All Episodes
Previous Next
March 23, 2024 - Whatever Podcast
02:19:36
Orion Taraban PsycHacks vs. Chase & Brian! | Whatever Podcast #5

LIVE on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠youtube.com/whatever

|

Time Text
Welcome to the Whatever podcast coming to you live from Santa Barbara, California.
I'm your host, Brian Atlas.
I'm joined by special guest host, Chase.
A few quick announcements before the show begins.
This podcast is your supported heavy YouTube demonetization, so please consider donating through Streamlabs instead of super chatting as YouTube takes a brutal 30% cut.
So some quick maths for y'all.
If you super chat 100, YouTube takes 30.
If you donate 100, Streamlabs only takes 30.
Streamlabs.com/slash whatever.
Link is in the description.
Donations and super chats.
$10 and up will be displayed in Stream Overlay.
So if you guys have any questions for our guests, donations and super chats, $50 and up will be read/slash answered.
If you want to interact nearly instantly with us and weigh in on the conversation, consider sending a TTS text-to-speech message, $100 and up triggers TTS.
TTS is via Streamlabs only.
And if you want to ask a question, like I said during the podcast, feel free to leave a super chat or TTS above the threshold.
Without further ado, I'm joined today by Orion Taraban.
He's a California board certified and licensed psychologist receiving his doctorate of psychology in 2016.
He also hosts his popular YouTube channel, PsychAx, which has nearly half a million subscribers.
Welcome, Orion.
Thanks, Brian.
It's good to be back.
Good to have you back.
Good to have you back.
I mean, first off, congrats on all your success.
If I recall correctly, I think when we last had you on for one of our dating talks, I think you were at about 100,000.
We hit 100,000 that show.
And then now you're blowing up, tons of viral clips here and there.
You were on Soft White Underbelly.
I think that got both of those got over a million views.
If I weren't quite there, then there was some controversy with the first one.
But yeah, I'm doing some more appearances.
What was the controversy with the first one?
I talked about the transactional nature of relationships and sort of the economic model of dating and the contemporary sexual marketplace, which rubbed some people the wrong way.
The second talk, which was about the spiritual nature of love, was much more well received.
Okay, gotcha.
Who did that episode rub the wrong way?
The spiritual nature of love?
No, the first one.
It's mostly women.
Mostly women.
Mostly women.
And older women, too, which I think is the majority of Mark's audience.
Why?
Well, I think that people would like to believe certain things about love and relationships and to potentially not look too closely at them.
Oftentimes, a mystified dynamic also serves those who benefit most from it.
And it's your mission to clarify those things so that everybody can benefit from increased understanding.
I think so.
I think that everybody can win in any game.
Like if you know the rules of the game and you understand where the pieces are on the board, there is always a best move that can be made.
And your best bet of winning is just to make a sequence of better moves over a long enough timeline.
It doesn't guarantee a victory.
But generally, yeah, people can win no matter what the game is.
And the game continuously evolves.
The game of mating and dating.
It will never be fixed.
Once and for all, it will continue to change and people will continue to adapt in order to stay successful and relevant.
Amen to that.
By the way, I just want to tell the audience his YouTube channel is fantastic.
I've watched a lot of his videos.
Very good stuff.
Very insightful stuff.
Yes, guys.
It's good.
Solid.
Psych Hax, right?
On YouTube.
Psych Hacks.
Nick, can you pull it up?
Just, guys, if you're interested, guys, check out his channel on YouTube.
Tons of great stuff there.
So, yeah, guys, give him a follow.
Give him a subscribe.
My first question for you, you said that women mate and date for gain, and men try to mate and date for acceptable loss.
And I was very curious about that.
Can you expand on kind of what you mean by that?
Well, sure.
I mean, the mate and date for gain part is just basic hypergamy, which is more the sense of I think women need to feel like they're going to benefit from a relationship to feel like it's worth the opportunity cost.
of pursuing that opportunity versus all the other opportunities they may have available to them.
It sort of makes sense.
I think guys would also mate and date for gain kind of if they could.
But because a lot of that takes place in the 20s where women's sexual marketplace value is higher than men's, I think that they are in a privileged position to better dictate terms for a relationship.
And I think that if a relationship does not significantly improve a woman's life, especially in today's day and age, she's going to be confident and content in just sort of doing her own thing.
If it's just a little bit better or awas, it's like maybe it's actually a loss to that woman in the long term because of the opportunity cost of foreclosing on that opportunity.
So it's simple economics.
If women are mating and dating for gain, then if they're mating and dating with men anyway, men have to sort of resign themselves to acceptable loss.
And I think that there is acceptable loss and unacceptable loss.
And I think it's for every man to determine for himself where that line is.
But as I mentioned before, it's like all men pay to access a relationship with a woman, whether it's for a night or for a lifetime.
But the more she likes you, the greater the discount.
And when you say pay, do you mean financially or do you time?
When you say pay, what do you mean?
So in general, my approach to the sexual marketplace is in a grossly simplified way that men attempt to trade resources for sexual opportunity and women attempt to exchange their sexual opportunity for resources.
Resources I'm defining in the broadest possible way.
It means like anything that isn't sex.
So it could be money, but it could also be time.
It could also be attention.
It could also be emotional validation.
It can be instrumental support, somebody who's going to help take the refrigerator up the stairs when it needs to.
It could be somebody who's exciting, who can provide emotional stimulation or the alleviation of boredom.
Like resource can mean many different things to many different women, and it will change for the same woman over time.
That's what also makes it so difficult to maintain long-term relationships, is that what people want constantly changes.
Gotcha.
And you mentioned something about, you know, there's differences when it comes to when men and women reach their peaks, sexual value in the sexual marketplace.
So, I mean, and I think you've said men need to wait to get an advantage in the sexual marketplace.
So what does that mean?
And then when are the peaks and when does the switch occur?
Sure.
So according to one study I read that was revealed preference of men and women on a popular dating app, which included millions of data points in several major U.S. markets.
According to men, women were most physically attractive at 23.
And according to women, men were most attractive at 50, which is way older than most people think.
And that's potentially artifact of that one study.
What it does seem to be is that women's sexual marketplace kind of value, it just sort of decreases as a function of time.
Men is more logarithmic.
They increase, and then they kind of plateau for a while, maybe between 35 and 55, and then it's kind of a slow decline into old age.
Go ahead.
Were they evaluating just physical attractiveness?
Probably not.
Yeah, when I think of the term sexual marketplace value, like I don't, men oftentimes look at women and they evaluate their sexual marketplace value based on their youth, their fertility, their physical appearance, so on and so forth.
But women don't just take into account, obviously, a man's physical appearance.
They also take into account what's his personality like.
Is he funny?
What's his earning potential?
Is he going to be a provider?
And all of that kind of gets factored into this concept of sexual marketplace value for men, I would say.
In terms of women's perception of men, were they just measuring physical attractiveness in a study for them?
No, they were measuring swipes.
Okay.
So it presumably plays out the way that you do, is that a man looked at a woman's profile.
He probably mostly looked at her pictures and so made his selection based on physical attractiveness, which is the primary determinant of sexual marketplace value in women for men.
Okay.
For better or for worse.
And women looked at the profile and decided what way to swipe, right?
So they took into account the pictures, but also the responses and the context of the pictures.
In a grossly simplified way, I often say that men want the Barbie doll and women want all the stuff the Ken doll comes with.
And so if in a dating profile in six pictures or even better on Instagram, if you can create a photo narrative that sort of accurated people into your life that a woman could potentially look at and say, oh, this is what the Orion doll comes with, or this is what the chase doll comes with, they're going to make their determination and be like, what does it feel?
What might it feel like to be in that life next to that man?
And that's kind of the fantasy that tends to motivate initial responsiveness in the sexual marketplace.
Right.
And that age range of 50 years old, was that same data, has that same data been replicated in any other studies that you know of?
It's usually not as old as 50.
50 is probably the oldest one that I've seen, but it's actually been younger for women and younger for men.
So I've seen studies where it's 21 for women and maybe 38 for men.
But it's generally above like 35.
Oh yeah, for sure.
I mean, the average age of the sexiest man alive, I think, is 42.
Do you know what the age cohorts were that they were taking data from?
No, I don't.
Because the reason why I ask is because when I think of like the mid-20 year old women that I know, like none of them would look at a 50-year-old and be like, oh yeah, that guy's hot.
That's what they always say.
Right, right.
You think they're lying?
Maybe they are.
Maybe they're not.
You know, the thing about talking about the sexual marketplace and how men and women behave inside of it is that we can at best sort of make statistical observations.
And any statistical observation on the population level will be disproved at the individual level.
So you could say that women generally respond better to men who are taller and higher status and older.
And you will always have a woman who might say, well, that doesn't work for me.
I don't care anything about those things.
As if that doesn't validate the population level observation.
Right, right.
But it is true.
It's like on an individual level, it's anybody's guess.
And I talk about that in my forthcoming book, is that perceived sexual marketplace value.
Because you don't actually transact with an abstraction.
You can't get into a relationship with women.
You can't get into a relationship with men.
You get into a relationship with a specific man and a specific woman.
And people can and do deviate significantly from, let's say, the cultural expectations and the norms for what the society finds attractive.
Right, that makes sense.
You know, it's interesting.
The more that I think about the data from that study that you just referenced, like initially I'm like, man, I don't know any 20-year-old, 25-year-old women that are looking at 50-year-old guys, and they're like, oh, hell yeah.
But when I was in high school and my dad was in his mid-40s, drove a pretty decent car.
He was fit.
All of these girls in my high school were like, Chase, your dad is so hot.
Like, what's his number?
And I'm like, I'm looking back at that.
I'm like, yo, I'm like, there might be something to it.
And part of it, and this is one of the things that I talk about in my book, is that women in their early 20s aren't around men in their 50s.
Certainly not around single men that they might actually have relationships with.
They're around guys who are around their age and maybe a little bit older.
That's why in high school, the women that you wanted dated the guys in college.
And when they were in college, they dated the guys who already graduated and have their own place.
So most people generally associate with people around their own age until they launch into real life.
Right.
And then their cohort kind of becomes their workplace.
Right.
And they start to lose, not that they fall out, but they kind of drift away from their high school and college friends just to the busyness of life.
Yeah.
And so I think one of the main reasons is that women just are, it's like what Hannah Bolechter said in Silence of the Lambs.
People covet what they see every day.
And if women are around other 23-year-old guys, they're going to covet the most attractive one that they can see.
But if they're exposed to a wider cohort of more successful men who might actually be in a position to extend them the lifestyle and the commitment that they're looking for, that might actually be in their best service.
And women used to have access to that when actually their fathers were more involved in the process.
Do you think, though, when it comes to sort of an equalization of the advantage in the sexual marketplace?
Because I mean, it seems to me that if we're comparing, let's say, like for like, say, an average woman to an average man, I mean, at least from what I've seen on dating apps, for example, and perhaps we can talk about dating apps in a moment, that even an average woman, and there's this term, the wall, right?
Women hit the wall.
I don't know if there's much truth to that, but it seems like a bit of cope.
Like, oh, once they're 35, it's like they're done for.
That's not true.
Yeah, but it occurs to me that they still, in terms of their sexual optionality, even into, I would argue, their late 30s, early 40s, women can still run circles around men when it comes to their sexual optionality.
Some of them.
Oftentimes, guys, even the playing field, but guys often never get a chance to see that because they commit to a long-term relationship in their late 20s, early 30s before they enjoy that advantageous gap in the sexuality.
Which is right around the time, like you said, when they're kind of getting into their advantageous.
Yeah, generally it switches at 30.
30 is when the average male sexual marketplace value exceeds the average female sexual marketplace value for the very first time.
But it doesn't really start to be noticeable until maybe 34, 35.
What's the average age of marriage for men and women?
Is it like 30 and 28?
Is that a matter of?
30 and 29 in this country.
So right early for men, 29 for women?
Yeah, correct.
In no culture on the planet is average woman's age at first marriage more than average man's age at first marriage.
And it rakes, I just looked up these numbers.
It ranges from like less than a year to almost a decade on average in some cultures.
Do you guys know how those numbers, how those ages have gone up over time?
Like, do you know what it was like 50 years ago?
The gap in the United States has stayed mostly, it's narrowed a little bit.
I think maybe 50 years ago, it was maybe two or three years, and now it's maybe one or two.
But do you know what ages?
Oh, it's definitely gone up.
And it was 1970 that saw the big spike in ages.
The average age at 1970 at marriage was like 22, 24.
Oh, it's at 29, 30.
Interesting.
I don't think it'll go much higher than that.
You don't think so?
No.
Why?
Because it wouldn't be in women's best interest for it to go higher than that.
So you have to understand that the reason why the data looks this way is because it makes a lot of sense for women to secure a lifetime or a long-term commitment from a man at the last moment that they enjoy a relative advantage in the sexual marketplace.
Like, why not hitch your ride to a rising star?
You know, everybody plays blackjack.
Women hit the wall.
Yeah, men also hit the wall too.
The wall is a little bit different.
