct game" or obsolete courtship that doesn't work at least 60% of the time.
FiveSix 2016-05-08 14:26:33
As for being married or in a live in OLTR and doing the whole hot young side girl thing properly while still maintaining good relations with your wife/OLTR. Honestly, you’d better be wealthy. It’s a costly hobby. I really don’t see how the average guy can do it. Actually having experience doing it myself for a long time, I know it simply wouldn’t be possible unless I had alot of disposable income to play with.What do you mean by wealthy, and average? The cost for me to have side women is, about $100 a month that goes to coffee, alcohol, cover charges, a dating website.
Obviously the OLTR/open marriage and a side girl (or 2) is the best long term model, but it requires ALOT of work to maintain, and you’re constantly competing, which might become tiresome for many.My open marriage has been WAY easier than monogamy, it feels more natural to me, and requires less work than monogamy. If my wife's on a date, I have a free night to work on my mission (or whatever else I want!); if we're both home, we're home together; if I'm on a date, I'm on a date. It's an all-win scenario.
Lovergirl 2016-05-08 18:46:14
I don't think women are going to freak over sex robots. They definitely won't satisfy a man's desire for variety, unless you can afford a bunch of them. I mean, vibrators don't keep women from wanting to have sex with men. More likely though, it will cause men to have issues cumming or issues getting hard with real women, which could become a real issue and then women will not want to fuck men at all.
wolfofgeorgestreet 2016-05-08 22:20:52
What do you mean by wealthy, and average? The cost for me to have side women is, about $100 a month that goes to coffee, alcohol, cover charges, a dating website.It'll depend on where you're living (probably the most important factor) and the quality and age of girl you're chasing and what you're working with (ie. if you're 26yo, white, 6'3, ripped and look like a male model it will cost you less than a fat, ugly, bald guy). Likewise if you're chasing 6's who are thirsty for high value male attention it will also be cheaper than chasing 9+'s that are showered in cash, handbags, shoes, expensive dates, private yacht harbour cruises etc. So talking figures is useless without context. $100 will get you a single date in the likes of Sydney where you're paying $20 a cocktail. So let's say you're a decent looking guy who's married and targeting young 8+ women in a place like this. A normal drink date costs on average $60-$80 (2 drinks each). Multiple dating website subscriptions run $80 a month ($20 for tinder, $60 for SA). Then you've got hotels. Median house prices are a little over a cool $1m for a very average home, so obviously most girls either still live with their parents or have a bunch of roommates, usually until they're in a serious relationship and can pool resources. Sometimes you get lucky and find a girl who's living on her own or is willing to host despite her roommates or when her parents are out, but usually you have to host. Unless you're allowed to bring girls over to your place (Many of us aren't) and can work it when your wife isn't there, then you're looking at hotels or Airbnb. That's $150-$250 a night. You're probably going to get hungry and thirsty while you're going at it in the hotel. So there's an extra $100 in minibar/room service expenses. At best you can go out and pick up some fast food and hit up a liquor store. But even that's $25 for your takeaway for the 2 of you and $35 for your 6 pack of beer and 6 pack of alco-pop for her. So that's about $10k a year if you're doing it once a week and using hotels. Still cheaper than escorts and will get you more time in the sack for your $. Costs in Manhattan seem about similar. You might be able to find a girl who can host and cut those costs down drastically, but they're rare in high cost of living cities and you'll usually be compromising on quality for it.
