The comparison between Madame Bovary’s behavior and cheating women’s behaviour as described by Michelle Langley (http://www.womensinfidelity.com) and gathered by F. Roger Devlin is pure genius.

Great article.

I think a shout out should go out to Darwin. After all, it was his work (and his understanding of sexual selection) that paved the way for all the stuff I read about today on sites like Roissy etc.

Emma Bovary was a wanton social climber eager to escape the provinces and work her way up the social ladder. In the beginning, Charles represented a rung upward on that ladder. It turned out it was not nearly enough of a climb for Emma who sought to go ever higher up the social food chain and find herself with the idle, wealthy aristocracy of the France at the time.

Social climbing is usually a vice attributed to women and for good reason. Hypergamy fits quite well into social climbing and a clever, modern, and amoral woman can climb that social ladder with a series of marriages, affairs, divorces, and remarriages.

In the realm of Game, “social proofing” is all about a woman’s social climbing. In consideration of the “Alpha/BadBoy and Beta/NiceGuy meme, social climbing also fits but only when the vagina tingle does not trump the hypergamous urge. There is sometimes conflict there but the amoral woman marries the provider, has affairs with the BadBoy, much like Emma Bovary.

The ultimate catch for a woman is the Alpha/BadBoy who is also further up the social ladder. He is pursued by most women so this type of man merely picks and chooses at his leisure and his desire.

I spend a fair bit of time in Palm Beach, Florida – the haven for the ultra wealthy. In that socially isolated community, everything I have described plays out like a predictable and well rehearsed dance of sex, money, marriage, and divorce. It’s always funny to see hordes of desperate young woman cross the bridges onto the island to attend social events where rich, available men are attending. These men pick the best (and hopefully least batshit insane) of these women to marry. Some of these men simply seduce their way through a score or more of sales girls, marketing assistants, waitresses, and their ilk. Note to the girls wanting to break in to this society and find themselves a man – no single moms may apply and the men will likely be at least 25 years older than you. Oh, and the younger guys (in their 40s, mind you) will likely trade you in when your first wrinkles appear or your bad attitude shows.

What do you mean by the chemically odd? Be careful how you answer, because I was born with a few mental “defects” that turned out to be benifits in the long term. I have Aspergers and depression. I pride myself on my “chemical ” oddness. My depression allowed me to see many of the mistakes, hypocrisies, and contradictions in the world around me long before wisdom could be more naturally attained. My asperger gave me late developing language skills, but superb visual-spatial abilities. My ability to look at things from different and unusual perspectives is invaluable. Creativity cannot be measured like IQ. Many geniuses were/are quite odd by standard cultural definitions. Many geniuses were thought to be slow or lacking self control because of their “odd” behaivor by their teachers, parents, and peers.

And men aren’t better than women. We are different. I believe based on the structure of the female brain that it possesses a natural synergy of mental schemas that could potentially allow it to achieve amazing mental feats of systemizing and organizing data, even though in raw processing power, it will never be able to “crunch numbers” as effeciently as a male brain, it still has a wonderous potential to see the big picture if it was programmed right. Bad data in equals bad data out. Lets not underestimate our opponent. Thats how we got this deep in the shit hole were in now. Women are brilliant, they just can’t make decisions not tinged with emotions because they’ve been taught that their emotions are always valid.

Sorry if I misinterpreted you. Sometimes I miss stuff that is obvious to normal people. Like I said, I think differently. Not better, not worse….differently.

What planet are you from? Whipping up war fever among men is as easy as walking out the door.

The vast majority of men are ’salt of the earth’ kind of guys

Bwhawhawhawha. The vast majority of men, like the vast majority of women, are more or less crap human beings. (I happen to have known a few men in my times.) Not that that excuses injustice.

You try to denigrate me for stating a fact. Men are better than women. Well dude, good luck with your credibility around here…;-)

Thursday October 12, 2009 at 6:14 pm
“I find statements like this idiotic. ”
And you have some evidence for this? The ‘evidence’ (and that is taking that word to extremely liberal use) you posted demonstrates a low level of intelligence coupled with no research and no facts.

The Illuminati organised all the wars….an extremely small number of dominant men. A few thousand at most. To then brand ALL men as having this ‘massive darker side’ is ignorant, stupid, incorrect and idiotic.

Grow up. Do some research. Find out just how good the majority of men are. The vast majority of men are ’salt of the earth’ kind of guys and they will do pretty much anything to help out their mates. Remember, men died for women all through history. That bump in the night? It has been the mans job for 10,000 years to find out if it was a sabre tooth tiger, jack the ripper, or just the cat.