It's not in the sense purely of your physical attractiveness like it generally is for women.
But everybody is like, you know, this is good.
The next card could improve my position, but it might also cause me to go bust.
I don't want to get too greedy.
Maybe I'll stand here.
And it's actually in women's best interest to stand at the last moment that they enjoy that advantage where they can dictate more beneficial terms for themselves for the relationship.
And the man doesn't yet really enjoy and subjectively know what it might be like to have abundant sexual optionality, to have women pursuing him, to have relationships on his terms.
How do men hit the wall?
Generally, men hit the wall when they have a mortality scare.
Maybe someone close to them dies, or maybe they get diagnosed with some sort of serious illness, and they think, what if no one's around when the end comes?
What if I, you know, I can't just chase heedless hedonistic pleasure?
Maybe I need somebody to tie my fortunes to on a deep and significant way.
I think that's generally what wakes guys up.
So like people say that the wall happens for women at 30.
Where would you estimate the wall happens for men on average?
I mean, I did a consultation with a guy yesterday.
He was in his late 60s, and he's deciding that, hey, I'm in my end game now.
He's never been married.
Was he just playing the field the whole time?
He was.
And he seems to have done very well from himself.
He has a very high net worth.
He has houses in different countries around the world.
He, in his own words, has been cleaning up and enjoying his life.
He's a successful professional and a musician.
But now in his late 60s, he's thinking, you know, will I just do this forever?
Maybe I need somebody to care for me.
And he's looking to get married now.
Gotcha.
I think that's the extreme example for men.
Yeah, that's pretty late.
That's a long time men have before they hit the wall, but it makes sense.
He can still have kids, though.
Right?
He can.
He's good.
He's good.
Did Al Pacino just have another child?
Yeah.
He's got 80s.
Yeah, who was that rocker that did too, like a year or two ago?
Was it Keith Richards?
Someone.
I don't know.
He's still kicking.
I have a question.
So before the show, we were talking about your practice.
Sure.
And for anybody unaware, Dr. Orion Terraban, as a psychologist and a therapist, you've worked with thousands of clients, right?
Yes.
So one, I asked my Instagram and Twitter audiences if they had any questions for you.
Great.
And one of the top questions was, what are the most important qualities that it could be sex-specific, men or women, or both sexes?
What are the most important qualities people should look for in a long-term relational partner?
Ooh, that's a good question.
I think it's a little bit different depending on if you're a man or a woman.
One of the things that I tell guys, like the thing that the best woman that they could possibly get in the sexual marketplace, in my opinion, is a useful eight.
Tell us what that means.
Well, if we're going to be using the Metric for a sexual marketplace value.
I don't know if you've ever dated women that you would consider nines and tens based on your own subjective perception of attractions.
Is this like the crazy hot matrix?
It's kind of it.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, some of them are absolutely nutty in a handful.
Because they've also been created that way.
A lot of these very beautiful young women were beautiful precociously, like from a very young age.
They started to realize that they could command male attention using their bodies or their sensuality.
And that was a power that they became aware of before they even really understood how to utilize it or to handle it.
But because they became aware of that power at such an early age, a lot of them didn't develop other parts of their personality.
That's so common.
I've seen that so many times.
But I can understand where they were coming from.
Being a beautiful woman is like being a billionaire's scion.
You know, it's like the rules don't really apply to you.
You have such a distorted view of what everyday life is and what normal people go through.
You can't possibly sympathize or associate on some level, right?
This is the pattern that I've noticed here in the area.
There's a lot of really attractive chicks that are dumb as rocks and have nothing interesting to say.
And there's a lot of really interesting girls that aren't as good.
Well, think about it.
Why did I have to cultivate my intelligence?
Because I thought that it was a way to make a living and to get money and to secure my place in the world.
Right, you have to provide value.
But if I could get money and secure my place in the world without the hard work of cultivating my intelligence and building my practice or what, why wouldn't I?
That might be a temptation that I might not have been able to resist either.
It's the path of least resistance.
It is.
Everything that we're doing is to get what we want.
And if you're offered what you want on a silver platter from a very early age, you're not going to work to get it like everybody else does.
That doesn't make those people bad people.
The people who had to work for those things, absolutely, the vast majority of them would act exactly like the really rich or really attractive people.
Right.
But they just didn't have the option.
They could either cry and mope about or they could do something about it.
Right.
So to go back to this concept of a useful eight, what does it mean for a woman to be a useful eight?
Obviously, eight, she's not a 10 out of 10, so to speak.
Yeah, so she's developed her personality usually.
Even better if she's an ugly duckling, as I talk about on my channel.
So women definitely bloom at different ages, you know?
And I know women absolutely who are more attractive in their early 30s than they were in their early 20s.
That it happens.
Sometimes women, they only start to understand, they start to take care of their appearance, they start to dress better, they start to work out, they start to have a cognizance of the sexual marketplace.
For whatever reason, they weren't just focused on those things, which actually makes them kind of sweet and almost naive in a way, which makes them kind of good faith actors in the marketplace because they're not as, you could say cynical, or you could also say worldly.
So an ugly duckling who's an eight, an eight is by far, she's going to be attractive enough for you.
Like she's going to be able to maintain your sexual interest.
You don't need more than that.
And useful.
So you like to have a woman in your life that actually makes your life better, that contributes value, that you look forward to spending time with.
Another thing I say, someone once asked me about a woman I was dating who I really liked.
And they said, well, what do you think?
What about that girl?
What do you think about her?
And I said, you know what?
She's inoffensive.
And that was like the highest praise I could give that woman.
I have dated many different women in my life, and the ones that I've had the longest relationships with were not the hottest, were not the smartest, were not the most savvy with respect to relationships.
They were not the most domesticated, whatever that means.
It was the women who were the most inoffensive.
They were so easy to get along with.
They didn't cause any problems.
They didn't create any disrespect.
They actually cared and even better, worked and made an effort to make my life better and to further the goals that I was working towards both for myself and for the relationship.
They brought you peace.
I already had peace.
It's so much easier to attract a woman who isn't going to disrupt your peace if you have peace already yourself.
If you're looking for peace from a woman, you don't have it yet.
I don't know if I mean it in that sense where, as in perhaps her life is chaotic, but by introducing her, she's brought peace to your life.
But perhaps what I mean there is she's bringing you peace by not introducing chaos into your life.
Because with so many relationships, it can certainly, a lot of them can introduce quite a bit of chaos.
It's certainly true.
I was doing a consultation with a woman the other day who was in her late 30s and she wanted to find a husband.
Almost all the consultations I do with women these days are about how to get a husband.
And she was contrite.
She admitted that she had drank some of the ideological Kool-Aid for a long time and she's waking up to the fact that that caused her to behave in certain ways that were counterproductive to her ultimate relationship goals.
And she's trying to disabuse herself of a lot of that ideology, right?
Is that a really polite way of saying that she was promiscuous throughout her 20s?
No, I think it was more a polite way of saying that she was a proud feminist and progressive ideology.
Yes, we love calling out the proud feminism.
It is not an attractive quality.
And she was swearing up and down.
She's like, found my content.
Your content is so helpful, Orion.
I'm trying to be very respectful for men.
I'm trying to be submissive and obedient.
And I just stopped her.
And I was like, look, all that sounds real good.
Like, okay.
But you actually don't need to be respectful or obedient or subservient to men.
Just don't be disrespectful.
Just don't be disobedient.
Just don't be conflictual.
Like, that's enough.
You don't have to go out of your, you don't have to put a guy on a pedestal and pretend that he's some new god and just cater to his ego.
Does that help?
Does that help?
It can.
Like, one of the best, it's not good for the men, but one of the best ways a woman can get a man is to cater to his ego.
It's like she stoops to conquer kind of a thing.
Oh, you're so strong.
I never would have thought of that.
It's like, really?
So many women play men.
But you're saying so long as there's just the bare minimum of not being disrespectful, that can get a woman really far.
Way far.
Yeah.
You don't have to necessarily do all of these wonderful, great things.
I mean, if you can.
It helps.
It's great, for sure.
I'm not going to say no to that.
But like, the one bad thing that you do is probably more bad than the one good thing that you do.
In fact, according to, let's say, John Gottman's research into relationship longevity and which couples break up and which couples divorce, he said that couples need to have at least five positive micro interactions for every one negative micro interaction.
Which one way to think about that is that like a negative interaction is five times more negative than a positive interaction is positive.
Makes sense.
I mean, you're on YouTube.
It's sort of like kind of human nature.
You might get 99 positive comments, but the one that's not is the one that you tend to remember.
Yeah, you tend to focus.
You could get 100 positive messages, but you get a couple nasty ones and you'll pay a little more attention to those than, yeah.
And those one or two things can cancel out the 99, 98 things that you're doing well.
So just don't do the things that mess it up.
I do want to come back to the useful aid thing and then Chase's original question, but really quick, just since we brought up peace, what do you think about Proverbs 21, 19?
Better to live in the desert than with a quarrelsome and nagging wife.
I actually think it was a corner of the attic.
There's two.
I think there's differences.
There's two.
So there is like a, what is it, better to live better, better to live in the desert than with a quarrelsome wife, and better to live on the corner of a house or corner of a roof than with a quarrelsome wife.
That's the one I know.
Yeah.
Because I know a lot of guys who live in a corner of their own house.
I don't know a lot of guys who live in the desert.
I mean, on that note, are you helping out men who are in contentious marriages?
Oh, yeah, all the time.
It's very difficult to fix.
Like, it's so much easier to do the right thing from the beginning than to do the wrong thing for 10, 20 years and then try to do the right thing.
Is there a commonality, a common thread between the situations and how they get fixed?
Because I've got some theories on it, but I'm curious from a professional perspective.
Well, I usually target a specific behavior and apply behavioral principles to it.
So like bad behavior from a woman in a relationship is generally co-created.
Yes, it's potentially coming from her, but it exists and is being maintained or even rewarded in a dynamic that exists between two people.
So one thing that I teach guys is to become more aware of, let's say, the reinforcement contingencies under which that behavior occurs.
A lot of women say things that could be very hurtful to men, not necessarily because they really believe them in their heart of hearts, but because they work.
They work to get that man to do what she wants.
And to the extent that the guy backs down or changes his behavior or gives up seeing his friends or his hobbies or whatever it is, it's going to make it easier for that woman to do that thing in the future.
And the more that the guy concedes, the more that woman kind of becomes monstrous, which isn't good for him, obviously, but it's also not good for her.
And so when I talk about it this way, it's like, oh, she's not a bad person.
It's just almost like the hot young women.
They're not bad.
It's just life has thrown all of these things at them so fast.
And they're kind of making maybe short-term but rational decisions about getting those good things into their lives.
Okay.
So one thing I talk about is that it always gets worse before it gets better.
So if you start to change an entrenched dynamic, even if changing it would be in the best interest of both parties involved, the person who more directly or immediately benefits from it is going to get pieced.
She's going to get very angry.
It's kind of like you have to stay in your lane.
This isn't how it works.
That's not what I signed up for.
And that's called an extinction burst, where you see an intensification in the behavior that you're actually trying to get rid of.
And it's designed to kind of reinstate the status quo.
And that's why I say that guys shouldn't do this lightly, because if they kind of do this casually and not prepared for things getting worse, they're just going to make a bigger monster out of the situation.
But if you change what you do and you hold the line and you offer a different form of reinforcement, then if you do that maybe 10 times in a row, you might have solved the problem.
Maybe not all the way, but it will get better.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, it does.
Have you read the book, Love and Respect?
So I was talking to a friend of mine recently about women and relationships and stuff like that, and he shared with me a quote that his dad had shared with him.
And what his dad told him was, at their base level, what men most need in a relationship from a woman is respect.
And what women most need in a relationship is love.
And most men would rather be respected than loved.
And most women would rather be loved than alone, right?
Loved or respected.
You think most women would rather be loved or respected?
Well, you said loved or alone.
Right.
Most women would rather be loved than they would prefer to be alone, is what his dad said.
But what I'm saying is that that's a study.
That's a very famous study, a survey study, where they gave a choice to a bunch of men.
Would you rather be loved or respected and gave the same choice to women?
Men would rather be respected than loved, and women would rather be loved than respected.
So maybe it's a slightly different study?
It might be, but my point being, his dad got that information from a book called Love and Respect based on the author.
He was a Christian author and he wrote this off of some verses in Ephesians.
The verses, I think it's Ephesians 5, where it says that, you know, women ought to submit to their husbands, which speaks to a deep need that men have in relationships to be respected.
And also, men have to have unwavering love towards their wives and lay down their lives for their wives like Christ laid down his life for the church.
And I was reading through the book and it was talking about the negative downward spirals that people can get into in relationships, where like if men feel like they're being disrespected by their woman, oftentimes what they'll do in response is they'll pull back their love a bit because they'll be like, okay, I don't want to deal with you right now.
I'm not going to treat you in the same affectionate, loving way because you're disrespecting me.
And that often causes women to then start nagging the man more and more and more because she wants attention from him.
And so it's kind of like she's using a negative behavior to try and get what she actually wants.
And I've seen this in my own family, like my grandmother, type of woman who could nag a man to death, right?
But she does it because she wants attention.
And like when women feel like, you know, as I was saying, when women feel like a man is pulling back their love, like they will push that negative behavior towards them.
And the author talked about how to break that downward spiral by, you know, the way he described it, he was like, men need to show women unconditional love.
They need to show their wives unconditional love.
That can break the negative cycle for women sometimes.
And if women show a man unconditional respect, that can break the negative cycle on their end.
What do you think about that?
I think I follow you.
I'm not a big fan of the word unconditional.
I think love is and can be unconditional, but I think that relationships are conditional.
And I think that's actually as they should be.
When we create positions in relationships or in society that are completely immune from any kind of revocation, those are historically the positions that are most prone to abuses.
Right.
Like I'm glad that divorce exists.
Like, because without that exit, some marriages could get really, really dark and really, really bad.
I think that divorce is clearly overutilized, but I'm glad that it exists as a social entity.
Let's put it that way.
Right.
So I don't love the unconditional word.
I see the point that you're making.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think that men interpret respect as love.
Yeah.
If a woman, you know, if you came to me for advice, Chase, and I sat down with you and I said, okay, well, based on what you're telling me, I think you should try X, Y, and Z.
And then you went off and did what the fuck you wanted to do anyway.
Well, one, I'd be less likely to sit down with you and give you counsel in the future if you were to ask me for it, because I felt like I took my time to guide you and you didn't have enough faith in what I was saying that you disregarded it.
And whatever feeling you might have inside of you about me, in that moment, I would feel like you didn't really value what I had to give as a result of that, let's say, disobedience.
It's another possible way of approaching faith, actually.
Like if a doctor gives you a certain treatment, says, hey, you got to take this pill twice a day, and you think you should do 30 minutes of cardio, and I think you need to cut this out, and you nod and say, hmm, yeah, that's great.
And then you go off and do whatever you want anyway, you had no faith in that treatment.
You didn't believe that if you followed that advice, it would actually improve your health and get you what you wanted.
So faith has to be connected to obedience.
If you're not obeying, you have no faith that that will work.
Right.
And your disobedience also shows that you don't value what the other person is saying.
And if I'm just not following anything that you're saying after coming to you for advice or counsel or whatever, you're going to be like, well, why would I continue giving that to you?
I hear you.
And this is tricky because then you get into, well, why should I be obedient?
Why should I listen to you?
Well, because I'm the man or because I'm the doctor.
It's like those are ultimately arguments of authority and they only work to an extent, right?
So I was also a teacher for about 20 years and I worked with thousands of students and some of them would follow my advice and some of them would not.
And when I'd asked the students who weren't following my advice why they didn't do these things, they said, well, I thought that I could do this, but not do that.
They were like cherry-picking the things that they wanted to do, which is kind of irrational because if they knew better what to do, they would be the teacher.
Do you understand?
Right.
So what I told them is that the only way that they could possibly prove that I was wrong, that I didn't know what I was talking about, was for them to do exactly what I told them to do and for it to not work.
Right.
Because until that happens, we don't know if I'm the problem or you're the problem.
Right.
Right.
And usually when I frame it that way, just as an experiment, do exactly what I tell you to do and we'll see what the outcome and results are.
Usually I get a lot of more buy-in into that relationship afterwards.
Yeah.
As opposed to, well, I'm the teacher.
You should just follow what I have to say.
Yeah.
Like, fuck that.
Yeah.
I've had so many bad teachers in my life.
Yeah, same.
If we can just, I think we didn't fully get over your original question.
We were talking about the useful eights.
Sure.
Useful eights.
I have a clarifying question for that particular subject.
Yeah, do you want to restate yourself?
Yeah, the original question was, what are the top qualities that people, men and women, or men or women, should look for in a long-term partner?
And on the subject of the useful eight, we can start there.
So when I queried my audience about what questions they might have for you, one of the most common ones that women had were, so like there was one girl that messaged me, she was saying, I'm not married yet, but I want to do everything that I can to prepare myself to become as valuable as possible for my future husband.
So she wants to make herself, let's assume she's doing everything she can to take care of her health, her physical appearance, all that kind of stuff.
What qualities can she or women in general, besides just being inoffensive, what qualities can women cultivate to make themselves as valuable as possible?
Again, inoffensiveness is huge because I want to stress this.
It's better to get rid of the one or two things that are sabotaging your success than to practice 10 new good things that are just going to be canceled out by the one or two bad things that you're not attending to.
So the inoffensiveness is key.
It should be number one.
One thing that I think might be useful for people to approach, both men and women, is to think of relationships like roles.
People often have a problem with the word role.
They think that it's playing make-believe or it's faking or it's lying.
And I think it can be those things, but I also think that it's not necessarily those things.
We all have roles at work, right?
We don't just say whatever we want when we're on the job or do whatever we feel like doing in the moment.
A lot of us have this professional role.
And it doesn't mean that we're lying or faking.
It just means that certain parts of ourselves come to the forefront while we're on the job and certain others fade into the background.
And the more you occupy that role, the more that you're like authentically embodying that role too.
So, and everyone's professional in their own unique way.
You know what I'm saying?
One of the things that I think get people into a lot of trouble, especially women, is they kind of think that the relationship, their intimate relationship, is where they don't have to do any of that.
It's like out there is where I have to keep it together and serve other people and keep it together.
Here, I don't have to do that.
I should just be able to say whatever I want and do whatever I want, and you should just love me irrespective of what I say or do.
Because this is where I finally get to relax and let all that stuff go.
And I would say the only time you really get to do that is when you're alone.
Like, I'm more of a kind of a Confucianist with respect to this in the sense of like, there are different roles that we all play.
I play the role of brother, of son, of boyfriend, of therapist, and I play them often concurrently, right?
And different roles have different privileges and different responsibilities.
And if you want to occupy that role legitimately and through time, you have to assume those responsibilities and you get to enjoy those privileges as a result.
Like the privileges and the responsibilities should be commensurate with each other.
So to understand in terms of a role, like what do most men want from a woman that they're in an intimate relationship?
They want somebody who's sweet.
They want somebody who's kind.
They want somebody who's feminine.
They want this home that they're creating with this woman to be an oasis for them in life, which can be very, very difficult for men.
A lot of men, the most dangerous place in the world for them is at home.
Like, why would a woman create that for their men?
Like, that's a terrible, terrible idea.
Right.
So to approach relationships in terms of a role, and if we do that, we can also see that there might be traits or skills or attributes that make a person more able to discharge that role than others.
It's like I said, kindness, sweetness, femininity.
I think a sense of humor.
Emotional equilibrium is huge.
Like guys will have different, I talk about this with women.
Guys say they like femininity.
And what they mean is they kind of want the nice made-up appearances and the softness, but often what comes with femininity is the emotion.
And sometimes we'd rather not deal with that so much.
I personally get along best because of who I am with women who have low expressed emotionality.
I've dated very high expressed emotional women and I like women who are kind of like emotionally even keel.
That sometimes means that they don't get that like super lovey-dovey highs, but I don't get the crazy key or car lows.
What about from women looking towards men in terms of the top qualities that they should look for in men?
What would you say?
What produces the greatest success and happiness for women and relational fulfillment in those, like what qualities are required for?
Well, a lot of things are practical.
Like we know both men and women report greater relational and marital satisfaction when the man makes more than the woman.
When the man is more successful, when he has a higher earning, and he's higher status.
That's good for both the men and the women, okay?
The issue with that is a lot of women want to target the men who already have the status and the wealth and the success and the lifestyle.
And those men have the pick of the litter.
And a lot of guys, if given near infinite sexual optionality, are not going to be interested in settling down with any one of those women.
And a lot of women have to take a really cold hard look at themselves and say, could I beat out 100 other women for this relationship?
Because you might have to.
Another thing I talk about is like date like it's your job.
If women are really serious about getting married, like how many hours a week are they working and how many hours the week are they trying to get a man?
Right.
Like maybe they go on two dates a week, but they give 50 hours, 60 hours to their career.
A lot of women bulk and say, well, you know, what am I going to do?
Just live in a hovel or with my parents until some man comes along.
It's like, I get it.
We need money and things like that.
But if you're giving 60 hours a week of your life to your work for 15 years, that's no longer a hedge.
You're not hedging your bet against not finding a man.
That's your primary bet.
And that's what you're going to get.
If that's what you're giving the majority of your time and energy to, you're going to get the career.
So it's no longer a hedge the way they handle it.
Right.
So a lot of women can't successfully compete for the fully extrapolated man when he's actually arrived.
So I talk about like how men should try to look for their ugly duckling.
Women can look for their dark horse.
A dark horse is a racing metaphor.
It's a horse with bad odds, like 100 to 1, who actually goes on to win the race.
So this actually requires knowing shit about horses.
You can't just read the names and think, oh, Stormy, I like the color of his mane.
And it's like, you can't make your betting based on that.
You have to understand how, you know, look at their teeth and what's a good, healthy horse's teeth.
Look at their hooves.
I don't know much about horses, actually.
You know, it's like you have to become an expert in horses to be able to tell which horses are undervalued and have a good chance of going the distance.
By analogy, women should get better at understanding men.
And understanding men with potential.
Yes.
It's like what kinds of things should they be looking for?
These are things like ambition, drive, a vision for the future.
These are things like discipline.
These are things like the ability to delay gratification.
These are things like kindness and responsibility to others.
I think those things can help a woman discern a dark horse before he's won the race.
I would add assertiveness in there too.
And of course, confidence.
Confidence is tricky because confidence is so attractive to women.
Like I made an episode recently that hasn't even been released yet.
But I talk about how men get it wrong all the time about what gets you laid in particular.
They think it's going to be money.
They think it's going to be a six-pack.
They think it's going to be 6'3.
I'm sure all those things help.
Like if you had two identical men and one had a six-pack and one didn't, why wouldn't you choose the guy with a six-pack?
It's like, okay, I get that.
But I call those things attraction proxies because guys think that just having them will cause women to line up.
And that's not what happens.
The three things that actually get you laid as a guy are confidence, the ability to engage a woman's emotions, and being a contextual alpha.
And confidence is tricky because...
Got to be humble.
But yeah, it's like I like confident, but not cocky.
And it's like, it's very difficult to walk that line.
I hear what you're saying.
But this is the issue that men find themselves.
My definition of confidence is it's the consistent felt experience of success.
The way to authentically be confident is to do the thing, to do the thing enough times that you know all things being equal, you can do it, and to emotionally integrate that into yourself.
But obviously that takes a lot of reps.
When you're 22, you probably don't have consistent success yet, but you're still expected to be confident.
So you can kind of have this like psychotic confidence that isn't like based on actual delusional self-confidence.
You could call it that.
And there's like narcissistic guys who have that.
There's also guys who they have six shots and they can do that.
You know what I'm saying?
It's like, and it can be difficult for women to tell the difference between the narcissistic kind of confidence and the grounded authentic confidence.
But most 22-year-olds don't yet have consistent success.
So they do kind of have to fake it until they make it for a while.
I have a video coming out about that, about how to be confident without success.
Obviously, the success makes it much easier to have confidence.
But sometimes we have to act before we have what we want, to get what we want.
Yeah.
Do you have questions you want to follow up on?
I got some.
This has been a great conversation.
Yeah, I got some real, real interesting ones.
I got one, and then if you want to just fire through them, just like, what do you think is the biggest red flag in a woman?
Oh, yeah.
So externalizing.
So an externalizer is somebody who doesn't have an internal locus of control.
So it's not that she gets angry.
It's not because of anything that's going on inside of her mind.
It's that you did this.
The problem with externalizers is because they don't see their thoughts and emotions and behavior as originating within themselves, but in their environment.
They just are responding to their environment.
So the way that they're going to regulate their own emotion is not by controlling themselves, but by trying to control everything around them.
And if you're going to be around them, they're going to be trying to control you.
So like, don't do that.
We have to do this.
And if you deviate from that, they get all out of sorts because they're in this like perpetual and completely futile quest to make external reality permanently exactly how they want it to be so they can feel not anxious or not angry or whatever.
And that's not possible.
It's not possible to do that.
But a lot of times externalizers lack the insight and awareness that that's what they're doing.
And trying to explain to these people that their feelings and their behavior originates in them and their choices, some of them will, you're just trying to trick me.
You don't understand me.
They won't be able to accept any kind of accountability.
And it's absolutely impossible to have a peaceful, loving relationship with a person like that.
So this raises an interesting question that I was dying to ask you.
And this is something I've been trying to figure out for a while.
And I think you've spoken about it on previous podcasts.
What is it about women and accountability to where the two are just like oil and water?
Why is that?
Well, how often do we really hold them accountable?
I mean, like, bro, I hold chicks accountable, but like, it's like trying to grab something that's like very slippery.
I hear you.
Like, I remember many years ago, I was in a relationship with a woman, a beautiful woman, like just a total dime piece, went on to be a lingerie model.
And I met her when she was 23, like at her peak hotness.
