<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://therationalmale.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Rollo Tomassi]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://therationalmale.com/author/counterflow1/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[The Beta Hamster]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p><a href="https://rationalmale.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/beta-hamster.jpeg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-343" title="dv2174008" src="https://rationalmale.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/beta-hamster.jpeg?w=319&#038;h=382" alt="" width="319" height="382" /></a></p>
<p><em>I&#8217;ve never had meaningless sex; I meant to bang every woman I&#8217;ve ever banged.</em></p>
<p>It&#8217;s endlessly entertaining to read the rationalizations men will create in order to better identify with what they&#8217;ve been conditioned to think is expected of them to achieve the &#8216;precious gift&#8217; of a woman&#8217;s intimacy. They get quite creative sometimes. Aunt Susan has (yet another) <a href="http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/10/26/hookinguprealities/redditors-on-casual-sex/">anecdotal analysis</a> of Casual Sex highlighting exactly these anonymous stabs at male pre-qualification courtesy of <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/sex/comments/lnpu4/has_anyone_else_had_casual_sex_and_realized_it/">Reddit</a>. And once again, in classic feminine form, the thread becomes this echo chamber circle jerk of male identifiers qualifying themselves to the equally anonymous women – parroting the &#8216;right thing to say&#8217;, and we all renew our faith in humanity and the hope for men who really &#8216;relate to what women want&#8217;.</p>
<p>I think I covered this identification motive as a primary element of <a title="Beta Game" href="https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/09/02/beta-game/">Beta Game</a> fairly adequately in <a title="Identity Crisis" href="https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/09/04/identity-crisis-2/">Identity Crisis,</a> but lets look under the hood at this specific dynamic. The inherent problem with doubting what is intended as the noble motives of a guy to eschew <strong>casual sex</strong> is that you risk appearing shallow for doing so. Betas generally love to wallow in preconceptions of nobility and delusions of being more &#8216;deep&#8217; than the general mass of men that they hear women complain of. They think it gives them an edge. It&#8217;s an integral part of the beta mating strategy; the more alike you are with women the more they&#8217;ll appreciate you as being unique and reward you with sex.</p>
<p><strong>The Spinning Wheel</strong></p>
<p>For beta men this mindset also has the added bonus of giving the perception that he is unique among men in his ability to place the importance of relationship above his natural impulses. In publicly confirming his stance on placing relationship (women&#8217;s first security priority, i.e. <a title="Wait for it?" href="https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/09/23/wait-for-it/">wait for sex</a>) above his ever-present physical need for sex, his subconscious hope is to appear so in control of his feelings and so above his feral nature that women will <em>have</em> to appreciate him as a paragon of female identification. That&#8217;s some REAL pre-fucking-qualification there Mr. Alpha. This guy not only has the capacity, but also the depth and conviction to turn off his sexuality in order to better comply with the relationship security priority women need to enable their own sexual strategy. This is the ultimate in pedestalization of womankind – to put women&#8217;s emotional criteria above his physical need for sex. And the god of biomechanics laughed atop his throne of genitalia.</p>
<p><strong>The Beta Hamster</strong></p>
<p>It&#8217;s very difficult to criticize social dynamics rooted in personal feelings. All one need say is &#8220;it&#8217;s just how I feel&#8221; and the discussion grinds to a halt because who am I, or who are you, to doubt the veracity of what they&#8217;re telling me? Add to this that it&#8217;s men who are the <a title="The True Romantics" href="https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/the-true-romantics/">true romantics</a> of the sexes and it gets even harder to be suspect of an underlying self-serving motive. In fact it may not even be a conscious effort on the part of a guy to express this. Feminization has conditioned into society a greater, almost default validity for personal feelings. <strong>As men have become increasingly adaptive to a feminized culture, placing primacy on identifying with, becoming more like, women, so too have they developed their own version of the female imagination – the feminized-male version of the mental Hamster that spins the wheel in women&#8217;s heads</strong>. The doubts, suspicions and anxieties caused by the male Hamster are directed towards an idealized female-centric goal state which they mistakenly believe is a male-centric goal state.</p>
<p><strong>Behaviorism</strong></p>
<p><strong></strong>Self-reporting has always been an unreliable measure in psychological analysis, particularly when the one doing the reporting isn&#8217;t aware of the latent purpose of the psychology behind those &#8216;feelings&#8217; they&#8217;re sharing. The only truly reliable, provable means of demonstrating motive or intent is observable behavior. It&#8217;s kind of a cliché in the community now, but bears repeating: never believe what a woman says, believe what she does. We use this meme more liberally with women because men make the mistake of wanting to believe that women are more rational agents than they are emotional agents, but this should really apply to men as well, and particularly when men are predisposed to women&#8217;s mental models.</p>
<p>From a behavioral standpoint, we&#8217;re going to see a lot of incongruent behaviors vs. the Beta Hamster&#8217;s rationalizations. To begin with, I&#8217;m not going to deny that there is some base element in men that desires a real emotional connection with a woman. However, sex is a man&#8217;s priority, it&#8217;s a biological imperative, and actively denying that it isn&#8217;t or creating mental schemas that attempt to sublimate this imperative are disingenuous at best, psychologically retarding at worst. Sex is the glue that keeps a relationship together, and it&#8217;s sexual arousal that prompts a relationship in the first place. Deemphasizing sex, actively desexualizing yourself in the hopes that it will make you more sexually arousing is an effort in self-defeat.</p>
<p>To paraphrase Joe Rogan, men will blow themselves up for the very unlikely possibility of sex in another dimension. That&#8217;s the degree to which men place a value on sex, any sex, meaningful, a fuck buddy, a hooker, any sex. Pornography isn&#8217;t a multi-billion dollar industry because guys are concerned with adding some nebulous &#8216;meaning&#8217; to sex. Women are concerned with applying meaning to sex because it is integral to their long term mating strategy and locking down a commitment of male provisioning. The men who claim to share in this importance (at least initially) are listening to the Beta Hamster and repeating what it says to them back to the women they hope to fuck. Even anonymously on a Reddit thread, they can&#8217;t let the pretense drop for fear that they&#8217;d miss a potential opportunity to prove themselves as &#8216;deep&#8217; meaning oriented guys.</p>
<p>I have to laugh when men make these self-effacing claims to be seeking more &#8216;meaning&#8217; after they tire of their long string of ONSs or &#8216;cheap sex&#8217;. Statistically, most men never even approach a lay count that could validate such a claim. According to the most recent studies I&#8217;ve read, most men have an average of 7 sexual partners over the course of a lifetime. That may be changing, but even if it were an average of 10 or 12 it would still make the rationale for seeking &#8216;meaningful&#8217; sex as a result ridiculous, as well as suspect of a feminine-identifying mating strategy. Add to this that 80% (a conservative estimate) of men are plugged-in betas, hopelessly lacking the social skills and motivation to rack up a lay count that would ever justify this reasoning. So what is it that compels them to concoct these self-convincing rationalizations? The Beta Hamster.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a far healthier mentality for men to embrace their own sexuality. God forbid a woman actually might think you find her sexy and want to fuck her. Despite their protestations, women want guys to want to fuck them. Women often complain that the reason they don&#8217;t feel sexual is due to their not feeling sexy, and they wont feel sexy if you approach sex from an asexual starting point because you think it adds &#8216;meaning&#8217;. Of the 40+ women I&#8217;ve had sex with, not one do I regret banging. I most definitely regretted some of the ensuing drama as a result of a few of those relationships, but I thoroughly enjoyed the sex. Sex for the sake of sex is OK. Trust me, after the one thousandth time you&#8217;ve had sex with your wife or LTR, sex for the sake of sex is fantastic. Stop writing poetry about sex and get fucking.</p>
]]></html><thumbnail_url><![CDATA[https://i1.wp.com/rationalmale.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/beta-hamster.jpeg?fit=440%2C330]]></thumbnail_url><thumbnail_height><![CDATA[330]]></thumbnail_height><thumbnail_width><![CDATA[275]]></thumbnail_width></oembed>