Blackdragon 2016-05-08 22:31:18
There are numerous ways to have sex with side women without having to pay for hotels or purchase a second residence, provided you're willing to be a little creative. I cover many of them in the ebooks, though I've learned of more ways since publishing those. (Someday I'll have to update those two ebooks; it's on my project list.)
wolfofgeorgestreet 2016-05-08 22:48:44
There are numerous ways to have sex with side women without having to pay for hotels or purchase a second residence, provided you’re willing to be a little creative. I cover many of them in the ebooks, though I’ve learned of more ways since publishing those. (Someday I’ll have to update those two ebooks; it’s on my project list.)Purchased them, read them. I'm all ears if you have other suggestions that actually work. Genuinely interested in other suggestions. The only thing I've found that works is compromising on quality in favor of girls willing to host. If I find a hot, young, girl who can host and is ok with me being married I've found a unicorn. I have found them before, but they are very rare, and obviously, in very high demand. I've also found girls that can occasionally host while their parents are out, but it usually requires using hotels until they're comfortable enough inviting you over. Overwhelming majority of 18-23yo girls live with their parents here (we don't have the whole moving away for college thing going for us). As for the ones that don't, alot of girls are funny about hosting when they have roommates, usually they're used to guys having them over and don't like to look like 'sluts' in front of their roommates, depends on the girl, but it's also a very tough sell inviting yourself over when they're sharing. I've banged girls while their roommates were just outside the bedroom, but again, it's a rare find. The other option is finding somewhere private in public...
Parade 2016-05-09 00:26:17
So talking figures is useless without context. $100 will get you a single date in the likes of Sydney where you’re paying $20 a cocktail. So let’s say you’re a decent looking guy who’s married and targeting young 8+ women in a place like this. A normal drink date costs on average $60-$80 (2 drinks each).Dunno, I've lived in both SF and NYC and I've never ended up paying $80 for a date, even with someone from SA. You can find a decent cocktail bar in either city for $10-13/drink. I buy both for SA dates, but only mine for regular online dates. One drink and then we either go back to my place/hers/end the date and meet up another time. So around 10-20/date, depending on where I met her. If you have the kind of open relationship where the rules are "don't bring other girls home", well, another 100-150/night for a hotel/airbnb seems reasonable, even in Manhattan (at least it was when I was living there). Unless you're going for a luxury hotel. The extra money on the mini fridge is completely up to you -- I wouldn't say that is anywhere near required. Of course, you need to find somewhere to pull to...but I don't have issues there and can't suggest anything because I don't have a wife (or anyone else) at home who will object. I do have a roommate, but that's never been an issue. For reference re. other things: While I don't get chicks hitting on me randomly, I do typically get 1msg/week from a 2-3 who matched me on OKC (I yes vote everyone), out of the blue. I've gotten a grand total of about 5 messages from chicks on tinder in about 1 year, with around 1 match per week. I haven't figured out how that one works yet, and I haven't bothered to really focus on it.
wolfofgeorgestreet 2016-05-09 02:15:18
Of course, you need to find somewhere to pull to…but I don’t have issues there and can’t suggest anything because I don’t have a wifethe entire point of the post was having a wife or live in OLTR and having hot young side girls is an expensive endeavor, of course things are cheaper if you're single. BD recommends this as a long term strategy that works, which is great, it does, I concur, but I think he understates the costs involved. Have you been married or in a live in OLTR? If not you'd have no experience in the matter. A few thoughts based on my experience doing this for about 7 years: When you're married and honest about it women you're seeing on the side will expect more from you because there's no chance of marriage or a relationship down the line (unless you're playing the 'I might divorce my wife card' which leads to drama), otherwise they'll just opt for a single guy. This will translate to having to treat her better than her other single suitors, you can minimize costs, but not eliminate them. Chances are if you want them to stick around, you're paying for everything. Women expect less from single guys because the Disney fantasy remains alive in their mind, there's a chance that they might 'fall in love' with you and live 'happily ever after', married guys lose this advantage. (Yes, there are exceptions like women that love married guys etc. but these are exceptions to the rule). When you're spending extended periods of time in hotels with women you're going to want something to eat or drink. So you're either hitting the mini-bar or going out and buying food/drink. Associated costs were provided. You can't just go to the supermarket and cook something up at home. 60aud-80aud = 44usd-58usd. You're going to be hard pressed finding a cheaper date than that in Sydney or Manhattan (I'll be there in a week, with drinks and tips I'll be looking at $50usd dates at any nice looking bar within 200 meters of my apartment, which frankly is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of the apartment). Maybe it's cheaper in cheaper neighborhoods, I don't know, but that's what I've priced up in the area I'm staying, the area itself is a draw card and DHV though, so probably worth the expense. In the past couple weeks of selectively swiping with my tinder set in Manhattan I have matched over 250 women and have already lined up over 10 dates, and have had an offer from a girl wanting to pick me up from the airport. So I do question the quality of girls guys claim to get online when they can't even get many matches on tinder, especially if they're claiming to do it while married, and claiming to do it super cheap. I just don't buy the whole I can get loads of super hot chicks, while married, for super cheap thing I see online, that's not my experience, and I've tried.