It was a tough relationship because apparently, according to her, I was the first man in her entire life who ever told her no.
Not any of her previous boyfriends, not her brother, not her father.
No man had ever told her no.
Imagine getting to be 23 years old and no one has ever told you no.
Like you were going to, like when toddlers are told no, they have a tantrum because that's the first time they've heard no.
If you haven't, you will have a tantrum the first time you heard no, whether it's two or 23.
It just looks better on a two-year-old than on a 23-year-old.
Do you understand?
Yeah.
So the point is, is like, how often do we, as a culture, hold women accountable?
It's very rare.
It's very rare.
Sure.
I guess just the pattern that I've noticed is like when I look back at my life and I look at obvious screw-ups that I've had, I'm the type of person that takes accountability for them because I want to learn from them and I don't want to keep repeating my mistakes.
I've noticed that when speaking with women oftentimes, maybe about previous mistakes, current mistakes that they're making, whatever, the pattern that I notice is it's not like how a man would often take accountability where it's like, yeah, I screwed up.
Okay.
Like I'm going to try and avoid that again.
It's a constant process of emotional justification for their actions without admitting that it was a mistake.
This is the pattern that I notice.
Again, I think it's not necessarily because in their heart of hearts they believe it.
It's because it works.
Like every time the cop lets the woman off the hook for the speeding ticket because she's crying, it just trains that kind of behavior in women.
Like to what extent has acting in that way caused the dad to let up when she was a girl or previous boyfriends to kind of like, well, what else can I do?
I tried to reason with her.
I can either give her what she wants or leave.
So what I'm saying is that a lot of the things that people do, they do not because they really believe those things often, but because it helps them to get what they want in the short term.
Right, and they can get away with it.
Exactly.
So that attempt to emotionally justify their reactions has worked in the past for those women, which is why they do it now.
Right.
It's that simple.
And if we held women to the same level of accountability that we hold men to, we would see that behavior disappear.
Like, it doesn't exist in other cultures to the extent that it exists in this culture, which is very permissive of female behavior.
There's a quote from Socrates that goes, trust not a woman when she weeps, for it is her nature to weep when she wants her will.
Thoughts on that?
It's a banger.
Yeah, I mean, again, I think people do what works.
Sorry, Madison.
Works.
I agree.
Oh, you agree?
Okay.
People do what works.
And the thing about this, that sometimes people, you know, rubs in the wrong way is that reinforcement contingencies don't have to be conscious.
Like, I might be reinforcing a behavior in you.
You might not be aware that that's happening, and I might not be aware that I'm doing it, but it still might be occurring under the surface.
Like, there is definitely a lot of cultures, I think, like Indian women, very emotionally self-regulated.
Japanese, Taiwanese women, very emotionally self-regulated.
And I think that they have much stricter upbringings.
And their families and their cultures don't tolerate some of the behavior that we permissively allow.
Like in the West, we kind of have the myth of the weaker sex.
And with that myth comes permissiveness.
When you say myth, do you mean like that's like a story, an archetype, or do you think it's actually a myth that women are the weaker sex?
No, I think it's a story that we have in the West that other cultures don't.
And the flip side of that is if you're the weaker sex, then we have to make allowances for your weakness.
Right.
Okay, so I have a question that's completely on a different topic.
This was one of the most common ones that came up.
What advice would you give men to make sure that they're being extremely effective leaders in their relationships?
I know that you've talked a lot about purpose.
I'm sure you've talked about leadership on your channel.
What would you say in that aspect?
You've got to have a plan.
Like most guys never thought that they would get as far as they have.
Like their plan was to go up and maybe chat the girl up and she actually says yes.
It's like, I never thought I'd get this far, kind of a thing, let alone he's in a relationship.
This is also a big asymmetry between men and women, where generally women don't understand how much work it takes just to be the guy that the woman will say yes to.
Yes, even for a date.
Yeah.
I've said in one video that it's taken me like 10 years to be able to pick a girl up in 10 minutes.
Do you understand?
Women have no idea.
They have no idea.
Work men have to put in.
And so a lot of guys never get past that point because they spend so much time and effort just getting the woman to say yes.
And oftentimes it's like that's kind of what they want.
The early stages of the dating process are really nice for a lot of guys.
It's like there's no pressure.
There might not even be an expectation of exclusivity.
There is, we live in different places.
We come together once or twice a week.
We go our separate ways.
There's a lot of dating and going out and sex.
It's like a lot of good times.
For a lot of guys, that could go on indefinitely.
Like, why mess with a good thing?
Kind of a thing.
And for a lot of guys, they shouldn't move further than that.
Like, the idea that marriage is for everyone is wrong.
It's wrong.
And that's, I think, why we have the high divorce rate that we see, among other reasons.
Why do you think marriage isn't for everyone?
Just because it seems that lots of people have trouble with it in the sense of like, and I think our culture doesn't have an alternative to marriage yet besides nothing.
Or just like casual promiscuity, which doesn't serve people in the long run either.
Do you think it's that marriage isn't for everyone, or do you think it's that most people get into marriage not having their shit together, not having an understanding of how to be a proper partner, how to properly be in relationships?
Sure.
I mean, that's certainly part of it.
But how do you learn those things until you have the opportunity to practice them?
So it's like, how do you prepare for a relationship without being in a relationship?
It's very hard to do.
Well, I think that there's principles that people can learn and understand before they get into a relationship.
Like we've gone over a number of them during this conversation.
Sure.
There's principles and then there's the execution of those principles.
Right.
You know?
Right.
It's like learning how to swim from reading a book.
You can't really do that.
You have to get in the water.
What was the question that you asked before?
I was asking about why you don't think marriage is for everyone.
Oh, okay.
That's the more recent question.
I think that just by looking at the facts, that people seem to have a lot of trouble staying married.
Okay.
And I think I made an episode about this, that one of the reasons for that is marriage is fundamentally a very humble institution.
It's very humble.
And we want it to be too many things.
At the very least, the modern conceptual of marriage consists of a legal contract.
It consists of a solemn oath before God.
It consists of cohabitation.
You live together.
Co-parenting.
You're going to raise children together.
You're my best friend.
And you're my passionate sexual romantic partner, an exclusive sex dealer.
And those are just the basics.
Other people want a therapist.
Other people want a mommy or a daddy.
Other people want a personal chef or a maid.
It's like it's very, very difficult to be good at all of those things at the same time.
And I don't think that marriage had that expectation to be all things to all people until very recently.
Do you think you'll get married?
I don't think so.
I think I can make a long-term commitment to a woman, and I've done that in the past.
But the actual legal contract, as different from the spiritual or religious institution of marriage, is, I don't see how it serves me.
I think it's just nothing but risk with no upside to compensate for that risk.
Gotcha.
Did you have another one, Chase?
I know some more.
Yeah, I mean, to follow up on something.
Okay, Leonardo.
Hold to that one.
Save that one.
Okay, that's a juicy one.
To follow up on something you said a moment ago.
So, like, I got a number of questions from men who were, you know, they're expressing the fact that they have anxiety when it comes to approaching women.
Sure.
And one of the reasons, there's a few reasons for this.
I mean, for one, like speaking as a guy who has been rejected in the past, like it can be crushing and blowing to your ego when you approach a woman.
But also, there's more importantly, we live in this culture where there's like this like weird Me Too culture and like women will treat guys like they're just the biggest creeps in the world.
You'll see viral videos of women who will, you know, get in their cars after being approached in the supermarket and talk about how some guy was the creepiest thing in the world and like it'll go super viral.
And, you know, there's a weird.
Yeah, women should really dissuade that behavior in other women because that behavior is running it for a lot of women who want to be approached.
Yeah, and this is the thing that I often hear from women too.
They're like, man, I wish more guys would approach.
But a lot of guys nowadays, women out there will explicitly say they don't want guys approaching them.
And then that content gets blasted out on the algorithm.
So a lot of guys have anxiety about this.
And they were asking me to ask you, like, what advice would you give those men?
I think the ability to overcome your approach anxiety as a man is really important.
It's something that I made a committed effort to do about 10 years ago.
And it was difficult.
I made an episode about it.
And I put on, I made a commitment on a Saturday night to put on my suit and to go down to a San Francisco meat market and put in some reps to approach women.
And I would go to the place, the bar, and I'd get my drink, and I'd get another drink, and maybe I'd get a third drink, and I would leave without talking to anybody.
And I felt so embarrassed and ashamed that I left without approaching, even though there were clearly, there were usually women there that I felt attracted to and wanted to talk to.
But I made this commitment to do it.
And so I had the next week I did it, and I didn't talk to anybody, and I left feeling ashamed.
And the third week I did it, and I didn't talk to anybody.
I left feeling ashamed.
I think I had to do it like seven or eight weeks in a row without talking to a single woman in my suit, you know, all dressed up.
People are probably wondering, what is this guy doing?
Who knows?
Who knows what they were thinking.
And then I was there the eighth time and I was probably on my second drink and like thinking, looking at the door and being like, oh man, it's going to happen again.
And I saw this woman that I was attracted to.
And in that moment, I realized that if I were to leave again without speaking to this woman, I knew exactly how I was going to feel.
I was going to feel like a schmuck.
I was going to feel like a coward.
I was going to feel lonely.
I was going to feel hopeless that I was never going to meet a woman.
I knew that with 100% conviction because that had been my emotional response for the last seven times in a row.
And so I looked at this woman and I thought to myself, no matter what comes out of that woman's mouth, it can't possibly hurt me more than it's going to feel if I leave here without talking to her.
And I went up and talked to her.
And I said something along the lines of, hey, I just want to let you know that if I left here without talking to you, I would feel like a real schmuck, which was true.
And I think we talked for like five minutes and I don't even remember.
She probably had a boyfriend.
I don't think I definitely didn't go home with her.
But that was the beginning of getting over the approach anxiety.
Like I had to be more afraid.
I had to feel the pain of not doing it more acutely than the fear or the pain of approaching that woman.
And it was only when that calculus shifted that the woman was safer on some level than getting what I'd already gotten by going home alone.
What do you mean she was safer on some level?
Because I knew that leaving without speaking to a woman was painful.
It would make me feel ashamed.
It would make me feel cowardly.
It would make me feel that she would feel safer as well.
No, she does, like as an alternative between going.
Not to you, but that she herself physically would feel safer.
Oh, no, no, no.
The prospect of approaching a woman was safer in my own subjective consciousness.
Right, I got you.
Okay.
So did you ever get to a point where it became easy for you to approach women?
Yeah.
You know, it's never entirely without a little bit of anxiety.
And one of the things I teach people is that the physiological state of anxiety is actually indistinguishable from the physiological state of excitement.
They're the exact same somatic response, just interpreted differently by your mind.
When you have that response, but you think things are going to go badly, you're anxious.
If you have that response, you think things are going to go well, you're excited.
And so you can kind of do this mental judo and reframe that interpretation of your somatic response as excitement.
And that's probably for the best that there's a little bit there.
If you didn't have that, I mean, if there was no anxiety or excitement whatsoever, I don't think men would approach women either.
I agree.
I got a question here.
Kind of shifting gears once again.
You had this great video, and there was two things.
You said why it's important to disappoint women.
Sure.
And then also how, and perhaps these were two separate ones, how do women punish the men that they like?
So maybe let's start with the first one.
So why is it important to disappoint women?
I do that all the time.
I'm quite adept at disappointing.
Intentionally?
Okay.
Intentionally, sometimes unintentionally.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Okay, why is it important?
Because eventually, when you find yourself fortunate enough to be in a relationship with a woman that you like and who also really likes you back, when a woman really likes a guy, she wants everything about that guy.
Like she wants the good.
She also wants the bad.
Like women are kind of weird like that.
They just want the whole thing.
Give me, it's like that lady gaga.
Give me your sickness.
Give me your evil.
It's like they want to experience the guy completely.
And so they'll want more of your attention.
They'll want more of your time.
They'll want more of your emotional energy.
And if you just say yes, that woman will very quickly become the center of your universe.
And that's not where a woman should be.
A woman, like the center of a man's universe, should be his overarching mission or his purpose in life.
And the woman, ideally, is helping him achieve that because that's also in her best interest as well because she can be with that guy as he's victorious in his purpose.
So learning to disappoint women is important because if you allow a woman to become the center of your life, you tend to lose your life and then you tend to lose the woman anyway.
Now, if you say, I'd love to see you, sweetie, but I can't tonight, and she starts to cry, and she's, I'm going to miss you.
Like, and a guy feels guilty at seeing that man, that woman's tears at disappointing that woman, he might, like, say, oh, okay, sweetie, I guess just this one.
So, you know, and it's that slippery slope to concession of your friends, concession of your hobbies, concession of your purpose.
So it's just a feeling.
She's not going to die, guys.
Like, in 15 minutes, she won't even be feeling that anymore.
So let her feel.
You also don't have to change a woman's feelings.
That's something that a lot of guys don't get.
Because especially negative emotionality in a woman makes men uncomfortable.
And so they want to fix the problems so they don't have to deal with the discomfort of experiencing a woman's negative emotions.
But you don't have to do anything.
