Low self-esteem as the key to happiness

Women are too picky.  They’re always complaining that there are no good men out there, but they only show interest and attraction for maybe 10% of men, and there aren’t enough of that group to go around.  Some say women should learn to settle for less.  Dalrock rejects this advice and offers an intriguing suggestion of his own:  a woman can learn to be attracted to men in her own league if she takes a brutally honest look at herself in the mirror.  Women are wired (he claims) to be attracted to men of higher status/value than themselves, rather than to men above a certain absolute threshold of status/value.  A woman who is not attracted to most men (including the men she could realistically succeed in getting interested in her) just has an exaggerated idea of her own desirability to men.

If a woman is unable to experience love and attraction within her own “league”, then the most likely problem is she is greatly overestimating her own attractiveness.  It isn’t that most men aren’t good enough, it is that she sees herself as above the vast majority of men.  As Roissy has said, many women have too much self esteem*, and the amount of game a woman needs depends on the degree to which she overvalues herself, and this changes based on her life experience*.  This last bit is key.  Women are naturally learning to stop overvaluing themselves as they grow older.  As they do this, it reduces the amount of alpha/game that they need to feel attraction.  The problem is, by the time this typically happens the woman is already past her prime marriage and fertility years.

*Crass site warning

So the solution is both obvious and extremely unpleasant.  Women whose ability to be attracted to normal men is malfunctioning can fix this by deflating their own egos.  Some may look at this and decide they prefer to continue waiting or outright decide to remain unmarried.  These are valid options.  Some may be close enough to attracting the kind of man they are attracted to and decide to improve their own attractiveness and achieve their goal.  This is also a valid option.  A few will recognize the seriousness of their problem and decide to tackle it head on.  But far too many will persist in a fantasy world where marriage without love and attraction is “good enough”.

I’m not sure if I buy it–I don’t judge women’s attractiveness against my own, and I can’t imagine why women wouldn’t also have objective standards–but it seemed intriguing enough to share.  Perhaps some of my female readers can comment on the idea’s plausibility.

8 Responses

  1. It’s not so much, I think, that women judge men’s attractiveness against their own or against some objective standard. Rather, attraction is the product of a kind of feedback loop; women who are more attractive themselves receive more flattery and attention from men, which leads to higher self-valuations and thus greater pickiness.

    This results in the paradox of some objectively unattractive women overvaluing themselves and some objectively highly attractive women undervaluing themselves because cads, given a choice, will always pursue the path of least resistance to sexual conquest.

  2. From what I’ve read, Roissy is a malignant cynic who thinks that every woman who believes herself something more than an animal is a woman suffering from excessive self-esteem. What about the disciples of Roissy? More than a few seem to be smelly slobs with halitosis who like the thesis of female hypergamy as an explanation for their failure to get a date (and a justification for their future refusal to wed). And the rest, who boast about the success of their “Game,” seem mostly to rely on the probability of success when one makes several “hits.”

    But this post prompts me to remark that, of the hundreds of university students (and other young people) I see every day, very few seem to make much effort to make themselves attractive. Even making allowances for changing “style,” how attractive is a woman in baggy grey sweatpants and a wrinkled tee shirt, especially when she hasn’t recently washed or combed her hair? Sure, gorgeous women can pull this off, and in so doing draw attention to just how gorgeous they are. But most women can’t. The same goes for the guys. Take a shower!

    Slovenly grooming, dress, and manners speaks to me of excessive self esteem. “To know me is to love me,” these slouching, surly ragamuffins mumble, “and there’s no need for me to make myself pleasing or pleasant.” Maybe the first clause is true; but no one will ever find out if you don’t look and act like someone who is worth getting to know.

  3. JMSmith

    If you have a day to day job of dealing with young people, imho, you owe it to them to be better informed about Roissy-World. You do not have to like any of it but please consider that it describes their psycho-sexual environment rather brilliantly and that is not something to brush off.
    The truth is, he is dead-on right about feral human female instincts. Conservative, traditionalist, and dare I say pious commenters these days are largely clueless about this because their experience and knowledge came from a pre-feralized social order
    I am too slow of a typist to rapidly secure this point but think for a minute what it means if this is truth. It means that attractive young women in our present culture will increasingly shun young men who approach them with well intentioned but wrong-headed ideas.
    Then everything falls down. Only Religious with true callings will not abandon every aspect of Traditionalism if it means having to watch from the sidelines as the vast bulk of the hotties sex up guys running as-hole game.

  4. Rum,
    The sexual dynamics described in Game are certainly plausible, and I don’t doubt that the number of young men and women displaying this primitive, de-cultured behavior has increased. At the same time, I doubt the entire youth population is feral, and can’t imagine why a non-feral boy would wish to get mixed up with a feral girl. Sure, he may feel that “raw” erotic attraction, but the whole point of his being cultured is that his reason is still in the driver’s seat and he can (with effort) keep his pants on. Same thing goes with cultured girls.

    You’re right that we should teach young people about the art of seduction, but as something to beware of, not something to employ. Psychological manipulation is largely defanged once we see it for what it is.

    I doubt the general orgy will have the quite the black-hole-like attraction you describe. In fact the statistics I’ve seen suggest that youth today are somewhat more prim and prudish than their parents. One reason for this, I suspect, is that some of them find sex stripped of mystique more than a little revolting. Along with the lessons in feral sexual dynamics, we should include the data that correlated prior promiscuity with marital infidelity and divorce. Plenty of young people have the prudence to balance long- and short-term interests.

  5. I believe Mr Smith has a good point.

  6. Some good points again. I’m a little older than the “youth” demographic these days, but I certainly agree that the “entire youth population” isn’t feral, and some of us have more self-respect than to resort to psychological manipulation.

  7. Hi JMsmith,

    I hope you’re right about the evolution of today’s youth. My sense, though, is that they’ve just learned to be practical about their licentiousness. The first generation that broke with chastity traded it for reckless fornication. They at least realized the magnitude of their desecrations. The next generation, for whom sex isn’t a “big deal”, removes the worst dangers with birth control and moderately limited partner number, and they stay away from crazy stuff like open marriages and prostitution. It’s these practical hedonists, to whom it has never occurred that there might be anything mysterious about sex, that I find really chilling, just as the practical capitalist atheists scare me more than the crazy communist ones these days. It’s potentially sustainable; mankind could fall into that rut forever.

  8. Most thoughtful people, whether traditionalists or not, are comfortable with the idea that the natural sexual instinct of men is something that must be tamed if civilization is to be maintained. Going from one attractive partner to another might feel right to the male hind-brain but no one imagines that actually living that way will turn out well for families and society in general. So, men are told, “Control your sinful sexual instincts” And if they do, it is supposed that a stable and constructive family structure will follow as day follows the night.
    Feral, hind-brain, female sexual instincts have never been had a chance to be expressed or lived-out until very, very recently. Rutting with a dominant male simply for the sake of the desire to do so was always a straight line path to disaster – early pregnancy without means of support, watching the child die, and so on.
    Nowadays, with female financial independence, reliable BC with AB as a back up, and the fading away of social shaming for promiscuity females can rut it up with whomever “alpha” that rings their bell – without immediate consequences – and so they are.
    Here is the problem. A man can simultaneously control his wayward instincts and still desire sexually his sole long term female partner. A woman however, at least the average woman, cannot on average desire sexually the average man that she must marry(if she is to marry). At best, she can TRY to feel attraction – against the headwind of her strongest sexual instincts towards hypergamy
    Marriage, in other words, condemns most men to a lifelong, exclusive committment to a women who can never authentically desire him sexually in return.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: