Frustrated Woman Syndrome
I have this friend. Let’s call him Clark. Clean cut, all American guy. Southern Baptist, very religious – but not in the asshole way that Southern Baptists are prone to be. The kind of guy who’s followed all of the “wisdom” his elders have given him. He goes to church regularly. He worked hard in school. He was frugal and didn’t party. He got his degree, and took a crappy job in middle-of-nowhere southern USA (I’m talking seriously rural) for a bit because it was the only job he could get. He managed to snag a state job right before his girlfriend finished her undergraduate degree. It was a big pay raise (which is sad, because the pay was still about 30% less than my first software engineering job), and it was enough that they could feel much more comfortable in their imminent wedding. Also, it was a move back home to where we grew up, which is a relatively large city for the south, so no more BFE.
They got married, and she commuted about two hours to finish grad school. For a couple of years, while she was finishing, they were really happy. They’re both very religious. They’ve got a bit of the “the man rules the house” religious thing going on. She’s a good southern girl. He’s not a pushover, so he’s not just playing doormat like so many AMCs. He’s firm in his beliefs, firm in his morals, firm in his friendships. After graduation, she moved to be with him (instead of the other way). Of course, it helped that his new (or old, depending on how you look at it) location was a good place for her to be, career wise, anyway.
But all is not well in paradise. He’s still at the state job. Now she’s a minor partner in a brand new – and very successful – private enterprise. Her starting salary was significantly higher than his then current salary. Now, a few years later, she makes more than twice his salary. Alas, this is not the only beta issue in their relationship. Clark isn’t too bad, but he’s got a few very beta behaviors that raise their head every now and then. He covers his eyes at nudity in TV and movies, and she tells him when it’s OK to open them. He puts on a good show of being honestly unaware that she’s significantly overweight. Not the “she’s overweight but I don’t mind” attitude, mind you. I very delicately mentioned the issue once, when she completely wasn’t around, in one of those “she actually looks good despite it kind of ways.” His reaction wasn’t anger that I’d brought it up, or frustration with it, or excusing. It was complete denial. Also, he tends to pretty much just cave when it comes to their home, which is almost completely devoid of male presence. There’s not even really a significant man cave, although they have a three bedroom home that, until very recently, was only occupied by the two of them. And he’s definitely a pedestaler. He’s got her very, very high up on one.
They just had a baby (hence the house no longer just being the two of them), and that’s making the issues a lot worse. She doesn’t talk about it, but she’s very clearly going through the, “Now I want to stay home and be a mommy” phase. But she really can’t. They’ve started accumulating the kinds of things that end up owning you. A nice house, nice furniture, nice middle class cars. All stuff that they can comfortably afford on their current income – they’ve been smart about that. But stuff that they certainly couldn’t afford on just Clark’s income.
So she wants to stay home, very clearly to those who know her, but she can’t. He’s already fighting a huge uphill alpha battle because of the income discrepancy. And there are the other beta behaviors on top of it. The result is a phenomenon I’m starting to recognize as “Frustrated Woman Syndrome,” and now that I know about Game and can recognize it, I see that it’s a huge problem in the modern western world. She subconsciously wants a much more alpha partner than she’s getting. On top of that, she’s followed the feminist play book for doing everything “right” to make herself happy. Only it’s not working. She’s not happy. She’s frustrated in her relationship, frustrated that she can’t play mommy, completely unhappy and worst of all she doesn’t even really understand why.
This has effects outside of their marriage, which is common with FWS. The main effect is that she’s transformed from a nice, well behaved, fun person into kind of a bitch. The effect is most pronounced around certain kinds of people: men who are more alpha than her husband; women who are partnered with such men; women who seem to be higher status than her (measured by shiny things). She obviously still cares greatly about her husband, and I’m not even convinced that she’s consciously aware of how unhappy she is. I’m certain that if you described her current behavior to her past self, her past self would be appalled. But if something doesn’t change, this is likely to end badly.