Just let her feel.
She'll get over it.
Right?
Madison?
Do you think?
Yeah.
If you love a man, you'll get over it in at least a day.
You said that women feel unsafe when a man never says no.
Yeah, one of the things that seems kind of paradoxical is sometimes a woman will go up to like the guy in the bar with the tattoos and the facial scars and the leather jackets because he's safe.
Now a lot of guys are looking at that guy, that guy does not look safe at all to me.
He looks really risky and dangerous.
Well, yeah, but on the other hand, he's safe because you think that about him.
No one's going to fuck with that guy.
Like for a lot of women, it's safest with the most dangerous guy in the room because no other guys are going to mess with that guy.
Do you understand?
That guy might mess with her, but no other guys are going to mess with him.
Do you understand?
So, oh, a guy who can't say no or hold the line with a woman, and what's a woman really going to do?
Like, how can she trust that he's going to be able to hold the line with a guy?
So I think when women do these tests, consciously or unconsciously, to men, they're testing whether they're safe because if they can't actually say no and hold the line with them, they're going to despair of his ability to do that with a real threat out in the world.
And so that guy's not safe.
And that feeling of unsafety will cause her to test further if she's still attracted, which will cause her to be even more squirrely, potentially.
And the guy probably is going to blow it, and that relationship isn't going to go anywhere fast.
Does that make sense, Brian?
Yes.
Yeah.
And you said one of the previous questions I had was, how do women punish men they like?
Punish the men they like?
Well, punishing actually takes time.
It takes investment.
It takes effort.
You're not going to, if you don't actually really care about keeping a relationship around, you actually don't want to punish.
You just want to be like, hey, no problem.
Absolutely.
No harm, no foul.
Let's just go our separate ways.
Like punishment on some level is a corrective action in the service of making the relationship better.
So it requires some degree of emotional investment.
You're not going to go around trying to correct people that you don't care about.
So the other thing is I actually made that episode when I found out about Tom Brady's divorce.
And ostensibly, who knows the real story, but ostensibly his wife was unhappy that he decided to not retire and to play another year in the NFL.
And when he decided to go back to the Buccaneers, she divorced him.
That's the story anyway, that I understand.
And you would think that on some level she is punishing Tom Brady for his decision to go back to the NFL.
And she's only doing that because he's Tom Brady.
Like if she didn't actually care about that man, she wouldn't have like tried to incentivize him to spend more time with her, which is kind of what her argument was: is that you've spent all these years with football, now spend some time with the family.
Like if she didn't really want that guy around, I don't think she'd have any problems with him playing football.
You know what I'm saying?
Yeah.
You got something?
What you got?
Yeah, I got, bro, I got a few.
I got some good ones.
So one pattern that I've noticed in the world is that women who do not have a strong father presence in their lives or they didn't receive a lot of love from their dad growing up, these women often end up presenting promiscuous lifestyles in their 20s and 30s and so on.
Compared to women who receive a lot of attention and love from their dads, it's less often that they will be very promiscuous as they grow older.
I'm curious, what do you think the connection is there?
Is that reflected in data or studies that have been shown?
I'm sure they would be.
I can't think of a study off the top of my head.
But we talk about it just socially as daddy issues.
I think that without the validating, stabilizing presence of a masculine figure in a girl's life, she often can seek for validation through her sexuality when she's a little bit older.
And it works.
Like if a woman parades her body and throws sex at guys, guys will respond positively, which actually creates a vicious cycle for those women because it does work in the short term at the very least.
This is going to sound kind of strange, but I do remember this one study that I read a long time ago that there's actually a pretty high incidence rates of incest between long-lost siblings.
So let's say siblings were, it's true, as I understand it, like siblings who are separated at a very young age, you don't even know that they exist, when they're reunited in their adulthood, they feel their love and affection for each other.
But the way a normal, healthy adults kind of express love and affection is often sexual.
When they were younger, they wouldn't do that.
Do you understand?
And so they often end up in these sexualized relationships because that's part of the kind of a healthy adult response of love in a heterosexual relationship.
So that could be part of what you're talking about, is that they didn't get a chance to feel this love or it was love in a very dysfunctional way when they're younger.
So they've kind of gone their whole lives craving it and then and it becomes inappropriately sexualized as an adult because that's what adults do when they love somebody in a heterosexual dynamic.
I've noticed a lot of a lot of those women will tend to go for guys that treat them quite poorly.
Sure.
And they will opt for those relationships as opposed to relationships with healthy, stable men who really.
Holy stable men are boring.
No, no, no, but like that, this is the thing, though, is I've noticed, like, like I can think of a few girls in particular where not just like nice guys, not just like boring nice guys, but like good dudes who are attractive will pursue these girls.
But it almost seems like something about the stability of the relationship almost like repels them.
Like it seems like they're craving being treated poorly by guys.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Okay.
So we all.
Why is that?
Well, we all these love templates that exist in our mind that are based on observing the relationships of our primary caregivers.
Okay.
And it's for better or for worse.
Like the child is not in a position to judge whether this dynamic that they're observing is healthy or unhealthy or functional or dysfunctional or toxic or loving.
They just take it in.
Now what can happen later on in life, I don't know how exactly this works, but people have this like radar where they can potentially walk into a room and say, oh, oh, that's the one.
That's the one that I can recreate this dynamic with.
There are some sort of signs that give off the fact that it's not that you feel dysfunctional.
It's not that you feel toxic.
It's that you feel familiar.
You feel familiar.
You remind me and you're activating this thing inside of me that has been trained to recognize love in this way.
Okay.
I had something along these lines myself in the sense of I grew up in a very chaotic family.
And when I was in my early 20s, I got involved with all kinds of stupendously dysfunctional women, but I was dysfunctional myself to a certain degree.
And what I would discover is that I kind of had this terrible decision I had to make.
There were the women that I was authentically attracted to who were terrible for me.
And then there are the women who were good for me and could have stable long-term relationships I felt nothing for.
Like I was like, they're good, I guess.
You know, she's a really nice girl, but I don't know.
And I'd always go back to the dumpster fire on some level.
And I did that until I sufficiently healed my own inner wounding that was related to the love template that was associated with that.
And for a while, that meant that I had to actively resist spending time and dating the women that I felt that passionate attraction to.
And I had to kind of abide in relationships for a while that felt a little boring and unemotional.
And as I continued to do that, and as I continued to heal, my attraction organically changed.
And now I'm very attracted to stable, high-functioning women.
And when I see that, it's almost like an addiction.
You know, I used to have a number of addictions.
And thank God I don't have them anymore.
But every once in a while, there's that craving, you know, that pops up.
And sometimes I'll walk into a room and I'll see that girl.
I'm like, oh, oh, there it is.
And it's like, oh, nope, bad, Orion.
We don't want to go down and open that door again.
It gets easier and easier to resist.
Is it like a look, like she's just blasted in tattoos?
For some guys, that's what it is.
That wasn't for me.
Not for you.
No.
What were the tells for you?
I liked women who, I was an actor for a long time, so I dated a lot of actresses who had, like, there was something in their eyes.
They had very emotive eyes.
Like they could change their emotional expression very quickly and also very clearly.
For a long time, I was kind of an emotional idiot.
And so I was kind of attracted to these women in part because I could like read their emotions because they could telegraph them so well and so obviously and so intensely.
I was like, oh, I get it.
You're feeling happy right now.
Or you're feeling annoyed because they were a little bit, they had the emotionality turned up to 11 a little bit, which probably was off-putting to other guys.
But I was like, oh, I can hear you now.
That's nice.
So there was something in like their emotional expressivity in their eyes and in their face that led me think, oh, she's going to be a roller coaster.
She's going to be fun.
People ride roller coasters for fun.
Did you get better over time as you healed your inner wounding?
Did you get better over time at reading women's emotions?
Oh, yeah.
And then find that you didn't need that overexpressiveness?
Sure, yeah, absolutely.
Interesting.
Yeah.
Your attraction can change, but it can also take years.
Nice.
It's not something that changes overnight.
I got a video for us to react to.
This went viral about three or four weeks ago.
Nick.
Matt Walsh responded to it.
So Nick, if you can play that.
This is my Twitter mutual right there, Echo.
What up, Echo?
You want to go full screen?
Yeah, full screen, please.
If you are a boy who has ever been dumped by your girlfriend for seemingly no apparent reason and you're looking for answers, this is what happened.
Okay, this is you guys.
You guys are in a happy relationship.
And now all of a sudden you have one simple fixable problem.
For this example, we're going to use no good morning texts.
And your girlfriend who loves you, she's really happy with you.
She comes to you and she tells you, she's like, hey, do you think we could start doing good morning texts?
Like, it mean a lot to me if you text me good morning.
So you, her loving boyfriend, agree to give her good morning texts.
But something happened and for whatever reason, you stopped giving her good morning texts.
So now we have a bigger problem.
She now thinks that you don't care enough about her to send her good morning texts, even though she asked.
But she's going to be like, you know what, this is still kind of a small problem.
I'm just going to remind him.
She reminds you, you're like, oh my gosh, that's right.
I did agree to that.
Okay, I will text you good morning.
Unfortunately, though, you didn't follow through again.
Now we have confirmed that you do not care enough to text her good morning, even though this is a simple, fixable problem.
This is now a big problem.
So now your girlfriend, who has never picked fights before in her life, starts picking a bunch of little fights about all these different things because she believes that you do not care enough.
Through all of these picking fights with you though, she still loves you and likes you enough to want to be with you, even though you guys have all these little problems now.
Until one day these become unattractive to her.
She's going to realize that all of these little things that you do that remind her that you don't care about her enough are unattractive.
And so now the problem is not these things.
It's not even that you don't care enough.
It's not even that she never got good morning texts.
It's that she literally does not like you anymore, does not like you.
Now, unfortunately, she has to break up with you.
And then you're going to ask her why.
And she's going to list out all the reasons why she has to break up with you.
And you are going to say, no, you should not break up with me because of those reasons.
Because from now on, I am going to do all of these things.
And you will never have to worry about me never doing these things again because I'm going to do them every single day.
But remember, it doesn't even matter if you were to do all of these things anymore because the problem now is that she's unattracted to you and just simply does not like you anymore.
And now she's going to go move on with her life and you're going to go and tell your friends that you got dumped by absolutely no reason and that you guys all hate her and that she's crazy for dumping you over something so simple.
But in reality, she never dumped you at all.
This was a slow moving process that eventually led to the final reason and you weren't dumped.
Probably actively chose not to give her what she said she needed.
And now you guys, you guys aren't together anymore, sorry.
So what's uh, your thoughts, your reaction to that video?
Women are complicated, aren't they?
Yeah um, so I I think there's probably some truth to it.
From like, I think that woman is describing a emotional progression that occurs in women.
Like I think she's speaking about a subjectively truthful experience that women can go through.
The problem was that the guy agreed to do something he didn't fucking want to do.
I've never sent a good morning text in my life.
I never intended to do it.
I have no interest in doing it.
I'm not actually a big texter.
I'm going to spend as little time as possible on my phone.
Interesting.
The problem was, not that he didn't care about the woman.
I mean, who the fuck knows, but that's where I'm going.
The problem is he didn't care about that behavior.
He didn't want to actually do it.
He didn't, he wanted to do it just because she wanted to do it or she cared enough to try to avoid the problem of not doing it.
Do you understand?
He didn't actually feel intrinsically motivated to send a good morning text to his girlfriend.
So if I were to advise men out there, if a woman comes to you and says, hey, sweetie, could you do this?
Like, think about it.
Do you actually want to do that?
If you don't, say, no, I don't really want to do that.
And you avoid that entire cascade of problems.
She might be huffy and upset for a little bit, but it doesn't get to that dire state that this woman was describing.
The reason why he was flaky about it, it's like it was a New Year's resolution.
It was something that he felt that he should do because his girlfriend wanted him to do it, not because it was coming out of him from his own internal locus of control.
I see.
And so, of course, he was going to be inconsistent and flaky about it.
He didn't really want to do it.
You ever done any good morning?
Did you do the good morning text?
Do you do that?
Yeah.
But I do it now.
I do it by choice because I like feeling connected to this.
I'm with you.
I'm not a, I don't like to.
What I've gotten is flowers.
Like some girls that I've dated in the past, I'm like, why don't you buy me flowers?
I was like, I don't fucking like buying women flowers.
But other guys like, maybe they do.
Maybe they don't.
Maybe they feel like they're doing it just because they feel like they have to in order to not have her be upset or in order to get laid.
Or maybe they authentically like to buy woman flowers.
If that's that important to you, absolutely.
There's the door.
Or there's the door.
Yeah.
Well, kind of, in the sense of like, is good morning text enough to walk away from a guy that you're still attracted to that there are no significant problems in?
No, it's not.
That would be psychotic.
Madison, are you a good morning text person?
You're in a relationship.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Does he do the good morning text?
Now, did you ask me?
No, no, no, no.
I usually like wake up a little later.
He just started doing it?
Yeah.
Okay.
He buys flowers, William.
Maybe it's a generational thing.
It could be.
I wasn't raised on texts.