Parade 2016-05-09 09:49:37
I gotta ask how you do tinder...I don't think I even have 250 people who swiped right on me, yet I do ok with other online dating. And no one said I was single, but I don't(and probably never will) live with a chick full time. I don't bring that up on any of the first few dates unless I happen to know she's in an open relationship already. And what I meant by 'that kind of open relationship' was that I'm seeing chicks who will recommend me to their friends/bring their friends over for a threesome, as well as anything I do on my own. That doesn't cost much extra 😉 That makes a little more sense with the exchange rate then. I can easily see spending 40-60 on a date in NYC if you're not familiar/careful about where you're going, and for certain chicks I have spent 40ish on a first date. If you search a bit there are upscale bars that are in the 10-13 dollar range, even in the middle of the meat packing district...but you need to search for them. Most of my dates when I lived in NYC involved the outdoors or dancing. Either 'hey, let's go walk around central park' and then conveniently end up at my place, or 'let's go salsa dancing' and most people dancing just drink water, so that's a cheap date.
FiveSix 2016-05-10 08:06:09
Yeah, if I was going to hotels a lot then I understand where the cost really comes from. I've never gotten a hotel room to bang, and have only been with >23's who have their own place (or roommates that don't care). Are you also giving extra cash to SA girls, or just paying for the date/hotel?
donnie demarco 2016-05-20 12:44:07
The only thing I’ve found that works is compromising on quality in favor of girls willing to host.Are you really screening women based on their living arrangements? Why? If you are dating younger women (common in this community), realize that these girls do not have expectations for when and where sex takes place. They just want your penis, Dude. Have sex with her in the car. Find a dark spot in the woods and throw her up against a tree. Wait for her dad to go to work and sneak inside the house for a quickie. Most women are turned on by this kind of "gotta-have-it-no-matter-what" sex. Furthermore, most men are boring in bed. So it's basically win-win for you, as long as you stop thinking like this:
I just don’t buy the whole I can get loads of super hot chicks, while married, for super cheap thing I see online, that’s not my experience, and I’ve tried.... and keep trying.
Dunno, I’ve lived in both SF and NYC and I’ve never ended up paying $80 for a dateAgreed. I live and date in SF. My last date, this past Sunday, was with a 25 yo swimmer that I met on Tinder. It was our first date. Grand total was $23, two drinks for me, one drink for her + tip. We spent about 90 minutes together and by the end, we had our hands all over each other and she was trying to kiss me (I didn't). We have another date planned this weekend, and I'll probably have sex with her in a dirty alleyway or something. It's gonna be fun.
I gotta ask how you do tinderTinder is a bit of a pain. I have my age set to the age of the girls that I'm targeting, with a note in my profile about my age being wrong and "if you have any questions just ask". From there it's the usual numbers game; 80% of matches go nowhere, a small percentage of them think I'm a creep, and a small percentage of them turn into dates. I also use OKC, where I can be honest about my age and the numbers seem to work a little better overall. I don't use POF because it's a giant piece of shit. To be totally honest, the biggest pain about Tinder is underage women lying about their age.