The solution is fairly clear: introduce Clark to Game. The difficulty is how to do so in such a way that he’ll be open to it. Unlike my brother Wilson, I’m fairly certain that he’d respond well to it if it were communicated in the right way. Unfortunately, the Game community as it exists on the internet is totally not the right way to broach it to him. He’d be appalled by Roissy. I’d buy him a copy of Athol’s book, but I think it would be too risqué for him. Even broaching the topic is a little tricky, because the standard evo-psych approach to Game wouldn’t carry much weight with a Creationist. Also, I’m pretty certain that framing it in terms of sex (the main motivator of most of the Game community) isn’t the right approach here. It would be better to frame it in terms of making her happier in the marriage.
So today the question is for my readers. How do you introduce a person like this to Game before it’s too late?
Long time reader, first time commenter. Thoughts on your topic:
I would think appealing to virtue and being more of a “man” would be the way to approach it to him. Biblically, there is definitely the concept of manly virtues (courage being the main one). I would point out that he’s fearful of his wife, which most beta men are, and go from there.
Jesus was a super alpha and wasn’t afraid to offend anyone. Surely, Clark can take His example and stop being afraid of his wife. Then I would point him to Hawaii Libertarian’s posts on Roissy (Dave from Hawaii) and tell him that that’s what it looks like when you don’t fear your wife. You can tell him that it’s just an example and he can ignore the rest of what Roissy says. In other words, introduce him to game from what he’s failing to do as a Christian. Frame it as a failing on his part to be a good husband.
Yeah, pretty much this. I was raised a Christian, and a Progressive, and there was a fair chunk of the Bible — particularly the writings of Paul — that I just couldn’t square with my progressive morality. Then I read about Game, female hypergamy, etc. and it starts to make sense.
Further, the “narrative” of the Bible — a decline from perfection — I found hard to square with the “Whig history” narrative of progressivism. Then I put Moldbug and Roissy in a mental blender and voilà: a secular description of social decline from order into anarchy.
A lot of evbio “works” from a creationist perspective with a simple change of terminology. Where evbio says “adapted” the creationist says “designed;” where evbio says “limbic system” the creationist says “sinful flesh.”
Slotting all this together and I don’t think you should have any trouble framing the Alpha behaviours prescribed by Game as the true role of spiritual, moral and physical leadership God designed Man for, and that your friend should aspire to.
I remember being linked to something on Laurence Auster’s blog ages back where someone told him about Game. I lol’d. He was horrified, describing it as degenerate and hedonistic. He and his commenters then went on to describe how they believed an upright Christian man should behave in his relationships with women and his family, and incidentally described an archetypical Alpha male. Funny how that works…
If you’re not comfortable grubbing around amongst the racism and gay-bashing I can probably dig out the link for you.
“Wives, you must be submissive to your husbands” “Husbands, you must love your wives.” – Paul the Apostle
As a Christian, I get amused whenever I hear a progressive pastor try to wiggle his way out of those verses, especially if they are fundamentalist in their interpretation of Genesis and claim you must be liberal in your reading of Paul’s rather plain wording here…
Yup. That’s the one. I mean seriously: could you get a better one-line description of the Ethic of Game?
Unfortunately, this is not good. Here is the way I see it. I would become more present in his life. Schedule more time together….earn trust and establish a sense of comradery. Show him by example…how you deal with your wife. Throw out examples of scenarios of instances where you calmly and firmly addressed a problem and by your behavior divert confrontation….and create attraction. (For instance….”Hey the other night, my wife said this and I told her this! I don’t tolerate that…what do you think?”) Then….wait. You wait for him to ask you…..how you do it. How is it that you know so much about this subject. Once his interest is sparked…..you open the gates and let him in on GAME. It may take some time…..some pain……for him, before he sees a need to reach out. He won’t talk to you unless things are noticeably bad enough…and you want the first man he thinks of to be you, for help. In addition…you could also suggest “No More Mr. Nice Guy”…..have him buy it on kindle for his phone if he has a smart phone. I have also tried to share this information with a beta friend of mine. I got the glossy…..what the hell you talking about look. Not a word has been said about it sense. His wife treats him like a kid…and he just lowers his head and pouts. Pathetic. As for your friend, game will save his marriage…..but if you are truly committed to helping him…he must see that the status quo is not working…and unless he changes…he will be paying child support.
Explain to him that he has to be a Man; and that this requires some thought, because traditionally, women were dependent on men, and wanted this (despite feminism).
When this situation doesn’t obtain, explain game in this way:
-it works for non-Christian guys. They emphasize other things, but it’s not fundamentally immoral: it’s a tool. If it works for semi-attractive players in a big city, it’ll work for anyone, *IF* it’s translated into a different environment.
- Don’t mention the evo-psych components. If mentioned, just say: This is the operating paradigm of the modern world, it’s just the way they use to explain the *observations* that are made.
- Crass sexuality: Don’t worry about it. Get him to ignore that; again, it’s possible to use a tool to get what you want, whether it’s a hot 22 year-old cheerleader for a night or a better job or a happier and loyal wife.
He’ll understand that human psychology is universal. Then say: These other guys, whose motives are suspect, and live in a different world, are exploring male/female relations and psychology.
It would be smart to adapt it to a more noble pursuit: Making your wife happy.
The problem:
His ethical system will be attempting to discard info it doesn’t like; give him a framework which will translate the info and strip it of its less salient features. Emphasize that for those guys, manipulating human psychology serves one end; that he should look for the kernels of truth in them, and then apply them as he sees fit.
If he’s intelligent enough, he should see the reason in this. Electricity can be generated in California (these days, anyway) and New York. But in CA, it can power granola grinding factories. In NY, it can power auto chop shops. In Iowa, it could power lights at an outdoor drinkfest. In Atlanta, it could power an airport (there’s nothing else left to do in Atlanta; the Airport is everything).
But give him the translation matrix so he can flip the script and translate the matrix Game is written in into whatever matrix he uses. Basic linear algebra.
Gorby, this is what I was trying to relate below. The problem for LTR guys is you cannot fake being a man in the long run, as you can for one night for the PUA. You have to actually BE a man, which is difficult and painful and often requires you to ignore what your wife says she wants (bigger house, high paying career) and pay more attention to what she actually needs (security if she wants to stay home, a man who can take care of her, who can be the priest of the household, etc). A few negs on Clark’s part might work for a good night or two, but if it’s “just” a game, it will wear off.
Clark needs to learn how to be a man, and that only by being a man and not a boy will he have any chance of making his wife happy. She won’t be happy if she leaves him, and she won’t be happy if she stays married to a boy. Her happiness is totally up to him, and only him. If he finds it hard, tough. This is his wife’s and children’s future happiness at stake, he needs to take it more seriously than anything else he’s done for his entire life.
I am going thru the same thing. I am in real estate and my income nosedived and the mrs. is a nurse who brings home more money, and, yeh, we can’t do it on just my income though we bought all the stuff, including the house, on both our incomes.
I have been reading this blog (love it) and others, and all I can say is that I pick my spots. I do the sensible things like make sure dinner is on the table and I reasonably take care of things. Though in conversation I have been using “man talk” and using Athol’s advice. I have devoted myself to using the treadmill and going out with the guys every now and then. The mrs. hates golf and looked at me funny when I dragged them out to go play a round recently. Instead of kind of looking forward to it (the game doesn’t hold much for me really after playing young), I told her in no uncertain terms I was really looking forward to it. As a “fair” concession, I did say I was only playing nine holes, didn’t get a beer afterwards, came right home, but I was definitely playing golf.
She was very, very frustrated half a year ago and seems to be coming out of it. Too soon to tell fer sure, but I’m continuing to work it. We’re underwater on our house so when she started mewing about being unhappy, I told her that it would be fine if she wanted to destroy our little girls’ lives and our credit rating for seven years. Or she could “woman up” and work with me. It’s a bit push-pull though I definitely do the romantic stuff more and let her know she’s my pal (in some doses) and definitely my sex kitten too.
Problems abound here, and I’m not certain that simple “game” as practiced by PUAs is enough.
Clark is very unlikely to change his approach unless/until wife leaves him. Though you claim that they have the “man head of household” idea, they pretty clearly don’t. If he was the head of the household, there is no way he would have allowed her to spend her money on lifestyle choices like they have, trapping them into needing her to work now that the child has arrived.
Now, like so many before them, they are reaping what they have sown, and praying for a massive crop failure. Unless and until he demonstrates that she can stay home, she will not respect him, period. She needs to have a husband who can and will take charge and do what is necessary to make her stay at home.
So, step 1 is to get Clark to accept the problem is he has allowed their spending to outstrip his resources, which has limited his wife’s choices and happiness. Step 2 is to get him to understand that she is unlikly to see it this way, but that does not make it untrue. This will introduce the concept that she is not always right and does not always know what is best for her own good. This is the key point, and once he accepts that he, as the “head of household” is responsibly for her actions as well as his own, he should be open to the introduction of game, even to roissy eventually, understanding to take to good and discard the bad.
Use the Garden of Eden as an illustration, while Eve ate the apple, she did so right in front of Adam who said nothing and did nothing to stop her. Though she was at fault, God punished him because he was also at fault for her actions. If Adam had been the true head of that family, he would have realized what she needed and was good for her better than she did, and acted accordingly. Instead he assumed she knew what she was doing, and suffered for it.
Once he is fairly along with understanding game, introduce the idea that sex is a good and proper part of a healthy marriage, created by God and intended for pleasure. If he accepts that his wife does not always know what’s best for her, he’ll accept that sometimes some playful force in bed will lead to better sex for her and him both. If that doesn’t motivate him, nothing will.
Once he is fairly down this path, and she is accepting his dominance in bed, she should be open to him suggesting they downsize their lifestyle to allow her to stay at home. If he pulls this off (with help from game) then she’ll no doubt squeeze out a few more rugrats, and he can encourage her to lose the damn weight and her happiness and his will continue to increase.
Good luck!
Show him the Hawaiian Liberterian post on the Spearhead. Or on his own site. “Avoiding the fate of the AMC.” I think it is the best explanation. Tell him just try it a little and adjust his behavior. Listen to what she does not what she says.
He’s not going to be open to anything called “game”, and he is likely to be turned off by the explicitness, the general fondness for Darwin, and a strong smell of biological reduction, even in the Christian “game” community. Dalrock could be an exception… But I would just frame the whole thing as manliness, tradition, rightly ordered societies. The woman wants to stay home. Great! That’s a big chunk of the battle already. But he’s got to make that happen, come hell or high water. She really will be much more happy, and (although of course it could never happen with her) she’ll be much less likely to cheat.
Obviously, they need to downsize their expenses. He’s got to take the lead in that. Smaller home, crappier/fewer cars, fewer dinners out. Big deal. Whatever. Include her in the decisions in such a way that it feels like it’s “their” decision. It’s not that hard. She wants to follow. She wants him to man up. She probably lacks the vocabulary to even articulate what she needs. And that’s okay, because (while it lasts, while the cultural poison has yet to fully act) she’ll know it when she sees it. She needs to understand, preferably implicitly, that this is really what they’ve always wanted, and he’s going to do whatever it takes to make sure it happens. And he’ll be a hero, even if he’s king of a smaller, more sustainable domain. And he’ll get way more, way better sex, to boot!
Been reading a while, but first post.
Toz and Steve N. are both right. Clark has to have tight Game, but in a context he can relate to.
I only discovered Game after my marriage ended (fairly amicably). What I’ve learned since is that I had unconscious Game before I was married, but gradually lost it to growing betatude. One of the main factors was my ex started making more money than I did, a gap that only got worse as time when on. That wouldn’t have been enough to kill my marriage by itself, but in my betaness, I didn’t do anything about it. (One other major marriage killer was she got fat and I got disinterested. Then I got fat, too. I’ve dropped it since, thankfully).
One point to emphasize with Clark is that while for the PUA community, the result of Game is sex, the true reality is that for everyone the result of Game is compliance. Willing compliance to a man’s wishes. Or, if you prefer, to his guidance. And that may be the tack to take in introducing Game to Clark.
Christian men are commanded to be the head of the family and to lead righteously. He can’t have her on a pedestal and lead her at the same time. But in order to lead, Clark has to know with some clarity where he’s leaving by prioritizing what’s important. And that should be his wife and children; his family.