Women are crap. They do not give men the respect men have earned across 1,000 generations. If a woman was being raped in the street in front of me I would laugh and walk on by calling back to her to get ‘big sista guvment’ to help her out. I will never again lift a finger to protect a western woman because they are such crap. If David Rockefeller came to my office and held a gun to the head of some hapless female I’d say “Go ahead dude, she’s nothing to do with me.” THAT is how a LOT of men feel about western women. We are not going to injure them ourselves but we are not going to lift a finger to protect them because when we asked their help they laughed at us. Paybacks a bitch.

Well technically the dark side women also has a silver lining. If you think about how evolution works, there can’t be an “everybody gets laid” outcome otherwise evolution can’t pick the winning gene mutations from the losing ones.

This would be true if the dark side of female sexuality and hypergamy was such that they *only* craved higher-status, high-achieving, high-IQ, Masters of the Universes. It is not true when they crave reckless, sociopathic, knuckle-dragging bad-boys who leave a trail of broken lives in their wake, incurring a dysgenic cost on society.

The road of female hypergamy has a fork in it: one road leads upwards and one road leads downwards.

The morality of a population may be judged by that of its women, and one cannot observe the society of the United States without marveling at the respect in which the married state is held. This respect never existed to so high a degree among any of the ancient peoples, and European society, corrupt as it is, cannot conceive of such moral purity.

In America they are no severer than elsewhere toward the irregular life and toward even the debauches of a bachelor; many young men can be found here whose dissoluteness is well known, and whose reputations do not suffer thereby; but their excesses, to be pardoned, must be committed outside the circle of family and friends. While indulgent concerning the pleasures obtainable from prostitutes, society condemns without pity those who obtain them at the expense of conjugal fidelity; it is as inflexible toward the man who incites the transgression as toward the woman who acquiesces. Both are banished from society; and to incur this punishment it is not even necessary to have been guilty; to have aroused the suspicion suffices. The domestic hearth is an inviolable shrine which no breath of impurity must besmirch.

The morality of American women, fruit of a serious and religious upbringing, is protected further for other reasons.

Completely engrossed in practical matters, the American man has neither the time nor the temperament for tender sentiments or gallantry; he is gallant once in his life, when he wishes to marry. He is undertaking a business affair, not a love affair.

He has no leisure to love, still less to make himself loved. The taste for fine arts, which is so closely allied to the pleasures of the heart, is forbidden him. If, emerging from his industrial sphere, a young man displays a passion for Mozart or Michelangelo, he loses public esteem. Fortunes are not made by listening to sounds or looking at colors. And how chain to the accountant’s stool one who has once known the charms of a poetic life?

Thus doomed by the traditions of the country to confine themselves to practicality, young Americans are neither preoccupied with pleasing women nor skillful at winning them.

Moreover, there is a corrupt element, influential in European society, which is not to be met with in the United States: this is the idle rich and the soldiers in garrison. The wealthy without professions and the soldiers without glory have nothing to do; their sole pastime is the corruption of women–impetuous, open-handed youth, in need of space and action; comparable to the flood waters of the Mississippi: beneficial when flowing freely, deadly when stagnant.

In America, everyone works, because no one is born rich, (It does happen, by accident, that a few young people are conditioned by an inherited fortune and a polite education to gallantries and social intrigues, but they are too few in number to be a nuisance, and if they give the least indication of troubling the peace of a family, they find the American world leagued solidly against them to oppose and crush the common enemy. This explains why American bachelors of wealth and leisure do not stay in the United States but come to live in Europe, where they find men of intellect and corrupt women.) and the dreary idleness of the garrison is unknown here, because the country has no standing army.

Thus, the women escape the perils of seduction; if they are pure, one cannot tell if it is due to their virtue, for this has not been put to the test.

The extreme ease of becoming rich also comes to the aid of upholding morality; money is never an essential consideration in marriages; commerce, industry, the practice of a profession, assure young people of a living and a future. They marry the first woman they fall in love with; and nothing is rarer in the United States than a bachelor of twenty-five. Society thereby gains more married men in place of licentious bachelors. Finally , the condition of equality protects marriages, while difference in rank obstructs them in our country. In the United States there is only one class; no barrier of social distinction separates the young man and young girl who agree to become united. This equality, propitious to legitimate unions, is highly embarrassing to those which are not. The seducer of a young girl necessarily becomes her husband, whatever the difference in their economic position, because while superiority of fortune exists, there is no difference at all in rank. The rectitude of tradition, which applies less to individuals than to socity as a whole, gives a serious cast to all American society.

This country is dominated by a public opinion, from whose rule no woman can flee… [it] condemns all passion without pity, and authorizes calculation alone; indifferent to sentiment, it is exacting concerning moral obligation.