Yeah.
Because, I mean, I'm 34.
And, you know, we started getting cell phones around last year of high school.
Smartphones came out a few years later, but I was never a fan.
Never a fan of the good morning text, you know.
Let's get into it.
The 50 shades of Craig, you want to go to the next one?
Bro, don't spoil it.
Don't spoil it, bro.
So I have two questions I am intent upon asking by the end of the show if we have time.
Also, for all my followers that are listening, my apologies to you guys if I didn't get to your question.
I got like over 100 questions.
We only have so much time.
Wow, what a great response.
Yeah, yeah, pretty sweet.
People wanted to hear what you had to say.
What'd you say?
I'm honored.
So one of the things, we'll jump right into it.
One of the things that I am fascinated by are The secret and darker interests of the female psyche.
And one of the most interesting phenomenons, I think, of the past couple of decades in pop culture is how insanely popular the 50 Shades of Gray novel and movie were.
Both were among the fastest-selling of all time.
I mean, women were just absolutely all over it.
And for anybody who's listening, who's unaware, 50 Shades of Gray, it's a fictional story about a woman who gets into a relationship with this like billionaire guy who's into BDSM and you know, sex dungeons and all that kind of stuff.
And women just absolutely loved it.
I mean, they loved it.
What do you think the popularity of those stories speaks to within the female psyche?
I think there's a couple of things to that.
First of all, is that people always sort of want what they don't yet have, or the opposite of what they got.
So, for example, many, many years ago, I dated a woman who went on to become a dominatrix in a dungeon in New York City.
And we were still in touch, and she would tell me some of her experiences.
And these were high-powered, professional men who were worth millions of dollars who would pay her hundreds of dollars an hour to step on them, to berate them, to do all kinds of other things that we don't necessarily have to get into, but to kind of like humiliate these guys.
Why?
Because they had, in their professional and personal lives, become so powerful that there was no balance to their experience anymore.
They had to pay somebody to arbitrarily create the word no for them.
Do you understand?
So there's a lot of women out there who are the boss bitch, who are actually doing very well in the real world.
They actually have good careers.
They're out earning men who are childless in their cohort in major metropolitan markets.
They are empowered.
They are confident.
They are self-sufficient.
So what are they not getting?
What's the shadow to that?
And I think it's being controlled.
I think it's being helpless.
I mean, what's the opposite of being power?
Disempowered, powerless.
So I think that's one part of it: the sexuality that exists in a society behind closed doors is often the shadow of the roles that those genders play out in public.
Okay.
Does that make sense?
There's another way that we can kind of approach it, which is that there's kind of masculine and feminine love and sexuality.
There are two words that we can take from Greek: there's eros, from which we get erotic, and there's agape, which we don't really use anymore, but it's an excellent word.
Eros or erotic love is very masculine.
It's about penetration.
It's about conquering.
It's about overcoming and like dominating, right?
Agape love is like being raptured.
It's like total and complete surrender.
You can even have a religious or a spiritual context to this.
I've had it, I've heard it said that we're all feminine in the relation to God, in the sense that we're always receiving and He is potentially penetrating us.
Do you understand?
So it's like it's not necessarily about men and women, it's about masculinity and femininity, and there's different attributes to that.
Right.
And there is a rapturous pleasure to complete abandon and surrender.
And I know a lot of women who will admit that like being left in a quivering puddle is a successful and enjoyable sexual experience.
And one of the ways that they can get there is when a man is more assertive and dominating.
It's tricky.
You can't just go into a random encounter assuming that that's what the woman is looking for.
But it can be negotiated not through like explicit consent and contracts, but kind of with awareness and intuition.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, yeah, it does.
It does.
This is something I've been curious about because like one of the things that one of the things that very few women are bold enough to admit, but that applies to a lot of women, for example, is like an interest.
I think the interest in forceful domination from a masculine presence in the bedroom is like pretty across the board.
It applies to almost all women, if not all women.
And like a lot of women, they won't admit to it publicly necessarily, but like they have interest in being choked or spanked by a man that they trust, so on and so forth.
And it's like, I guess like I understand intuitively why that is.
I can kind of intuitively understand why women would be drawn towards like a 50 shades of gray.
And it's not just like the CEOs and boss babes.
It's like your normal everyday, you know, woman who's just like a suburban mom or whatever.
Like all types were attracted to it.
But I had never heard it articulated like that before.
It's also not a simple thing to say who's in charge in a dominant submissive dynamic.
You could make the argument that the submissive is in charge because the submissive is so safe and is controlling the experiment experience to such an extent that he or she can allow him or herself to experience being subjected to a greater power than themselves.
Does that make sense?
Like that person might actually be controlling the person who's controlling them ostensibly.
This is why all of these historical arguments about the dominance of men needs to be nuanced and approached.
There is plenty of men who have been controlled or influenced behind the scenes by their women.
Right.
Where it was safer and more protected for them to do so.
So the idea that just because the person who's big and aggressive and assertive or dominant is the one in charge is not right.
Yeah, well, in those stories, for example, I'm pretty sure the female character always had like a safe word to stop the situation.
Of course.
So she was, you could make the argument she was in control, so to speak.
Sure.
Yeah.
I have one other question, I don't know if you.
Yeah.
Yeah, go for it.
So one thing there's been a lot of discussion in the manosphere, the red pill sphere, so on and so forth about is the idea of female promiscuity and how, you know, as a woman racks up a body count, so to speak, that makes her less suitable for a relationship.
And there's a myriad of reasons why that would be the case.
But in particular, one area of focus that people will speak about is how it can decrease a woman's ability to pair bond with partners.
And I was curious, there were a lot of questions that I got about this.
Does clinical data or studies or anything like that show a difference in terms of how promiscuity can negatively affect men versus women?
I've read studies that show that promiscuity can negatively affect both men and women for long-term relationships.
Is that technically through the mechanism of pair bonding, which is, I think, chemical and related to oxytocin?
And we know that oxytocin gets released in different contexts for men and women, so that is gendered.
I think it's more just that if what you're practicing is short-term relationships, you're going to get better at short-term relationships.
And the more time you spend practicing and getting better at short-term relationships, the less time you're practicing and getting better at long-term relationships.
And they're totally fucking different.
Like what is successful for a short-term relationship is almost antithetical for what is successful in a long-term relationship.
This is why I say for guys, it depends on your dating goals.
If you're just looking to have fun and to meet some women and have short-term sexual relationships with, you want to err on the side of being too bold.
Like boldness will work.
It will make it happen.
But if you're looking for a wife, if you're looking for a long-term commitment, actually err on the side of being too boring.
A lot of guys fuck this up and they still want to take the woman out on the hot air balloon rides and the Michelin star restaurants.
But unless you're doing that on the regular, you shouldn't do that with the woman that you're vetting for a long-term relationship.
Like, what are you usually doing on a Wednesday night?
Invite her to do that.
Be boring.
Don't hide who you really are.
If you don't send good morning texts, like let her fucking know that in the first week so that she knows what she's getting into and she can make the decision as to whether or not that's really a deal breaker for her.
You understand?
But if you want short-term relationships, absolutely be bold, cultivate a fantasy, go big.
Okay.
Depends on your goals.
Okay.
Got it.
But pair bonding does affect both men and women.
So it's wrong to think that men can have indefinite, promiscuous sex without having that impact their emotional reality and their relationships with women.
Do you think it has more of a negative effect on women compared to men or vice versa?
I think men can do it more than, like, be promiscuous without negative consequence than women, but over a long enough timeline, it will catch up with men as well.
Psychologically.
Yeah.
Have you seen that present in your practice?
Sure.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I've worked with a number of guys who, man, they were charming, they're attractive, they're young.
They would go out with their friends.
Every night they were bringing women back home.
They must have run through half the city.
You know what I'm saying?
And one thing is that's actually hard to give up.
It's just sort of like what we were talking about with the really hot women who were hot since they were 15.
You know what I'm saying?
And they were attracting attention from all the other guys in high school.
They didn't have to develop other sides of themselves.
Like it's very hard for a guy who can effortlessly enjoy sexual optionality with women to like try to be a loyal, consistent partner because it's so, sex is so rewarding for guys.
Yeah.
It's hard to give up.
I spoke to a guy.
He told me that he had slept with 150 women and he was just incapable anymore of forming an emotional connection to a woman through sex, which is pretty interesting.
Well, another thing I talk about is that there's big differences between male and female sexuality.
Let's leave the body count of the promiscuity thing away.
But like, it's act, we see, we often hear stories about like sexless marriages or long-term relationships, and we assume that it's always the woman's fault who like becomes frigid or isn't interested anymore.
And that is often the case, but it's definitely not always the case.
Sometimes guys can lose their sexual attraction to their wives, not because they get old or they gain a bunch of weight or they stop putting effort into their appearance, but because they love them.
What do you mean by that?
They call this the Madonna whore complex in psychology.
It's like it's actually hard to take somebody that you love, not just the body, like the person inside the body that you love and cherish and care for, and bend her over and fuck her hard.
It's really hard to do that.
It's really hard to do that to the mother of your children and your sacred wife.
You understand?
It can be.
So, what I'm saying is that like for guys, they kind of have to have this switch in their mind where sometimes they have to be able to just objectify a woman in order to bend her over and give it to her real good.
Like they have to be able to turn off the, she's a whole person and I love everything about her and I'm ready to do something really nasty and disrespectful to this woman.
It's like, that's a nice ass.
It's like, I'd love to see that over here.
You know, guys need to be able to turn that on and off.
And when they can't turn it off, they lose their sexual arousal.
Is there anything women in those long-term relationships can do to help men get in that mental state?
I mean, they can try to bring back some of the nastiness a little bit.
It's like one of the things that I talk about on my channel about how a woman can get a man is to be the nastiest, sluttiest version of herself possible with the man she wants to have a relationship with.
That got a lot of pushback in some respects.
I'm sure.
One thing I'll say is sort of like, by definition, a woman has to be, she has to be the nastiest, sluttiest version of herself with somebody.
That's how superlatives work.
Some man is benefiting from that side of herself.
Why not have that be your husband?
Why not have that be the man that you want to be your husband?
Do you understand?
Yeah.
Otherwise, that's even sluttier than what I'm recommending, is that you are that side of yourself with somebody you don't even want a long-term relationship with.
Well, isn't this sort of an old saying, like lady in the streets, freak in the sheets?
Sure.
This is sort of a concept that's been.
Women have to be able to turn it on and off too.
Maybe there's a switch in their minds.
Yeah.
Don't you think, though, that if a woman is looking for marriage and she's just being as freaky and nasty as possible with whatever guy she's seeing that she's hoping that she can lock down, that that could actually be counterproductive towards her goals of getting commitment from a man if, for example, let's say she's dating a guy who actually is not interested in marriage and she hears your advice and she's like, okay, if I'm the sluttiest, nastiest version of myself possible for this guy, maybe he'll want to lock me down.
He doesn't want to.
He breaks up with her or she breaks up with him.
Time goes on.
Then she finds another guy who she does want to marry and then he finds out about that last relationship and all the things that she did with him.
Yeah, she's got to do more with that guy.
But then that could create a vicious cycle where it's like, like that could be counterproductive.
Well, I responded to this in a forthcoming episode.
It's like, first of all, the nastiest, sluttiest version of yourself doesn't mean sex.
I didn't say that.
Like if all you've ever done is hold a boy's hand, there's a way of holding a boy's hand and there's a way of holding a boy's hand.
You know what I'm saying?
So this is titrated to your sexual experience and your sexual history.
One.
Two is one of, I made an episode about this, which is called the cost of winning.
Overpaying is the cost of winning.
So if you want to win, you have to be willing to pay more or give more than anybody else will.
So life is like an auction house.
It goes to whoever bids the most.
And that also means that no one else thought that that was worth as much as you did.
So you overpaid.
But overpaying is the price of winning.
Do you understand?
So a woman has to be willing to give more to beat out her intersexual competition for that man.
Now, in some probably traditional or religious contexts, there's going to be the no sex prior to marriage.
Fine.
There's still ways around that.
Like I did a consultation with a guy from the country of Georgia where it's like 98% Christian and it has a very high premium on female virginity in the sense of like having their hymen intact.
But those women, he told me, do all kinds of other sexual behaviors.
So it's like virginity and chasteness aren't quite the same thing.
You know what I'm saying?
Like, there are ways that you can capture a man's attention if you want to have a relationship with that person.
Now, your rebuttal about, well, what if she does these things to a man that doesn't really want a relationship with her?
Well, that's part of discernment that we were talking about earlier, is women kind of have to learn how to become experts in men to know who to pick.
One, two, so many of them are so bad at that.
They are.
They're really, really good at that.
They're terrible at it.
And two, like a woman can potentially turn that guy around.
Like, if you give a man a brain-notice sexual experience, something that he can't get anywhere else, he might be like, Yeah, whatever.
And then he's going to have trouble finding that.
So sometimes I talk about like getting a man, there's acts to it.
The first act often is up to the takeaway, which is like, hey, we've been doing this for a while.
We've been dating.