Not his house, not his car, not any of the other shiny trappings of modern life. His family. Which may mean some hard choices. If Wife (and Clark) wants to stay home with the kids, which is probably a good idea, then they may have to do without some of the shiny things to live on Clark’s earnings. Clark may have to try to get a better paying job. They may have to move to a smaller, more affordable house. She may have to take part-time work when the kids are older.
But Clark has to decide if that’s where he should be leading them. Then applying aspects of Game with a Christian aspect. Game works because Game works. It works because women respond to it on a very fundamental level. Which is where feminists miss the mark on Game. It’s not manipulation, it’s leading.
There’s nothing to say that Clark (or you) can’t be the first to formulate Christian Game…
You gotta throw him some horror stories to make him think it might happen to him.
I’m not sure what else to do. My book is 99.99% done and pretty straight. I get a couple Christian’s a week telling me it’s essentially Biblical, but I’m not even trying for that angle in the slightest.
If he’s covering his eyes at naked bits on TV, there’s not much that can be done for him I think. If she starts losing the weight he’s going to get ganked by her.
Take a look at this book – Reforming Marriage by Doug Wilson. You can read the epilogue on Amazon. He may find it helpful!
Wow, you have a bigger uphill battle than most people realize. Part of the problem (and I hate to sound Roissian, but it fits), is the church is emasculating men. Way too many examples, statements, sermons, and ministries undercut the message you need to get across. To that end, you need to start him off with a book, “Wild at Heart” by John Eldredge.
I think this is a great first step for your friend for the very reason I hated it.
This book is aimed at Christian men who don’t know they have permission to be a man. It talks about how good being a man feels, how it falls in line with biblical teaching, and meets the needs of himself and others. Unfortunately, it does not go further than giving permission, but that’s what he has you for!
If he as as devote as you state, make sure you have a receptive audience. This book will prime the pump and give you the groundwork you need for the road ahead.
I am also reminded that when Jesus was found in the Temple, he returned home and “was subject to them.” Them being his parents. So the Son of God was a dutiful son and was indeed subject to his mother and stepfather. And Mary was subject to Joseph. That is also about honoring your mother and your father, not only is it OT but “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother which is the first commandment with a promise, so that it may be well with you, and that you may live long on the earth” (Ephesians 6:1-3). Thus he needs to have her help in the children seeing him as the true head of the house and recognize him as that, both her and the children.
Alte has a few pages on her Complementarian Marriage “sister site” that might be a good place to start — check her blogroll. They’re written from an explicitly Christian perspective and I don’t *think* they’ll trip any anti-papist alarms for a Southern Baptist. But I’m not sure where to go after that.
Oh, and how well does your wife know your friend’s wife? A two-pronged approach would work better, but obviously introducing these concepts to a woman is fairly ticklish.
Another tactic to allow you to use the evolutionary psychology explanations would be to make fun of them while tacitly assuming that what they describe is real (as opposed to how they’re trying to explain that it got there). For me, this is easy because I find most psychology to be utter nonsense and just-so stories.
I hope Athol’s wrong and he’s got SOME hope. Or maybe I’m not only talking about HIM…
Leo: There are many parallels between Game and the New Testament approach to male-female relationships. Previous posts set that out. First, Clark has to see that it’s not working because neither he nor his wife are doing what the Bible says to do. Clark is to be the leader of his household and his wife is to submit to him and comply with the decisions they both make.
Being a leader does not mean he’s a dictator and she’s the doormat. It means he sees the work is done, she submits, and he breaks all ties in the event of fundamental disagreement. If she wants to stay home, then they make the decision and they do whatever it takes to see that that happens. If that means they live on his salary then that’s what it means. If that means they have to move, then they have to move. Period. To do this, he has to take her down off the pedestal and tell her that from now on, if they disagree, then they will do what Clark decides. That’s Biblical. Clark, as a good Southern Baptist, should know that.
He needs to tell her in no uncertain terms that he expects her to submit and comply with his decisions. If she does not, he needs to remind her of her desire to stay home and her agreements.
