After you read this incredibly Millennial news story, you’ll understand why I titled this post “The Voluntarily Sexless Marriage” instead of “The Voluntarily Celibate Marriage”. Our platonically married couple isn’t celibate at all; they’re just celibate for each other.
The sexless marriage is a timeless rue with an explainable kernel of pedestrian truth to it, but at least it can be said for men trapped in age-independent sexless marriages that their woeful predicament wasn’t contractually inked before the vows were exchanged. Not so for Tiffany Trump’s newlywed friends:
When New York socialites Quentin Esme Brown and Peter Cary Peterson got hitched in Las Vegas over the weekend in front of a small group of friends — including Tiffany Trump, who acted as the flower girl — they knew that people would make some assumptions. Either they were madly in love or drunk, right? In reality, the best friends said they were neither. They’re planning to make theirs a sexless, open marriage, they explained, and this actually sounds like a pretty wise idea to relationship experts.
100% of chaimstream media approved “relationship experts” are charlatans.
“Sexless marriage”. An irretrievably broken, anhedonic society at war with the reality of innate sex differences takes the one redeeming feature of marriage and tosses it away.
A sexless marriage is pointless, but a sexless, OPEN marriage is just plain malicious, because those super progressive, feminist friendly polyamorous arrangements never benefit both parties equally; it’s usually the slutty woman getting her rocks off down the hall as her moans of ecstasy drive her incel “partner” crazy with murder-suicide ideation.
“He has always been my soulmate in every sense of the word
Women and men have competing definitions of “soulmate”. Men tend to emphasize the “mate” part of the term.
and we felt mutually that Vegas was the place to finalize our commitment to partnership,” Brown explained on Instagram. “Peter and I are not romantically involved — in fact we are still dating others and will continue to seek love in all forms — we are just each other’s hearts and wish to begin our journey towards evolution, because the more we face reality, the more we can see that there is no right or wrong.”
Poopytalk. They’re doing the opposite of facing reality; they’re hiding from it under cover of Clown World’s Cloak of Inchoateness. If Tiffany Trump’s friends are indicative of Tiffany’s own views, it’s no wonder Papa Trump practically disowned her.
Susan Pease Gadoua, a licensed therapist
Licensed to bilk.
and co-author of The New “I Do,” has yet to meet anyone else with this kind of marriage, but she says it fits in with the way she sees many people deciding to change the rules to suit their relationship needs.
Dope. People aren’t changing the rules to suit their piques; they’re lowering their expectations and adapting to the encroaching jungle.
“We don’t need to get married for any of the reasons we used to,”
Including but not limited to reasons such as reproduction and generational continuity.
Gadoua tells Yahoo Lifestyle. “Once you’ve got everything else in place, it is like the cherry on top.”
But Brown and Peterson don’t seem to have married for children. So why get married at all?
The question with no answer that won’t sound like a try-hard rationalization.
“We did this because we wanted to finalize our commitment to each other as life partners and best friends,” Peterson wrote on Instagram.
What happened to mutually presumed and unspoken loyalty between friends? If you have to rely on the imprimatur of State authorization to declare your shared friendship, you don’t have anything remotely resembling a friendship. Instead, you have a pose. Two attention whores jockeying for social status within their group of unloveable weirdos.
Brown also put a statement on Instagram, saying, “I am confident my husband and I will break some walls down,” she wrote.
If your official terms of endearment preclude fucking, he’s not your husband.
Husband:
before 1000; Middle English husband(e), Old English hūsbonda master of the house
You haven’t consecrated a house for him to master. You’re two neutered farm animals who happen to be dozing in the same bed of hay and dried manure.
“A lot of these sorts of marriages are in response to society getting increasingly isolated, and people want to create a kinship model. You either have to be married or you have to be blood relatives; otherwise, you can walk away from each other.”
Like I wrote, adaptation to the r-selected jungle.
This kind of union may in fact last longer than a marriage based solely on intense romantic attraction, Gadoua surmises.
Well, sure. Because it isn’t a marriage. It’s a zero-investment masquerade. It’s easy to let a “sexless, open marriage” linger for eternity because the cost of upkeep and dissolution is negligible. No romantic reward, no romantic risk.
The other advantage is that the friends can seek out those romances outside of this relationship. In this way, their setup resembles the kind of polyamorous arrangement that some couples have found to be a better alternative to divorce.
“Some couples” = a few physically and psychologically repulsive losers who can’t hack it in the human sphere where standards still exist.
“Where the complications are going to come in is when people outside their relationship look at it like, ‘I don’t want to get involved in that,’” Gadoua says. “It’s going to make it a little bit more complicated for them to find partners who understand.”
GIRL: hey I’m free for that drink Thursday, but I should tell you I’m married to a great guy, but we never have sex. It’s in our vows.
THE DEVIL’S HARD BARGAIN: fantastic! you sound totally normal. I’m scratching you in now as my third stringer.
Rodman also cautions that this won’t work if one partner isn’t being entirely honest about what he or she wants in this relationship.
“If one person was secretly hoping that this would turn into something romantic or sexual, then that would be quite the disappointment,” she says.
The Voluntarily Sexless Marriage is the next evolution in beta male bait. Watch for hordes of thirsty betas to jump in with both feet hoping a piece of worthless paper has the power to unplug the tingle spigot.
But if we’re to take Brown and Peterson at their word, they’re pretty happy with their decision so far.
“We have one life,” Brown wrote. “Free yourself!”
Combined IQ: 1
Time for a Phys Quiz. The glowing, and strangely tense, lovebirds:
Hm mm mm. So progressive! Tiffany Trump’s friend married her gay bestie. Cameras and Yahoo blog typists are standing by….