You know who I am.
You know what I like.
Are you interested in a relationship?
And if the guy says, you know, I really like you, but I'm not in a place to commit to anybody, that doesn't mean that the play is over.
That's just the end of act one.
Sometimes a guy has to miss a woman to come back and commit to her.
That's often the case.
So if you provide an experience that is very difficult to replicate otherwise, that is you doing something that your competition obviously is not willing to do.
One final thing, and then I'll see what your thoughts are: is that, yes, it's kind of a slippery slope.
So if she is this version of herself with that guy who doesn't commit to her, she has to be at least that nasty and slutty with the guy, the next guy, right?
The issue is that between holding hands and like crazy porn star sex, there is a long distance between those two things.
Like that could take dozens or hundreds of experiences.
You know what I'm saying?
So if that happens, it's not that my advice is bad.
The advice is good.
It's that that woman is consistently choosing the wrong men over and over and over again to do this with.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, it does.
I mean, your argument about, you know, a person or a woman providing an experience that can't be replicated by somebody else and them investing everything they have into it so that they're the best possible option for that person totally makes sense.
One, I guess one follow-up question that I would have is: so there's a lot of young women that are following me that are, and this is in line with the theme of a lot of my questions throughout the show.
What'd you say?
What a heartbreaker.
Well, they, you know, they're following a Christian guy who's giving Christian dating advice, and they're looking for they want to be competitive in the Christian dating marketplace, especially when it pertains to marriage, because a lot of young women out there, they want to find that like top 10% guy.
Sure, they all do, whether they're Christian or not.
Yeah, and they're like competing with all of the other women that want it.
But Christian women are in an interesting position because a lot of them will not do anything sexual before marriage.
Yes.
And so they're like...
Anything?
Not like...
Not anything?
Well, they are pursuing chastity, generally speaking.
Some of them will do sexual stuff, but there's a lot of them out there that are like, okay, I don't want to have sex before marriage.
This is something, this is a commitment that I want to stick to.
A lot of them feel pressured because their competition are women who will do sexual things before marriage that are trying to capture the guys that they want, right?
But these women who don't want to do anything sexual before marriage because of religious convictions, they're like, okay, how can I be as competitive as possible with the girls out there that are sluts and that are giving it up to these guys, so on and so forth.
And it's like, you know, you made the argument, okay, well, girls won't have sex, but they'll do other things.
But what would you say to the women that don't even want to do other things but still want to be competitive for those high-value men?
That's a great question.
I think it's important to understand that there's a difference between sexuality and sensuality.
And a lot, actually, of what guys are seeking after in a sexual encounter is sensual.
It could be a soft touch.
It could be a word or a phrase that is spoken to him in admiration.
It could be a look in her eyes that she believes that this guy is just her heart's content kind of a thing.
Those are very difficult to get in a purely sexual interaction.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
And those things that I just described, I think, play more to a guy's emotions for a long-term commitment.
I think, you know, best practices, you kind of want to do both.
But if you're not interested in doing the sexuality for religious convictions, you can absolutely provide sensuality that's completely devoid of sexual arousal.
Where could women learn more about how to cultivate that?
No, I don't know.
I think it used to be something that was like mothers or grandmothers used to teach their daughters potentially, but I don't know if that happens anymore.
Man, we used to be a proper country.
Maybe you got to watch like old movies.
If you watch old black and white movies, women will still like look at the men in that way in the movies.
You know what I'm saying?
Yeah, yeah.
That's the best I can do off the top of my head.
It's like a look.
It's like a look.
I can't believe it.
It's like a sultry look.
The look.
The look.
Like you said, eye contact is powerful.
I don't know.
I don't think I can do the look, though.
I haven't seen this look in a woman in a long time.
Like, I've seen it.
The Bush administration.
It's been a while.
I've seen it even just occasionally in the women that I've dated.
It's like, it's this, it's this, you know, in the old movies, it was accompanied by this.
I was like, kind of a thing.
I know I didn't do it well, but maybe it's a destination.
And it's like, damn, all right.
Wow, okay.
I could feel like her open, sincere love beaming through her eyes in that moment.
That's what I'm talking about.
And especially if a guy's looking for a long-term relationship, he's going to notice that because no one looks at fucking men like that.
Nobody.
Even their wives often don't look at them that way.
You know what I'm saying?
So like, so many men are contenting themselves with just a crumb of kindness.
Interesting.
Because they're starving.
They're starving.
Two more questions here before we wrap up.
You mentioned that, and I don't know if we fully got into it, the useful eight thing.
What are some ways that women can make themselves useful?
That's a great question because I talked about the useful eight in terms of like that's the ideal from a male's perspective, but that's the other side of how a woman can get a man.
Like I talk about one being the nastiest, lattice version of herself possible because that kind of, in a society where sex precedes commitment, that's the Trojan horse that allows the guy to open the gates to let the woman into the city.
Now, whether she just gets used and kicked out has to do with what she does with that opportunity.
And if she just gets let into the city and she thinks that she doesn't have to do anything, she's going to get kicked out, most likely.
That's just the cruel reality of today's sexual marketplace.
So once she's there, that's the opportunity to become useful.
Why?
The idea here is for a woman to be kind of a detective, which women generally are.
They're good at like stalking people online and figuring out who's dating who and all that stuff.
Is like, listen to a guy.
Look around his lifestyle.
Do your due diligence in your research.
Figure out what this guy is about.
And then without really being asked, start to try to help him in his mission.
Like try to, if you see something that you could do that would make his life easier, just do it.
Don't wait to be asked.
And this is good for women because what this does is, because most guys, they might not even notice it's happening in the beginning, but the idea is that the woman implicates herself so thoroughly into the man's lifestyle that it becomes functionally impossible to extricate herself from it.
Like if you are not, I say this in an episode, if the only thing that I lose if I were to break up with a woman is access to her Netflix account, she fucked up.
She fucked up.
She blew that chance.
Blown.
Chance blown.
So the idea here is it has to be difficult or painful or expensive to get rid of you because you're kind of irreplaceable at this point.
Like I've come to depend on you so much.
That's how a woman gets de facto commitment, even if they haven't like had an official ceremony or defined the relationship talk is she's a part of his life now.
This is such good advice because to be frank, one of the things that I've learned on this show, speaking to so many women on it, so many women are dumbfounded as to how to offer more to a relationship than just sex.
It's crazy how many young women have no idea what value they can provide beyond that.
And part of that might be the lack of fathers, but part of that also might be that the women you know on the show are young.
And what are they dealing with?
22-year-old guys?
Like, what did I want from a woman exclusively at 22?
You know what I'm saying?
So it's like, have guys trained these women to expect more from them than just being a sexual object?
Maybe not.
I definitely think there's some blame on the man's end because a lot of men are just, unfortunately, just perfectly content just getting some pussy.
But there are men out there that do demand more and want more.
But yeah, a lot of simps out there just, they're happy to get just sex.
Well, I don't even need to be a simp to be happy with just sex.
I think it just makes you a man.
I mean, men just find sex to be so rewarding.
Right.
But there's definitely other things that you can bring to a man.
Sure, but the man might not even know what those things are.
Like I said, the woman needs to kind of be aware of that man's mission and purpose.
And how to be complimentary.
Which means the man has to fucking have the mission and purpose for the woman to see it.
And a lot of 22-year-old guys don't have that.
They don't know their ass from their elbow.
I mean, so what would be some ways that a woman could be useful?
Could be, for example, she sees his house is a bit untidy and she goes and tidies it up.
Absolutely, that's laundry.
Laundry is such a real pain point for so many women.
There's something psychologically associated with that.
You say laundry and they're back in the handmaid's tail and they're down at the river with the washboard.
There you go.
When it's really like the easiest household chore.
What do you think of this?
One of the things, and I actually kind of fell upon this accidentally.
I just met this girl, invited her over, and I had my laundry was finished, and I needed to fold it.
So I was like, I kind of like, you just gave her expressions.
I was like, just gesturing with my head.
I was like, You want to do the laundry?
Like, first or second time hanging out.
And she went right for it.
No, because I've had similar experiences where they'd be like, I'm not doing your laundry, but the girl who goes to do the laundry.
The price of winning is overpaying.
You have to be willing to do what the other women won't.
And guess what?
It's never been fucking easier in the history of the world to do more than what most women are willing to do today.
So it is an easy market.
Same with men, too.
It's like it's never probably been easier in the history of the world to be a masculine man.
Yeah, it's a great point.
You don't have a lot of competition.
You mean in the sense of by comparison?
Yeah.
Because there's a lot of feminine.
Not masculine.
Correct.
I see.
And there's a lot of masculinized women.
So it's actually never been.
Think about it.
How hard must it have been to be a feminine woman in like the Wild West in the 19th century, where you didn't have indoor plumbing, where no one had, you showered like once a week, where you had to wash your clothes by hand, and your makeup was powder that came from or no makeup even.
It's like how hard.
And women would have their hair curled.
They'd be in these lacy dresses.
They would be scented and perfumed when it was extremely difficult for them to do that.
Now it would be so easy.
Femininity takes effort.
Like that kind of performative femininity, women don't roll out of bed looking that way.
You know what I'm saying?
It takes expense and effort and consideration.
But it has never been easier in the history of the world for a woman to enact those aspects of performative femininity than today, and women don't do it.
By the same token, probably for men as well.
I think it's also never been easier to differentiate oneself from other women by being inoffensive.
Oh, look at that.
Living under coordinated $100.
There's no way Orion Taravan is a real name.
Talk about the double standard of a GF getting attention outside of a relationship, but the BF can't approach women.
They get to exercise their mating strat.
Did you get that?
I don't think I understood that besides the dig on my name.
Talk about the double standard of a girlfriend getting attention outside of a relationship.
Oh, okay.
Well, this is good.
I can talk about this.
So it is my name for the record.
Can't really take credit for it.
You know, that was my dad's choice, but I've kind of grown into it.
So there is a double standard around this.
And what I talk, I talked about this on one of my Fresh and Fit appearances, which is that women generally have this passive optionality in the sexual marketplace because of the fact that most men will have sex with most women, but most women will not have sex with most men.
Which means that women don't generally have to go out and generate optionality for themselves.
They just sort of like maybe they have beta orbiters or they trust that if they needed to, they could make something happen.
Right.
Right?
Most men don't have that kind of passive optionality.
So in order to kind of balance the power dynamic in a relationship to create a kind of deterrence, men need to actively cultivate their optionality to counter the woman's passive optionality as an agent in the sexual marketplace.
Men and women, however, cultivate their optionality in different ways.
The way that women cultivate their optionality is by being visibly attractive.
Duh, right?
That's why women have these Instagram accounts.
And they're never going to give them up if they have 100,000 subscribers.
Even if they truthfully say they will never entertain the possibility of a relationship with one of their fans, I actually believe that.
Women don't date their fans, right?
They want to date who they're a fan of, right?
So a lot of those guys actually aren't a threat to that relationship, but they're never going to give it up because it's a source of validation and attention and power, right?
To know that there's 100,000 men right out there today who are attracted to me.
Men, even if they have the abs and the arms, they can't really cultivate their optionality by being visibly attractive.
The way that men cultivate their optionality is by being visibly competent.
by being at the top of their status hierarchies.
So what I tell guys is that if you're really good at something, you need to tell the world.
You need to find a way to tell the world in a non-douchey way that you're really good at this and allow people to recognize that from all over the world and come to see you as a master of that dominance hierarchy.
Even if there are no other women in that hierarchy, the fact that other men are looking up and saying, wow, that was amazing what you said.
I really appreciate it.
You've helped me out so much.
These are men saying they're praising, right?
They're respecting.
I'm using respect in the masculine form, which is we don't just respect everybody, right?
We respect based on where it's deserved because of a demonstration of excellence, right?
That's very different from like, we should just respect all people, which is really just basic dignity and consideration.
And so if you are visibly competent as a man, you will have that passive optionality to counter the passive optionality of most women.
Does that answer that question, do you think?
Yeah, I think so.
Fairly.
Yeah, it sounded like he was a little bit pissed that he couldn't approach women while his girlfriend was getting attention.
Well, you could.
She might not like it, but you could do it.
And that doesn't necessarily mean that you shouldn't.
It's like sometimes when the woman is happy, she leaves.
And when a woman is unhappy, she stays.
Like, the happiness of a woman is not necessarily predictive of whether she's going to stay in that relationship.
Why do you think women leave when they're happy?
When they're happy?
Yeah.
They've gotten too much of what they wanted.
And eventually they run out of things to want.
And it's almost like, you know, is that going to sound weird?
But it's like, how do black holes die?
You know, they have to go away eventually.
They suck up everything around them and then there's nothing left to suck up.
And then they have to suck themselves up, kind of a thing.
And then, I guess.
We do know that black holes don't exist forever.
I can't explain the astrophysics, but.
Final question.
Unless you have one more.
Maddie, what you got?
You got anything?
Let me look through.
Okay.
Are you okay?
You didn't say much.
Were you listening?
I told you I was here for moral support.
I feel so supported more.
No, I really.