He needs to see that she has a weight problem. He needs to tell her gently to do something about it. He needs to understand the culture he lives in. If he’s going to see movies with nudity, then he needs to not act like a pussy when the naughty bits come on. Dammit he needs to stop apologizing for being a man and for liking to look at beautiful women.
She’ll snap her legs shut. She’ll get pissed off. She’ll rebel. She’ll give him the silent treatment. SHe might even leave. Tough. Too bad. I did this with my wife. She did almost all the stuff – pouting, crying, yelling, complaining, silence, withholding sex. She came around.
He should understand that men and women are different, are constructed differently, and have different functions. Women are hardwired for emotion. Clark needs to understand that women are emotional at their core. They cry at the drop of a hat. They get mad, sad, happy, weepy, or bitchy for reasons even they don’t understand. (I once had a girlfriend during my beta days who would spontaneously cry. I was genuinely puzzled. She could never express why she had these uncontrollable weeping bouts. “What’s wrong?” “I don’t know! *sniff sniff*” I now understand it was PMS or hormones, or most likely, shit testing.) Clark needs to be told and needs to understand that when all this happens, you just stand. (Ephesians: “And when you have done all you can do, you stand”) You just stay there and let it pass. He doesn’t need to understand it.
I agree with JD above. Get him “Wild at Heart”.
by the way: Christian women do everything described on this blog and on Roissy’s site. Christian women can, and have been known, to:
1. develop an entitlement mentality
2. think they are a special little snowflake
3. shit test
4. flake
5. lie
6. ask questions they don’t really want answers to
7. seek validation
8. manipulate, distort and twist
9. go for the alpha over the beta
10. develop distorted views of their own sexual market value because of circumstances or environment
11. have extramarital affairs because of the husband’s betatude
12. cuckold
I could go on and on.
This, to me, validates much of what science has said, as summarized a lot on Roissy’s blog. Despite our better natures as Christians, we still wrestle with flesh. I’ve seen Christian women do every single one of these things. Every one.
On the other hand, christian men go after fat chicks all the time
Don’t forget the curse from God.
“Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”
“He needs to tell her in no uncertain terms that he expects her to submit and comply with his decisions”
Okayyy, not really how it works. It’s the wife’s job to submit, not his job to make her. Playfull force in bed? He’s a pussy because he doesn’t look at naked women? This is where I, as a Christian, get pissed and as a reasonable person tells you you’re wrong. You’d be surprised how many patriarchal men refrain from watching naked women, and women married to those men would be plenty pissed if they both ordered their wives to submit and then stared happily at naked women in films; that’s a summation of an arrogant ass.
The head of the home belief is a non-issue, really. What this guy needs to do is be assertive, understand his wife and ADDRESS her problems, their financial issues and what needs to be done. He needs to take the initiative, understand why she feels the way she does, then explain in no uncertain terms how they can accomplish their goals. No pussyfooting around, and no “you’d better submit to whatever I say” either; she will not be happy if she has to continue working just because hubby said she’d have to. It’s time to bite the bullet, and get her to address what they both want as a couple.
I wouldn’t phrase it like that (and obviously didn’t in the original post). I would say, however, that how he avoids looking at naked women comes across as highly juvenile. I’ve known this guy for some years now. I have no doubt that his desire to avoid looking at naked women is a sincere Christian belief. I’m sure his wife understands that as well. Nevertheless, sitting in a movie that’s rated R or watching an HBO original show (so you’ve got a pretty good idea up front that it’s got nudity in it) and turning into your wife’s chest at the briefest hint of nudity, then waiting for her to give the “all clear” comes across as pretty juvenile. Even when you know the true motivation behind it, it just comes off like a middle school kid saying, “Ooh, boobies! Icky!”
I’ve never heard his wife complain about this. Nevertheless, you can see in her body language (and the body language of all of our mutual friends) that this is not merely my opinion.
Yeah seriously the turning away from the TV for fear of seeing boobies is just totally weaksauce. It’s not like they burn your retina.
Also as an aside for clarity, that “Jennifer” isn’t my wife. I can barely get her to comment at MMSL lol, let alone another blog.
“I would say, however, that how he avoids looking at naked women comes across as highly juvenile”
That’s true. Ok then.