PS I was planning to award Peter Peterson both the coveted Beta of the Month and White Male Pussy of the Month titles, but as you can see from the picture above, those titles aren’t applicable.
The Girl Notch
Posted in Biomechanics is God, Comment Winners, Game, Girls, Rules of Manhood, Sluts on November 2, 2017| 193 Comments »
Biomechanical sex differences extend to the infamous “notch count”. A man’s notch is not the same in style nor substance as a girl’s notch. Psychologically, girls record their “notches” in a limbic language that would befuddle men.
From williamk, our COTW winner:
Well stated. For women, actual sex, rather than telegraphed sexual interest, is an additional risk that adds little to nothing to her need to be validated as a desirable object. Yes, OBJECT. Objectively speaking. Because that’s what it all cums down to: the human race survives when men look at women’s sexy bodies and faces and are compelled by the power of the Lord to seed their wombs with His gestational image.
This isn’t to say women don’t need and want sex. They love to fuck, but fucking isn’t necessary to fluff their self-conceptions. The man whom a woman WILL fuck is he who arouses her so completely that his flirtatious interest isn’t enough to satisfy her. She needs to complete the soliciting-dicking cycle.
A man’s sexual interest is necessary but not sufficient to pump a woman’s ego to bursting with fertile flavor, IF the man can successfully communicate a “take or leave her” attitude and redirect his sexual interest to other women without suffering some existential crisis of identity.
williamk’s last line gets to the heart of Game and seduction of women. Eagerly flirting with a girl and never pulling back or challenging her — i.e., exhibiting not an abundance mentality but an outcome dependent beta thirstiness — is handing the win to the girl. It’s giving her the trophy before she’s crossed the finish line. That’s the Girl Notch. (Or Thot Notch if you prefer a Current Year lexical rhyme.)
The nature of the Girl Notch is such that a thin girl in her plunderable prime will collect daily and even hourly affirmations of her sexual worth. This indiscriminate frequency means that the Girl Notch is lass valuable than the Man Notch (given that notch value is partly measured by difficulty of acquiring it), but more readily available for ego-stroking when the mood for a personal boost strikes. The Girl Notch doesn’t have the raw power of the Man Notch, but what it lacks in intensity it makes up for in volume. This is why girls often look happy if not ecstatic at all hours of the day, while men tend to evince alternating emotions of ecstasy and despondency.
The Man Notch — which traditionally and properly is simply known as the Notch — is meaningless without a finish line crossing. No man ever earned a notch with hours of foreplay and then a night spent spooning the girl through her jeans as his blue balls weighed heavily with unreleased pressure. For men, ego gratification is the rope of validation unleashed by PIV. Anything less than a Final Coition has the opposite effect on his ego, deflating it from a precoital high; though kissing and a gentle rebuff at the decisive moment is not nearly as ego-shattering as outright rejection on the approach, it is a fact that men feel a twinge of failure, as if they let themselves down, if they can’t close the deal when all the signs were pointing to vajhalla.
So what kind of man does a girl feel unsatisfied receiving his mere flirtatious interest and nothing more? What kind of man does a girl recruit to top her Girl Notch with her popped cherry? Very broadly, two kinds of men:
This is the skeleton key to opening pussy: You’re the prize, and she has to win you over. Every man who can be called a beta male forgets this lesson, or disregards it out of spite and an addiction to noble losing and daydreaming about what could have been. Betas appease, alphas tease.
A girl knows a beta male is a sure thing, and that sucks all the tension and excitement out of her interest in him. But the alpha male leaves her wondering if he’s really that into her or if she’s up to his standards, and this will compel her to work harder to please him and earn his affection.
To wrest the real notch from a girl, you have to deny her the Girl Notch. And that means taunting her ego with the idea that uncertainty is the rule and validation is the exception.
***
Related to the subject of this post, LeShitlourde writes about the different motivations for male and female cheating, and why the existence of the Girl Notch hints that female cheating isn’t entirely, or even substantially, about fulfilling sexual desire:
The Girl Notch is SMV validation without the sex. It is particularly suited for women because men are less sexually continent, thus there’s no equivalent Girl Notch for men. Women know men will have sex with them as soon as they have indicated their interest, but men don’t know the same about women. It is often the case that many men receive positive signals from girls but then fumble somewhere along the way and lose the shot at sex. This affliction hits greater beta males the hardest.
Tangentially, what this means is that when women cheat they are doing so for reasons that extend beyond ego and loin gratification. Sexual fulfillment is part of that (alpha fux, beta bux) but a bigger part is what Le Shitlourde mentioned: women cheat to lash out at their domesticate men. If cheating was solely about stroking her ego, she’d get her kicks flirting with strange men but not taking it farther than that. This is why a man must immediately ditch a GF or wife who cheats on him; she has crossed a line that indicates a commitment to a larger disloyalty than that which would follow from mere “momentary passion”.
Reader Cracker adds that men’s apocalyptic reactions to female cheating are indirect proof that different standards for the sexes are evolved responses that accurately reflect the differing size of the impact that cheating has on each sex,
It’s a fact that men experienced in the world of women learn early on: women can get over male cheating quicker and more thoroughly than men can get over female cheating. Women often run right back to cheating men, if they love those men; and though the wound of betrayal never fully heals she is happy to have him back in her arms again, because the grief of losing him would cut her deeper. Men, by contrast, and unless they are LSMV losers with no other options or hope of options, are less eager to take back a cheating woman. As Cracker said, there is often an accompanying disgust that prevents a man from ever again touching a woman who has cheated on him. It’s as if the invasive cock left a foul odor or slimy sheen on her skin, and now she is an object to be tolerated at best, disposed of at worst, for whom his affection can find no purchase.
Share this:
Like this:
Read Full Post »