I'm an observer.
All right.
How mysterious.
Janita, she was mostly there just in case you need a water refill.
I'm good.
She's the water girl.
Thank you.
So I do have one.
What can young women remind themselves of to maintain self-control when it comes to not sleeping around in their 20s and preserving their purity?
Not necessarily even from a Christian context, just like this whole body count discourse has penetrated the whole collective consciousness and like a lot of women are wondering about this.
Maybe I can add something on top of that.
Could it also be how in an effort to, and in furtherance of not racking up a high body count, how can women pick the right guy or avoid the or avoid the temptation to sleep with the fun chads that they know probably aren't going to commit, but they still really want to anyways.
This is tough because the assumption that might be undergirding this, I don't know, there's this belief that men just want to have sex and women just want to have commitment.
And clearly that's not true if women can rack up a body count.
And I don't think that's because they actually wanted a committed relationship from every man that they slept with.
A lot of women just want to fuck.
A lot of women just want to have fun.
There's a lot of women I've met in the Bay Area in San Francisco in their 20s who are absolutely, they have no belief that they will ever want to get married and have a family.
Now, we know that statistically speaking, a small percentage of those women will persist in that belief as they age.
And the vast majority of them will change their minds in their 30s.
It's very hard to get women who aren't interested in commitment to value commitment.
When you're 18, you could say, oh, I just want to have fun.
And if you respond, yeah, but when you're 36, you can't, that's going to be a liability for you in attracting a husband.
And that's going to be a tough sell because 18 to 36 is a lifetime for an 18-year-old.
That is so far in the future, they can't even conceptualize.
They don't even, they don't remember being two.
Sometimes they don't even remember being five.
You know what I'm saying?
They're not even aware of their whole life.
So another lifetime away is so outside of their ability to conceptualize that I think it would be very difficult to convince them to withhold a certain behavior that's clearly pleasurable and exciting in the short term for something that they don't want and they believe they will never want.
Can I make my question more point?
Okay, please.
Okay.
So what I've observed in a lot of young women nowadays is that they will know, I want to get married at some point.
Okay.
I want to have kids at some point.
Okay.
I might not be there yet, but like one common pattern that I've noticed when speaking to women about this is that they will, they know that they want those things.
Some of them also understand if I rack up a body count, it could seriously hurt my prospects later on.
I get it.
Right.
But then they will face a situation where they meet a guy who they like and they will want commitment from him.
They might want marriage in a future with him.
But he might not want that with them, but their emotions and their attraction to him will override those logical thought processes and they will sleep with him anyways, even though they know it's counterproductive to their long-term goals.
Got it.
Right.
So they'll do it out of just sheer attraction, desire for him, while knowing sometimes logically, this is actually hurting my chances later on.
Like how can young women, what can young women tell themselves?
Or how can they look at this?
Okay.
So first of all, you went very specific to like this particular man that they're attracted to.
I'll get to that in a second.
Let's expand just a little bit.
There's this phrase in AA that says that if you hang around a barber, you're going to get a haircut.
Okay, so a lot of what dictates women's relationship history or trajectory depends on who they're spending their time with, who their friends are, what their social circles are, and where they're going in their free time.
So if your five best friends are going out every Friday and Saturday night to the parties to make out with boys, you're going to be the sixth.
You see what I'm saying?
So the first thing that women can do who are interested in that is to very critically examine who they're spending time with and where are they spending their time.
Like again, if you're going to parties every weekend, you're eventually going to be one of those girls.
The temptation is going to be too great.
And or the breaks that would prevent you from enacting that behavior are going to erode because you don't see any examples of temperance or forbearance, right?
Okay.
So with respect to the specific person, what I would recommend is one of the best ways to get a, a man needs to feel emotionally engaged to commit to a woman.
And a man doesn't get there just by having sex.
He can eventually, especially if it's really good and he can't find it anywhere else, et cetera, et cetera.
But if a woman demands or asks for commitment before the man is emotionally connected or hooked, it's not going to work.
So what a woman has to do is emotionally hook a guy.
And the way that I describe this is she has to be Netflix.
Okay?
Who has a Netflix account here?
Yeah.
Everybody has a Netflix account.
Very popular streaming service, obviously.
How does Netflix get people to buy memberships?
They don't demand that they give a membership right away and pay full price.
What they do is they say, free trial.
We want you to explore everything about this channel, everything about this product.
It's all yours.
And the idea here is Netflix wants you to get emotionally engaged in one of these episodes, in one of these series, so that you kind of need to know what's going to happen.
You good?
And then straight.
You all right?
You okay?
After the three months or the six, however long the trial is, then they say, okay, you've had enough.
Are you interested in buying a membership?
Now, if that guy didn't get emotionally engaged on any of the content on that channel, and or that guy felt like he could get that content somewhere else, he didn't have to pay for it, Netflix is not going to convert that person into a customer.
But if that person feels that I need to know how that series ends, because I can't get that series anywhere else, not on Hulu, it's not on Disney Plus, it's not on Peacock or whatever, they're going to buy a membership because they're emotionally engaged to original content that they can't find anywhere else.
That's how women get commitment from men, whether they're attracted to them or not.
Gotcha.
Got two chats here and then one final question, and then we're going to wrap up.
We have Alberta Sovereign donated Canadian 50.
Hey, thank you, man.
Maddie, do you want to read this?
Damn, good to see you, Chase.
We all miss your presence on the show.
Crisis King.
God bless you all on the show tonight.
Thank you, Alberta Sovereign.
Thank you, thank you.
And then we have, this one's going to come through here in just a moment.
Casey Millet, thank you.
How do women find the balance between taking care of their man and mothering them?
Have you ever been in a relationship where you felt mothered in a negative way?
Yes.
That's a good question.
I have.
How did that feel?
I didn't like it.
And I reacted to the encroachment on my maturity and autonomy through what I felt was inappropriate infantilization of me.
And that's actually a strategy that some women use, is that they will intentionally try to mother men to cultivate a kind of infantile dependence upon them.
It's a little dark and twisted, but it can work on men who are susceptible to that strategy.
You know, maybe it's not healthy or the best, but it does work.
The balance is if I can do it for myself and I want to do it for myself, don't do it for me.
I don't know how else to say it.
People are going to have different opinions over what that thing is.
Some people, they can't do that, or they do it, but they don't want to do it, and so they're fine with the woman doing it.
But if you can do it and you want to do it, don't let her do it.
And if because if you allow her to do it, it's going to create that encroaching infantilization, which cultivates inappropriate dependence on the woman, which might be in the service of her relationship goals.
Got it.
Got it.
Final question for you.
Great.
What do women want?
That's the last question.
That's the last question.
Yeah, that's like an opener.
We could have spent the last two hours talking about that.
The truthful and unsatisfying answer to that question is that women want what they want.
What means obviously meaning it varies from woman to woman.
Of course.
Yes.
We can talk.
We were talking about this before the show.
Like we can talk statistically based on what we know from the empirical evidence and the research and just our observations.
That works on the population level.
Like we know in general that women want a taller guy, an older guy, a higher status guy, a hiring guy, et cetera, et cetera.
But on an individual level, people's personal preferences often deviate significantly from the statistical ideal or the social norm.
So people want what they want.
The reason why actually you guys probably get into a lot of controversy on your shows is you will bring some of this research, I'm sure, and individual women say, well, I don't want that, or I don't care about that.
And let's assume that they're telling the truth.
It's certainly possible that an individual woman wouldn't value very highly what the research statistically says women as an abstraction value highly.
That could very well be true.
Everyone has a type.
Like, we know that ideally, what's a 10?
It's like a lingerie model.
You know what I'm saying?
But for me, like, I like cute nerds.
That's my type.
So I'm going to respond more positively to that when it shows up than the Victoria's Secret model.
Sure.
Clarifying question on this.
Sure.
Let's get more pointed with it to hopefully get to the core of the matter because obviously women are going to want different things.
But in the data, what have you seen?
How would I phrase this?
In the context of relationship, what would you say are the three most common emotional desires that women have from their relationship?
Oh, that's so hard.
Because I'm sure there's probably patterns in the data.
I can speak off the top of my head about a study that's one of my favorites.
It's called Attractive Women Want It All.
And so true.
The researchers first evaluated, well, which women are very, very attractive.
So they gave a bunch of pictures and of faces and bodies to like a thousand men who all voted on who the nines and tens were, who the most attractive women were.
And the researchers only gave the survey to these very attractive women.
And the survey had like 40 items on it, which is like, are you looking for a handsome and sexy man?
Are you looking for a wealthy provider?
Are you looking for a family-oriented man?
Are you looking for somebody who is loyal and committed?
There's 40 items.
And the attractive women across the board responded with yes.
They wanted all 40 things.
They wanted all 40 fucking things on the survey.
Like to a statistically significant degree.
They all said yes to all 40 things.
They didn't all say yes to all 40 things to the same degree.
So they could rank them, but they all said yes to all 40 things.
Do you understand?
Yeah.
And what's interesting, because the study, as I said, was called Attractive Women Want It All.
You can Google it.
It's easy to read, this one.
But what I found is that maybe you've discovered this yourself, is that less attractive women don't want less.
This can be very baffling to some guys where the six has the same standards of expectations for relationship as the nine.
And we might think, well, that's kind of nutty, isn't it?
But from their perspective, that's what they want.
Okay?
So could that also be because both of those women actually have sexual access to the same men?
It's possible.
Like we know, we've talked about, you talked about it on the show last time I was on that because most men will have sex with most women, lesser attractive women can gain sexual access to men who would never ever think of committing to them.
Right?
So they get used to Chad.
They think, so I talk about this in my forthcoming book about how to actually dial in sexual marketplace value.
And one way to think about it is because it can lead to this inappropriate inflation of your SMV for a woman if you're having sex with all of these attractive, sexy, high-status dudes, right?
But I think it's a better measure to take, let's say, the median or the average of the SMV of the men who are willing to give you commitment.
That's a better marker for a woman's SMV.
And it's actually more of a metric to see what is the average or median SMV of the women that men can sleep with.
You want to measure it in what's more difficult.
It's more difficult for men to get sex than commitment, and it's more difficult for women to get commitment than sex.
And so that's the real metric for what they can pull because people basically trade unequal things of comparable value in the sexual marketplace.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
Great questions, man.
This was so much fun.
I personally enjoyed this much more than the panel because I feel like I got, I didn't want to take up too much space when there was 12 people at the table.
You know what I'm saying?
But I feel like I could really get in sixth gear tonight.
Oh, definitely.
I thought it was a great conversation.
The panels are definitely.
It's hard.
You know, there's 10 people at the table.
Only one person should really be speaking at a time.
It's hard to sometimes, you know, find a way to insert yourself.
But I thought you were great on that episode.
Yeah, thank you.
A bunch of, actually, I think we had a couple clips from that episode that you were featured in that did incredibly well.
So just great to have you back.
Is there anything that you want to plug before your book, right?
Yeah, thanks for reminding me.
Yeah, my book is forthcoming.
It's called The Value of Others.
And will that be available like paperback or is it just going to be digital?
It will have a digital e-book.
It will be an audio book read by myself.
And it will be a paperback as well.
What's it about?
It is understanding relationships through the lens of behavioral economics.
So it's about all relationships, but it's specifically about heterosexual relationships between men and women.
And I'm bringing this lens of behavioral economics to explain why men and women do the things that they do in their relationships and in the sexual marketplace.
Got it.
I'm really excited about it.
I don't think there's ever been a book quite like this one.
It's in the final editing stages, so it should be out in a month or two.
Where can they get it?
On your website, Amazon?
It'll be on Amazon.
I'm sure I'll have links on my channel and on my website.
Don't worry, everyone's going to know about it once it's ready to be pre-sold, which should go.
Where can people follow you?
Oh, yeah, Psychax, like you said.
So, my main following is on YouTube, Psychax.
Nick, if you're able to pull it up, there it is.
Better running through psychology.
I say it every time.
Check out his channel.
He's got some great videos, guys.
So be sure to check it out.
Okay, guys.
Well, Orion, thank you so much for joining us.
Thank you.
Thanks for coming on, Naddy.
Thank you.
Thank you for the moral support.
I felt very morally supportive.
So, guys, last call.
Please hit the like button on your way out.
Thank you for tuning in tonight.
You could have been anywhere in the world, but you were here with us.
I appreciate that.
Thank you to everyone who supports the show.
Thank you to all the chatters.
We will be live again Sunday with our normally scheduled dating talk podcast at 5 p.m. Pacific.
And those of you who are watching on Twitch, I'm just going to quickly send you over to Bobka.
He's playing World of Warcraft right now.
So those of you watching on Twitch, thank you for joining us.
I'm going to raid Bob.
Oh, I got to wait just a few seconds here to raid him.
And let me see.
So I want to see 07s in the chat, please.
07s in the chat.
Thanks again so much, everybody, for tuning in.
Okay, I just raided over on Twitch.
And yeah, thanks again for watching, guys.
We'll be back on Sunday.
Hope you all have a very, very good night.
Thanks, guys.
▲
Export Selection